Victorians! discussion
Archived Group Reads 2009-10
>
Middlemarch - Books 1 & 2
Oh your holiday sounds lovely Boof. Wish you could pack me in your baggage. Have a great time. Look forward to you being back.
I am reading a small type edition of Middlemarch, so i am around page 112. Book 1. I am surprised at how easy i managed to get into the book, no i cannot put it down. I cannot help but think that the relationship between Miss Brooke and Mr Casaubon will turn out bad, but maybe i am in error. Mostly because already they seem to be seeing slight errors in each other (side of Miss Brooke) and Mr Casaubon seems to have no real feeling towards the marriage, even to the point of being slightly unhappy. It does seem Miss Brooke would not fit with anyone else, do to her viewpoints and opinions of others. Which nevertheless i feel are a bit rude, but nevertheless honest unto herself. An interesting layer of characters. There seems to be alot of gossip within Middlemarch. Not sure how i am supposed to discuss here, but thought i would write something down for now.
I was scared off but now I think reading the comments I wish I were reading it. Looks really good.
Rebecca wrote: "I was scared off but now I think reading the comments I wish I were reading it. Looks really good. "Still plenty of time.
Yes, it's good. I would rate it one of the five best novels ever written in English. (Actually, I rank it one of the two best, the other being Bleak House. But there are several other close contenders.)
Although a number of Victorian novelists speak directly to their readers (Trollope being one of the best examples), I find George Eliot to be the most successful at this. In my view she is using Middlemarch as a vehicle for several purposes beyond just telling a story. It is indeed, of course, a story, or perhaps more accurately several intertwined stories, but it is so much more than that. The novel is set about forty years before its publication date, and Eliot did meticulous research into all the aspects of political, social, and economic life of the period she writes about. I find her exploring the ways in which various "levels" of society (and there were certainly such levels in the 1830s even more than in the 1870s) reacted to the various changes that were going on in their rapidly changing society. Developments in medicine are one of the more prominent of these changes she works with, but she also talks about upward mobility, the development of the railroads and the changes their rapid spread throughout England brought, (Gaskell in her Cranford novels also deals with this theme), political changes resulting from the First Reform Act and pressure for further reform (I think England was closer to following the French and Americans in revolting against monarchical government than many of us appreciate), changes in the Church, and other aspects of the rapidly changing period of the first third of the nineteenth century.
I hope we can have some discussion of these aspects of the novel as we move into our reading.
The Prelude is often skimmed over by readers anxious to get to the meat of the novel, but I suggest that it deserves a bit of discussion. Why does Eliot start her novel, subtitled "A Study of [English:] Provincial Life" with the story of a pair of Spanish children running away from home? What in these two pages of the prologue is this woman, who at the time of writing Middlemarch was living a robust life outside the strictures of decent society (she was openly living with a married man) saying about the opportunities, or lack of them, of women of imaginative power and intelligence?
Everyman wrote: "Although a number of Victorian novelists speak directly to their readers (Trollope being one of the best examples), I find George Eliot to be the most successful at this. In my view she is using M..."It seems you have read a bio on Eliot? I cannot respond to some of this as i have not read any biography on her nor have i studied in depth the 1830s provincial English life. I am gleaning only what i read out of the book. Can you point to some further reference I can take a look at?
I feel already from what i have read that she is pointing at extremes of social behavior. Each person in turn seems disassociated from the other. Some are completely egotistical, others are puritanical to the point of disregard, and some seem lost in their own world. i dont see any feeling yet of good will toward each other. Except for Mr Brooks, who seems to be fairly relax about things and open minded or also Mr. Cadwallader who seems willing to give people the benefit of the doubt instead of condemn them immedietly. Is Eliot pointing at some sort of hypocrisy she found in Provincial life or is this an allegory to the period she was living in 40 years later?
In journeying into book 2, my immediate question that comes to mind is what kind of change in medecine is happening at this moment in time? It seems she implies there are alot of doctors giving prescriptions that are useless or too much liberal use of drugs for cures? For me it is not clear yet in what the meaning is. I would suppose in reading what i have read so far that Lydgate means to use the knowledge he has gained in his studies and 'revamp' the provincial idea of medecine, diagnosis, and health in general. There is a small allusion to him trying not to prescribe to many drugs? Here is the small passage i am refering to.. "for since professional practice chiefly consisted in giving a great many drugs, the public inferred that it might be better off with more drugs still, if they could only be got cheaply, and hence swallowed large cubic measures of physic prescribed by unscrupulous ignorance which had taken no degrees." But maybe as i read more this will become clearer.
I confess i skimmed over the prelude having little idea what she meant. I will re read it and see what i can glean from it.
I haven't started this one yet - how is everyone else finding it so far?Also, for those who have also read The Mill on the Floss how does this compare for you? I haven't finished TMOTF yet and admit to struggling with it so I am curious.
Anna wrote: "My edition does not have this prologue. Which edition are you reading?"Sorry -- I should have said Prelude, not Prologue. I assume your volume has this? Two pages (in my edition) starting "Who that cares much to know the history of man..." and talks about the story of Saint Theresa.
Do you have this?
Boof wrote: "I haven't started this one yet - how is everyone else finding it so far?Also, for those who have also read The Mill on the Floss how does this compare for you?
Well, Middlemarch is one of my very favorite novels, so I'm prejudiced. [g:]
It is a much different novel from The Mill on the Floss. TMOTF is a more traditional story novel, semi-autobiographical, very enjoyable, but not a book, I think, which gives up deeper understandings and insights on the third, fourth, and fifth readings. Middlemarch is that and more.
Middlemarch is a much richer, more detailed, more philosophical novel, with intertwined stories (it actually started out as two independent books, one about Lydgate, one about Miss Brooke, which Eliot merged together into one work) based around a single town.
(This paragraph discusses some themes I find in it, which may be a bit of a spoiler for those who want to come at the story totally fresh, but I'm not revealing any plot details.) It deals with multiple issues, including (but by no means limited to) the dramatic changes in society which happened in early 19th Century England, developing industrialism vs. the traditional agrarian economy, class and gender distinctions and how they affected human relationships, idealism and conservatism, upward mobility or the lack thereof, scientific (largely medical) traditionalism vs. new ideas, and other issues using the town of Middlemarch as a sort of laboratory for exploring these ideas. But don't let this description scare you; it's also a very good novel simply in its storytelling aspect and the range of very well drawn and interesting characters and situations it presents. Much greater scope than any of Eliot's other novels, including TMOTF.
Virginia Woolf called it "the magnificent book that, with all its imperfections, is one of the few English novels written for grown-up people.” I think that's a pretty fair statement. It is not a casual read, but is one of those few books to be chewed and digested (Sir Francis Bacon: "Some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested: that is, some books are to be read only in parts, others to be read, but not curiously, and some few to be read wholly, and with diligence and attention.")
Hope this helps encourage you to tackle it and join the discussion!
Scott wrote: It seems you have read a bio on Eliot? I cannot respond to some of this as i have not read any biography on her nor have i studied in depth the 1830s provincial English life. I am gleaning only what i read out of the book. Can you point to some further reference I can take a look at?I haven't read a full biography of her, but am going on what I've read of introductions to several editions I've read of MM over the years, several entries in the Oxford Companion to George Eliot (including the pages on her life and those on MM itself), and various other places, including the section of The Victorian Web on Eliot-- I find TVW to be one of the best and generally most authoritative sources on Victorian life and literature that I'm aware of; everybody on this board should know about it!
I feel already from what i have read that she is pointing at extremes of social behavior.
I would have said differences rather than extremes, but I agree with your point. She is, I think, using her characters for very specific purposes.
In journeying into book 2, my immediate question that comes to mind is what kind of change in medecine is happening at this moment in time?
Here is a nice overview of developments during the period she is writing about ((the early 1830s).
It seems she implies there are alot of doctors giving prescriptions that are useless or too much liberal use of drugs for cures?
Yes, doctors made most of their money not from diagnosing, but from compounding and selling drugs, which I believe often were just palliative, often containing opiates -- you often read in Victorian or pre-Victorian novels of doctors prescribing laudanum, which was an alcoholic tincture of opium. No wonder the combination of alcohol and opium made patients feel better! But there was very little research into drugs that actually cured diseases. (Indeed, there was very little ability to diagnose; for example, we think of the stethoscope as a basic medical tool, but in 1840 some still thought of the stethoscope, invented in 1816, as a toy.
Everyman, thanks, that has made it sound really interesting. I love the Sir Francis Bacon quote too - spot on.
I haven't gotten to MOTF or MM either. I am still reading Villette. I am on the last book finally. I am also sneaking a fun one in between and I plan to read Vanity Fair with another group. So it may be a while before I get to them but I will.
Everyman wrote: "Scott wrote: It seems you have read a bio on Eliot? I cannot respond to some of this as i have not read any biography on her nor have i studied in depth the 1830s provincial English life. I am glea..."Thanks for the input Everyman. I will spend some time this weekend going over what you sent. I am all happy that i can dig further into the actual time period she is giving perspective on.
Everyman wrote: "Boof wrote: "I haven't started this one yet - how is everyone else finding it so far?Also, for those who have also read The Mill on the Floss how does this compare for you?
Well, Middlemarch ..."
I second Everyman on Middlemarch. It is so rich and vast in scope that I'm sure that it will be even more interesting in subsequent rereads. I suppose that it's Eliot at the height of her powers as a novelist. If TMOTF is a beautiful piano sonata, MM is an amazing full orchestral symphony. I hope the analogy makes sense. :-)
Everyman wrote: "The Prelude is often skimmed over by readers anxious to get to the meat of the novel, but I suggest that it deserves a bit of discussion. Why does Eliot start her novel, subtitled "A Study of [Eng..."Warning : mild spoilers.
Because the story of St. Theresa provides a contrast to the ultimate fate of Dorothea Brooke --- an idealistic, intelligent woman who is denied the education and freedom that she needs to realize her true potential. Society's strictures compel her to enter into a loveless (and somewhat degrading) marriage to Casaubon for the sake of attaining knowledge and a meaningful life outside of the domestic sphere. She is mercifully released from that bondage by his early death, but although she later found love and a somewhat useful occupation, she never achieved her true potential ---never lived an epic life as St. Theresa had.
To me one of the most tragic moments in the novel is when Dorothea realizes that Casaubon's learning is not quite what she thought it was. But how could she have judged it objectively when the tool to do so (the knowledge of classical languages) has been denied her because she is a woman?
Both Dorothea and Maggie in TMOTF are Eliot's avatars, and both women are punished by society for their intelligence and idealistic nature. Maggie is destroyed by it, but Dorothea survives although somewhat compromised. Eliot, by living an unconventional life, escaped the limitations of that society and went on to become a great novelist. Unlike her characters, she lived an epic life of her own.
I am definitely skipping the last post, as i have not completed the book yet. :-)I cannot make a comment about whether I think this is the best novel of Eliot or even of Victorian literature or not, maybe as I read more I will find out. Though I am more prone to liking the Authors and stories that are more overlooked.
Boof wrote: "I haven't started this one yet - how is everyone else finding it so far?I have been most surprised by the ease of reading. I was hesitant to devote brain cells that are in high demand to a slow, difficult novel, however I have pleasantly discovered that Eliot writes with such wit and observation that I am pulled quickly into the middle of her tale. I absolutely agree that she pulls off "speaking" to her audience in lovely, non-distracting ways. I find myself very ardently cheering for and against her characters who've become so real to me.
Ashley wrote: "Boof wrote: "I haven't started this one yet - how is everyone else finding it so far?I have been most surprised by the ease of reading. I was hesitant to devote brain cells that are in high deman..."
And it only gets better! After Book V I just couldn't put it down as the various plots that Eliot have set up earlier come to fruition.
Oh I am so glad to hear that. I didnt think I would give it a try. I guess I will at some point now.
I too was a little surprised at how readable MM is. I can't put it down. Every once in a while I get a little bogged down in her prose but when I take the time to go back and clarify I'm almost always amazed at her insights.
Everyman wrote: "The Prelude is often skimmed over by readers anxious to get to the meat of the novel, but I suggest that it deserves a bit of discussion. Why does Eliot start her novel, subtitled "A Study of [Eng..."I've read the prelude a few times now and I think she giving us instight into the mind of a certain type of woman. (Dorothea I'm assuming but I'm not all the way through part II yet so I could still be surprised.) A woman who doesn't fit into the current mold, who is capable of greater things but never quite find her purpose. An ugly duckling who never quite makes the transformation into swan.
Eliza wrote: "Everyman wrote: "The Prelude is often skimmed over by readers anxious to get to the meat of the novel, but I suggest that it deserves a bit of discussion. Why does Eliot start her novel, subtitled..."I think you are right. In reading over the Prelude again a few times I feel she is definitely alluding to Dorothea. I think. A woman searching for the unattainable epic ideal but eventually finding nothing and returning to the common yearning of womanhood? Like you stated.. 'capable of greater things but never quite finding her purpose. Or rather maybe Eliot is stating that that greater purpose is not found in religious fervor but in another type of deed and fullfillment?
Maybe this is why she combined the books of Miss Brooke and Lydgate. As Lydgate is the 'other side' of that coin, wherein he is searchign fullfillment of his purpose through science not religion.
Anna wrote: "Everyman wrote: "Anna wrote: "My edition does not have this prologue. Which edition are you reading?"Sorry -- I should have said Prelude, not Prologue. I assume your volume has this? Two page..."
Secretly she might want to be his equal, or to learn all she can from him. She seems more thinking he is a path to her spiritual vision, that he will show her the way. But i think mostly she just worships at his feet, will do anything for her supposed ideal. If she had found better then Causabon she would have gone for that. So there is no love here, just what can be gained from a situation. Her helping Causabon out is only 'in trade', it is not selfless.
It is true she needed someone that would contradict her and stimulate her intellect as she puts it. But it is a narrow area of intellectual pursuit, so only Causabon would seem to have fulfilled that.
Anna wrote: "I guess I was thinking that she could have worshipped at Causabon's feet, even read to him and assisted him like Milton's daughters, and not married him. It would have been perfectly acceptable for..."I've always seen Dorothea to be quite ambitious intellectually. She is desperate to learn classical languages (which Eliot tells us was an exclusive masculine learning) and even basic Hebrew. I suppose that it is nearly impossible for a woman at that time to gain such knowledge independently. She hopes to learn them through her marriage to Casaubon.
Casaubon's mythological research is very attractive to her because of her interest in religion. His aim is to find a unifiying theory for all mythologies, which if succesful would be quite an achievement in an age when such theories were in vogue. I believe that Lydgate is also seeking for something similar in the medical field. Assisting Casaubon in his discovery would be quite an achievement for Dorothea.
Perhaps she figures out that to be able to do all that, she needs to be married to him, instead of just becoming his student.
I think I've read somewhere that in her youth Eliot had a similar relationship with an older, learned man, although it was platonic.
Anna wrote: "I guess I was thinking that she could have worshipped at Causabon's feet, even read to him and assisted him like Milton's daughters, and not married him. It would have been perfectly acceptable for..."Ya, it does seem she could have taken a different avenue to get what she was looking for. i guess the question is, why does Eliot create the character to take this road rather then that other one. And why does Dorothea feel she must marry him to achieve this?
Sandybanks wrote: "Anna wrote: "I guess I was thinking that she could have worshipped at Causabon's feet, even read to him and assisted him like Milton's daughters, and not married him. It would have been perfectly a..."i guess i have to look at these relationships as more a means to an end. But is that how Victorians looked at things in general. Sandybanks,you give it a broad perspective, which maybe open up the complete view of the story for me. For when i am reading the book I feel I am tending to hone in on the bad parts of the characters. I do like the fact that Causabon is looking into mythology for his research, that is the only interesting part i find about him. Dorothea on the other hand i find looking to be selfless and instead being highly selfish, but maybe that will change as i go on reading. I think it is valid that she wants to be his equal, the road she took to get it is tragic. haha.. i dont know, at least that is what i am thinking at the moment.
Scott, i didn't like Dorothea when I first encountered her at the beginning of the book. She seems to be so uptight and moralistic, as well as somewhat cold. But I emphatized with her intellectual ambitions, even if her way to achieve them is questionable. This was the 1830's, and at that time women did not have any access to higher education or the professions. Women were allowed to learn a bit about music and painting at an amateur level (which Dorothea derides as 'small tinkling and smearing'), but the 'masculine' knowledge, such as Latin, science, theological studies etc. were only open to men. Therefore, her intellectual aspirations are actually quite subversive.Later we will meet another female character that society considers to be the epitome of womanhood. She provides a stark contrast to Dorothea.
I was wondering why Dorothea did not simply join a religious order, as she is religious, but apparently that option was also not open to her (in the Anglican church there was no religious order comparable to the one that St. Theresa belonged to).
This thread is getting very interesting!I'm not as far into the book as some of you seem to be at the moment but there are a couple of elements that strike me immediately about the book and Dorethea's character.
The first is the narrative voice - Eliot is quite pithy and I'm reading it as a very 'tongue in cheek' style of narrative. Does anyone else find this? - I'm wondering whether some 'under-the-radar' fun poking is going on at traditional Victorian values, accepted modes of behaviour and the role of men and women within society.
The second is that Dorethea is a particularly 'modern' character and I'm starting to think that Eliot was quite ahead of her time.
When does 'feminism' begin? - I'd always asumed that the first wave of feminism was around the 1920's and that it reached full force in the 60's. However, when I studied Mary Shelley's Frankenstein it appeared that Shelley's mother Mary Godwin Wollstonecraft had written what is held to be one of the first works of early feminism - 'The Vindication of the Rights of Women'. Is it feasible that Eliot had read this? and that Middlemarch is therefore a work of early feminism?
Dorethea's character type offers women readers of the time 'a different path' to traditional marriage and motherhood. Novels were not held in the same regard in Victorian times as they are today - many scholars of the day thought novels had the ability to corrupt young (unmarried?) female readers. Was Eliot, by marrying Dorothea off to Causabon, ensuring that the feminist messages were there for those who wanted to read them but at the same time were sufficiently screened from those who might attemp to censor the book in any way?
Just some half-formed thoughts to throw into the pot at this stage. - I'll keep reading!
Ally
Sandybanks wrote: "Scott, i didn't like Dorothea when I first encountered her at the beginning of the book. She seems to be so uptight and moralistic, as well as somewhat cold. But I emphatized with her intellectual ..."I guess I am learning quite alot about the idea of women and society in the 1830's within the context of this provincial area. For a fiction book, i am learning alot of social historical aspects. It is a good book though, because i am so caught up in either liking the character or not, wondering why they are making the choices they are making, etc.. already this far into the book i am hooked.
Allhug wrote: "This thread is getting very interesting!I'm not as far into the book as some of you seem to be at the moment but there are a couple of elements that strike me immediately about the book and Dor..."
If i get this right, Eliot is writing in the 1870's about the '30s? So she would be on the edge of where things started to change in society. Where women were more allowed in middleclass society to live on their own or begin to get a job of their own. I think it was the very beginning spark of the feminist movement ideas, though it was not really a movement per say yet. Correct me if i am wrong.
The first is the narrative voice - Eliot is quite pithy and I'm reading it as a very 'tongue in cheek' style of narrative. Does anyone else find this? - I'm wondering whether some 'under-the-radar' fun poking is going on at traditional Victorian values, accepted modes of behaviour and the role of men and women within society. "I've definitely found her to be very pithy. I've actually laughed out loud a few times.
"The first is the narrative voice - Eliot is quite pithy and I'm reading it as a very 'tongue in cheek' style of narrative. Does anyone else find this? - I'm wondering whether some 'under-the-radar' fun poking is going on at traditional Victorian values, accepted modes of behaviour and the role of men and women within society. "Ally, Eliot is a funny gal with a caustic sense of humor. These are some of the humorous passages that I found in Book I :
Plain women he regarded as he did the other severe facts of life, to be faced with philosophy and investigated by science. (Chap. 11) What Dr. Lydgate thinks of 'plain' women.
Mrs. Cadwallader insults Casaubon :
"He has got no good red blood in his body," said Sir James.
"No. Somebody put a drop under a magnifying-glass and it was all semicolons and parentheses," said Mrs. Cadwallader.(Chap. 8)
Mrs. Cadwallader makes fun of Casaubon's useless learning :
" ... As to his blood, I suppose the family quarterings are three cuttle-fish sable, and a comentator rampant..."(Chap. 6)
Mrs. Cadwallader is imagining Casaubon’s family crest to be one with three (ink spitting) cuttlefish and an expert who (uncontrollably) spreads his knowledge. lol
Mr. Brooke comments on the condition of the tenants in Lowick :
The speckled fowls were so numerous that Mr. Brooke observed, "Your farmers leave some barley for the women to glean, I see. The poor folks here might have a fowl in their pot, as the good French king used to wish for all his people. The French eat a good many fowls - skinny fowls, you know."
"I think it was a very cheap wish of his," said Dorothea, indignantly. "Are kings such monsters that a wish like that must be reckoned a royal virtue?"
"And if he wished them a skinny fowl," said Celia, "that would not be nice. But perhaps he wished them to have fat fowls." (Chap. 9)
Someone had actually written a Ph.d thesis on the use of humor in Middlemarch. Link :
http://tutkielmat.uta.fi/pdf/gradu035...
LOL - I agree - she loves her maxims doesn't she. Some of the funnier 'universal truths' I've found so far(...and not all of them are politically correct these days) are...p.9 - "Sane people did what their neighbours did, so that if any lunatics were at large, one might know and avoid them"
p.21 - "... Dorothea's inferences may seem large; but really life could never have gone on at any period but for this liberal allowance of conclusions, which has facilitated marriage under the difficulties of civilisations." (...refering to the hyperbolic tendancies of feminine, or probably just human, opinion when it comes to deciding on 'the one' to love - we exaggerate the bits we like and are blind to the bits we don't!).
(...page refs are to the Oxford World Classics version published in 2008).
Ally
Sandybanks wrote: ""The first is the narrative voice - Eliot is quite pithy and I'm reading it as a very 'tongue in cheek' style of narrative. Does anyone else find this? - I'm wondering whether some 'under-the-radar..."Was it considered funny at the time the book was released or was it only later people found it humerous?
Allhug wrote: "LOL - I agree - she loves her maxims doesn't she. Some of the funnier 'universal truths' I've found so far(...and not all of them are politically correct these days) are...p.9 - "Sane people di..."
the p.9 - "Sane people did what their neighbours did, so that if any lunatics were at large, one might know and avoid them" seems regressive rather then progressive.. haha
In my reading today I passed over something that Eliot wrote in chapter 18. It made me laugh slightly but also realize she gives a layered opinion at times of how things were seen or developing or had developed in this particular period of time with regards to doctors, diagnosis, and religion.'At all events, it is certain that if any medical man had come to Middlemarch with the reputation of having very definite religious views, of being given to prayer, and of otherwise showing an active piety, there would have been a general presumption against his medical skill'.
It seems she is stating that doctors were deemed more trustworthy and skillful in the peoples views if they were a bit less religious.
Also in the passage just before this where it says 'It was perhaps this negation in the Doctor (religious negation) which made his neighbours call him hard-headed and dry-witted; conditions of texture which were also held favourable to the storing of judgements connected with drugs.'
Scott wrote: "Sandybanks wrote: ""The first is the narrative voice - Eliot is quite pithy and I'm reading it as a very 'tongue in cheek' style of narrative. Does anyone else find this? - I'm wondering whether so..."Oh, I'm sure it was, Scott. I bet Eliot had her tongue firmly in her cheek while she wrote, and that her Victorian audience laughed and snickered with her. Like Austen's, her humor is ironic, and is used to question and criticize the people and society that she was writing about. That thing she wrote about doctors that you quoted is a pretty good example of it.
When I first read Middlemarch, I was (pleasantly) surprised by the humor, as I was with The Brothers Karamazovs. I expected them to be big, deadly serious classics. They deal with serious subjects, true, but that doesn't mean that they can't be humorous at the same time. After all, these novels were serialized in magazines and they had to keep their audiences entertained!
Allhug wrote: "LOL - I agree - she loves her maxims doesn't she. Some of the funnier 'universal truths' I've found so far(...and not all of them are politically correct these days) are...p.9 - "Sane people di..."
Yes, she does love her maxims! Maybe it would be interesting to note and quote them in this thread? I wish I had done that on my initial reading, but I was reading too fast for the plot.
I love the disucssions going on about this book. I haven't started it yet as I have started a new job this week and I am all over the place at the moment (physically and mentally ☺) and I can only just cope with about 50 pages of chick-lit per night. I will be sure to get to it sometime but in the meantime I'm loving the discussions.
I,m just up to chapter 9, so haven,t really read enough yet. I do know that at the mo I don,t really like Dorothea or Casaubon. She,s too young to marry himand Sir James is right she should wait until she is of age and she would probably have changed her mind by then. it will end in tears no doubt. Like Sir James and Mrs Cadwallader and Celia is nice enough. May change my mind about Dorothea later?
I find Dorothea a bit of an idealist - she's looking for a intellectually charged life rarely open to women of her time and is almost destined to have her dreams curtailed by marriage. I take on board what Anna said about not labelling Eliot as Feminist. However, have we reached a time when we can separate Feminism the 'movement' from 'Feminism' the concept? - Although it wasn't called feminism at that time, we collectively term such gender politics as feminism now. It's a bit like when we call Shelley, Keats, Wordsworth, Coleridge etc the 'Romantics' - there is the Romantic Movement and the concept of romanticism, which are both interwoven and separate.
I find Eliot's use of Dorethea as a progressive model of female aspiration to be very feminist in outlook and because this is beyond her own time-frame she's really thwarted in all her aims and dreams. Others of her time, her sister, uncle and suitors are all firmly rooted in the mindset of their own time. Its a bit like Dorothea is speaking a different language.
Also - what do we draw from Eliot's use of a Male Pseudonym?
Having almost reached the end of book 2 I have to admit my thoughts on Dorothea have changed since the beginning. I now feel I have much more sympathy toward the character and realize her aims to elevate herself, out of what I consider 'the norm' of the time, to be very progressive. The path she took was probably the only possibility the character could have taken to develop the way she wanted, though Sandybanks does mention that there could have been a possibility of entering a religious order. (or did the Anglican Church not have such a comparable religious order to join?)i agree that Eliot does seem to use Dorothea as a progressie model as Alhug mentions above. I believe in the time that Eliot wrote there was a small seed of 'Feminism' concept or wish though not movement developing. I have been reading a book called The Victorian Girl and the Feminine Ideal which details among the pages some of the progression towards women developing on their own in the realms of work and living alone, etc. (Though this book is most entirely on the Victorian ideal and the 'Domestic cult'. (Little girls as angels, etc.)
It seems that in the time Eliot wrote this book (1870s right?) these seedling changes would not have been really developing much.. It seems that it wasn't really till later that more changes in society and the Victorian Ideal begin to alter to accomodate certain ways of being for women and girls.
I think her use of a Male Pseudonym is saying that she could not be accepted as serious in the time she wrote her book unless she appropriated a Male Pseudonym. So that is a bit of our answer there, that whatever thoughts she had on 'feminist' concepts, writing was one of the few avenues she could let out some ideas. I wonder why she chose that exact name, and if it had a significance to her?
On another area of my reading I was curious to hear a bit more about Causabon's research. My ears lit up when i was hearing that he was researching a bit on the Philistine god Dagon and also the other fish sea gods, sun deities, etc.. Though he seems to be going in circles with his research. Is it true what Ladislaw says about the fact that because Causabon does not read German his research will never be worth much? That the German researchers of that period of time were much farther ahead then the rest of Europe?
I have just begun the book as I was finishing up some other group reads. I'm a quick reader generally so I should make some headway. Now having not gotten much farther than the prelude I don't have much to offer. I too was wondering about the male psuedonymn. I am thinking it was so people would take the work seriously. I have also wondered at her choice of name: perhaps George is from her lover, George Lewes I think his name was? I always think there's a meaning to everything though...it might have just sounded nice, lol! But my bigger question is why we still call her that. The Brontes, for example, all used male pen names, yet books are now published with their true names. George Sand, however is like Eliot, we've hung onto the psuedonym - why is that?
My understanding is that Casaubon's life-long research is obsolete --- he has been devoting his life to a futile activity. He is either ignorant of it (because of his refusal to read German), or is perfectly aware of it but deludes himself that his research is still relevant. It's been a few months since I read Middlemarch, and some of the details of the plot have receded in my memory.It is doubly tragic for Dorothea that, after realizing that she is trapped in a loveless marriage, she is also now aware that the meaningful occupation that she hoped to get with the marriage does not exist.
Thalia wrote: "I have just begun the book as I was finishing up some other group reads. I'm a quick reader generally so I should make some headway. Now having not gotten much farther than the prelude I don't ha..."Does anyone know of any good biographies on George Eliot? I find it might enlighten my understand a bit if i read something about her.
Allhug wrote: "I find Dorothea a bit of an idealist - she's looking for a intellectually charged life rarely open to women of her time and is almost destined to have her dreams curtailed by marriage. I take o..."
Allhug wrote: "I find Dorothea a bit of an idealist - she's looking for a intellectually charged life rarely open to women of her time and is almost destined to have her dreams curtailed by marriage.
I take o..."
I agree with this post. The term "feminism" wasn't used but there is a strong feminist viewpoint nevertheless. I haven't read a bio of George Eliot, but clearly she was ahead of her time, living out of wedlock with her lover, etc. And Dorothea clearly longs for a life that is both productive and intellectual, something that was frowned upon for women in those days.
Incidentally, speaking of romantics, I think Mary Shelley was also pretty "feminist" in spirit, wasn't she?
Sandybanks wrote: "Society's strictures compel her to enter into a loveless (and somewhat degrading) marriage to Casaubon for the sake of attaining knowledge and a meaningful life outside of the domestic sphere."(I'm addressing only this part of the post since it contains no spoilers for Parts 1 and 2.)
That's an attitude toward the marriage I haven't considered before. I haven't seen it so much as society's strictures compelling the marriage, as much as her hunger to be associated with a man who she saw as equivalent to a Milton. Though I do agree that she saw this marriage as the best way to participate in the life of the intellect that she craved.
And while it might have been loveless on his part, I don't think it was on hers. But she may have loved her conception of the man more than the reality of the man; but then, is that any different from many people who get married today??
Allhug wrote: "This thread is getting very interesting!"It is indeed! It was slow getting started, but I'm really enjoying the insights and some new ideas -- no matter how many times you read a great book like this, there's always some fresh way of looking at it. And this group is the place to find those new ideas!
Victorians!
Books mentioned in this topic
The Rise of Respectable Society: A Social History of Victorian Britain, 1830-1900 (other topics)Inside the Victorian Home: A Portrait of Domestic Life in Victorian England (other topics)
The Mill on the Floss (other topics)
The Real Life of Mary Ann Evans: George Eliot, Her Letters and Fiction (other topics)
The Victorian Girl and the Feminine Ideal (other topics)
I am going on holiday tonight so I won't be here to set this up on 1st so sorry it's a little early but please join in when you can.
There are threads for 2 books at a time and also one for those who have finished (further down this section - just click on "all" to find it).
Enjoy!!! ☺