Sign in with Facebook
Traveller's Reviews > Middlemarch
Middlemarch
by
by
Since I've been told bigger is better, and long reviews are better than short ones, I've decided to update my short Middlemarch review with a long one:
Although Eliot started working on the serialised chapters of Middlemarch around about 1868 (they were published three years later), it is set in roughly 1829-1832, (so writing it took place roughly 40 years after the setting) which gave her the advantage of hindsight.
It is partly this, and the fact that Eliot did a lot of conscientious research, that enabled her to render the period with such historical accuracy.
Aristophanes, Plato, and Goethe, Feuerbach, Spinoza, and Auguste Comte all had an influence on Eliot's thought; -though she seems to illustrate in Middlemarch a kind of social determinism. It seems to me that she is saying that your class will to a large extent determine how you live (which was largely true still in the era that the novel is set in).
Individual character and 'moral fiber' is important to Eliot, but in her novel personal ideals easily become shipwrecked on the rocks of what the forces of society has pre-ordained for you.
19th Century determinism was to a large extent due to Darwinism: The question to be considered in this regard is, do people lack all free will - are their actions predetermined by their genetic make-up, and/or their psychological background, or do people have a real opportunity to make an impact on the world, and to be responsible for their actions? Eliot seems to lean towards the idea that good intentions don't necessarily spell success, and not only character plays a role: choices and environment do too.
However, the choices of Eliot's characters are subjugated by the forces of society. The characters play out what seems to be pre-set "roles" for them; no matter how they struggle, like flies in a web, they eventually have to conform to the role society has laid out for them.
The portrayal of marriages play a large role in Middlemarch, in illustrating various things.
In the marriages that Eliot portrays, we see mainly personal character coming into play with the strictures of society, and the ways in which the latter confines these people decides on the final happiness or not of the characters. The good outcome of the marriages don't depend on divine providence anymore, as it tended to in novels written before the realist/humanist/rationalist style that Eliot to a large extent pioneered, came into being; it is now the forces and expectations of society.
Material wealth and affluence play a large part, too, in how the characters manage to handle the forces society exerts upon the individual: at least four of the marriages are "made or broken" in part by how the protagonists manage to attain their wealth, but there is a very complex interplay regarding how the characters manage or attain their wealth.
An important early influence in Eliot's life was religion. She was brought up within a Low Church Anglican family, but she soon rejected religion in favor of the aforementioned schools of thought. The importance of morals and 'duty' still remained deeply ingrained in her belief system, though.
The possession of knowledge, and the use of that knowledge is highly praised by Elliot. She makes a distinction between the dead and irrelevant knowledge that her character Casaubon displays, and the living and useful knowledge that her characters Lydgate, Farebrother and Mrs Garth possess. The 19th century saw a great move towards more "practical" thought. Scientific thought was starting to revolutionize every sphere of human life.
It is probably of use to take cognizance of the industrial sociopolitical background to the period that the novel covers:
The 19th century was the age of machine tools - tools that made tools - machines that made parts for other machines, including interchangeable parts. The assembly line was invented during the 19th century, speeding up the factory production of consumer goods. There was a lot of resistance towards automation from the lower classes, since many people were displaced from their work by machines, especially in the textile industry.
In rural areas the remains of the feudal system could still be seen in that land tenants gave labour for the right of tenancy, but didn't receive much as payment, and often lived in very poor conditions. The industrial revolution saw a sharp rise in population, and resulting increase in a poverty-stricken lower class.
There were groups agitating for reform, but most of them confined themselves to lawful, non-violent means of supporting reform, such as petitioning and public oratory, and they achieved a great level of public support.
The many social injustices such as young children working exceedingly long hours in mines and factories, and being made to do very dangerous work;
industrialists preferring to employ women and children because they could get away with paying them less, etc,
as well as the aftermath and influences of the French Revolution and humanism on general thought, was stirring winds and thoughts of political revolution throughout English society.
The upper classes, as quite humoristically portrayed by Mr Brooke in Middlemarch, would, according to Eliot's portrayal, albeit reluctantly, prefer to "go with the times" than to be "caught up in, or going against an avalanche" ..and lose their heads as had so many of the French aristocracy.
The period also saw the rise of wealthy capitalists - all of these are represented in the novel, there is a family from each walk of life represented in Eliot's cast of characters.
Middlemarch also illuminates many aspects of scientific thought at the time. The novel exhibits an extraordinary interest in medical politics, especially.
General influences here, were Bichat, Lyley, Claude Bernard, Auguste Comte T.H. Huxley, John Stuart Mill, William Whewell, Herbert Spencer,and G.H. Lewes, Eliot's companion.
The 19th century gave birth to the professional scientist; interesting to note, is that the word 'scientist' was first used in 1833 by William Whewell.
In Middlemarch, Eliot pays a lot of attention to what is happening to the medical profession at the time.
According to her various biographies, she did quite a bit of research into what was happening on the front of medical science.
For instance, one of the historically true incidents reflected in Middlemarch, is that in 1932 a worldwide Cholera pandemic reached Britain. Lydgate, one of the protagonists of the novel, is involved in and very much interested in studying and treating fevers, such as Typhoid and Cholera.
A note of interest: In 1819 René Laënnec invented the stethoscope, one of the instruments mentioned in the novel; - at that point in time, this was something quite cutting edge and new .
Before the advent of the 18th century, the medical profession had not progressed much since classical times. In fact, people were probably even worse off in places like Christian hospitals, where the main cure given to patients was prayer.
There had been, throughout the Middle Ages, a belief that the human body should remain intact after death, since it would rise up to heaven in a glorified state. In Middlemarch, we see this sentiment to some extent still prevalent, something which Eliot seems to deplore.
Incidentally, it was a common theme in Victorian literature to paint doctors and students of science who wanted to dissect human bodies as "evil". Of course, one needs to dissect the human body before you can research what it looks like inside, and how it works, so of course beliefs like these held back the progression of medical science.
In the novel, Eliot also focuses on the aspect of gender inequality that existed at the time. Women didn't receive the same education as men, and especially upper class and aristocratic ladies were expected to be merely ornamental; (view spoiler)
Time and time again, Eliot illustrates the frustration that an intelligent woman had to endure in Victorian England: "...there was the stifling oppression of that gentlewoman's world, where everything was done for her and none asked for her aid – where the sense of connection with a manifold pregnant existence had to be kept up painfully as an inward vision, instead of coming from without in claims that would have shaped her energies. "
I noted Eliot's strong interest in Saint Theresa of Avila, whom she introduces in her prologue, and found it rather representative of Eliot's idealistic bent.
Dorothea, one of the protagonists, is compared throughout the novel to her. Saint Theresa was an idealistic religious mystic, who fought for reform in the church; Dorothea is similarly an idealistic dreamer, bent on reform, but totally out of touch with the practical realities of life. I think Saint Theresa probably mainly represents reform to Eliot, but also someone who led a dramatic, even heroic "epic" life, as the conclusion to the novel suggests. In the latter, Dorothea fails, she never does anything large or heroic, but Eliot suggest that change can also be wrought in smaller, multitudinous pervasive acts.
As far as Eliot's illustration in the novel of the institution of marriage is concerned, her different portraits of marriage is various and complex, so the message she seems to bring across is that a marriage can be beneficial to the partners only under a certain set of circumstances: if the marriage fits in with society, but above all, that the two partners be suited to one another.
Eliot herself knew only too well the sting of social disapproval, since she was forced to live with a still married man (Henry Lewes could not divorce due to religious reasons), and society in general, even her own family, cut her off because of this.
Eliot is known for attempting to establish realism in her novels, and I think she does that well, but for one little niggle I have - that loud very visible intrusion that she as author makes into the narrative.
This might be a thoughtful and thought-provoking work, but the best in English Literature? Not quite, in my book.
For me there is too much narration and "interference" by the author's voice. I know this is part and parcel of Victorian writing, but really, when it's pages and pages apiece, it just becomes unbearable. Victor Hugo, one of my favorite authors, was also guilty of this, but somehow he does it more interestingly, and in less of a schoolmarmish tone.
The novel would be more enjoyable if culled by about a quarter of all the pages of narration, (some events and scenes are really carried on in too much detail, like for instance the comments and reactions of the townspeople regarding Lydgate - a lot of it gets repetitive) and the tedious didactic commentary. It's like Eliot hits you over the head with the same hammer a few times, to make sure that what she's trying to get across sinks in properly.
Eliot as author/narrator just glares at you from every page.
Well, I salute all of you who actually read every unabridged word and still had the mental and emotional energy at the end, to give this book 5 stars. I subtracted at least 1 star for my gripes as mentioned above. :)
No doubt MS Eliot AKA Evans/Cross was a very intelligent and learned lady, delightful to those who knew her personally, I'm sure, but her tone is simply too didactic for my tastes. However, given the scope she achieves, this novel is certainly a huge achievement.
Bottom line - I reckon that all the work and erudition that went into this novel deserves a 4 at least, in spite of my grumbles. I also laud Eliot's reformist attitudes, so I suppose one should try and look past a less than pleasing style.
Although Eliot started working on the serialised chapters of Middlemarch around about 1868 (they were published three years later), it is set in roughly 1829-1832, (so writing it took place roughly 40 years after the setting) which gave her the advantage of hindsight.
It is partly this, and the fact that Eliot did a lot of conscientious research, that enabled her to render the period with such historical accuracy.
Aristophanes, Plato, and Goethe, Feuerbach, Spinoza, and Auguste Comte all had an influence on Eliot's thought; -though she seems to illustrate in Middlemarch a kind of social determinism. It seems to me that she is saying that your class will to a large extent determine how you live (which was largely true still in the era that the novel is set in).
Individual character and 'moral fiber' is important to Eliot, but in her novel personal ideals easily become shipwrecked on the rocks of what the forces of society has pre-ordained for you.
19th Century determinism was to a large extent due to Darwinism: The question to be considered in this regard is, do people lack all free will - are their actions predetermined by their genetic make-up, and/or their psychological background, or do people have a real opportunity to make an impact on the world, and to be responsible for their actions? Eliot seems to lean towards the idea that good intentions don't necessarily spell success, and not only character plays a role: choices and environment do too.
However, the choices of Eliot's characters are subjugated by the forces of society. The characters play out what seems to be pre-set "roles" for them; no matter how they struggle, like flies in a web, they eventually have to conform to the role society has laid out for them.
The portrayal of marriages play a large role in Middlemarch, in illustrating various things.
In the marriages that Eliot portrays, we see mainly personal character coming into play with the strictures of society, and the ways in which the latter confines these people decides on the final happiness or not of the characters. The good outcome of the marriages don't depend on divine providence anymore, as it tended to in novels written before the realist/humanist/rationalist style that Eliot to a large extent pioneered, came into being; it is now the forces and expectations of society.
Material wealth and affluence play a large part, too, in how the characters manage to handle the forces society exerts upon the individual: at least four of the marriages are "made or broken" in part by how the protagonists manage to attain their wealth, but there is a very complex interplay regarding how the characters manage or attain their wealth.
An important early influence in Eliot's life was religion. She was brought up within a Low Church Anglican family, but she soon rejected religion in favor of the aforementioned schools of thought. The importance of morals and 'duty' still remained deeply ingrained in her belief system, though.
The possession of knowledge, and the use of that knowledge is highly praised by Elliot. She makes a distinction between the dead and irrelevant knowledge that her character Casaubon displays, and the living and useful knowledge that her characters Lydgate, Farebrother and Mrs Garth possess. The 19th century saw a great move towards more "practical" thought. Scientific thought was starting to revolutionize every sphere of human life.
It is probably of use to take cognizance of the industrial sociopolitical background to the period that the novel covers:
The 19th century was the age of machine tools - tools that made tools - machines that made parts for other machines, including interchangeable parts. The assembly line was invented during the 19th century, speeding up the factory production of consumer goods. There was a lot of resistance towards automation from the lower classes, since many people were displaced from their work by machines, especially in the textile industry.
In rural areas the remains of the feudal system could still be seen in that land tenants gave labour for the right of tenancy, but didn't receive much as payment, and often lived in very poor conditions. The industrial revolution saw a sharp rise in population, and resulting increase in a poverty-stricken lower class.
There were groups agitating for reform, but most of them confined themselves to lawful, non-violent means of supporting reform, such as petitioning and public oratory, and they achieved a great level of public support.
The many social injustices such as young children working exceedingly long hours in mines and factories, and being made to do very dangerous work;
industrialists preferring to employ women and children because they could get away with paying them less, etc,
as well as the aftermath and influences of the French Revolution and humanism on general thought, was stirring winds and thoughts of political revolution throughout English society.
The upper classes, as quite humoristically portrayed by Mr Brooke in Middlemarch, would, according to Eliot's portrayal, albeit reluctantly, prefer to "go with the times" than to be "caught up in, or going against an avalanche" ..and lose their heads as had so many of the French aristocracy.
The period also saw the rise of wealthy capitalists - all of these are represented in the novel, there is a family from each walk of life represented in Eliot's cast of characters.
Middlemarch also illuminates many aspects of scientific thought at the time. The novel exhibits an extraordinary interest in medical politics, especially.
General influences here, were Bichat, Lyley, Claude Bernard, Auguste Comte T.H. Huxley, John Stuart Mill, William Whewell, Herbert Spencer,and G.H. Lewes, Eliot's companion.
The 19th century gave birth to the professional scientist; interesting to note, is that the word 'scientist' was first used in 1833 by William Whewell.
In Middlemarch, Eliot pays a lot of attention to what is happening to the medical profession at the time.
According to her various biographies, she did quite a bit of research into what was happening on the front of medical science.
For instance, one of the historically true incidents reflected in Middlemarch, is that in 1932 a worldwide Cholera pandemic reached Britain. Lydgate, one of the protagonists of the novel, is involved in and very much interested in studying and treating fevers, such as Typhoid and Cholera.
A note of interest: In 1819 René Laënnec invented the stethoscope, one of the instruments mentioned in the novel; - at that point in time, this was something quite cutting edge and new .
Before the advent of the 18th century, the medical profession had not progressed much since classical times. In fact, people were probably even worse off in places like Christian hospitals, where the main cure given to patients was prayer.
There had been, throughout the Middle Ages, a belief that the human body should remain intact after death, since it would rise up to heaven in a glorified state. In Middlemarch, we see this sentiment to some extent still prevalent, something which Eliot seems to deplore.
Incidentally, it was a common theme in Victorian literature to paint doctors and students of science who wanted to dissect human bodies as "evil". Of course, one needs to dissect the human body before you can research what it looks like inside, and how it works, so of course beliefs like these held back the progression of medical science.
In the novel, Eliot also focuses on the aspect of gender inequality that existed at the time. Women didn't receive the same education as men, and especially upper class and aristocratic ladies were expected to be merely ornamental; (view spoiler)
Time and time again, Eliot illustrates the frustration that an intelligent woman had to endure in Victorian England: "...there was the stifling oppression of that gentlewoman's world, where everything was done for her and none asked for her aid – where the sense of connection with a manifold pregnant existence had to be kept up painfully as an inward vision, instead of coming from without in claims that would have shaped her energies. "
I noted Eliot's strong interest in Saint Theresa of Avila, whom she introduces in her prologue, and found it rather representative of Eliot's idealistic bent.
Dorothea, one of the protagonists, is compared throughout the novel to her. Saint Theresa was an idealistic religious mystic, who fought for reform in the church; Dorothea is similarly an idealistic dreamer, bent on reform, but totally out of touch with the practical realities of life. I think Saint Theresa probably mainly represents reform to Eliot, but also someone who led a dramatic, even heroic "epic" life, as the conclusion to the novel suggests. In the latter, Dorothea fails, she never does anything large or heroic, but Eliot suggest that change can also be wrought in smaller, multitudinous pervasive acts.
As far as Eliot's illustration in the novel of the institution of marriage is concerned, her different portraits of marriage is various and complex, so the message she seems to bring across is that a marriage can be beneficial to the partners only under a certain set of circumstances: if the marriage fits in with society, but above all, that the two partners be suited to one another.
Eliot herself knew only too well the sting of social disapproval, since she was forced to live with a still married man (Henry Lewes could not divorce due to religious reasons), and society in general, even her own family, cut her off because of this.
Eliot is known for attempting to establish realism in her novels, and I think she does that well, but for one little niggle I have - that loud very visible intrusion that she as author makes into the narrative.
This might be a thoughtful and thought-provoking work, but the best in English Literature? Not quite, in my book.
For me there is too much narration and "interference" by the author's voice. I know this is part and parcel of Victorian writing, but really, when it's pages and pages apiece, it just becomes unbearable. Victor Hugo, one of my favorite authors, was also guilty of this, but somehow he does it more interestingly, and in less of a schoolmarmish tone.
The novel would be more enjoyable if culled by about a quarter of all the pages of narration, (some events and scenes are really carried on in too much detail, like for instance the comments and reactions of the townspeople regarding Lydgate - a lot of it gets repetitive) and the tedious didactic commentary. It's like Eliot hits you over the head with the same hammer a few times, to make sure that what she's trying to get across sinks in properly.
Eliot as author/narrator just glares at you from every page.
Well, I salute all of you who actually read every unabridged word and still had the mental and emotional energy at the end, to give this book 5 stars. I subtracted at least 1 star for my gripes as mentioned above. :)
No doubt MS Eliot AKA Evans/Cross was a very intelligent and learned lady, delightful to those who knew her personally, I'm sure, but her tone is simply too didactic for my tastes. However, given the scope she achieves, this novel is certainly a huge achievement.
Bottom line - I reckon that all the work and erudition that went into this novel deserves a 4 at least, in spite of my grumbles. I also laud Eliot's reformist attitudes, so I suppose one should try and look past a less than pleasing style.
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
Middlemarch.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
Comments Showing 1-41 of 41 (41 new)
date
newest »
newest »
Mariel wrote: "If Mj said that there must have been some ironical intent? He's well known for refusing to read long reviews (such as Ian's!). I figure friends on the feed don't want to read my long ones but that ..."But those people's reviews can be very informative. Ian has literally almost done a college paper on The Recognitions, and Bird's last review is actually very interesting if one has the time to get through it.
..and I always read your reviews if I catch them. Sometimes I miss reviews though, because the feed gets so busy at times due to the tons of people that I follow.
Oh, and btw, I did check for your review of MM, but there isn't any. :P
I have never been able to love Eliot, but maybe she will make a better impression on me in my 40s than she did on me in my 20s. I often wonder if I didn't waste a lot of time reading too many great books in my 20s, but then who would I be today. I kind of like who I am today.
Jeffrey wrote: "I have never been able to love Eliot, but maybe she will make a better impression on me in my 40s than she did on me in my 20s. I often wonder if I didn't waste a lot of time reading too many great..."She requires an exceeding amount of patience. There was actually a whole lot of (to me) interesting stuff about medical politics that I also wanted to include in my review, and perhaps I'll put it in later when I have some time for it.
To me, that was the most interesting aspect of reading this novel, actually. I didn't quite understand, at the point before I started reading this, the difference between an apothecary, a surgeon and a physician as they were defined in those days, and my research on the issue actually quite astonished me.
Traveller wrote: "Jeffrey wrote: "I have never been able to love Eliot, but maybe she will make a better impression on me in my 40s than she did on me in my 20s. I often wonder if I didn't waste a lot of time readin..."One of the great things about goodreads is that reviews are never finished. We can tinker with our reviews for infinity.
I'm a fan of the short - mid-range review myself. It is the best way to limit my interwebby burblings.
Shovelmonkey1 wrote: "I'm a fan of the short - mid-range review myself. It is the best way to limit my interwebby burblings."Yes, I'm in a double-bind to some extent re that. I find informative reviews very enriching; the problem is though, the time it takes to read them.
The very well-written ones are usually at least as worthwhile as notes on the book would have been, so I appreciate that aspect of it.
This review was so good; made me want to read the book again actually as it has been so long and I admit that at the time I was reading one eighteenth-or-nineteenth century novel every two weeks for a literature course and so often ended up skipping or skimming through parts. I really did enjoy Elliot's style though, but suspect that the schoolmarmish tone to which you aluded would grate on me much more today.Longer reviews are not automatically better, but more thought and discussion is certainly a good thing. I notice that I don't really enjoy hammering nails into someone's work all that much, so the books I don't like at all get very short reviews, whereas the ones that I love are those which I would have a great deal to say about.
Jean-marcel wrote: "This review was so good; made me want to read the book again actually as it has been so long and I admit that at the time I was reading one eighteenth-or-nineteenth century novel every two weeks fo..."Gee, thanks, Jean-marcel! *blushes* Actually quite a lot of research went into this, so I appreciate that.
But I really wish I had even more space to put in all that goodness about the doctors!
Eliot really did her homework regarding that. I must admit that I admire her for her hard work and scope.
I suppose I should look for a group discussion on the book sometime.
There must be one! I don't know when I'll get to the book again. There was actually another book of hers that I wanted to read first...Silas Marner. Being on goodreads the past few weeks has made me aware that I need to start reading classics again, or at least, ones that aren't Russian. :PTime to check out your reviews now; I figured out how to comment from the review/shelf page at last!
Great Review, Traveller. Big and broad like the book it proclaims. I was unaware of some of these social forces at work. I just know that I fell in love with Dorothea Brooke, "foundress of nothing, whose loving- heart beats and sobs after an unobtained goodness."
*pant*pant*gasp*pant*I made it! I made it! I want my PhD now, please.
As very cogent as the long form review you wrote is, it was intimidating on first viewing....
Oh, my goodness, what on earth is up with Goodreads updates? Pehaps I've just been so busy that I never noticed the notifications come and go, but please accept a belated thank you for the kind remarks.Richard, if you really read all of it right to the end, you deserve a very special prize - I'll mail you a silver hip flask full of very special coffee. :) I actually wanted to make this review even longer, but I'll add the additional stuff separately under "writing".
I guess it's only when I saw the size of my review, and even so had not even said everything I had wanted to say, that I realized the magnificent scope of this novel.
I just assumed you read my comments and decided you didn't like me anymore. No worries. ;-PCoincidentally, it's turned chilly, cloudy, and windy outside, so I was partaking of Symposium coffee already!
Richard wrote: "I just assumed you read my comments and decided you didn't like me anymore. No worries. ;-PCoincidentally, it's turned chilly, cloudy, and windy outside, so I was partaking of Symposium coffee al..."
Nothing like a good flask of coffee to warm you up! ;)
..and like any Saint Bernard laboring through icy wind and snow with a flask of brandy around his neck to rescue poor lost travelers will tell you; - adding a dash of brandy to it will speed the effect remarkably! ;D LOL
(Watch out how much brandy you add, mind) >:D
Uhhhh...huh. Hmmm. Right. And this
Why get something else dirty? Just gotta wash it anyway.
Wow, what a review. Good stuff. The whole bit about the medical trends of the time sounds really interesting. I've been meaning to check this out since I saw that episode of 30 Rock where Tracy Morgan accusses his buddy of being sexist and only reading men, he throws his copy of Middlemarch down and shouts 'George Eliot was a woman!' I hadn't known that until then.
I love when a reviewer can be so critical of a work but still rate it so highly. I've been reading (struggling with) this book for almost 4 months. I've read several books since beginning it. With far more grace than I could have possibly mustered, you have precisely articulated and nailed nearly every detraction I have been challenged with. And yet, you have given it 4 stars! I have been searching high and low for permission to just give up. I know it's a great achievement but I Am drained mentally and emotionally by this book. By most others than Eliot and I would have slammed this thing shut never to return again.
I was raised Catholic, I always had this affinity for both Saint Teresa and Saint Therese, I work in medicine and know the politics, I'm passionate about equality... I get it. I guess it's just tough to be in the choir with so much preaching going on.
I'll finish Middlemarch (after about 6 more other books) but I don't see 4 let alone 5 stars in the future. I guess that's what separates the hacks from the really great reviewers.
Another great review, Traveller... thank you.
This was a tough one for me, Robert, both to read and review. There really are a lot of interesting issues raised in the book, but she can waffle and waffle incredibly. At times, when she'd carry on about a minor detail for pages, i felt like throwing the book across the room!It's a bit like War & Peace, which is really a great book - i love all of Pierre's philosophising and his spiritual and physical adventures as well as Count.. (ok, I went and forgot his name again) as well as the bits with Napoleon. But so drawn out, and with so many characters included that Tolstoy could have left out!
I suppose books like these were fine at a time when people had little else to read...
..and i hereby give you permission to skim. Just skim through the pages of waffling, and if something catches your eye slow down. (Hope you're not doing this as an audiobook?)
The best plan is actually to borrow a DVD of the BBC TV series of the book from the library, and after you'd watched it, give the book a quick skim through, and thar you go! XD
I have a book or two that i've marked as 'skimmed' . One of them is an autobiography of George Elliot, which is actually quite a bit thicker than Middlemarch is.. :P
Oh Jen, thank you, thank you. I was really only being rhetorical about seeking permission but I'll take yours literally. I love long books when I'm reading one that really grabs me. That is one of the reasons that I am so picky about what I choose to read. And dang, I hate to give up on a purported-to-be masterpiece but skim it will be. And, ah, yeah. It's another audiobook but I can skim.
Actually, I got the DVD last month looking for inspiration to finish the book. I've cheated that way before when just trying to figure out what a particular book was supposed to be about. I started watching the Middlemarch DVD twice and fell asleep both times. Can you believe it? I guess sometimes things just don't resonate. I have to get credit for trying though.
You probably meant Count Bezukhov; yes, WaP was wonderful. I recently read a review by someone I follow who gave WaP 1 star. Humans are unbelievably funny.
Robert wrote: "You probably meant Count Bezukhov;"Ah, no sorry, i had actually meant PRINCE Andrei Bolkonsky ... sorry, i don't know why i can never remember his name and station... as for Count Pierre Bhezukhov, why, he and i are on first name terms. hahaha. (He is who i meant when i said 'Pierre')
As for Middlemarch.. you couldn't even get into the DVD...-twice? This is obviously a marriage not made in heaven; a liason not meant to be.
Robert Delikat, i hereby pronounce you divorced from Middlemarch - you are now officially absconded from reading (or skimming, or listening to) another single word from this tome... go in peace, and go free. ;)
I've just ploughed thru this 'meself and totally agree with you about the didactic and repetitive nature of this novel. Contrast to say Hardy's Return of the Native (written ten years later) or anything by the Bronte's but especiually Wuthering Heights: and its apparent immediately whats missing: there is no atmosphere, no real passion, and yes, I know she's aiming for realism, but I just couldn't engage. Not awful, by any means, but just lacking that je ne se quoi: and your review is great.I'll just add she got a lot of flak for dipping her toe in in 'men's business' on publication (! sheesh!) and also that as far as I can tell, free will in 1830s england is a chimera: social classes were too prevalent and the economy too tight to allow real movement.
knig wrote: "I'll just add she got a lot of flak for dipping her toe in in 'men's business' on publication (! sheesh!) and also that as far as I can tell, free will in 1830s england is a chimera: social classes were too prevalent and the economy too tight to allow real movement. .."Cool, Knig, thanks, and congrats on having made it to the other side!
Both very interesting points, yes. I'm so used to our modern privileges that I'd neglected to mention how extraordinarily erudite Eliot was for a woman of her time, though I hope that is implicit in my review and the reason why i gave it a high rating. (In any event, i literally ran out of character space.)
As for free will in 19th century England, of course this is true, and I think Eliot quite nicely reflected this especially with poor Lydgate. Not as dramatically as Hardy with, for instance Tess and Jude, or Bronte with Heathcliff, agreed, but eloquent in its significance, nonetheless.
Long reviews accompanied with great quality is what makes them better and you give us exactly that. Excellent review, Trav. I'm a bit reluctant in picking this book because of various reasons (it's length is NOT one of them) but after reading your detailed analysis, I'm ready to include it in my tbr.
Thanks Garima! It's actually an old review, as you see, but I saw some things that I'd wanted to fix, and forgot to unclick the 'remove from feed' button.In any case, I will admit to you that at times, especially towards the end, you might reach moments where you want to heave that hefty volume across the room from being so tired of it; because this is indeed not a slim little volume. You might want to skim at these parts, and I'd encourage you to do so. :D
What is nice about the book, is that I'd reckon there will be something for everyone in it. Some people might for instance like the characterization, the development of the characters as they see their dreams go by, unattained, and for instance the portrayal of the various relationships, including the different marriages, which I didn't have the space to address, because I was tickled by the scientific and political issues which she addressed amazingly well, even if one doesn't take into account that she was actually a woman...
Like I said, the book is certainly 5 star material if only she could have been more brief, and is probably 5 star material as it stands, in any case (especially when taking in account that people tended to have more time to read back then, he he.).
Excellent review, Traveller. You've convinced me that I need to read this book.
Diane wrote: "Excellent review, Traveller. You've convinced me that I need to read this book."Thanks, Diane!
s.penkevich wrote: "Wow, what a review. Good stuff. The whole bit about the medical trends of the time sounds really interesting. I've been meaning to check this out since I saw that episode of 30 Rock where Tracy Mor..."
Oh. my. golly. gosh. How could I have missed Spenke's comment? Especially since I had not had space to write about the medical politics aspect in the review itself, but was looking for an opportunity to waffle on about it... I'd read up a whole thing about how the politics used to work between surgeons and physicians. The latter was reserved for gentlemen, and the other was the province of the 'working classes', and so Lydgate was attempting to apply himself in a field that was not fit for a gentleman. As we also see in the novel (and as was the situation in England at that point in time), the medical profession wasn't seen as a "gentlemanly" pursuit. A true gentleman was expected never to "dirty his hands".
But, just like Dorothea, Lydgate was an idealistic reformer; he fought against the many wrongs apparent in the medical profession of the time, and was met with much opposition from patients and colleagues alike, for instance, the fact that doctors only charged for medicines, not for the consultation, and therefore often prescribed medications even when they were unnecessary, just to get paid.
This has been sitting on shelf for such a long time. Now that I've read your review, I feel I should get to it soon.
Meenakshi wrote: "This has been sitting on shelf for such a long time. Now that I've read your review, I feel I should get to it soon."I quite understand your trepidation, Meenakshi! You might need to push yourself through in certain places, but least one has a feeling of satisfaction once done with it.
Good luck!
Krys wrote: "Spoiler !!! :("Do you mean I have spoilers in the review? If you'd be kind enough to point them out under a spoiler tag or via a PM, I would be happy to hide them. :)
'liked' in spite of the length
Traveller wrote: "Krys wrote: "Spoiler !!! :("Do you mean I have spoilers in the review? If you'd be kind enough to point them out under a spoiler tag or via a PM, I would be happy to hide them. :)"
Done and done :)
Ha, thanks Fionnula, and thanks Krys, got your message and checking. :)
Fixed. Thanks! :)
Impressive review, Traveller, and I totally agree with your criticism about the narrator's voice. I am currently reading Romola by the same author and the author's voice is all over the place. Nevertheless I am enjoying her profound scholarship and looking forward to reading Middlemarch. Your review offers a great insight, thank you!PS: I suppose the Cholera pandemic took place in 1832 and not 1932? ;-)
You demonstrate that Eliot wasn't the only one to do her research.(Just as I'm trying to make my reviews shorter, this comes on my feet, proving the value of the opposite!)
Thanks Traveller. I've read Middlemarch three times-I love this book-but it's been 20 years since the last time. Your review made me want to revisit it and poor Dorothea. I'm am also a fan of Teresa of Avila and the opening of the book gets me every time.
I have no general rule about how long a review should be or even how it should approach a work. I love Ian's reviews and there are a few other scholarly reviewers that I follow and admire. But sometimes I also enjoy a quick run down of a book to get a sense if I'd like to read it. Also depends on the book, of course.
Anyway, I really enjoyed your review. I've been wanting to read Romola but I may have to go back to Middlemarch.
Hehe - posting this loong review was in response to a remark that MJ had made, that implied that long reviews are automatically better. (Which I disagreed with actually).
So I remembered that I once had to do a paper on George Eliot, with specific reference to Middlemarch. I managed to locate the original of it and my copious notes (pages and pages of them - maybe that's why I was so sick of Eliot and Middlemarch by the time I wrote my original review; - I'd spent so much time on the darn woman and this long tome of hers :P )
But then I thought that since I'd done such a lot of research for it, rather than let all of that research go to waste, let me try and salvage parts of it to use it for cobbling together a loong review.
I thought it might end up being too long, even after ruthlessly removing pages and pages of material, but looking at the loong scholarly treatises that Ian Graye and Bird Brain tend to post as reviews, this is actually still a little baby and it needs some images inserted as well. In fact, let me go and find some. :D