PROFESSOR GILRAY ON "GEORGE ELIOT."

Otago Daily Times, Issue 11113, 14 May 1898, Page 7

PROFESSOR GILRAY ON "GEORGE ELIOT."

Professor Gilray delivered a lecfcnre -on "George Eliot "in connection with the University Debating. Society in the chemisbsy lecture room.pt' the university on Friday before a good audience, Sic A."R. Barclay beiiig in the. chair. Gsorge Eliot, the lecturer said, Was the most cultured, the most philosophical, and, in some , departments'/ the most le»rhed of ■English novelists. In. .substanceand .mellwd hor.books were realistic, critical, and analytical.. Wbab gave her her paculiar position among English writers was that in tivo respects she was wprarar, As a delineator of tholifeof theEngliah Midlands She was absolutely unapproaeheii. And in the regiou of the modern psychological novel, which aims at an elaborate study of character in a ruthlessly analytics! fashion, ehe had no rival. She had had, for a 'writer of fiction, an altogether unique infiuance on the thought of the Vicforiau era. It was no exaggeration to Ray that, in this u-sptct, her only iiuperiora were Carlyla and Darwin.- Slie Was deoply influenced by the scientific spirit of the ago ;. and no iiovelisfc was mor* thoroughly in sympathy with the most advanced of contemporary ideas. She was profoundly interested in the problems of onr time, and w«s as much a moralist us a novelist. The greatest moiiuiaenb of her power was iiot co much auy one book aa the general intellectual strength characterising nil her books. Georga Eliot, by her learning, genius, and philosophical ability, had proved* onco for all, th&t ho limits could ba assigned to the capacities of women that did not also apply to men. Of all her works "Adamßede" was the most popular, •' Silas Mnroer" was the most perfect and artistic, " Felix Holt" was the poorest, •' Etiraola " was the most learned and impressive, and '' Midiilemarch'' was the greatest, alike in its epic breadth of treatment, its marvellous power and variety of characterisation, and ita wonderful literary, grace and perfection of execution. The real, sphere of George Eliot Was the. English Midlands, and, »s a picture of provincial Englabd, " Middleinaech " was Nature hgrcelf. One of the first things that struck U3 in George Eliot's works was that she was a moralist quite as much a», if not more than, ohe was an artist. All. her works had a strong'didactic tendency,, and her readers felt that she was' burdened'with a message, and that to pleasel and. amuse werfi quite secondary, aims with her. No English novels had such great psychological value sus George Eliot'e, none showed such keen Srientifie iasight into the Bpriag» of Jiuniuti li?» aud character. In ono raspaotshe strongly resembled Wordsworth; she was an interpreter of the homelier aspects of life and character, Bnd revealed the po.strjr latent in ordinary Incidents1 and everyday characters. George Eliot was realistic, and had a horror of senaationnlisßo, The great triumph of Gsorga Eliot was that she had invested homely characters and ordinary iaoidents with such a vivid interest. ■' The majority of hef characters were presented with great vividness, and (.truck us by their lifelike reality. They wera real individuals; and George Eliot was not content with giving us an account of their, exterior*, and_ emphasising any peculiarities or eccentricities that might distinguish them. She made an elaborate study of their minds and motive*, and presented them to us as distinct moral types. George Eliot allowed extraordinary skill iv creating appropriate buvrouudings for her character*, and she showed unusual genius in their grouping p.nd hi por-h-ayinjr their action aud reaction on each other. Her characters were thoroughly human, and she forced us to recognise, by the. vividness of her portraiture, that f.hey were complete moral organisms, not cleverly constructed puppets. We saw her characters in the actual process of growth. They were presented to us as the products ,of haredity and early association, modified by the ceaseless play of the events that occurred in later life. Her stories were deeply routed in human experience. It wss the moral aspect of lifn that chiefly interested her. Life was viewad by George Eliot as essentially a moral struggle between good and evil. More than any other English novelist, she pierced below the surface and brought to view the deeplying roots, of huua&n joy and sorrow. She herself had said that her aim was "to disclose the tragedy which lies below the surface of commonplace lives." It was tha rem&rkable keenness of her sympathy that made her such an admirable interpreter of the changes in human experience. She made us realise what philosophers called "tho solidarity of the race," the destiny common to all human beings. No philosopher taught more clearly than George jEliot that moral lawa were ss rigorous as physioal laws and that happiness and misery were intimately connected niththetboughtsand emotions we habitually fostered. Ou the other hand, sha made every allowance for thß influence of external circumstances ; but she was careful to point out that external circumstances affected ns only in so far as they related themselves to our actual moral state, and that the most powerful external forces with which we had to deal were blood relations and intimate friends. It therefore followed that in her novels the story and incidents were quite secondary to the development of the moral characters of the aofcor*; and, as a means of this development, she gave an altogether unusual prominence to dialogue. George ElioS looked at lif« as a mere conflict, aud a struggle between selfish pleasure, loving instincts, and the instincts of duty and selfsacrifice. Hence the moral aspect of life was always the most prominent one with her. In nil her character studies she showed that new moral experience invariably modified character, and necessitated a readjustment of the charaoter to its surroundings. A favourite theme with her was the ntceßsity of adjusting youthful ideals and aispirations tc> the stern realities of life. Thiß sense of baffled aims and shattered ideals was. the chief reason for the deep sadness of tone that characteriaed her books. George Eliot's art then brought into prominence the tragic interest of the hnmblest lives, the far-reaohing effects of seemingly insignificant actions ; and she was able to do this because (the had herself and gave to her reader.' -vhat she cnlled «'a large vision ot relations." George Eliot was, above everything, an adept in psychological analysis. Her books, especially her later ones, were fall of scientific reflections ou lifa and character. Inasmuch as it was her capital artistic tenet thatbuman action wao complex in its origins as in its issues, it followed that sho must, in order to exhibit this complexity, lay much stresß ou thone subtle internal processes of preparation and rehearsal. I "Men, like planets," Bbc said iv "Daniel Deronda " have both a vißible and an invisiblg ' history." It was characteristic of George | Eliot that she gavw great prominence to the j invisible history of her characters. Sha did so partly beoausa without it the visible hiotory was uninlelligible, and partly on acoouut of the deep interest, begotten of sympathy, thafc human beings took in the thoughts and feelings of others. Her belief in the complexity of human action nnH in the powerful influence of eatly K?sociatiui:R wus one reason Cor the amount of scientific reflection on life and ; character found in hoc writings. Her studies of charactf-i1 iv her later bonks wera distinguished by NiibMely, penetration, precision, and liorai; of tlieai, it must be ndded, by j great bitif>rrfi-n urd irt-limtlcss severity. As ■! j wan proiff in '.Mils! fjf Gotiou, her teaching wks iiidiicc'. ami implicit, an much co ' t)j,,f, fc..,.*.» .<,(:,. c-.'iifeisocl tfaS tbey conld :

£ ] derive do theory ot mortis from her < 3 '■. writings. She gave no definite moral rules . for action, because she believed that the moral s ; problem . presented itself difforenfcly to ,erery i individual. According to George Elliot, one of r the sources of the tragedy of life was that the moral problem presented a distinct puzzle to r everyone, and must be solved individually or . not at all. Works of art. aimed at beauty ; , works of instruction aimed at truth. George > Eliot had managed to combine the two without i ceasiDg to be artistic. So far a? George Eliot j nag a ttuhject of controversy among critics, it • Ws mainly on account of her later works. All r were agreed that the works of her first period : i were full of freabness* and charm, *nd were ) i distinguished by literary genius of the highest ( order. While her earlier books owed their charm j : to the exquisite piotures of English country life ' i they contained, they owed their power and [ i great,-; g'sii, aa the luterones did, to the author's ' knowledge of the human . heart and ' deep inBiguo imo tna workings tit "uutnaii pimuiuui. One secret of George Eliot's greataess wbs that she had sll the intellectual t strength of a man , of high genius united to the subtle insight of a < singularly gifted woman. It was very rare to of speculative grasp and psychologic*! insight with such remarkable power of creating real characters. In George Eliot, if in anyone, the abstract and the concrete, the objective and the subjective met and united. ' fiar culture wi* unusually., complete and solid, and embraced art, science, aud philosophy, as well as literature proper. All the results of her untiring application were harmonised by her artistic iuetinot, and fused into A unity by her moral fervour. She w«a hot the greatest of British novelists, bat she was ths greatest thinker, the most penetrating philosopher among English 'novelists. I'he leading thinkers of the tim6—such as Herbert Spencer—recognised her no their intellectual equal. It was thi? peculiarity, that,.made her novels unique and difficult to compare with other English , novels. Iti their me'ditafive, cultured, and t Shakespearean way of looking at the world, they had more affinity with Goethe's " Wilhelm Meister" than with sjiyJSngli6h uovel. Her incisivenesß as a thinker had attracted the attention of the bftst judges. .IS might atfen be maintained that the extent), of her knowledge, the profundity of her culture, her moral eavne-tnens, and sense of responsibility, to some extent, over-weighted her art. She was inferior j ac an artist to not a i'Sw acithdra whom- sbe far | surpassed as & thinker, teacher, and in<ipirer of j thought and moral ideals. The very width ot i her range, the very extent of her ambition, made it difficult for her to give artistic expres- > oion to si! she wished to say. At the conclusion of the lecture, which was freqiifiutl.',' applauded very warmly, Professor Gilray was, on the motion of Mr J. Collik, .itconded by Mr W. Newlantjs, accorded a hearty vote of (.hanks. During the eveuiug Mis* Bauchop played % piano solo, and Mr F B. Heggitfc contributed a song, bath itoms being much appreciated.' - j