"The Unicorn" by Iris Murdoch

I must confess I have a very confused attitude to the literary works of Iris Murdoch as notwithstanding the characteristic style (or rather the manner of writing) her darker novels like The Unicorn, The Flight from the Enchanter and The Italian Girl are so different from the more realistic ones (The Sandcastle, An Unofficial Rose) that it is sometimes hard to believe they were written by the same author. And though I appreciate and value all of her works, only the gothic novels keep truly fascinating me whenever I read or re-read them.

In her dark novels Iris Murdoch combines gothic and folklore traditions with modern reality to create something unique and engrossing. To me they resemble neo-Victorian novels and stories of my beloved A.S. Byatt (The Children’s Book, Possession, The Djinn in the Nightingale's Eye) closely connected with British fairy tales and ancient mythological characters, and that is partially the reason why I loved The Unicorn so much.

The setting and the exposition are purely gothic: a young English teacher Marian Taylor accepts the position of a governess in a remote country estate called Gaze Castle and indeed this place possesses all the essential characteristics of a gothic castle with its darkness, seclusion, oil lamps and shabbiness. The mistress, Hannah Crean-Smith, stays all day long within the boundaries of this estate seeming reluctant to leave it and such strange asceticism in a young and beautiful woman in addition with unconceivable behavior of other house inhabitants becomes the mystery which our young Marian needs to unveil.

The atmosphere around the estate quite corresponds to the one within it for here are the moors so eagerly used by Conan Doyle and the Brontes to create their shadowy settings, and the dark sea which reminds of itself throughout the novel acting almost like a human being, a witness and an omen of something terrifying and gloomy.

Then, there is a motive of madness, also very frequent in gothic writings, when Marian has to question the sanity of people around her and sometimes even herself. This method of creating the sensation of mystery and suspense has been used for many centuries by authors from Wilkie Collins in his The Woman in White to Margaret Atwood and her Alias Grace.

If we consider the folklore traces in this novel, we surely must start with the belief of native people of the village in fairies and brownies so strong that the reader is almost deceived into thinking that all the strange things happening to characters might be due to the presence of some mythological creatures.

Also, if Marian in her actions follows the traditional gothic pattern, Hannah’s behavior is built according to the rules of a fairy tale: a princess is imprisoned in a tower (a castle), waiting for her savior whereas her husband appears to be the evil sorcerer, her janitor, invisible but ever controlling, and the house inhabitants turn into dragon-guards. Even the period – seven years – during which Hannah is supposed to be waiting corresponds to the folklore tradition.

Finally, there is the unicorn used as a complex and ambiguous symbol. On the one hand the unicorn stands for something magically attractive, mysterious, beautifully irresistible, and for many characters Hannah is precisely this unicorn. On the other hand, in biblical tradition unicorn is often used as an allusion to Jesus Christ as it also symbolizes purity and sacrifice. However not all the characters are unanimous in their perception of Hannah. Should she really be accepted as a unicorn or Christ or rather a Judah who merely tries to atone for her previous sins? Or is she a Circe, a sorceress living on a remote island who finds pleasure in her seclusion and her image of victim and tries to enchant some Odyssey and enslave him (or her?) with her magic spells?

The major theme of the novel is the issue of freedom in all its representations, be it physical, moral or spiritual one. All the characters find themselves both free and imprisoned in their own ways.

Hannah is obviously imprisoned physically although, as I have already mentioned, it is very difficult to conclude whether she suffers from being a victim or enjoys it. Still spiritually and morally she seems to be her own mistress, acting and thinking however she chooses. And while so many people, including Marian and Effingham Cooper who of all characters are most keen to act like saviors, the question arises: is there really any reason to save Hannah? And more importantly: does she herself want to be saved? Here Marian and Effi tend to fall into the sin of hypocrisy as feeling need to follow the fairy tale tradition and embrace the roles predisposed for them, they quite forget that after all they are not living in a fantasy world and everything might turn out much more complicated.

Marian is sorry for Hannah and wants to set her free but what shall Hannah do with this freedom? This question seems to never have crossed the girl’s mind and to be absolutely truthful, did Marian herself knew how to be free? She willingly came to the castle being free to choose any life she wanted, and thus having herself become a voluntary prisoner to the estate, has she any right to blame Hannah for being one too? Moreover, wouldn’t it be just another limitation of Hannah’s freedom if Marian and Effi took her away by force?

As for Effingham, he sees himself as a prince who at last has come to take the princess away and doesn’t want to admit that he lacks some very essential features to play this role, such as decisiveness, responsibility or moral strength. His constant qualms and thoughtless impulse-driven actions surely don’t make the situation any less complicated. Unlike Hannah Effi is free in any possible sense of the word and it often occurs to him that if he goes up to the end of the prince plot line it would mean marriage for him and Hannah which notwithstanding all his affection he doesn’t want to undertake. Marriage would surely put a limit to his freedom which Effi truly dreads. But does this unwillingness to have a family and enjoy the full development of romantic relations not limit Effingham in any way?

Then, there is Hannah’s neighbour, a retired philosophy tutor Max Lejour, who has taught Effi and in opposition to his apprentice he doesn’t need to dread the boundaries of work or family relations, with his wife having passed away and the children already having their own lives. Still, having become free and subordinate only to himself he finds himself incredibly lonely and forsaken and doesn’t enjoy this freedom a bit. Moreover, he willingly limits this freedom by signing a contract for a book publication and thus trying to escape the reality and the liberty which brought him only solitude.

Hannah’s estate manager, Gerald Scottow, goes even further. While acting like a prisoner towards Mrs. Crean-Smith, he himself becomes a vassal to her husband, Peter, following his orders and actually being as unable to leave as Hannah is. Having thus willingly limited himself, Gerald like other characters loses his freedom and practically becomes one of the prisoners of the enchanted castle.

Describing so many characters with their liberties and boundaries the author puts before the reader a difficult moral dilemma – is freedom really the most important thing in human life or should we sometimes sacrifice some part of it to be really happy? Does complete freedom bring one any happiness? Is it at all possible, considering that people are social animals, to become completely free? Surely living in society we have to stick to some boundaries for the sake of everybody’s welfare. The question is – how expanded those boundaries should be? Who has the right to set them? And if you set the boundaries yourself and they appear to be very limited, like Hannah’s, can you still be happy and satisfied within them?

So many questions for the reader to answer but quality novels are always thought-provoking and with so much material for consideration and judgement I’m sure any reader would be glad to dive into Murdoch’s philosophy.