I love the narrator! Then again I also like characters that break the fourth wall and soliloquies, so it might just be part of my preference.
This narrator has seemed to me like a puppet master or chess player assuredly moving the characters about. I have not read the book previously, but I'm expecting increasing complexity and feel I have a good guide in this narrator.
I love the honesty here! It's certainly an odd book — and Eliot is departing so much from narrator styles in her contemporaries. She really has created a *loud* narrator. You might find it valuable, should you decide to keep on with the novel, to try free writing about your frustrations. You're keying into many of the things Eliot's own critics were irked by in her work — being too clever, making too many references, intruding too often as a narrator. I think it's definitely worth asking: Why would an author do that? Why risk that effect on the reader? What is the hope of reward for the risk?
I am laughing out loud about your wedding night question. Yeah. Yikes. They probably will just end up talking all night? They both seem too high minded to put much importance or meaning behind physical consummation. Haha.
Yes I found that funny too! It was like Eliot saying “I will save you, dear reader, the details you don’t want to know about the wedding night. Let’s continue” hahaha
I'm now on my third reading of the Patrick O'Brian canon (20 books), and I'm totally used to not understanding a lot of the references (sailing, for those books). So it doesn't bother me to not get everything. My edition (Penguin Classics) does have footnotes in the back, which are mostly not very helpful.
The phrase "trapped in patriarchy" reeks of postmodern critical theory. You might want to just accept the book as a portrait of 1830 and not look at it through the lens of 2025. If you even IMAGINE that their wedding night is going to be depicted in any way at all, you're in the wrong century.
Chapters 2 through 10 give a deeper insight into Dorothea’s character.
She lives with her uncle, Mr. Brooke, a man who has a lot of prejudices about women and who firmly believes in the roles established by society.
Fine arts, music, singing are the domains of the feminine sex. He says: “ a woman should be able to sit down and play you or sing you a good old English tune”. He doesn’t want to discuss politics or economics with women since he considers them not thinkers. “There is a lightness about the feminine mind”, “ your sex is capricious”, he affirms.
In the period the novel is set, in the middle class, high education and access to politics was something that only men could have.
If we take these considerations into account, we understand the reasons that pushed Dorothea to accept Mr. Casaubon’s proposal. She is hungry for knowledge, she wants to make a difference in her society by actively participating in it. She sees Mr. Casaubon as the personification of knowledge itself. “These provinces of masculine knowledge seemed to her a standing-ground from which all truth could be seen more truly”.
“I should learn everything”, “I should wish to have a husband above me in judgement and in all knowledge”. She even mentions two great thinkers such as Pascal and Locke when she looks at him.
Despite everybody’s attempts to make her change her mind, she rushes into the marriage.
I think there is a similarity between Dorothea and Mr. Ladislaw, Mr. Casaubon’s cousin.
They meet for the first time at Mr. Casaubon’s house. She sees him in the garden with a sketch-book in his hands. For Dorothea, drawing is something detestable, since it’s part of the only activities women were allowed to do. Mr Ladislaw, on his turn, deslikes her interest for the “provinces of masculine knowledge”, which he wants to escape from.
They both want to get away from the roles assigned to them by society. Dorothea refuses to confine herself to domestic matters, drawing, singing, music, the fine arts, parties etc…and sees a way out in the marriage with Mr. Casaubon. Mr. Ladislaw refuses to choose a career, a profession. He wants to escape from all of that by going abroad and travel without a special aim in mind.
They are both outcasts. I’m looking forward to discovering where the two different paths will lead them.
The narrator wants us to pity Dorothea for her naive interest in marrying Casauban. I'm taking a counter view (currently). She would have been bored to death with Sir James who could not keep up with her intellect. Her uncle didn't seem equipped to look hard for someone else. Casauban, while older and ugly, at least has some respect for her interest in learning even if to serve himself. He has money and seems willing to offer her some level of autonomy plus a trip to Rome! Love was not the driving force for marriage back then (Jane Austen reminds us of that often enough). Having a companion who seemed kind (if distant) doesn't seem the worst thing. But the narrator's foreshadowing indicates that it is. I guess we will see! But I feel a lot of sympathy for Dorothea's limited options.
Yes! She doesn't want a husband, she wants a tutor. She craves access to knowledge that has been out of her reach. She really hasn't a clue as to Casaubon's nature or the expectations of the marriage that may thwart her desires.
I appreciate this counter view! I have been feeling disappointed in Dorothea's character in the ways that she attaches all her intellectual and personal agency to this relationship, and I like thinking about the ways in which she will have some autonomy through learning and travel.
Yes I feel like she doesn't see (have) an option outside of marriage (she is an heiress but can only pass on to her son so cannot really benefit from it). I think if she really had a choice she would have gone to university and travelled. Maybe a bit like Lazilaw.
I’m so curious to see how others view Chettam and Casaubon! I had the opposite reactions as you did. I came to dislike Casaubon more as it became clearer that he views Dorothea and a wife more generally as a sort of “adornment”. Meanwhile, while Sir James did start the whole cottages project to try to win Dorothea, him continuing with the project even after Dorothea’s engagement spoke well of him. I interpreted his words and actions as having relinquished any interest in Dorothea (he’s described as liking people who like him) and he’s concerned about her marrying Casaubon for her own sake.
On my first reading (this is my second) I felt much the way our host did about Chettam, but this time I feel more the way you do. Eliot's characters are complex and don't fit conventional stereotypes. On my first reading I tagged Chettam as a brainless upper-class twit, but this time I see more depth in him. He's very much a man of his time and social class, though.
I don't think Chettam is perfect and has perhaps a typical reaction to rejection. But at the end of chapter 8 there is a quote: "he found himself talking with more and more pleasure to Dorothea. She was perfectly unconstrained and without irritation towards him now, and he was gradually discovering that delight there is in frank kindness and companionship between a man and a woman who have no passion to hide or confess." I fear that Dorothea's marriage is going to not end up well as they are both sort of oblivious of what it will really entail. Perhaps friendship is what Dorothea will need. It is interesting that it is only once married (or engaged) to someone else that there is an option for this kind of relationship between a man and woman.
I agree with Robert that he is very much a man of his time and social class, though that doesn't necessarily make him a villian. I find him as patriarchal as Dorothea and Causubon in their own ways. I read his desire to delay her marriage only partly as hoping she would change her mind and partly his sincere belief that she and Casaubon are not a good match. While Mr. Brooke and the rector may agree, they will not override her decision while Chettam wants a guardian to say "I know better than you."
Same. Team James here. I would have totally married him. Seems like he's the most eligible and fun rich guy in the county. (Though reserve the right to change my mind if he turns out to be terrible in the course of the book).
I'm pretty obsessed with the cadence of dialogue that Mr Brooke has where he states and then repeats the back few words the majority of time he is talking. The man wants so badly to be important than he has to restate his point each time before letting it go like a "you heard me right, RIGHT?"
My fave quote of the week came from chapter 8- "he will run into any mould, but he won't keep shape." An excellent slam if I ever heard one and I hope to use it one of these days. Also, the epigraph for chapter 7: "pleasure and melons/ want the same weather". I need it stitched on a pillow immediately.
We are kindred spirits! I love Mr. Brooke so much. And I was laughing so hard at the "mould/shape" line — it was SO funny. And, yes, I also happily noted the melons epigraph and I, too, want it on a pillow. Someone get a Middlemarch Etsy shop going, stat!
I love how Eliot does Mr Brooke’s ‘voice’ as well, I started highlighting every time he said he tried something but it wouldn’t do, or something along those lines. It’s a real foible of his and worth keeping an eye out for!
What a lot of name dropping! Sir Davy, Cartwright, Wordsworth, Locke, Adam Smith, Sotheby, Wilberforce, Pascal, Peel, Mungo Park ... Eliot's characters are using these names in conversation like we might refer to current celebrities or politicians. That doesn't even include the literature and historical references casually tossed about, the foreign phrases, or the confusing vocabulary. As an example, there was much to parse in just this one quote for me to simply determine if it was meant as sarcasm:"I suppose the family quarterings are three cuttlefish sable, and a commentator rampant.” I had to translate as though it were a foreign language! I realize I don't need to know these details to get on with the story, but what a lot of lovely digressive pathways to follow. I guess it would be easier if my book had footnotes, but I've liked looking up the references and following the breadcrumbs myself.
As for the story itself, this quote from the Prelude now seems to describe Dorothea: her "ardor alternated between a vague ideal and the common yearning of womanhood." Her story seems to have taken center stage for now, and this conflict between her ideals and her mostly unexplored feelings could be a dominant theme. Still, it's a big book, so I'm keeping track of the characters as they are introduced and wondering which will become central to the story and which left in the background.
Someone in the comments of a previous post said to notice when Eliot uses the word "poor," and there was a noticeable use during the conversation that Mr. Brooke and Dorothea have about marriage:
"I know that I must expect trials, uncle. Marriage is a state of higher duties. I never thought of it as mere personal ease," said poor Dorothea.
I feel like the narrator's insertion of "poor" in that sentence says quite a lot about the narrator's view on Dorothea's motive, that the narrator believes Dorothea to be getting herself into an unpleasant situation because of her mistaken concept of marriage.
I think the narrator works so well for me in this book because, thus far, many of our characters lack self-awareness. To have a voice in the situation pointing out where these characters are deluding themselves or acting contrary to their interests or those around them adds depth to a story that would otherwise be more shallow.
Kate, I was noticing "poor," too! That note came from Kim. I'm very glad she raised it for us!
I love your reading of the narrator "filling the gap" of self awareness by giving us the insight we need, so that we don't end up thinking anyone too shallow. That's a fantastic reading!!
In these chapters, I became curious about Dorothea's views on the impoverished and the ways in which she demonstrates her zealousness for the cause: "I think we deserve to be beaten out of our beautiful houses with a scourge of small cords - all of us who let tenants live in such sties as we see round us. Life in the cottages might be happier than ours if they were real houses fit for human beings from whom we expect duties and affections" (Ch. 3).
This passage is an interesting contrast to the many other points in which Dorothea voices herself as lacking knowledge and in need of a patriarchal figure to teach and guide her. While she may want / need to increase her formal education, she shows a sensitivity toward humanity and the social class system...and a desire to do something about it!
And: to build on it. I found it fascinating that despite these strong feelings, she still decides to marry Casaubon, even though it's clear from the home tour that the folks in Lowick don't need her to step in and build cottages. She decided *not* to marry the man who would build cottages for her, based on her designs and goals.
I thought that was a really interesting insight into how Dorothea things about accomplishing her ends. Because, of course, Sir James is now her friend and has agreed to keep the project going. Another reader here has already commented that such a choice plants him a good light -- and I hadn't read it that way initially, but now I'm more inclined to agree. I like that the novel has not (yet) implied that Dorothea would marry for means-to-an-end when it comes to those goals; she sees herself as capable of carrying them out in any number of partnerships/friendships/agreements. And has, apparently, reserved marriage for some other types of desire she has...
Ahhh! I love your point here about her still choosing to marry Casaubon…. Is it because patriarchy and attachment to a godly figure wins out, or does she have a grand master plan?! I’m so intrigued now. And those hints dropped about her friendly relationship with Sir James… the plot thickens.
Yes! It is a total subversion — and yet the way it is written, with so much doubt and so many judgements surrounding the decision — I feel that it kind of dampers (in a smart and very intriguing way) how powerful it really may have felt for Dorothea to choose Casaubon.
I think rather than showing that she reserved marriage for a *different* desire, it’s showing us that the cottage scheme is actually just an illustration of another, larger desire, namely to find a way of “making [her] life good for anything.” She immediately redirects her sights to “more complete devotion to Mr. Casaubon’s aims, in which she would await new duties. Many such might reveal themselves...” In the end I think it shows us her actual desire is to be a living saint - wise, good, self-sacrificing.
In Ch. 5 Mr. Casaubon’s proposal letter is a clear example of his self centered needs in his own life. Several times through out the letter he is constantly reverting back to his, I, me needs. And I believe he is more concerned with having a devoted wife to converse with. He is looking to fill a void of loneliness. Love has not been mentioned nor anything to do with enjoyment of activities to share. I don’t think Dorothea is mature enough yet to realize that there is more to life than the acquisition of knowledge. She is very naive.
This is a fantastic reading — his letter is so completely about himself. It's like people who will tell you their favorite thing about their partner is how they make them feel. I wondered, reading his letter, if he could actually pick Dorothea out of a line-up of women, or if he's just relieved to have someone, anyone, there to pay attention to him and take care of him. I have a soft spot for him though — as you said, he is a deeply lonely person. I hope he will develop some kind of real feeling for Dorothea!
His letter coupled with the early part of chapter X when we learn as his marriage approaches he is not as happy as he expected to be leads me to expect unhappiness and disappointment in the marriage for him too: "Poor Mr. Casaubon had imagined that his long studious bachelorhood had stored up for him a compound interest of enjoyment, that large drafts on his affections would not fail to be honored...And now he was in danger of being saddened by the very conviction that his circumstances were unusually happy: there was nothing external he could account for a certain blankness of sensibility which came over him just when his expectant gladness should have been most lively"
Yeah, it seems like he's only marrying because the opportunity presented itself, and he still somehow feels like it's "the thing to do", even though up until now he hasn't bothered.
I wrote "ha!" so many times in my margins, too! And I'm glad you brought up the narrator; I wanted to ask what you make of that. As a fiction writer myself, I found it SO distracting when the narrator would interject with some casual first-person sentences. Those really pulled me out of the story and frustrated me at times mostly because it's not something you really see contemporary writers doing in fiction. But I LOVE your take on the narrator's purpose, and I'm going to keep an eye on what that voice is doing when it pops up as I read the next set of chapters.
And big time bummed Celia didn't get that dog hahah
I really enjoyed the beginning of chapter 10 when the narrator jumped in for a whole page but that was the first time it has pulled me out of the story noticeably.
I liked that too! It reminded me, a bit, of when the narrator from Winnie the Pooh will overtly pop into a story to tell you what to expect (or to give a breather from scary Heffalumps and Woozles for young readers). It has me wondering how this narrator voice was inspired by, and inspired, other narrative interventions.
You're not alone in that sensation! I read in some of my secondary texts this week that critics of Eliot at the time she was writing were divided on her use of narrative interjection. Some found it experimental and an evolution of the form. Others found it distracting and annoying — and questioned her craft decisions. I'm curious to see how the narrator continues to develop in the story!
Thanks so much for the reply! I’m curious to see how she uses the narrative voice through the rest of the book. Do you consider this narrator to be some omniscient voice, or is it meant to be the author?
I I thought kindly on Sir James, although on reflection the line about pride came back to me “but pride only helps us to be generous, it never makes us more so”. Ultimately I hold out hope for him yet.
I enjoyed the line about him finding the joys of platonic female company “he was gradually discovering the delight there is in frank kindness and companionship between a man and a woman who have no passion to hide or confess”.
So many great questions, Haley. First off, I love George Eliot's narrative voice — but I think my take is a bit different from yours. What I'm really noticing this time around is how opinionated she is at the same time that she acknowledges others might not share her POV. As you note about the various ways of viewing Casaubon, she reminds readers about differing perspectives in a social scene like this; I think she knows we'll be judging them, too. I trust her in the way I trust any sharp observer of their milieu, but is she directing us what to think? I'd say no. How we readers judge these characters now is inevitably different from those reading the novel in the 1850s, anyway.
Funny thing is, my judgment of Casaubon and Sir James is pretty much the opposite of yours (I think Meagan said this as well). I take for granted the patriarchal attitudes of the time; I also think Eliot was deliberately tweaking them. All the men in the novel are arrogant in their own jerky ways (even Will). Dorothea did dodge a bullet with Sir James (I laughed out loud when he described Casaubon as a "mummy"), but I'm pretty sure she would have figured out how to build a life of good works around a dolt like him. With Casaubon, she's walking into a firing squad. When I read this novel the first time, I was sure about that by the end of the first part; I won't say more to avoid spoilers, but I always assumed Eliot meant readers to understand that "The Key to All Mythologies" was a ridiculous academic exercise.
What I'm noticing with this reading is what fascinating characters Dorothea and Casaubon both are — still, in 2025 — which adds to the dramatic impact. Despite her wry take on Casaubon, I think Eliot was also more sympathetic to him than other male characters (perhaps she even pities him). There's a lot to say going forward about the the way this author describes variations on passion, from scientific to romantic to social idealistic, another reason I like her narrative observations so much. As for character types, for me it doesn't get much better than Mrs. Cadwallader, the local busybody and Queen Bee. Even she is more than a type; in some ways, she's the penny-pinching managerial shadow side of Dorothea (and St. Theresa).
Favorite lines: I also loved the dialogue exchange comparing Casaubon to "semicolons and parentheses" — and some of the persnickety parenthetical asides from his POV reflect his narrow focus. But here are a few others that get across who the characters are:
* "Sir James felt with some sadness that she was to have perfect liberty of misjudgment."
* "'That is very kind of you,' said Dorothea, looking up at Mr. Casaubon with delight. 'It is noble. After all, people may really have in them some vocation which is not quite plain to themselves, may they not?'"
* "In fact, the world is full of hopeful analogies and handsome dubious eggs called possibilities."
Yes! These smart, passionate, socially constrained women! Eliot and Dorothea, who's a gem, so idealistic but aware of what she doesn't know — unlike the men, who are great examples of the the Dunning-Kruger effect (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect).
This is so brilliant. I am just over here nodding vigorously as I read your words.
I especially love what you say about Mrs. Cadwallader: "the local busybody and Queen Bee. Even she is more than a type; in some ways, she's the penny-pinching managerial shadow side of Dorothea (and St. Theresa)." Wow that's so good!! She reminds me a lot of Rachel Lynde from LM Montgomery's Anne of Green Gables and other Avonlea novels. Both women are very much in the "type," but become so much more than the type—they exist in the nuances outside of the archetype.
I am also really appreciating these views on Sir James! I'm challenging myself to give him more room in my mind and not to write him off for disliking Casaubon and smarting at Dorothea's rejection.
Thanks, Haley! As I read forward in the novel, I’ve become convinced one of Eliot’s narrative subtexts is the way we humans judge each other based on very little information about individual histories or inner lives. It’s one of many reasons she wryly echoes scientific method in her subtitle: “A Study of Provincial Life.” The small town itself is a petri dish for empirical observation of how inherently biased participants interact 😉
Continuing my Celia love, her dismissal of a great soul being particularly offensive at breakfast is amazing. She’s being petty and shallow, but actually she is picking up on the fact that casaubon has no sensitivity or consideration - he would absolutely pontificate in the morning before you’d had your coffee. (Maybe I’m just not a morning person, and this line is classical literature’s acknowledgment of my pain.)
I actually hate Ladislaw - he makes my skin crawl. I feel there is something so lacking in substance with him - he wants to come across as so deep and interesting, but there is nothing real there. He’s charming but doesn’t ever show any real character. The extent to which he gloms onto Dorothea just shows how shapeless he is without her.
Dorothea is such a great character - she is so frustrating and yet so fascinating. Obviously she is entitled to make her choice, and yet something in me wants to take away that choice because she is so blind to what a serious, permanent thing she is doing. It’s notable to me that she is so focused on goodness and yet uncritical of Casaubon’s lack of benevolence. Maybe that is why I struggle with her - I feel she is more attached to the idea of goodness than its actual existence.
I love the love for Celia —she's so deserving! And she has such a clear view on Casaubon that Dorothea is well clouded from by this point in the story.
Ladislaw reminds me a LOT, so far, of Fiyero in Wicked. Shallow...but perhaps not if he wakes up to something that matters to him. I wonder (and hope?) that he will.
I love Dorothea, too. Just a note on some parts of your comment: be careful of spoilers for the readers here! for many of us, this is our first time reading :)
I read the Prelude to say that although many women strive for a life above the mundane, they usually fail and are stuck in a common place life. “Here and there a cygnet is reared uneasily among the ducklings in the brown pond, and never finds the living stream in fellowship with its own oarry-footed kind.” A foreshadowing of Miss Brooke?
I also found it interesting to look into Dodo, Celia’s apparently endearment for her sister. It turns out that Dodo was a character in Alice in Wonderland, published in 1865. Dodo became in the vernacular something bordering on extinction. Eliot would certainly have been aware of this. How may this tie into the prelude?
Excellent reminder from the Prelude here. Yes! In that quote you shared, there's this aching feeling of the odd ones in society who never find their "fellowship," and therefore never reach their full potential. I wonder so much about how this metaphor is not only about the individual cygnet, but also about the lack of other swans. What is Dorothea's "living stream"? Who, like Dorothea, is "oary-footed"? I love the way Eliot's metaphor here isn't just about the swan, but also about the swan's community. Where does Dorothea fit?
Also: LOVE this attention to Dodo!!! It had not occurred to me to connect back to Carroll, but you're so right! The Dodo is almost cartoonishly foolish, if I'm remembering correctly. Running off happily, ignorant of its impending extinction. I wonder if Eliot was thinking of Carroll when she selected her heroine's name!
Idk, to me “Dodo” sounds like nothing more than a younger sister’s childish pronunciation of a difficult name that became an affectionate nickname. 🤷🏼♀️
"Young ladies don't understand political economy, you know," said Mr. Brooke.
I love to think of Eliot smirking as she wrote this, knowing that her pen name would make people think she was a man. The irony is that Mary Ann Evans/George Eliot DOES understand political economy and she describes it well in this exchange between her uncle and Causabon.
"Such deep studies, classics, mathematics, that kind of thing, are too taxing for a woman." Eliot is satirizing the patriarchal stance by constantly and adeptly referencing classics and deep topics throughout her own writing. Haha.
I would have loved to see the faces of the men who read this and nodded along, then later learned that a woman wrote this brilliant book.
Both Casaubon and Chettam see a wife as an object, but Casaubon seems like he will encourage Dorothea's learning (for his own purposes), where Chettam may be annoyed by a woman wanting to learn.
Excellent reflections here! I totally agree: I could feel the smirks on the page and it really brought a lot to the reading experience. The views are so obviously annoying and tiresome...and to see Eliot trot them out so plainly with that smirk in the tone of our narrator is so much fun to read.
Now that I'm enmeshed in Eliot's character love web, I am working overtime in my brain not to compare this love triangle with Austen's love triangle between Elizabeth Bennet, Fitzwilliam Darcy, and George Wickham. Eliot's Dorothea is so different from Austen's Elizabeth, and I'm trying to appreciate Dorothea for who she is without holding her up to Elizabeth.
I'm finding this "concept of a man" a fascinating lens with which to read these first ten chapters. Again, the Bennet sisters' (sans Elizabeth) only concern is to find a "single man in possession of a good fortune." Dorothea, too, is searching for a husband, but not for wealth and security, but because she sees marriage as her way for self-improvement. Is this because she is so young? I wonder if I appreciate Dorothea's character all the more because she seems more realistic than a fierce Elizabeth Bennet?
Casaubon makes me feel sad. Maybe because I turn 45 in three months, and I don't consider myself a wizened old man like others see Casaubon. I'm saddened that Casaubon feels like he needs a younger wife elevate his own intellectual interests. Back then, wasn't it respected for a man to not marry and become a learned scholar? He seems resigned to marry Dorothea the way Charlotte Lucas feels obliged to marry Mr. Collins in Pride and Prejudice.
Finally, I am fascinated that y'all noticed the personality types and how they may play out in the rest of this novel. From what I've heard about Eliot, she is a master at character development and intertwining these characters and their lives. I think I'm in for a very bumpy roller-coaster read!
I think we're in for a wild ride, too! I love all these comparisons to Pride & Prejudice because my mind keeps veering there, too, and yet I'm continually struck by how different Dorothea is. She's so different from Elizabeth, even though both women have a kind of intensity about them — in their belief that they deserve a "good" marriage, whatever that means to them.
I love your reading, too, of Casaubon as a bit "resigned" to marry, similar to Charlotte (and perhaps also to Mr. Collins himself, in some ways). While being a scholar was certainly a respectable role for a man to take on, and while Casaubon has the means to stay an eternal bachelor, I really got the sense that he sees Dorothea as a young burst of energy who will take care of him. As another commenter here put it: Casaubon needs a nurse! It's not even really that clear he *wants* a wife. He just wants someone to take care of him — and why not take up the pretty girl with a desire to work with (for) him?
I heard or read somewhere that Middlemarch seems to be deliberately picking up where Pride & Prejudice leaves off. It starts with the marriage and then unpacks what happens *after* the wedding. I love this idea that it’s a response to Austen and that she’s really complicating Austen’s message by following the characters further past the finish line.
How gutting was the line, “a woman dictates before marriage in order that she may have an appetite for submission afterwards”?? And then, less gutting but so prescient “the mistakes that we male and female mortals make when we have our own way might fairly raise some wonder that we are so fond of it.” 👀👀
Your phrasing "elevate his own intellectual interests" intrigues me. I read his desire for a wife as more a need for a student/secretary -- someone to read to him, to listen to him work through is theories and thoughts, do some of the copying, but not an intellectual equal or partner in any sense.
I don't know enough about the context of English culture when Middlemarch was written or set. Was a gentleman scholar like Casaubon more respected or esteemed if he had a student/helpmeet like what I think he is seeking in Dorothea?
It was quite normal for scholars not to marry. In fact fellows (professor) at Oxford and Cambridge Universities were forbidden to marry until 1877 nearly 50 years after time of Middlemarch.
I love the narrator! Then again I also like characters that break the fourth wall and soliloquies, so it might just be part of my preference.
This narrator has seemed to me like a puppet master or chess player assuredly moving the characters about. I have not read the book previously, but I'm expecting increasing complexity and feel I have a good guide in this narrator.
Your chess metaphor is fantastic. I feel a bit like that, too. I can't quite see what she's setting up yet...but I trust her!
I love the honesty here! It's certainly an odd book — and Eliot is departing so much from narrator styles in her contemporaries. She really has created a *loud* narrator. You might find it valuable, should you decide to keep on with the novel, to try free writing about your frustrations. You're keying into many of the things Eliot's own critics were irked by in her work — being too clever, making too many references, intruding too often as a narrator. I think it's definitely worth asking: Why would an author do that? Why risk that effect on the reader? What is the hope of reward for the risk?
I am laughing out loud about your wedding night question. Yeah. Yikes. They probably will just end up talking all night? They both seem too high minded to put much importance or meaning behind physical consummation. Haha.
Yes I found that funny too! It was like Eliot saying “I will save you, dear reader, the details you don’t want to know about the wedding night. Let’s continue” hahaha
Yeah, especially since I think it’s highly likely that Casaubon is still a virgin…
I'm now on my third reading of the Patrick O'Brian canon (20 books), and I'm totally used to not understanding a lot of the references (sailing, for those books). So it doesn't bother me to not get everything. My edition (Penguin Classics) does have footnotes in the back, which are mostly not very helpful.
The phrase "trapped in patriarchy" reeks of postmodern critical theory. You might want to just accept the book as a portrait of 1830 and not look at it through the lens of 2025. If you even IMAGINE that their wedding night is going to be depicted in any way at all, you're in the wrong century.
Is really patriarchy over in 2025?
Chapters 2 through 10 give a deeper insight into Dorothea’s character.
She lives with her uncle, Mr. Brooke, a man who has a lot of prejudices about women and who firmly believes in the roles established by society.
Fine arts, music, singing are the domains of the feminine sex. He says: “ a woman should be able to sit down and play you or sing you a good old English tune”. He doesn’t want to discuss politics or economics with women since he considers them not thinkers. “There is a lightness about the feminine mind”, “ your sex is capricious”, he affirms.
In the period the novel is set, in the middle class, high education and access to politics was something that only men could have.
If we take these considerations into account, we understand the reasons that pushed Dorothea to accept Mr. Casaubon’s proposal. She is hungry for knowledge, she wants to make a difference in her society by actively participating in it. She sees Mr. Casaubon as the personification of knowledge itself. “These provinces of masculine knowledge seemed to her a standing-ground from which all truth could be seen more truly”.
“I should learn everything”, “I should wish to have a husband above me in judgement and in all knowledge”. She even mentions two great thinkers such as Pascal and Locke when she looks at him.
Despite everybody’s attempts to make her change her mind, she rushes into the marriage.
I think there is a similarity between Dorothea and Mr. Ladislaw, Mr. Casaubon’s cousin.
They meet for the first time at Mr. Casaubon’s house. She sees him in the garden with a sketch-book in his hands. For Dorothea, drawing is something detestable, since it’s part of the only activities women were allowed to do. Mr Ladislaw, on his turn, deslikes her interest for the “provinces of masculine knowledge”, which he wants to escape from.
They both want to get away from the roles assigned to them by society. Dorothea refuses to confine herself to domestic matters, drawing, singing, music, the fine arts, parties etc…and sees a way out in the marriage with Mr. Casaubon. Mr. Ladislaw refuses to choose a career, a profession. He wants to escape from all of that by going abroad and travel without a special aim in mind.
They are both outcasts. I’m looking forward to discovering where the two different paths will lead them.
Oh! "She sees Mr. Casaubon as the personification of knowledge itself." That is a beautiful account for Dorothea's feelings thus far.
The narrator wants us to pity Dorothea for her naive interest in marrying Casauban. I'm taking a counter view (currently). She would have been bored to death with Sir James who could not keep up with her intellect. Her uncle didn't seem equipped to look hard for someone else. Casauban, while older and ugly, at least has some respect for her interest in learning even if to serve himself. He has money and seems willing to offer her some level of autonomy plus a trip to Rome! Love was not the driving force for marriage back then (Jane Austen reminds us of that often enough). Having a companion who seemed kind (if distant) doesn't seem the worst thing. But the narrator's foreshadowing indicates that it is. I guess we will see! But I feel a lot of sympathy for Dorothea's limited options.
Yes! She doesn't want a husband, she wants a tutor. She craves access to knowledge that has been out of her reach. She really hasn't a clue as to Casaubon's nature or the expectations of the marriage that may thwart her desires.
I appreciate this counter view! I have been feeling disappointed in Dorothea's character in the ways that she attaches all her intellectual and personal agency to this relationship, and I like thinking about the ways in which she will have some autonomy through learning and travel.
Yes I feel like she doesn't see (have) an option outside of marriage (she is an heiress but can only pass on to her son so cannot really benefit from it). I think if she really had a choice she would have gone to university and travelled. Maybe a bit like Lazilaw.
I’m so curious to see how others view Chettam and Casaubon! I had the opposite reactions as you did. I came to dislike Casaubon more as it became clearer that he views Dorothea and a wife more generally as a sort of “adornment”. Meanwhile, while Sir James did start the whole cottages project to try to win Dorothea, him continuing with the project even after Dorothea’s engagement spoke well of him. I interpreted his words and actions as having relinquished any interest in Dorothea (he’s described as liking people who like him) and he’s concerned about her marrying Casaubon for her own sake.
I agree! I didn't find Sir James petulant beyond the initial rejection, I'm very curious if he will "settle" for Celia
On my first reading (this is my second) I felt much the way our host did about Chettam, but this time I feel more the way you do. Eliot's characters are complex and don't fit conventional stereotypes. On my first reading I tagged Chettam as a brainless upper-class twit, but this time I see more depth in him. He's very much a man of his time and social class, though.
I don't think Chettam is perfect and has perhaps a typical reaction to rejection. But at the end of chapter 8 there is a quote: "he found himself talking with more and more pleasure to Dorothea. She was perfectly unconstrained and without irritation towards him now, and he was gradually discovering that delight there is in frank kindness and companionship between a man and a woman who have no passion to hide or confess." I fear that Dorothea's marriage is going to not end up well as they are both sort of oblivious of what it will really entail. Perhaps friendship is what Dorothea will need. It is interesting that it is only once married (or engaged) to someone else that there is an option for this kind of relationship between a man and woman.
I noted that line as well… it gave me much more hope for Chettam as a character.
I agree that I liked him a bit better after he continued the project even when he had no hope to win Dorthea.
I agree with Robert that he is very much a man of his time and social class, though that doesn't necessarily make him a villian. I find him as patriarchal as Dorothea and Causubon in their own ways. I read his desire to delay her marriage only partly as hoping she would change her mind and partly his sincere belief that she and Casaubon are not a good match. While Mr. Brooke and the rector may agree, they will not override her decision while Chettam wants a guardian to say "I know better than you."
Same. Team James here. I would have totally married him. Seems like he's the most eligible and fun rich guy in the county. (Though reserve the right to change my mind if he turns out to be terrible in the course of the book).
I'm pretty obsessed with the cadence of dialogue that Mr Brooke has where he states and then repeats the back few words the majority of time he is talking. The man wants so badly to be important than he has to restate his point each time before letting it go like a "you heard me right, RIGHT?"
My fave quote of the week came from chapter 8- "he will run into any mould, but he won't keep shape." An excellent slam if I ever heard one and I hope to use it one of these days. Also, the epigraph for chapter 7: "pleasure and melons/ want the same weather". I need it stitched on a pillow immediately.
We are kindred spirits! I love Mr. Brooke so much. And I was laughing so hard at the "mould/shape" line — it was SO funny. And, yes, I also happily noted the melons epigraph and I, too, want it on a pillow. Someone get a Middlemarch Etsy shop going, stat!
I also love Mr. Brooke, his constant repetitions and emphasis on when he had "opinions." He makes me think of a bad Ted Talk :-)
OMG he's totally a bad Ted Talk hahahaha
a bad Ted Talk, you know.
I love how Eliot does Mr Brooke’s ‘voice’ as well, I started highlighting every time he said he tried something but it wouldn’t do, or something along those lines. It’s a real foible of his and worth keeping an eye out for!
I'm listening and reading a hard copy and the narrator does Mr. Brooke so well!
What a lot of name dropping! Sir Davy, Cartwright, Wordsworth, Locke, Adam Smith, Sotheby, Wilberforce, Pascal, Peel, Mungo Park ... Eliot's characters are using these names in conversation like we might refer to current celebrities or politicians. That doesn't even include the literature and historical references casually tossed about, the foreign phrases, or the confusing vocabulary. As an example, there was much to parse in just this one quote for me to simply determine if it was meant as sarcasm:"I suppose the family quarterings are three cuttlefish sable, and a commentator rampant.” I had to translate as though it were a foreign language! I realize I don't need to know these details to get on with the story, but what a lot of lovely digressive pathways to follow. I guess it would be easier if my book had footnotes, but I've liked looking up the references and following the breadcrumbs myself.
As for the story itself, this quote from the Prelude now seems to describe Dorothea: her "ardor alternated between a vague ideal and the common yearning of womanhood." Her story seems to have taken center stage for now, and this conflict between her ideals and her mostly unexplored feelings could be a dominant theme. Still, it's a big book, so I'm keeping track of the characters as they are introduced and wondering which will become central to the story and which left in the background.
Someone in the comments of a previous post said to notice when Eliot uses the word "poor," and there was a noticeable use during the conversation that Mr. Brooke and Dorothea have about marriage:
"I know that I must expect trials, uncle. Marriage is a state of higher duties. I never thought of it as mere personal ease," said poor Dorothea.
I feel like the narrator's insertion of "poor" in that sentence says quite a lot about the narrator's view on Dorothea's motive, that the narrator believes Dorothea to be getting herself into an unpleasant situation because of her mistaken concept of marriage.
I think the narrator works so well for me in this book because, thus far, many of our characters lack self-awareness. To have a voice in the situation pointing out where these characters are deluding themselves or acting contrary to their interests or those around them adds depth to a story that would otherwise be more shallow.
Kate, I was noticing "poor," too! That note came from Kim. I'm very glad she raised it for us!
I love your reading of the narrator "filling the gap" of self awareness by giving us the insight we need, so that we don't end up thinking anyone too shallow. That's a fantastic reading!!
In these chapters, I became curious about Dorothea's views on the impoverished and the ways in which she demonstrates her zealousness for the cause: "I think we deserve to be beaten out of our beautiful houses with a scourge of small cords - all of us who let tenants live in such sties as we see round us. Life in the cottages might be happier than ours if they were real houses fit for human beings from whom we expect duties and affections" (Ch. 3).
This passage is an interesting contrast to the many other points in which Dorothea voices herself as lacking knowledge and in need of a patriarchal figure to teach and guide her. While she may want / need to increase her formal education, she shows a sensitivity toward humanity and the social class system...and a desire to do something about it!
Oh! this is excellent!
And: to build on it. I found it fascinating that despite these strong feelings, she still decides to marry Casaubon, even though it's clear from the home tour that the folks in Lowick don't need her to step in and build cottages. She decided *not* to marry the man who would build cottages for her, based on her designs and goals.
I thought that was a really interesting insight into how Dorothea things about accomplishing her ends. Because, of course, Sir James is now her friend and has agreed to keep the project going. Another reader here has already commented that such a choice plants him a good light -- and I hadn't read it that way initially, but now I'm more inclined to agree. I like that the novel has not (yet) implied that Dorothea would marry for means-to-an-end when it comes to those goals; she sees herself as capable of carrying them out in any number of partnerships/friendships/agreements. And has, apparently, reserved marriage for some other types of desire she has...
Ahhh! I love your point here about her still choosing to marry Casaubon…. Is it because patriarchy and attachment to a godly figure wins out, or does she have a grand master plan?! I’m so intrigued now. And those hints dropped about her friendly relationship with Sir James… the plot thickens.
Absolutely agree - she chooses who she marries in the beginning section of the book, which really subverts the traditional marriage plot.
Yes! It is a total subversion — and yet the way it is written, with so much doubt and so many judgements surrounding the decision — I feel that it kind of dampers (in a smart and very intriguing way) how powerful it really may have felt for Dorothea to choose Casaubon.
I think rather than showing that she reserved marriage for a *different* desire, it’s showing us that the cottage scheme is actually just an illustration of another, larger desire, namely to find a way of “making [her] life good for anything.” She immediately redirects her sights to “more complete devotion to Mr. Casaubon’s aims, in which she would await new duties. Many such might reveal themselves...” In the end I think it shows us her actual desire is to be a living saint - wise, good, self-sacrificing.
Oooh, I like how you’ve connected the way she is shifting her energies.
In Ch. 5 Mr. Casaubon’s proposal letter is a clear example of his self centered needs in his own life. Several times through out the letter he is constantly reverting back to his, I, me needs. And I believe he is more concerned with having a devoted wife to converse with. He is looking to fill a void of loneliness. Love has not been mentioned nor anything to do with enjoyment of activities to share. I don’t think Dorothea is mature enough yet to realize that there is more to life than the acquisition of knowledge. She is very naive.
His letter is so selfish and objectifying, and he never says “love” but Dorothea assumes it in her reply (“grateful to you for loving me”).
Also, how sad was that? "thanks for loving me." Girl is taking breadcrumbs and calling them a meal!
I had that reaction to the letter as well!
It was wild. I read it as a "You're not like other girls Dodo!"
Girl is giving total pick me energy
This is a fantastic reading — his letter is so completely about himself. It's like people who will tell you their favorite thing about their partner is how they make them feel. I wondered, reading his letter, if he could actually pick Dorothea out of a line-up of women, or if he's just relieved to have someone, anyone, there to pay attention to him and take care of him. I have a soft spot for him though — as you said, he is a deeply lonely person. I hope he will develop some kind of real feeling for Dorothea!
He may have picked her out from a line up since I feel he is very observant. Also he had communication with Mr. Brooke to enlighten him.
His letter coupled with the early part of chapter X when we learn as his marriage approaches he is not as happy as he expected to be leads me to expect unhappiness and disappointment in the marriage for him too: "Poor Mr. Casaubon had imagined that his long studious bachelorhood had stored up for him a compound interest of enjoyment, that large drafts on his affections would not fail to be honored...And now he was in danger of being saddened by the very conviction that his circumstances were unusually happy: there was nothing external he could account for a certain blankness of sensibility which came over him just when his expectant gladness should have been most lively"
Yeah, it seems like he's only marrying because the opportunity presented itself, and he still somehow feels like it's "the thing to do", even though up until now he hasn't bothered.
Yes indeed!
I wrote "ha!" so many times in my margins, too! And I'm glad you brought up the narrator; I wanted to ask what you make of that. As a fiction writer myself, I found it SO distracting when the narrator would interject with some casual first-person sentences. Those really pulled me out of the story and frustrated me at times mostly because it's not something you really see contemporary writers doing in fiction. But I LOVE your take on the narrator's purpose, and I'm going to keep an eye on what that voice is doing when it pops up as I read the next set of chapters.
And big time bummed Celia didn't get that dog hahah
I really enjoyed the beginning of chapter 10 when the narrator jumped in for a whole page but that was the first time it has pulled me out of the story noticeably.
I liked that too! It reminded me, a bit, of when the narrator from Winnie the Pooh will overtly pop into a story to tell you what to expect (or to give a breather from scary Heffalumps and Woozles for young readers). It has me wondering how this narrator voice was inspired by, and inspired, other narrative interventions.
You're not alone in that sensation! I read in some of my secondary texts this week that critics of Eliot at the time she was writing were divided on her use of narrative interjection. Some found it experimental and an evolution of the form. Others found it distracting and annoying — and questioned her craft decisions. I'm curious to see how the narrator continues to develop in the story!
Thanks so much for the reply! I’m curious to see how she uses the narrative voice through the rest of the book. Do you consider this narrator to be some omniscient voice, or is it meant to be the author?
I’m trying to highlight the narrator’s voice and tracking where they take us, how often they interject!
Nice! Excited to learn your thoughts on this as we read more!
This is a great idea!
I I thought kindly on Sir James, although on reflection the line about pride came back to me “but pride only helps us to be generous, it never makes us more so”. Ultimately I hold out hope for him yet.
I enjoyed the line about him finding the joys of platonic female company “he was gradually discovering the delight there is in frank kindness and companionship between a man and a woman who have no passion to hide or confess”.
I LOVED that line! It made me think that Eliot would've been a great fan of Nora Ephron's work.
Also loved that line and highlighted it -
it felt like a major theme we may see played out throughout the book?
So many great questions, Haley. First off, I love George Eliot's narrative voice — but I think my take is a bit different from yours. What I'm really noticing this time around is how opinionated she is at the same time that she acknowledges others might not share her POV. As you note about the various ways of viewing Casaubon, she reminds readers about differing perspectives in a social scene like this; I think she knows we'll be judging them, too. I trust her in the way I trust any sharp observer of their milieu, but is she directing us what to think? I'd say no. How we readers judge these characters now is inevitably different from those reading the novel in the 1850s, anyway.
Funny thing is, my judgment of Casaubon and Sir James is pretty much the opposite of yours (I think Meagan said this as well). I take for granted the patriarchal attitudes of the time; I also think Eliot was deliberately tweaking them. All the men in the novel are arrogant in their own jerky ways (even Will). Dorothea did dodge a bullet with Sir James (I laughed out loud when he described Casaubon as a "mummy"), but I'm pretty sure she would have figured out how to build a life of good works around a dolt like him. With Casaubon, she's walking into a firing squad. When I read this novel the first time, I was sure about that by the end of the first part; I won't say more to avoid spoilers, but I always assumed Eliot meant readers to understand that "The Key to All Mythologies" was a ridiculous academic exercise.
What I'm noticing with this reading is what fascinating characters Dorothea and Casaubon both are — still, in 2025 — which adds to the dramatic impact. Despite her wry take on Casaubon, I think Eliot was also more sympathetic to him than other male characters (perhaps she even pities him). There's a lot to say going forward about the the way this author describes variations on passion, from scientific to romantic to social idealistic, another reason I like her narrative observations so much. As for character types, for me it doesn't get much better than Mrs. Cadwallader, the local busybody and Queen Bee. Even she is more than a type; in some ways, she's the penny-pinching managerial shadow side of Dorothea (and St. Theresa).
Favorite lines: I also loved the dialogue exchange comparing Casaubon to "semicolons and parentheses" — and some of the persnickety parenthetical asides from his POV reflect his narrow focus. But here are a few others that get across who the characters are:
* "Sir James felt with some sadness that she was to have perfect liberty of misjudgment."
* "'That is very kind of you,' said Dorothea, looking up at Mr. Casaubon with delight. 'It is noble. After all, people may really have in them some vocation which is not quite plain to themselves, may they not?'"
* "In fact, the world is full of hopeful analogies and handsome dubious eggs called possibilities."
Yes! These smart, passionate, socially constrained women! Eliot and Dorothea, who's a gem, so idealistic but aware of what she doesn't know — unlike the men, who are great examples of the the Dunning-Kruger effect (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect).
This is so brilliant. I am just over here nodding vigorously as I read your words.
I especially love what you say about Mrs. Cadwallader: "the local busybody and Queen Bee. Even she is more than a type; in some ways, she's the penny-pinching managerial shadow side of Dorothea (and St. Theresa)." Wow that's so good!! She reminds me a lot of Rachel Lynde from LM Montgomery's Anne of Green Gables and other Avonlea novels. Both women are very much in the "type," but become so much more than the type—they exist in the nuances outside of the archetype.
I am also really appreciating these views on Sir James! I'm challenging myself to give him more room in my mind and not to write him off for disliking Casaubon and smarting at Dorothea's rejection.
Thanks, Haley! As I read forward in the novel, I’ve become convinced one of Eliot’s narrative subtexts is the way we humans judge each other based on very little information about individual histories or inner lives. It’s one of many reasons she wryly echoes scientific method in her subtitle: “A Study of Provincial Life.” The small town itself is a petri dish for empirical observation of how inherently biased participants interact 😉
Continuing my Celia love, her dismissal of a great soul being particularly offensive at breakfast is amazing. She’s being petty and shallow, but actually she is picking up on the fact that casaubon has no sensitivity or consideration - he would absolutely pontificate in the morning before you’d had your coffee. (Maybe I’m just not a morning person, and this line is classical literature’s acknowledgment of my pain.)
I actually hate Ladislaw - he makes my skin crawl. I feel there is something so lacking in substance with him - he wants to come across as so deep and interesting, but there is nothing real there. He’s charming but doesn’t ever show any real character. The extent to which he gloms onto Dorothea just shows how shapeless he is without her.
Dorothea is such a great character - she is so frustrating and yet so fascinating. Obviously she is entitled to make her choice, and yet something in me wants to take away that choice because she is so blind to what a serious, permanent thing she is doing. It’s notable to me that she is so focused on goodness and yet uncritical of Casaubon’s lack of benevolence. Maybe that is why I struggle with her - I feel she is more attached to the idea of goodness than its actual existence.
*edited to remove spoilers*
Celia's passive aggressive pettiness and spot-on observations are so funny
I love the love for Celia —she's so deserving! And she has such a clear view on Casaubon that Dorothea is well clouded from by this point in the story.
Ladislaw reminds me a LOT, so far, of Fiyero in Wicked. Shallow...but perhaps not if he wakes up to something that matters to him. I wonder (and hope?) that he will.
I love Dorothea, too. Just a note on some parts of your comment: be careful of spoilers for the readers here! for many of us, this is our first time reading :)
Sorry, didn’t realize we were spoiler-free. Will be careful in future
Thank you!
woah woah woah can we edit this comment to remove spoilers? or delete it and repost without? i can’t believe i just read this 😭
I’m really sorry - edited and I will be careful in future.
ah thank you! i appreciate it 🙏🏻
My initial reaction to Ladislaw was pretty negative also - he gave me the ick, tbh.
I read the Prelude to say that although many women strive for a life above the mundane, they usually fail and are stuck in a common place life. “Here and there a cygnet is reared uneasily among the ducklings in the brown pond, and never finds the living stream in fellowship with its own oarry-footed kind.” A foreshadowing of Miss Brooke?
I also found it interesting to look into Dodo, Celia’s apparently endearment for her sister. It turns out that Dodo was a character in Alice in Wonderland, published in 1865. Dodo became in the vernacular something bordering on extinction. Eliot would certainly have been aware of this. How may this tie into the prelude?
Excellent reminder from the Prelude here. Yes! In that quote you shared, there's this aching feeling of the odd ones in society who never find their "fellowship," and therefore never reach their full potential. I wonder so much about how this metaphor is not only about the individual cygnet, but also about the lack of other swans. What is Dorothea's "living stream"? Who, like Dorothea, is "oary-footed"? I love the way Eliot's metaphor here isn't just about the swan, but also about the swan's community. Where does Dorothea fit?
Also: LOVE this attention to Dodo!!! It had not occurred to me to connect back to Carroll, but you're so right! The Dodo is almost cartoonishly foolish, if I'm remembering correctly. Running off happily, ignorant of its impending extinction. I wonder if Eliot was thinking of Carroll when she selected her heroine's name!
Idk, to me “Dodo” sounds like nothing more than a younger sister’s childish pronunciation of a difficult name that became an affectionate nickname. 🤷🏼♀️
Love and agree with both of these readings! That’s what I took from these two instances, too.
"Young ladies don't understand political economy, you know," said Mr. Brooke.
I love to think of Eliot smirking as she wrote this, knowing that her pen name would make people think she was a man. The irony is that Mary Ann Evans/George Eliot DOES understand political economy and she describes it well in this exchange between her uncle and Causabon.
"Such deep studies, classics, mathematics, that kind of thing, are too taxing for a woman." Eliot is satirizing the patriarchal stance by constantly and adeptly referencing classics and deep topics throughout her own writing. Haha.
I would have loved to see the faces of the men who read this and nodded along, then later learned that a woman wrote this brilliant book.
Both Casaubon and Chettam see a wife as an object, but Casaubon seems like he will encourage Dorothea's learning (for his own purposes), where Chettam may be annoyed by a woman wanting to learn.
Excellent reflections here! I totally agree: I could feel the smirks on the page and it really brought a lot to the reading experience. The views are so obviously annoying and tiresome...and to see Eliot trot them out so plainly with that smirk in the tone of our narrator is so much fun to read.
Just a small point - by the time she wrote Middlemarch, it was well known that George Eliot was a woman (she outed herself after her first novel.)
Thanks for the clarification!
Now that I'm enmeshed in Eliot's character love web, I am working overtime in my brain not to compare this love triangle with Austen's love triangle between Elizabeth Bennet, Fitzwilliam Darcy, and George Wickham. Eliot's Dorothea is so different from Austen's Elizabeth, and I'm trying to appreciate Dorothea for who she is without holding her up to Elizabeth.
I'm finding this "concept of a man" a fascinating lens with which to read these first ten chapters. Again, the Bennet sisters' (sans Elizabeth) only concern is to find a "single man in possession of a good fortune." Dorothea, too, is searching for a husband, but not for wealth and security, but because she sees marriage as her way for self-improvement. Is this because she is so young? I wonder if I appreciate Dorothea's character all the more because she seems more realistic than a fierce Elizabeth Bennet?
Casaubon makes me feel sad. Maybe because I turn 45 in three months, and I don't consider myself a wizened old man like others see Casaubon. I'm saddened that Casaubon feels like he needs a younger wife elevate his own intellectual interests. Back then, wasn't it respected for a man to not marry and become a learned scholar? He seems resigned to marry Dorothea the way Charlotte Lucas feels obliged to marry Mr. Collins in Pride and Prejudice.
Finally, I am fascinated that y'all noticed the personality types and how they may play out in the rest of this novel. From what I've heard about Eliot, she is a master at character development and intertwining these characters and their lives. I think I'm in for a very bumpy roller-coaster read!
I think we're in for a wild ride, too! I love all these comparisons to Pride & Prejudice because my mind keeps veering there, too, and yet I'm continually struck by how different Dorothea is. She's so different from Elizabeth, even though both women have a kind of intensity about them — in their belief that they deserve a "good" marriage, whatever that means to them.
I love your reading, too, of Casaubon as a bit "resigned" to marry, similar to Charlotte (and perhaps also to Mr. Collins himself, in some ways). While being a scholar was certainly a respectable role for a man to take on, and while Casaubon has the means to stay an eternal bachelor, I really got the sense that he sees Dorothea as a young burst of energy who will take care of him. As another commenter here put it: Casaubon needs a nurse! It's not even really that clear he *wants* a wife. He just wants someone to take care of him — and why not take up the pretty girl with a desire to work with (for) him?
I heard or read somewhere that Middlemarch seems to be deliberately picking up where Pride & Prejudice leaves off. It starts with the marriage and then unpacks what happens *after* the wedding. I love this idea that it’s a response to Austen and that she’s really complicating Austen’s message by following the characters further past the finish line.
How gutting was the line, “a woman dictates before marriage in order that she may have an appetite for submission afterwards”?? And then, less gutting but so prescient “the mistakes that we male and female mortals make when we have our own way might fairly raise some wonder that we are so fond of it.” 👀👀
Your phrasing "elevate his own intellectual interests" intrigues me. I read his desire for a wife as more a need for a student/secretary -- someone to read to him, to listen to him work through is theories and thoughts, do some of the copying, but not an intellectual equal or partner in any sense.
I don't know enough about the context of English culture when Middlemarch was written or set. Was a gentleman scholar like Casaubon more respected or esteemed if he had a student/helpmeet like what I think he is seeking in Dorothea?
It was quite normal for scholars not to marry. In fact fellows (professor) at Oxford and Cambridge Universities were forbidden to marry until 1877 nearly 50 years after time of Middlemarch.