Recent Criticism of Eliot's Middlemarch

The criticism authored by Jerome Beaty titled "History by Indirection: The Era of Reform in Middlemarch" (593) goes beyond any contemporary criticism previously provided. It takes a step back to really examine the historical implications of the novel. He is interested in the way Eliot scatters history through the novel through representation and delicate mentions. She never lumps together historical information but non the less provides accurate pictures of the times, something all critics seem to agree is done masterfully. Lee R. Edwards in his piece "Women, Energy, and Middlemarch" (623) again looks at historical implications but does so through contemplation of Eliot's personal motives. The critic details their personal transcendence of understanding of the novel at first, as the tale of a heroine, but then coming to realize its true nature. It is claimed that the novel is neither comic nor tragic, just how Eliot wanted it. A line is definitely drawn in this criticism between Eliot and her work, as she works to mock and criticize the society of the time through her characters. From her own history we understand that Dorothea and Celia are nothing like her in lifestyle selections and Edwards cites her characterizations as intentional calls out. T.R. Wright takes a separate step in the criticism of the novel by examining Eliot's intentions with faith in "Middlemarch as a Religious Novel, or Life without God" (640). God in a sense is blank in the novel, because he really does make no appearance. Wright names numerous other critics who have tried to answer the question of why and he himself offers the answer. He believes that Eliot's lack of god is made up for in other areas.

I most enjoyed Beaty's conversation on historical context in the novel. Many critics in the present and in the time of Eliot, unanimously praise her ability for an accurate portrayal of human nature. She creates a web of society that accurately reflects the expectations, responsibilities, and burdens of 1829 - 1832, the dates in which Middlemarch is set. Beaty creates an argument for how the novel is not only accurate of society but also politically and globally "Few readers notice how many details from the political history of a period forty years prior to the time of composition are present" (593). They are skillfully weaved into the novel, strengthening Eliot's already amazing picture of English life. Beaty goes on to elaborate on the death of King George IV that was during the action of the novel. The characters never directly pause to not the world larger than them but there is evidence of its impacts "The major political events are forecast and have effects with no surrounding air of "momentous occasion"; they assume their natural place in the lives and actions of the characters..." (595). Had the King's death overshadowed the death of a character it would in a sense remove from the emphasis on Middlemarch characters, as they never seem to act or look outside their own world much. However, to keep the plot true, the effects of his death in the news and postings are shown. I had no idea that so much history was weaved into the novel as I read it, and like any great piece of literature, I would like to reread it with more historical knowledge.