Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.06 AVERAGE
4.06 AVERAGE
emotional
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
“If we had a keen vision and feeling of all ordinary human life, it would be like hearing the grass grow and the squirrel's heart beat, and we should die of that roar which lies on the other side of silence.”
George Eliot might took on a man's name and wrote according to a prescribed formula by the male sex, but the perceptive insight that shaped the writing was that of a woman's, a superbly intelligent woman with astute, piercing observation skill and the subtle wit of a social critic but one with rare capacity to openness and compassion. It's not an easy matter to address sex/gender injustices and the contemptuous social conventions, especially when one was included in the injured party without being carried away by justifiable rage or bitter righteousness, but George Eliot managed it with profound wisdom.
The story itself perhaps read boring and soo loongg at times when nothing thrilling actually happening about a bunch of ordinary people living their provincial lives. I, myself had only the average capacity to bear only small doses each day so to not ruin the book for me. But, there was a continuous awe every single time I open the last marked page, and my constant inside-my-head, silent applauses, staring at the crazy intellect of the writer. She didn't merely delve into types of personality and the complex relationship they had with expectations and rules of society, but she did more than most other writers did. She motioned and encouraged readers to see the pattern of different types of personalities, to watch and discern and analyse their thought process and intricate emotions, to reason out the 'why' and the 'how' a person came to their words and decisions, together with her, except of simply told you the conclusion of her own reflections. Her shrewd study into self-delusion, illusion and the disillusionment that came from hasty marriage, superficial judgment, the chock-hold pressure of a society that valued appearance over substance, reputation over character, the 'ideal' beauty, the 'perfect' manhood and womanhood, about the concept of pride, honor and duty, and how much one's life was not one's own. “Sane people did what their neighbors did, so that if any lunatics were at large, one might know and avoid them.” It was so expertly done, that by the time you come to the same conclusion she finally laid out for you, you felt sort of pleasantly surprise of your gained insight into the machination of personality types and its convoluted entanglement with community.
Then of course, she did even more, this insanely far-sighted writer showed you how individuals had the unexpected potential to defy the pattern of their type and took contradictory actions that defied them but somehow also fit their temperament and internal motivation. “Character is not cut in marble - it is not something solid and unalterable. It is something living and changing, and may become diseased as our bodies do.” There was some really good twist, and the prose could be stunningly beautiful at times.
Middlemarch was a book that probably wouldn't be such a good idea to be subjected as a mandatory read in schools--except for the like of Maeve Wiley and other similar-minded Wileys who had read all Jane Austen by the age of twelve--instead should be read according to each person's right time and right mood for it to be thoroughly appreciated.
"Certainly those determining acts of her life were not ideally beautiful. They were the mixed result of young and noble impulse struggling amidst the conditions of an imperfect social state, in which great feelings will often take the aspect of error, and great faith the aspect of illusion. For there is no creature whose inward being is so strong that it is not greatly determined by what lies outside it."
George Eliot might took on a man's name and wrote according to a prescribed formula by the male sex, but the perceptive insight that shaped the writing was that of a woman's, a superbly intelligent woman with astute, piercing observation skill and the subtle wit of a social critic but one with rare capacity to openness and compassion. It's not an easy matter to address sex/gender injustices and the contemptuous social conventions, especially when one was included in the injured party without being carried away by justifiable rage or bitter righteousness, but George Eliot managed it with profound wisdom.
The story itself perhaps read boring and soo loongg at times when nothing thrilling actually happening about a bunch of ordinary people living their provincial lives. I, myself had only the average capacity to bear only small doses each day so to not ruin the book for me. But, there was a continuous awe every single time I open the last marked page, and my constant inside-my-head, silent applauses, staring at the crazy intellect of the writer. She didn't merely delve into types of personality and the complex relationship they had with expectations and rules of society, but she did more than most other writers did. She motioned and encouraged readers to see the pattern of different types of personalities, to watch and discern and analyse their thought process and intricate emotions, to reason out the 'why' and the 'how' a person came to their words and decisions, together with her, except of simply told you the conclusion of her own reflections. Her shrewd study into self-delusion, illusion and the disillusionment that came from hasty marriage, superficial judgment, the chock-hold pressure of a society that valued appearance over substance, reputation over character, the 'ideal' beauty, the 'perfect' manhood and womanhood, about the concept of pride, honor and duty, and how much one's life was not one's own. “Sane people did what their neighbors did, so that if any lunatics were at large, one might know and avoid them.” It was so expertly done, that by the time you come to the same conclusion she finally laid out for you, you felt sort of pleasantly surprise of your gained insight into the machination of personality types and its convoluted entanglement with community.
Then of course, she did even more, this insanely far-sighted writer showed you how individuals had the unexpected potential to defy the pattern of their type and took contradictory actions that defied them but somehow also fit their temperament and internal motivation. “Character is not cut in marble - it is not something solid and unalterable. It is something living and changing, and may become diseased as our bodies do.” There was some really good twist, and the prose could be stunningly beautiful at times.
Middlemarch was a book that probably wouldn't be such a good idea to be subjected as a mandatory read in schools--except for the like of Maeve Wiley and other similar-minded Wileys who had read all Jane Austen by the age of twelve--instead should be read according to each person's right time and right mood for it to be thoroughly appreciated.
"Certainly those determining acts of her life were not ideally beautiful. They were the mixed result of young and noble impulse struggling amidst the conditions of an imperfect social state, in which great feelings will often take the aspect of error, and great faith the aspect of illusion. For there is no creature whose inward being is so strong that it is not greatly determined by what lies outside it."
emotional
hopeful
reflective
slow-paced
Reading this book in English is too difficult, and I can't find a copy in Serbian :(
I wonder how many people miss out on Silas Marner because this is what they read first. Silas is so much better.
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
emotional
hopeful
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
This year has definitely taught me ~patience~ and I learned that I have the patience to make it through this gigantic beast of a novel. I didn't love it, I didn't hate it, but if not for the hype, I probably would have put it down.
It's clear that structurally this is quite skillful, and I love the takes Eliot has on gender roles. It often felt very tongue and cheek, almost like she was winking at the camera with her writing when a comment was made about men being more competent than women. (I also think the vast array of quotes from texts at the beginning of each chapter do a similar thing of showing how brilliant and well read Eliot was).
But truthfully, Dorothea was the main thing keeping me going, and I really loved her as a character. It was really refreshing to see a woman stick to her beliefs amidst others who got caught in the system of marriage/patriarchy (even if she made some mistakes along the way).
Overall, pretty great, I'm glad I read it for the literary canon significance, but I don't know if I would be so quick to read this again.
It's clear that structurally this is quite skillful, and I love the takes Eliot has on gender roles. It often felt very tongue and cheek, almost like she was winking at the camera with her writing when a comment was made about men being more competent than women. (I also think the vast array of quotes from texts at the beginning of each chapter do a similar thing of showing how brilliant and well read Eliot was).
But truthfully, Dorothea was the main thing keeping me going, and I really loved her as a character. It was really refreshing to see a woman stick to her beliefs amidst others who got caught in the system of marriage/patriarchy (even if she made some mistakes along the way).
Overall, pretty great, I'm glad I read it for the literary canon significance, but I don't know if I would be so quick to read this again.
hopeful
reflective
relaxing
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes