GE to Charles Bray, East Sheen, 16 July [1855]
Title
GE to Charles Bray, East Sheen, 16 July [1855]
Title
GE to Charles Bray, East Sheen, 16 July [1855]
Sender
George Eliot
Recipient
Charles Bray
Date(s)
- 1855-07-16
Place
East Sheen
Letter Content
GE to Charles Bray, East Sheen, 16 July [1855]
MS: Parrish Collection, Princeton. Hitherto unpublished.
Clarence Row | East Sheen | July 16.
Dear Friend
Thank you for returning the paper and for your letter of kind inquiry. We are both better, though not yet quite recovered. I was more ill the day you were with us 612 than I liked to admit to myself, and on Wednesday it was my turn to lie in bed and be prescribed for by Dr. Willis, 613 who notwithstanding his peculiar opinions about the chick, is a valuable person. I mention this fact of my having been ill as some apology for the very imperfect companionship and entertainment I gave you.
Mr. Lewes has never written a line about Mr. Silk Buckingham in the Leader. The article 614 to which I presume you allude was written by another person, and I believe you are aware that Mr. Lewes has nothing to do with the editorship. This is another admonition not to be too hasty in judgment. Mr. Lewes begs me to say that he never meant to deny that size was a measure of power, all other things being equal, but simply to deny that size is an absolute measure of power which I believe phrenologists don't maintain. I am not conscious of falling off from the "physiological basis." I never believed more profoundly than I do now that character is based on organization. I never had a higher appreciation than I have now of the services which phrenology has rendered towards the science of man. But I do not, and I think I never shall, consider every man shallow or unconscientious who is unable to embrace all Mr. Combe's views of organology and psychology -- especially as some of the ablest men I have ever known are in that position of inability.
The article on Lord Brougham was written conscientiously, and you seem to have misunderstood its purpose, in taking it for mere word quibbling. I consider it criminal in a man to prostitute Literature for the purposes of his own vanity and this is what Lord Brougham has done. A man who has something vitally important to mankind to say, may be excused for saying it in bad English. In such a case criticism of style is irrelevant. But Literature is Fine Art, and the man who writes mere literature with insolent slovenliness is as inexcusable as a man who gets up in a full drawing-room to sing Rossini's music in a cracked voice and out of tune. Because Lord Brougham has done some services to the public it does not follow that he is to be treated with anything else than justice when he is doing injury to the public, and I consider his "Lives" bad and injurious. I say thus much in vindication of my view of right, not at all in vindication of my article.
Dr. Willis, by the way, is a phrenologist, and was a most intimate friend of Spurzheim 615 for whom he had great respect and affection.
I am glad to hear that you enjoyed the view from Richmond Hill and that you had thus some compensation for the trouble you so kindly took in coming to see us. Mr. Lewes sends his kind regards. Best love to Sara and Cara. In haste,
Yours affectionately,
Marian Evans.
MS: Parrish Collection, Princeton. Hitherto unpublished.
Clarence Row | East Sheen | July 16.
Dear Friend
Thank you for returning the paper and for your letter of kind inquiry. We are both better, though not yet quite recovered. I was more ill the day you were with us 612 than I liked to admit to myself, and on Wednesday it was my turn to lie in bed and be prescribed for by Dr. Willis, 613 who notwithstanding his peculiar opinions about the chick, is a valuable person. I mention this fact of my having been ill as some apology for the very imperfect companionship and entertainment I gave you.
Mr. Lewes has never written a line about Mr. Silk Buckingham in the Leader. The article 614 to which I presume you allude was written by another person, and I believe you are aware that Mr. Lewes has nothing to do with the editorship. This is another admonition not to be too hasty in judgment. Mr. Lewes begs me to say that he never meant to deny that size was a measure of power, all other things being equal, but simply to deny that size is an absolute measure of power which I believe phrenologists don't maintain. I am not conscious of falling off from the "physiological basis." I never believed more profoundly than I do now that character is based on organization. I never had a higher appreciation than I have now of the services which phrenology has rendered towards the science of man. But I do not, and I think I never shall, consider every man shallow or unconscientious who is unable to embrace all Mr. Combe's views of organology and psychology -- especially as some of the ablest men I have ever known are in that position of inability.
The article on Lord Brougham was written conscientiously, and you seem to have misunderstood its purpose, in taking it for mere word quibbling. I consider it criminal in a man to prostitute Literature for the purposes of his own vanity and this is what Lord Brougham has done. A man who has something vitally important to mankind to say, may be excused for saying it in bad English. In such a case criticism of style is irrelevant. But Literature is Fine Art, and the man who writes mere literature with insolent slovenliness is as inexcusable as a man who gets up in a full drawing-room to sing Rossini's music in a cracked voice and out of tune. Because Lord Brougham has done some services to the public it does not follow that he is to be treated with anything else than justice when he is doing injury to the public, and I consider his "Lives" bad and injurious. I say thus much in vindication of my view of right, not at all in vindication of my article.
Dr. Willis, by the way, is a phrenologist, and was a most intimate friend of Spurzheim 615 for whom he had great respect and affection.
I am glad to hear that you enjoyed the view from Richmond Hill and that you had thus some compensation for the trouble you so kindly took in coming to see us. Mr. Lewes sends his kind regards. Best love to Sara and Cara. In haste,
Yours affectionately,
Marian Evans.
Signature
Marian Evans.
Citation
George Eliot, GE to Charles Bray, East Sheen, 16 July [1855], Complete George Eliot Letters(2026), George Eliot Archive, edited by Beverley Park Rilett. https://GeorgeEliotArchive.org, Accessed September 7, 2026. https://www.georgeeliotarchive.org/items/show/92111