The Conservative review

Front matter

Google to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

Contents

Art. I.— MRS. WARD'S MASTERPIECE. By Grkknough

White, A.M., B.D 5

Art. II. —THE LABOR TRUSTS. By Philip Alexander

II

Many of the essays written during these years have not been republished. She collected and revised the first seven, whose titles are given below, and after her death left instructions that only these of her earlier writings should permanently remain a portion of her collected work. However, at least one edition exists containing several others, two of which are among the most valuable that have come from her pen. The full list of titles, as will be noted, covers a wide range of subjects. Most of them are ostensibly book reviews, but she does not by any means confine her discussion to the volume in question. As in the essays of Macaulay and others, the book serves merely as the basis for the deliverance of her own views, either on the author or on the general subject under treatment. We give a list of the essays, with some bibliographical information concerning them :

Worldliness and Other-Worldliness: The Poet Young. (Westminster Review, January, 1857. Authorities : Young's Works ; Johnson's Lives of the Poets; Doran's Life of Edward Young, etc. Written at Ilfracombe and Tenby, June-July, 1856.)

German Wit: Heinrich Heine, (Westminster Review, January, 1856. Review of Heine's Collected Works and Miscellaneous Writings, Written at Richmond, October-November, 1855.)

Evangelical Teaching: Dr. Gumming, (Westminster Review, October, 1855. Review of Dr. Cumminsfs The Church Before the Flood, Occa* sional Discourses, Is Christianity from Godf etc. Written at Dover, June- August, 1855.)

The Influence of Rationalism : Lecky's History, (Fortnightly Review, edited by Mr. Lewes, first number, May 15, i8(55. Review of Lecky's History of the Rise and Influence of the Spirit of Rationalism, Written at London, April-May, 1865.)

The Natural History of German Life: Riehl, (Westminster Review July. 1856. Review of W. H. Riehl's Die Biirgerliche Gesellschaft and Land und Folk, Written at Ilfracombe and Tenby, May-June, 1856.)

Three Months in Weimar, (Eraser's Magazine, April, 1855. Written at Dover, shortly after her union with Lewes.)

Address to Workingmen by Felix Holt. (Blackwood's Magazine, January, 1868. Written in London, November-December, 1867.)

Carlyle's Life of Sterling, (Westminster Review, January, 1852. Written at London, October-November, 185 1.)

Woman in France: Madame de SablS, (Westminster Review, October, 1854. Review of Victor Cousin's Madame de Sable: Etudes sur les Femmes Illustres et la SociSte du XVII' Sihk, Other authorities: Sainte Beuve's Portraits des Femmes; Michelet's Les Femmes de la Rivolution, Written at Weimar, August-September, 1854.)

Silly Novels by Lady Novelists. ( Westminster Review, October, 1856. Written at Richmond, August-September, 1856.)

The Grammar of Ornament, (Review of a treatise by Owen Jones, the architect No date.)'

Ill

Having thus given the requisite external information, we will now proceed to a discussion of the inner content of these essays. It will be noted that they can easily be divided into groups according to their subject-matter and interest. Two have to do with woman in her relations to literature. Two, with the writings of celebrated divines, and religion generally. Three, with Germany and German subjects. Two, with philosophy and politics. The remaining two are very brief sketches of minor interest.

The article entitled The Grammar of Ornament does not contain anything of particular value It is a Ruskin-like plea for the internal artistic decoration of houses. She says :

If an evil state of blood and Isrmph usually goes along with an evil state of mind, who shall say that the ugliness of our streets, the falsity of our ornamentation, the vulgarity of our upholstery, have not something to do with those bad tempers which breed false conclusions?

She praises Mr. Jones very highly for his efforts at better ornamentation. Perhaps personal considerations may have influenced her in writing this review. Mr. Cross mentions in his Life that Owen Jones decorated "The Priory," and George Eliot there expresses to him her gratitude for his skill and taste.

CarlyWs Life of Sterling is also short and without especial significance. The interest of the biography, she says, lies rather in the author than in the subject. "Carlyle here shows us his sunny side." It is a fine presentation of Sterling's life and labors, in contrast to 'the rather unsympathetic treatment of Archdeacon Hare. The latter condemned Sterling's separation from the church, and was probably, says George Eliot, one of those who hold "that 'orders' are a sort of spiritual backboard, which, by dint of obliging a man to look as if he were straight, end by making him so." Let this be marked as the first appearance of that spirit of sarcastic humor, whose manifestations can be found so frequently throughout these essays. Indeed, they occur here much oftener than in her fiction. For afterwards she seems to have learned how to curb her tongue and to refrain from expressions which, if applied literally, could not fail to offend some classes of her nmnerous readers. She continues:

According to Carlyle, on the contrary, the real "aberration" of Sterling was his choice of the derical profession, which was simply a mistake as to his true vocation.

The quotation shows the trend of her own very strong beliefs upon this subject. Later, in her paper on Young, she expresses a very lively contempt for the clergyman out of place, and the reader will at once recall her handling of Fred Vincy's waverings and final decision. The sentiment expressed above is, indeed, very similar to those which she subsequently puts into the mouth of Mary Garth.

It is interesting to compare her views on biographical writing with those of Tennyson and others :

We have often wished that genius would incline itself more frequently to the task of the biographer — that when some great or good personage dies, instead of the dreary three or five-volumed compilations of letters and diary, and detail, little to the purpose, we could have a real "Life," setting forth briefly and vividly the man's inward and outward struggles, aims and achievementSi so as to make clear the meaning whidh his experience has for his fellows. A few such lives (chiefly, indeed, /autobio^aphies) the world possesses, and they have, perhaps, been more/influential on the formation of character than any other kind of writing, y^ut the conditions required for the perfection of life-writing— personal in|tmacy, a loving and poetic nature which sees the beauty and the depth of famiiliar things, and the artistic power which seizes characteristic points and renders them with lifelike effect— are seldom seen in combination. Tfte Life of Sterling is an instance of this rare conjunction.

This is certainly a high ideal, and one to which very few — her own biographers not excepted — have been able to attain. Her admiration of the book is very apparent, and, perhaps, somewhat excessive. A passage in one of her private letters is even more commendatory than anything in this article. Her personal acquaintance with Carlyle began about this time, and it is not unlikely that the influence of the man aided that of the writer. As to the style, she concludes :

The style is — for the most part — ^pure and rich. There are passages of deep pathos which come upon the reader like a strain of solemn music, and others which show that aptness of epithet, that power of close delineation, in which, perhaps, no other writer has excelled Carlyle.

IV

In this division will be placed the review of Lecky's Influence of Ratiaiuxlism and The Address to Workingmen. Both of these were written under disadvantageous circumstances, and by no means exhibit her best talent.

The first-mentioned article was produced while she was struggling with the conception of Felix Holt, and was, moreover, physically ill. It is a rather unappreciative criticism of an author whose fame as a philosophical historian has broadened considerably since George Eliot's day.

She begins with some amusing remarks concerning "the general reader," to whom, and to whom alone, she declares, Mr. Lecky's writings will appeal:

This modem type of the general reader may be known by the cordiality with which he assents to indistinct, blurred statements; say that black is blade, he will shake his head and hardly think it ; say that black is not so very black he will reply, "Exactly." He has no hesitation, if you wish it, even to get up at a public meeting and express his conviction that at times, and within certain limits, the radii of a circle have a tendency to be equal ; but, on the other hand, he would urge that the spirit of geometry may be carried a little too far. His only bigotry is a bigotry a^inst any clearly defined opinion, not in the least based on a scientific scepticism, but belonging to a lack of coherent thought — a spongy texture of mind that gravitates strongly to nothing. The one thing he is stanch for is, the utmost liberty of private haziness.

This suggests Mr. Brooke of Middlemarch in other things than catch-words. There has never been a woman who was a stronger advocate of penetrating problems, always and solely, by the cold, stem light of intellectuality, than George Eliot. She expresses her contempt, over and again, for those who will not or can not come to a clear decision on momentous questions. And that is precisely the indictment which she prefers against Mr. Lecky:

The writer frequently impresses us as being in a state of hesitation concerning his own standing-point, which may form a desirable stage in private meditation but not in published exposition.

And again :

Mr. Curdle's famous definition of the dramatic unities as ''a sort of a general oneness" is not totally false; but such luminousness as it has could only be perceived by those who already knew what the unities were. Mr. Lecky * * * does not discriminate, or does not help his reader to discriminate between objective complexity and subjective confusion.

Excepting for a digression considering the views of other writers on witchcraft, she sticks very closely here to the work under discussion, and we learn little of her own philosophical tendencies. There is a remarkable passage, throwing light on her attitude toward religion, which will appear later. But of her alleged Positivism we can discover here, at least, no trace. It may be well to say, in this connection, that a total misconception has arisen concerning her relation to Positivism in general and the Positivist body in particular. To the former she owned but a limited adherence, and with the latter she never formally allied herself. She often expresses her admiration of and indebtedness to Comte, but also distinctly declares that she considers Positivism "one-sided." To no one system of philosophy, as to no one system of religion, did she own her allegiance.

The Address to Workingmen by Felix Holt was written hastily at the earnest and repeated request of her publisher, Mr. Blackwood. It bears a later date than any other of the essays, and is, perhaps, unwisely included among them. She delivers her opinions in the character of her Radical hero.

The style is necessarily farced. She finds much difficulty, apparently, in compressing her rich flow of diction and full sentence-structure to suit the bare simplicity with which Felix Holt's sentiments should be uttered. Frequently, too, she forgets her assumed character, and we have a rather grotesque melange.

She believes, first, as all sensible people must, in the purification and intestinal reform of the working classes themselves, as a prelude to their attempting any great changes in society at large. They must have leaders and well-tried leaders. They must be very careful as to their methods of procedure:

Indignation is a fine war-horse, but it must be ridden by a man; it . must be ridden by rationality, skill, courage, armed with the right weapons, and taking definite aim.

"All else confusion," and we readily grant the major premise. She then declares that, as a workingmani considers the general good when he joins a trades-union, so he ought to extend the principle and apply it, philanthropically, to all society. Class interest, though almost inevitable, is fundamentally wrong; "the highest interest of mankind must at last be a common and not a divided interest" ; it is the familiar "greatest good of the greatest number." Old institutions must be maintained unless and until better ones can be secured. Improvements should be slow and thorough — ^these, as the opinions of a "Radical," are certainly rather siuprising-^and the way to this improvement is "by the turning of class interests into class functions or duties." She acknowledges the fact of the workingman's Philistinism; he does not have his share in the nation's wealth of knowledge and culture, any more than he has in its material wealth. And he cannot procure this immaterial wealth by attacking and robbing its present possessors. He will take his first step forward by attacking his own ignorance and immorality.

More follows to the same purpose. We have given enough to indicate the trend of her argument. Her attitude here is that of the true Liberal-Conservative, cautioning against overmuch Radicalism.

V

George Eliot has left us a novel portraying Italian life, and a poem dealing similarly with Spain; it is only in her letters and essays that we find any full record of the influence exerted upon her by the great world of German thought.

The Natural History of German Life is the first of the trio included in this division, which we shall consider. It is a review of some sociological works by W. H. Riehl. She commences with a lamentation for the ordinary Englishman's ignorance of common life and manners:

How little the real characteristics of the working classes are known to those who are outside them, how little their natural history has been studied, is sufficiently disclosed by our Art as well as by our political and social theories. * * * Only a total absence of acquaintance and sympathy with our peasantry could give a moment's popularity to * * * a picture * * * where we have a peasant girl who looks as if she knew L. E. L.'s poems by heart, and English rustics, whose costumes seem to indicate that they are meant for ploughmen, with exotic features that remind us of a handsome prima tenore. * * ♦ The selfish instincts are not subdued by the sight of buttercups, nor is integrity in the least established by that classic rural occupation, sheep-washing. To make men moral something more is requisite than to turn them out to grass.

The mingled truth and pungency of the above lines is entirely in her best vein. She continues along the same line, and shortly afterwards comes a most interesting passage which we quote at length, though at the risk of appearing to borrow too frequently her own language. The justification lies in the fact that it would be very difficult to improve upon her manner of expression, and condensation would inevitably deprive the original of its flavor and full meaning. The excerpt reads as follows:

We have one great novelist who is gifted with the utmost power of rendering the external traits of our town population ; and if he could give us their psychological character — their conception of life, and their emotions — ^with the same truth as their idiom and manners, his books Would be the greatest contribution Art has ever made to the awakening of social sympathies. But while he can copy Mrs. Plomish's colloquial style with the delicate accuracy of a sun-picture, while there is the same startling inspiration in his description of the gestures and phrases of "Boots" as in the speeches of Shakespeare's mobs or numskulls, he scarcely ever passes from the humourous and external to the emotional and tragic without becoming as transcendent in his unreality as he was a moment before in his artistic truthfulness.

The "precious salt of his humour,'' she declares, is his one saving virtue. This is the final verdict pronounced by posterity upon the genius of Dickens. It is well worth noting that the woman who was destined afterward to become his greatest rival, , and to delineate just those delicate traits of character which he could never delineate, has anticipated that judgment by nearly half a century. ,

This knowledge of the masses, the incompleteness of which she deprecates in England, has been much assisted and forwarded in Germany, she says, by the labors of Riehl. We will not enter at length into her discussion of his writings. The chief point that seems to impress her in his description of the German peasantry is their utter reliance upon habit and precedent. Her digest of his thought seems to be accurate and thorough. She believes his point of view wellchosen and his arguments just. Of his conservatism she asserts in a fine figure :

He is as far as passible from the folly of supposing that the sun will go backward on the dial because we put the hands of our clock backward ; he only contends against the opposite folly of decreeing that it shall be midday while in fact the sun is only just touching the mountain tops, and all along the valley men are stumbling in the twilight

Her paper on Heine contains much m'ore of the personal element. It is the work of an appreciative critic, in the days when appreciative criticism was yet in its infancy. We have here an opportunity to discover her conception of wit and

humor in literature. She says in beginning :

The last thing in which the cultivated man can have community with the vulgar is their jocularity; and we can hardly exhibit more strikingly the wide gulf which separates him from them than by comparing the object which shakes the diaphragm of a coal-heaver with the highly complex pleasure derived from a real witticism.

To apply the criterion personally, it is certainly this "highly complex pleasure*' which her own wit affords. It sweeps the whole gamut, from the harmless play of a delicate humor to the most pitiless lashings of carefully elaborated sarcasms; and it is, beyond all doubt, one of the most striking qualities of her prose style. We have called attention above to the fact that her sarcasm is, perhaps, to be found here more often than in her novels; we hardly know whether the supremacy belongs to the fiction or to the essays, for those happy comparisons, laughable allusions and dainty turns of expression, which constitute the soul of wit proper. The reader cannot have read thus far without being forcibly struck by this quality in the passages which we have cited. Nearly all of her most valuable reflections are clothed in this form, and thus create a doubly strong impression.

It is interesting to note her distinctions between wit and humor. Several of the points brought out are original, and all are, at the least, worth examining. She asserts that humor was the first-bom; that it "draws its materials from situations and characteristics"; that it is diffuse and whimsical, and that in its lower forms it is not necessarily sympathetic. Furthermore, that it finds its highest manifestations in poetry.

Wit, on the other hand, is a later product; it has to do with "unexpected and complex relations"; it is "brief and sudden and sharply defined as a crystal" ; and it is essentially what she calls "reasoning raised to a higher power."

But the two often blend and overlap, and they are frequently found in the same mind, sometimes each being highly developed. The purest type of wit is, perhaps, the representative Frenchman, and of humor, the representative German. The German idea of the ludicrous is, like his personality, colossal and unrefined :

He has the finest nose for Empirismus in philosophical doctrine, but the presence of more or less tobacco smoke in the air he breathes is imperceptible to him. To the typical German it is indifferent whether his doorlock will catch, whether his tea-cup be more or less than an inch thick, whether or not his book have every other leaf unstitched, whether his neighbor's conversation be more or less of a shout, whether he pronounce b or p, t or d, whether or not his adored one's teeth be few and far between.

Germany has produced no work of wit or humor which ranks as European. She believes, however, that there is hope for the future, and says :

Perhaps there is already earnest of that future crop in the existence of Heinrich Heine, who, to Teutonic imagination, sensibility and humour, adds an amount of esprit that would make him brilliant among the most brilliant of Frenchmen.

She rates him highly as a lyrical poet, wit, humorist, and even as a writer of prose. She admits and deprecates his occasional coarseness and scurrility, but her general estimate indicates a full belief in his genius. The greater part of the article consists of a sketch of his life with quotations from his various writings. His lyric gift is compared with that of Wordsworth and Tennyson, and is pronounced very like to theirs in their briefer and more simple strains. His "short swallow flights of song" are, she says, "so emphatically scmgs that, in reading them, we feel as if each must have a twin melody bom in the same moment and by the same inspiration."

The German language, she believes, is much better adapted to purposes of poetry than of prose. For the latter it is too unmanageable and clumsy. Heine, however, has succeeded well in mastering its difficulties. His prose is characterized by flexibility and variety; often, indeed, it is wonderfully poetic in effect. And, usually, the most poetic is also the most "specifically humourous."

The sketch entitled Three Months in Weimar differs in character from the remainder of the essays. It is purely descriptive, and, though pleasing, does not rank with her more serious efforts.

The "three months" are those spent there by herself and Mr. Lewes immediately after their union. The article deals almost entirely with their exj>eriences, more especially with the scenery and celebrated places among which they lived. She says of the town :

The blending of rustic and civic life, the indications of a central government in the midst of very primitive-looking objects, has some distant analogy with the condition of old Lacedaemon. * * * One's first feeling was. How could Goethe live here in this dull, lifeless village ?

The German Stratford, in itself, does not seem to impress her favorably. But she admires the scenery roundabout, and particularly whatever has any connection with Goethe or Schiller.

VI

We now come to a consideration of her views upon the subject of religion. The articles on Dr. Gumming and Dr. Young are among the most denunciatory and at the same time the most excellent that have come from her pen. The former, indeed, is, on the whole, her best essay. It was upon reading this that Mr. Lewes was for the first time convinced of "the true genius in her writing." It excited considerable comment on its first appearance, and the authorship was, for some time, unknown. Dr. Gumming was a voluminous writer of the day, and was not without his share of influence over certain classes of minds. The more marked points in his character will appear as we study the article.

It is a remarkable fact that the great English novelists have, JLS a rule, introduced members of the clerical body into their fiction, merely to deride the faults and failings of these reverend though unrevered fellow-beings. Generally, the trait enlarged upon is hypocrisy, frequently compounded with a disposition to long-windedness and female society. The Reverend Mr. Ghadband, The Shepherd and Gharles H^oneyman are familiar examples. George Eliot is, perhaps, less addicted than others to this satiric characterization in her novels, but this paper, together with that on Young, are little else than long-sustained innuendoes against certain tyi>es among the clergy. She begins thus:

Given, a man with moderate intellect, a moral standard not higher than the average, some rhetorical affluence and great glibness of speech, what is the career in which, without the aid of birth or money, he may most easily attain power and reputation in English society? Where is that Goshen of mediocrity in which a smattering of science and learning will pass for profound instruction, where platitudes will be accepted as wisdom, bigoted narrowness as holy zeal, unctuous egoism as Goid-gfiven piety?

The answer is, "the pulpit"; it is a popular resort for every weak-minded, bull-headed and strong-voiced donothing, where such a one can hardly fail to obtain success. "Let him fish for aouls, not with the bait of inconvenient singularity, but with the drag-net of comfortable conformity"; let him attract men's curiosity by ingenious political interpretations of obscure Biblical allusions; and beyond all doubt he will enjoy a pious, well-earned otium cum dignitate.

After some more remarks of the same general character, she mentions directly Dr. Gumming's name. She speaks of his popularity, and declares her belief that his printed sermons contain much that is "proifbundly mistaken and pernicious." Personally, she knows and cares nothing about

Dr. Cumming: it is solely as a moral teacher that he has incurred her condemnation.

There is in his teaching, she says, not the least trace of mysticism, and but very little of spirituality. He concentrates his attention upon the practical and the polemical.

Of really spiritual joys and sorrows, of the life of Christ as a manifestation of love that constrains the soul, of S3mipathy with that yearning over the lost and erring which made Jesus weep over Jerusalem, and prompted the sublime prayer, "Father, forgive them," of the gentler fruits of the Spirit, and the peace of God which passeth understanding — of all

this we find little trace in Dr. Cumming's discourses.

Surely one who speaks thus tenderly and lovingly of Christian doctrines cannot have been without some measure of sympathy with the faith therein embedded. Her creed is difficult to formulate, and, very probably, she herself never attempted the task in its entirety. In revelation and immortality she had little belief; her leanings towards Positivism have already been mentioned. Perhaps she may be best described as a reverent agnostic — unable and unwilling herself to render allegiance, but never expressing anything but respect for those who could serve, honestly and faithfully. Among this number the Rev. Dr. Cumming is not included.

His style, she continues, is diffuse and florid; she satirizes his ornate paraphrases of Scripture, and declares him to be a wolf in sheep's clothing — i, e., a journalist in the pulpit. Her attack will not be based upon any "doctrinal discussion" :

It is simply as spectators that we criticize Dr. Cumming's mode of warfare, and we concern ourselves less with what he holds to be Christian truth, than with his manner of enforcing that truth ; less with the doctrines he teaches than with the moral spirit and tendencies of his teaching.

The first of his faults to which she wishes to call attention is his "unscrupulosity of statement." His zeal is seldom according to knowledge. She considers his tmveracity as the result "of the moral and intellectual distortion of view which is inevitably produced by assigning to dogmas, based on a very complex structure of evidence, the place and authority of first truths." Against dogmatism we find her protesting, both here and elsewhere, frequently and strongly. A little lower down we discover the point of view from which she believes the Christian revelation must be accepted or rejected :

In proportion as religious sects exalt feeling above intellect and believe themselves to be guided by direct inspiration rather than by a spontaneous exertion of their faculties — that is, in proportion as they are removed from rationalism — ^their sense of truth is misty and confused.

In another paragraph she plainly demands that "the rules of historical criticism" be applied to the Scriptures. Again, she strongly objects to Cumming's conception of the infidel as a hardened monster, inconsistent, depraved, wilfully blinding himself to the light. He asserts that he has had experience with s-cepticism himself; she retorts:

This experience, however, instead of impressing on him the fact that doubt may be the stamp of a truth-loving mind * * * has not enabled him even to see the condition of a mind "perplext in faith, but pure in deeds," craving light, yearning for a faith that will harmonize and cherish its highest powers and aspirations, but unable to find that faith in dogmatic Cfiristianity.

Another of his objectionable characteristics is his "absence of genuine charity." This is shown by the manner in which he treats of the hereafter. He believes, uncompromisingly, in the horrors of hell-fire for all those who do not, can not, or will not accept Christianity:

He does not merely resign himself to the awful mystery of eternal punishment; he contends for it. Do we object, he asks, to everlasting happiness? Then why object to everlasting misery? — reasoning which ia perhaps felt to be cogent by theologians who anticipate the everlasting happiness for themselves and the everlasting misery for their neighbors.

George Eliot herself, elsewhere (The InAuence of Rationalism), firmly and solemnly repudiates all belief in "that awful image, with its group of associated dogmas concerning the inherited curse, and the damnation of unbaptized infants, of heathens, and of heretics. These things are no longer," she quietly adds, "the objects of practical belief."