Printable View
Having just finished Silas Marner, I can say I was thoroughly entertained by this fine moral story. But, after Middlemarch and The Mill on the Floss, I was expecting high drama and moral complexities akin to that in Emily Bronte's Wuthering Heights. But Silas Marner is something less. :frown5:
Still, isn't Priscilla stupendous?
It read like a straight morality tale. One of the characters was redeemed and all the primary characters got their just deserts. Although maybe not all the secondary characters: it was sad for Nancy too that they could not have children. I was concerned Dunsey might get away with his crimes. I hoped for a public execution at least. As I had only read Middlemarch before, I was not sure whether Elliot was the sort of author to allow a character to escape his just punishment or reward. George Gissing may have allowed him to escape.
I haven't read Silas Marner for years, but when I did last I was almost continuously weeping as I identified with the central character.
I'm bemused by the comparison of Middlemarch and Wuthering Heights.
PS, George Eliot doesn't really do nasty characters - good liberal that she is, everyone has a good side (apart from Grandcourt and possibly Rosamund Vincy).
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonathanB
Dunstan Cass was thoroughly bad. A scheming, dishonest, abusive, totally selfish character. No one missed him when he left.
I had more sympathy for Rosamund Vincy than for Dunsey Cass. Was Grandcourt in Middlemarch?
It is a charming tale. Feel that warm glow and happy satisfaction at the end. I'm reluctant to say less is more, but sometimes a simple tale, simply told, makes a more effective vehicle for a novelist's themes and aims than alot of clever literary convolutions. It's more enjoyable than Wuthering Heights too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gladys
Grandcourt is the baddie in Daniel Deronda.