Eliot once said, "Character is a process and an unfolding". She was talking about Lydgate, but she could have been talking about many of the main characters, and certainly those of the younger generation, which includes Lydgate, Dorothea, Rosamond, and Will. I always think the choice of 'unfolding' is interesting as it hints at character being revealed rather than constructed. That unfolding is both from the reader's perspective and within the characters within the story. We are on the journey with them. This is why Middlemarch is a novel that so rewards re-reading as we enter new stages in our own lives. I first read Middlemarch more than thirty years ago, and each time I return to the book, I find myself having greater sympathy for different characters as I can see how their process and unfolding bear similarities to my own and those I have called friends for the longest time.
“It is love alone that gives worth to all things.” — Teresa of Avila
Dorothea failed to see that the intellect can be very much like that other superficial ornamentation she eschews: jewelry. It is the unfortunate circumstance that Dorothea must learn through the bond of marriage that Casaubon’s intellect is not only cut from a lesser stone, but also that its edges are sharper.
Lydgate’s interest in Rosamond is much like Dorothea’s interest in Casaubon except the ornamentation is not abstract like the intellect, but Rosamond herself. --“Certainly, if falling in love had been at all in question, it would have been quite safe with a creature like this Miss Vincy, who had just the kind of intelligence one would desire in a woman — polished, refined, docile, lending itself to finish in all the delicacies of life, and enshrined in a body which expressed this with a force of demonstration that excluded the need for other evidence” (105)— Also, it was said that Lydgate once fell in love with an actress not by having actually met her, but rather by simply watching her perform on stage!
In spite of their troubles, both Dorothea and Lydgate remain dedicated to their vows.
--“The fact is unalterable, that a fellow-mortal with whose nature you are acquainted solely through the brief entrances and exits of a few imaginative weeks called courtship, may, when seen in the continuity of married companionship, be disclosed as something better or worse than what you have preconceived, but will certainly not appear altogether the same” (125)— Middlemarch, Ed. Bert G Hornback 2nd ed. New York: W.W. Norton and Company 2000.
I have tried to read Middlemarch as if I knew nothing of Freud, but I can’t.
It seems to me that she had an inkling of Freud’s revolution but didn’t follow it through.
The relationship between Casaubon and Dorothea drips with repressed sexuality. I like to imagine that Eliot struggled with that and perhaps understood what she’d really created and needed to express, but couldn’t because of the mores of her time.
Please do write a piece about the other characters, as you mention you might do. I would be fascinated to read your thoughts on Mary, Fred, and any others you think suitable. After my initial misgivings, I am now finding the novel fascinating ( I’m almost halfway on my close reading with Haley Larsen). Anything that I can lap up about it and Eliot will be most welcome!
Eliot once said, "Character is a process and an unfolding". She was talking about Lydgate, but she could have been talking about many of the main characters, and certainly those of the younger generation, which includes Lydgate, Dorothea, Rosamond, and Will. I always think the choice of 'unfolding' is interesting as it hints at character being revealed rather than constructed. That unfolding is both from the reader's perspective and within the characters within the story. We are on the journey with them. This is why Middlemarch is a novel that so rewards re-reading as we enter new stages in our own lives. I first read Middlemarch more than thirty years ago, and each time I return to the book, I find myself having greater sympathy for different characters as I can see how their process and unfolding bear similarities to my own and those I have called friends for the longest time.
yes it is definitely a good book to reread as we get older
“It is love alone that gives worth to all things.” — Teresa of Avila
Dorothea failed to see that the intellect can be very much like that other superficial ornamentation she eschews: jewelry. It is the unfortunate circumstance that Dorothea must learn through the bond of marriage that Casaubon’s intellect is not only cut from a lesser stone, but also that its edges are sharper.
Lydgate’s interest in Rosamond is much like Dorothea’s interest in Casaubon except the ornamentation is not abstract like the intellect, but Rosamond herself. --“Certainly, if falling in love had been at all in question, it would have been quite safe with a creature like this Miss Vincy, who had just the kind of intelligence one would desire in a woman — polished, refined, docile, lending itself to finish in all the delicacies of life, and enshrined in a body which expressed this with a force of demonstration that excluded the need for other evidence” (105)— Also, it was said that Lydgate once fell in love with an actress not by having actually met her, but rather by simply watching her perform on stage!
In spite of their troubles, both Dorothea and Lydgate remain dedicated to their vows.
This is true, but I think Dorothea changes a lot more than Lydgate
Totally! Great piece. I love this novel and what you have written here.
I really like that Teresa quote btw, really sums up Dorothea
--“The fact is unalterable, that a fellow-mortal with whose nature you are acquainted solely through the brief entrances and exits of a few imaginative weeks called courtship, may, when seen in the continuity of married companionship, be disclosed as something better or worse than what you have preconceived, but will certainly not appear altogether the same” (125)— Middlemarch, Ed. Bert G Hornback 2nd ed. New York: W.W. Norton and Company 2000.
A fine read. I was struck more than ever by the lines you quote:
“In bitter manuscript remarks on other men’s notions about the solar deities, he had become indifferent to the sunlight.”
There’s so much there to unpack…
Yes! She’s quite a dense writer despite her readability!
Thanks. Your writing encouraged me to read Middlemarch, which I did and enjoyed very much.
The introduction mentions that this article is the first of a series -- where can I find the others?
I have tried to read Middlemarch as if I knew nothing of Freud, but I can’t.
It seems to me that she had an inkling of Freud’s revolution but didn’t follow it through.
The relationship between Casaubon and Dorothea drips with repressed sexuality. I like to imagine that Eliot struggled with that and perhaps understood what she’d really created and needed to express, but couldn’t because of the mores of her time.
Really good piece. Enjoyed reading that. Thank you.
Thank you :)
Thank you. I love this reminder of Eliot's broad sympathies within the novel.
Please do write a piece about the other characters, as you mention you might do. I would be fascinated to read your thoughts on Mary, Fred, and any others you think suitable. After my initial misgivings, I am now finding the novel fascinating ( I’m almost halfway on my close reading with Haley Larsen). Anything that I can lap up about it and Eliot will be most welcome!