Scan barcode
lynneelue's review against another edition
2.0
This is epic poetry in narrative, which Elizabeth Barrett Browning attempted to give attention to in the Victorian novel-interested audience, and it was very successful. It also nicely gave details about the current culture, focusing for most of the book on life in the mid-nineteenth century. This follows the narrator, Aurora Leigh, from birth to age thirty, from her childhood in Italy to her move to "frosty" England, and back to Italy, from her denied proposal with Romney Leigh to her life with Marian Erle and Marian's baby to her accepted proposal with Romney Leigh. I did not enjoy reading this, because, frankly, I found it boring. Consistently, over 600 lines would pass that could be summarized in a short sentence. In order to get through the book without being so overcome with boredom, I broke my reading time down so I only read 600 lines at a time. It often became philosophical, for instance, about the art of poetry, and I had patience only to skim it. Barrett Browning's lines can certainly be beautiful in their attentive detail; I just don't appreciate it enough. I recognized some of her style included repeating/rephrasing the same line, which was interesting.
I did, however, like the independence and strength of Aurora Leigh. She wants to become a poet, and when faced with the possibility of becoming a wife, she declines it, because she thinks it will ruin her chances of becoming a poet/putting in the time to create poetry. I think she was correct there: 1) Romney Leigh was not mature enough when he first proposes that he would expect her to fulfill wifely duties, and she would not have time to write; 2) he did not believe in marriage for love, whereas she would have wanted that; and 3) he did not consider her poet-aspirations valid because of her gender. So, only in the end, when he fully recognizes the success and value of her poetic aspirations and states his love for her can he be a healthy match for her. As one phrase in the book states, "I am Aurora Leigh": I love the assertive strength of Aurora's character.
I also really appreciated the treatment of Marian Erle's illegitimate child. Aurora discovers the context of the child's existence and does not blame Marian for it. She considers her pure still, not Marian's fault, and takes her in. She does not judge Marian but treats her as a very caring friend would. Housing Marian was so extremely kind, and it enabled Marian and the child to grow in a loving environment rather than a hate-filled and judgmental one as would be common in the period. So I also really liked that.
I did, however, like the independence and strength of Aurora Leigh. She wants to become a poet, and when faced with the possibility of becoming a wife, she declines it, because she thinks it will ruin her chances of becoming a poet/putting in the time to create poetry. I think she was correct there: 1) Romney Leigh was not mature enough when he first proposes that he would expect her to fulfill wifely duties, and she would not have time to write; 2) he did not believe in marriage for love, whereas she would have wanted that; and 3) he did not consider her poet-aspirations valid because of her gender. So, only in the end, when he fully recognizes the success and value of her poetic aspirations and states his love for her can he be a healthy match for her. As one phrase in the book states, "I am Aurora Leigh": I love the assertive strength of Aurora's character.
I also really appreciated the treatment of Marian Erle's illegitimate child. Aurora discovers the context of the child's existence and does not blame Marian for it. She considers her pure still, not Marian's fault, and takes her in. She does not judge Marian but treats her as a very caring friend would. Housing Marian was so extremely kind, and it enabled Marian and the child to grow in a loving environment rather than a hate-filled and judgmental one as would be common in the period. So I also really liked that.
aegagrus's review against another edition
3.5
Elizabeth Barrett Browning's language in Aurora Leigh is very beautiful, full of elaborate Victorian similes, lush description, and clever dialogue. Some modern readers might find the language excessive and indulgent. This was not my reaction. EBB's poetic register is very much of its time and it serves her characters well. These are people who obfuscate and conceal not by tight-lipped caution but by overflowing verbosity.
I was struck by how unreliable of a narrator Aurora is. It's not so much that she's lying to the narrator; she's lying to herself, and a great amount of cognitive dissonance makes its way into the story she's telling. At several points she acts in ways which will self-evidently produce results contrary to her purported (and probably genuine) intent. The characters with whom Aurora interacts are similarly unreliable in their dealings with her, all of which makes for a work which is sometimes thematically ambiguous. It is not always clear how to read EBB's depictions of aristocratic society, socialist idealism, or literary culture. These depictions are plainly satirical in certain ways, but it is not always clear in which direction the satire is aimed.
The clearest unifying thread is that the three major characters -- Aurora, Romney, and Marian -- all struggle with a tension between some transcendent purpose (respectively art, social reform, and an idealized love) and the concrete relationships in which they find themselves. While we cannot know exactly what EBB made of this tension, we can be sure that she wrestled with it. She was a poet, inclined towards the transcendent, and also a woman, socialized towards the domestic and relational. Cognitive dissonance or no, Aurora's reflections on art, gender, and love offer a fascinating glimpse into some of the conflicting loyalties EBB lived with (it is this sense in which Aurora Leigh is "semi-autobiographical").
The story's ending is likely unsatisfying to many readers today, and one wonders whether EBB was simply offering a concession to the expectations of her readers. Even then, the ending is "saved" somewhat by the fact that the reader has by this point learned to be wary of taking the story they are being told at face value.
I was struck by how unreliable of a narrator Aurora is. It's not so much that she's lying to the narrator; she's lying to herself, and a great amount of cognitive dissonance makes its way into the story she's telling. At several points she acts in ways which will self-evidently produce results contrary to her purported (and probably genuine) intent. The characters with whom Aurora interacts are similarly unreliable in their dealings with her, all of which makes for a work which is sometimes thematically ambiguous. It is not always clear how to read EBB's depictions of aristocratic society, socialist idealism, or literary culture. These depictions are plainly satirical in certain ways, but it is not always clear in which direction the satire is aimed.
The clearest unifying thread is that the three major characters -- Aurora, Romney, and Marian -- all struggle with a tension between some transcendent purpose (respectively art, social reform, and an idealized love) and the concrete relationships in which they find themselves. While we cannot know exactly what EBB made of this tension, we can be sure that she wrestled with it. She was a poet, inclined towards the transcendent, and also a woman, socialized towards the domestic and relational. Cognitive dissonance or no, Aurora's reflections on art, gender, and love offer a fascinating glimpse into some of the conflicting loyalties EBB lived with (it is this sense in which Aurora Leigh is "semi-autobiographical").
The story's ending is likely unsatisfying to many readers today, and one wonders whether EBB was simply offering a concession to the expectations of her readers. Even then, the ending is "saved" somewhat by the fact that the reader has by this point learned to be wary of taking the story they are being told at face value.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Classism and Death of parent
sophiefreeman's review against another edition
challenging
hopeful
lighthearted
reflective
medium-paced
4.5
msgtdameron's review against another edition
reflective
medium-paced
4.25
Big picture items I got from this work:
One: Love, real love is the most necessary idea when one is working for social change. With out love for individuals No social justice work or experiment then or now will be successful. Auroras; love for the individual is what forces her forward and leads to her rejection of Romney and his high ideas of social justice.
Two: With the love of an idea and not of the individuals that will be changed by that idea, social justice programs are more likely to harm than do overall good.
Three: That the conservative right will never figure out that they are wrong. Lady Waldemar's letter in book nine shows this. She skips over in two lines the damage she inflicted on Marian as, well if my agent failed me it is not my fault. That the real fault belongs to Aurora for not pushing her cousin to marry her or to marry Lady Waldmar, or their mutual friend who just appears in the work as her editor/lawyer new betrothed. An obviously delusional women who can't accept her fault in Marians' rape and subsequent pregnancy. Typical well off person, (GOP)
Four: The poor have their own dignity and any and all programs to help them must be answerable to that dignity. This is still a major problem today with all the do-gooder programs that crop up and then find failure. Most of these people work hard, many hold two or three jobs. This as was true in 1856 as it is today. Yet social reformers and the politicians they support usually ignore this simple basic fact the each man poor, rich or in-between should be treated with the same dignity and deference as is shown to the powerful donor or politician. To be successful each program for the benefit of the poor must give them same deference. This is the real statement at the endow Book IV. Love and respect for each person, Aurora, with the plan and political moxy will work. To bad as in 1856 and 175 years later there is so little of both in our social contracts.
One: Love, real love is the most necessary idea when one is working for social change. With out love for individuals No social justice work or experiment then or now will be successful. Auroras; love for the individual is what forces her forward and leads to her rejection of Romney and his high ideas of social justice.
Two: With the love of an idea and not of the individuals that will be changed by that idea, social justice programs are more likely to harm than do overall good.
Three: That the conservative right will never figure out that they are wrong. Lady Waldemar's letter in book nine shows this. She skips over in two lines the damage she inflicted on Marian as, well if my agent failed me it is not my fault. That the real fault belongs to Aurora for not pushing her cousin to marry her or to marry Lady Waldmar, or their mutual friend who just appears in the work as her editor/lawyer new betrothed. An obviously delusional women who can't accept her fault in Marians' rape and subsequent pregnancy. Typical well off person, (GOP)
Four: The poor have their own dignity and any and all programs to help them must be answerable to that dignity. This is still a major problem today with all the do-gooder programs that crop up and then find failure. Most of these people work hard, many hold two or three jobs. This as was true in 1856 as it is today. Yet social reformers and the politicians they support usually ignore this simple basic fact the each man poor, rich or in-between should be treated with the same dignity and deference as is shown to the powerful donor or politician. To be successful each program for the benefit of the poor must give them same deference. This is the real statement at the endow Book IV. Love and respect for each person, Aurora, with the plan and political moxy will work. To bad as in 1856 and 175 years later there is so little of both in our social contracts.
sarahreadsaverylot's review against another edition
3.0
Another case of the absent .5 star increment stifling my creativity and expression.
This is a great example of thoughtful and scholarly publishing making an old work relevant and accessible. High fives to Norton for moving beyond biography and getting into the meat of EBB's writing and not just harping on her personal life. The inclusion of relevant contemporary criticism as well as more recent scholarly essays made me sit up a bit straighter and get as much out of this work as I could. A refreshing presentation of a 'classic'.
This is a great example of thoughtful and scholarly publishing making an old work relevant and accessible. High fives to Norton for moving beyond biography and getting into the meat of EBB's writing and not just harping on her personal life. The inclusion of relevant contemporary criticism as well as more recent scholarly essays made me sit up a bit straighter and get as much out of this work as I could. A refreshing presentation of a 'classic'.