CHAPTER III.
THE WESTMINSTER REVIEW.
| 1 |
UPON her return from Geneva, George Eliot had gone
to the Brays, with whom she stayed for some months.
A turning-point in her life was now to occur. The
Westminster Review, started originally by the Benthamites
in their most hopeful days, was in its normal
state of insufficient circulation. J. S. Mill had given
it up when the decline of the "philosophical radicals"
made the management of their organ a thankless task.
Since his day it had been in the hands of Mr. Hickson.
It was now to be transferred to Mr. Chapman, who
hoped to make it an adequate organ for the best
liberal thought of the day. He paid a visit to the
Brays in October 1850 with Robert William Mackay,
an amiable and accomplished man whose chief work,
The Progress of the Intellect, had just appeared. George
Eliot wrote a sympathetic review of this book for the
Westminster Review. Her article was in the number
for January 1851, and was the first writing in which
she attempted anything more ambitious than translation.
Mackay's aim, as she defines it, was to show
that "divine revelation" is not to be found exclusively
in the records of any one nation, "but is
coextensive with the history of human development."
A phrase about the "inexorable law of consequences"
shows that she was still a disciple of Bray, who praises
her for illustrating that "law" in her novels. She
seems, too, to have accepted the phrenology of Combe
and Bray, as is shown by occasional references to the
"anterior lobes" of such great men as Dickens and
Professor Owen, whom she was presently to see.
Chapman finally bought the Westminster, and arranged
that George Eliot should become assistant-editor. She
took up her duties in September 1851, and boarded
with the Chapmans at their house in the Strand.
Her wide knowledge of foreign and English literature,
her industry and willingness to perform any kind of
drudgery, were admirable qualifications for the post.
It might be doubted whether a young lady who had
hitherto lived only in the provinces, and had had no
concern in periodical literature, would possess an instinct
for the qualities which secure popular success.
That, however, would be mainly a question for the
Editor-in-chief, and the Westminster endeavoured to
make its way by enlisting contributors already distinguished
or soon to win distinction. The list of
persons who were more or less interested in the undertaking
is remarkable, and in one way or other George
Eliot saw something of most of the writers who have
left their mark upon the time. Some of the lights
have paled. She is introduced to the daughter of the
Religion of the Universe, and perhaps few readers will
be able to say offhand that the phrase means the
religion of Mr. Robert Fellowes. But in many cases
we regret that her letters, written hastily in the
intervals of continuous labour, give us only tantalising
glimpses. The philosophical radicals had
ceased to be efficient contributors. J. S. Mill, whose
position had been established by the Logic and the
Political Economy, was at this time much of a recluse.
He was, however, "propitiated" by Grote, who was
"very friendly," and he contributed one article (upon
Whewell's Moral Philosophy) of which the sub-editor
did not think highly. Mill's early friend, William
Ellis, of whose "apostolical labour" in trying to get
Political Economy taught in primary schools he spoke
enthusiastically, was personally kind, but does not
appear to have contributed. Carlyle, who had just
published The Life of Sterling, and beginning to plunge
into Frederick, was invited to denounce the peerage.
"Insinuating letters," offering "three other most
glorious subjects," failed to bring him down, but he
called and strongly, though fruitlessly, recommended
"Browning the poet." With Froude, then just becoming
a disciple of the prophet, she was more fortunate.
She had greatly admired the Nemesis of Faith,
and written a notice of it for the Coventry Herald. A
personal acquaintance had followed; and but for his
marriage at the time, Froude would have joined the
Brays in their trip with her to Geneva. He now
contributed a striking article upon the Book of Job,
and afterwards wrote upon Spinoza. The number in
which the "Job" appeared included contributions from
Theodore Parker and Harriet Martineau. Miss
Martineau attracted her by kindness and cordiality,
and was an effective contributor. To James Martineau
there are admiring references, though he generally
wrote in other organs. Francis Newman, whom she
had already called "our blessed St. Francis";
W. R. Greg, whose Creed of Christendom had produced
a marked effect; W. J. Fox, the veteran radical
author and orator; and W. E. Forster, who wrote
an article greatly approved by her upon American
Slavery, are other names incidentally mentioned.
Mazzini wrote an article, pronounced by Greg to be
"sad stuff." The most important contributor, however,
appears to have been Mr. Herbert Spencer. His
article upon the "Universal Postulate" made a special
impression. He had just brought out his Social Statics,
pronounced, as she had heard, by G. H. Lewes to be
the "best book on the subject." They rapidly became
friends, and she declares him to be "a good, delightful
creature." She "always feels better for being with
him." By Mr. Herbert Spencer she was introduced
towards the end of 1851 to George Henry Lewes, of
whom more must be said directly.
|
| 2 |
Meanwhile it may be remarked that she was thus
becoming more or less familiar with nearly all the
eminent writers who, in one sense or other, were on
the side of intellectual advance. They differed widely
enough from each other, and there could hardly be a
more fundamental contrast than that between Carlyle
and Mr. Herbert Spencer. It was as well that she
should learn that the Brays and Hennells, however
excellent in their way, did not represent the only line
of thought. She had, indeed, read too widely to be
kept within the prison house of a single sect. One
point may be noticed in passing, as it had a marked
influence upon her later views. The philosophy of
Comte was at this time attracting notice in England.
Mill had been for a time a warm personal disciple, and
had spoken of him with great respect in the Logic; Miss
Martineau was compiling an abridgment of his work;
and G. H. Lewes had written as an adherent of his
doctrine. George Eliot was interested; and in later
life drew nearer to the Positivist than to any other
school. Her editorial work seems to have been absorbing
and often dispiriting. It was too much like
flogging a dead horse. The public declined to care
for the admirable articles addressed to them, and
showed no very keen hankering for sound philosophy.
She had to plod through much ponderous manuscript
on arid topics. Her hands, she complains, are "hot
and tremulous," while there is a "great dreary article"
by her side asking for reading and abridgment. One
day she has to read a review article upon taxation,
to collate it with newspaper articles, and consider all
that J. S. Mill says on the subject. Then Mr. Chapman
produces a thick German volume, of which she is
to read enough to form an opinion. Mr. Lewes calls,
and "of course sits talking till the second bell rings,"
and at 11 P.M. she is still puzzling over taxation. Letters
and callers and meetings of Associations distract her,
and she is glad to fly for occasional relief to her friends
at Coventry. In addition to her regular work she is
translating Ludwig Feuerbach's Essence of Christianity,
which appeared as by "Marian Evans" (the only time
her real name was used) in July 1854. Feuerbach
had developed Hegelianism into naturalism, and the
translation apparently implies an extension of George
Eliot's anti-theological tendencies. Another book by
her on the Idea of a Future Life was advertised, but
never appeared. She complains of headaches and
rheumatism; and one is not surprised that by the end
of 1853 she is becoming tired of it, and is giving notice
of resignation to Mr. Chapman. She was living alone
in lodgings, snatching brief holidays to be spent with
the Brays, and, we may guess, feeling the want of the
domestic circle, which, even when not intellectually
sympathetic, had satisfied her craving for affection.
|
| 3 |
George Henry Lewes, born in 1817, if not the profoundest
reasoner, was certainly one of the most
brilliant of the literary celebrities of the time. He
was the grandson of a second-rate actor, and had had a
very desultory education. The dates and facts seem
to be rather confused. He had, it is said, passed
through several schools, had then been a clerk in a
merchant's office, and for some time a medical student;
he had spent some years in France and Germany, and
almost forgotten the use of his mother tongue. On
returning to England he had for a time gone upon the
stage; at the age of twenty he had given lectures upon
philosophy at the chapel of W. J. Fox; and he had
finally settled down to write books and articles on the
most various topics. He had written a play and a
couple of novels, one of which, Rose, Blanche, and Violet,
made something of a mark. He had written articles
upon French and German philosophy and literature;
discoursed upon the Greek, Spanish, and Italian drama;
and criticized Browning, Tennyson, and Macaulay.
His Biographical History of Philosophy, which appeared
in 1845 and 1846, showed that in spite of all distracting
interests he thought himself qualified to expound
ultimate truths. Learned professors who, like Sir
William Hamilton, had spent lives upon abstruse
metaphysical treatises, might despise the audacity
of the young man who entered the arena with so
slender an apparatus of learning. The brightness and
vivacity of the book, however, and the happy introduction
of the biographical element, roused the interest
of ordinary readers, and perhaps persuaded some of
them that much of the mystery in which the more
ponderous philosophers wrapped themselves could be
dispelled by a little common sense. The preface,
indeed, announced that "philosophy" had had its day,
and was to be superseded by Comte's Positivism.
Lewes afterwards wrote the Life of Goethe, which
though ardent Goethe worshippers may pronounce
it to show a want of sympathy for some aspects of the
hero, is singularly interesting and well written, and
deserved the success which has made it a standard
work in biography. He afterwards took to physiology,
and after producing some popular books, approved, it
is said, by "scientific bigwigs," proceeded to show the
philosophical bearing of his studies in his Problems of
Life and Mind. This was left as a fragment at his death.
I need only say here that whatever their value, his
later writings show the old alertness and keenness of
intellect and his continued interest in the philosophical
disquisitions to which, spite of all distractions, he was
constantly recurring.
|
| 4 |
At this time Lewes was literary editor of the
Leader, a weekly paper representing the same tendencies
as the Westminster. He was publishing a
series of articles upon Comte, to whom he had been
personally introduced by J. S. Mill. He was what
is generally called a Bohemian, though always with
serious ambition. He could converse ably upon all
such matters as interested literary and journalistic
circles in London, and his wide knowledge of continental
writers gave him an authority in some matters
not shared by many English contemporaries. He was
a brilliant talker, fully able to turn his knowledge to
account. His conversation abounded in lively
anecdotes, told with infinite zest; he was thoroughly
genial, and ready at good-humoured repartee; and he
was not hampered by any excessive reverence for conventional
proprieties. He was of slight figure, and,
according to Douglas Jerrold, the "ugliest man in
London." It would be presumptuous to express any
opinion upon the justice of so sweeping an observation.
But if not beautiful, he was a man to forget, and to
induce companions to forget, any such defects. He
had bright eyes and a fine brow, and the whole face
and bearing was full of intelligence. A social gathering
must have consisted of very ponderous interests
if it could not be stirred into animation by a man with
so much more quicksilver in his composition than falls
to the lot of the average Briton. Nobody, one might
guess, was more likely to dazzle the grave young
lady, profoundly interested in philosophy, and anxious
to get the newest lights in speculation, than this
daring and brilliant writer, who knew all that was
being done in France and Germany, and could talk
with equal confidence upon Comte and Hegel, or upon
the last new play or oratorio in London. She was
apparently rather repelled by his levity at first; but
after a time says that he has "quite won her liking
in spite of herself." He has had a good deal of her
"vituperation"; but, "like a few other people in the
world, he is much better than he seems--a man of
heart and conscience, wearing a mask of flippancy."
|
| 5 |
Lewes had married in 1840; and for some time later
lived in the same house with Thornton Hunt, who
had edited the Leader in co-operation with him. Mrs
Lewes had already borne children to her husband.
Circumstances arose which, though Lewes's view of
the marriage tie were anything but strict, had led
some two years previously to a break-up of the
family. A legal divorce was impossible; but George
Eliot held that the circumstances justified her in
forming a union with Lewes, which she considered
as equivalent to a legitimate marriage. I have not,
and I suppose that no one now has, the knowledge
which would be necessary for giving an opinion
as to the proper distribution of praise and blame
among the various parties concerned, nor shall I
argue the ethical question raised by George Eliot's
conduct. It may be a pretty problem for casuists
whether the breach of an assumed moral law is aggravated
or extenuated by the offender's honest conviction
that the law is not moral at all. George Eliot at any
rate emphatically took that position. She had long
protested against the absolute indissolubility of
marriage. She thought, we are told, that the system
worked badly, because wives were less anxious to please
their husbands when their position was "invulnerable."
She held, with Milton, that so close a tie between
persons not united in soul was intolerable. "All self-sacrifice
is good," she had said upon reading Jane Eyre
in 1848, "but one would like it to be in a somewhat
nobler cause than that of a diabolical law which chains
a man body and soul to a putrefying carcass." Mrs.
Lewes was not so bad as Mrs. Rochester, but the
hardship was sufficient to justify an exception to the
ordinary rule. Writing a few months after the union,
she says that she cannot understand how any unworldly
unsuperstitious person, who is sufficiently
"acquainted with the realities of life," can pronounce
her relation to Lewes "immoral." Nothing in her
life, she declares, has been more "profoundly serious,"
which means, it seems, that she does not approve
"light and easily broken ties." In her writings,
indeed, her tendency is to insist upon the sanctity of
the traditional bonds, which, whatever their origin,
are essential to social welfare, and so far she agrees on
this, as on many points, with her friends the Positivists.
Comte, though he admired the Catholic doctrine of
the indissolubility of marriage, discovered the necessity
for making an exception which happened to cover his
own case. George Eliot, it seems, who had never
accepted the strictest doctrine, was more consistent.
No one can deny that the relation to Lewes was
"serious" enough in her sense. It lasted through
their common lives, and their devotion to each other
was unlimited, and appears only to have strengthened
with time. She never misses an opportunity of expressing
her affection for her "husband," or her
gratitude for the blessings due to his devotion. Lewes
expressed his feeling with equal emphasis. In a
journal of 1859 he speaks of a walk with Mr. Herbert
Spencer. Mr. Spencer's friendship had been the
brightest ray in a very dreary "wasted period of my
life"; it had roused him from indifference to fresh
intellectual interest; but, he adds, "I owe Spencer
another and a deeper debt. It was through him
that I learned to know Marian--to know her was to
love her--and since then my life has been a new
birth. To her I owe all my prosperity and all my
happiness. God bless her!" Lewes, like other men
of his buoyant temperament, was well enough satisfied
with himself; but his vanity was made inoffensive by
his generosity. He recognized all talent gladly; and
the recognition in the case of George Eliot rose to
enthusiastic devotion. He looked up to her as in her
own field an entirely superior being, in the front rank
of contemporary genius. Their house became a temple
of a domestic worship, in which he was content to be
the high priest of the presiding deity. He stood as
much as possible between her and all the worries of
the outside world. He transacted her business, wrote
her letters, kept her from the knowledge of unpleasant
criticism, read all her books with her as they were
composed, made suggestions and occasional criticisms;
but, above all, encouraged her by hearty and sincere
praise during the fits of depression to which she was
constitutionally liable. She gave him the manuscripts
of her books with inscriptions recording her gratitude,
and the inscription in Romola may sum up her permanent
sentiment: "To the Husband, whose perfect
love has been the best source of her insight and
strength, this manuscript is given by his devoted wife,
the writer."
|
| 6 |
The Leweses left England together in July 1854 and
went to Weimar, where he worked upon the Life of
Goethe. In November they went to Berlin, and returned
to England in March 1855. They saw a good
many distinguished Germans, only one of whom
"seemed conscious of his countrymen's deficiencies."
They were, however, kindly received, and George
Eliot's intellectual horizon was no doubt widened
by intercourse with Rauch the sculptor, Liszt the
musician, Liebig the chemist, Varnhagen von Ense,
and others well known in various departments. She
worked at a translation of Spinoza's Ethics, which was
never published, though much of it seems to have
been completed. On reaching England they settled
for a time at Richmond, and had to take seriously to
writing. Lewes had to support his wife's children,
and both had to depend upon their pens. Lewes was
bringing out his Life of Goethe. George Eliot continued
her labours upon Spinoza, and contributed articles
to the Westminster and other periodicals. She wrote
upon Heine, Young of the Night Thoughts, Margaret
Fuller, and Mary Wollstonecraft, and upon Dr.
Cumming, who in those days was interpreting the
Apocalypse and thrilling simple readers by a prospect of
the approaching battle of Armageddon. Her remarks
upon Cumming--rather small game, it must be admitted,
for such an adversary--had one result. They
convinced Lewes that she possessed not only great
talent, but true genius. In 1856 the Leweses made
some stay at Ilfracombe and Tenby, where Lewes was
seeking materials for his Seaside Studies. Upon their
return to Richmond in September, George Eliot at last
took up the work by which she was to become famous.
|
