GE to Sara Sophia Hennell, Richmond, 2 March 1857
Title
GE to Sara Sophia Hennell, Richmond, 2 March 1857
Title
GE to Sara Sophia Hennell, Richmond, 2 March 1857
Sender
George Eliot
Recipient
Sara Sophia Hennell
Date(s)
- 1857-03-02
Place
Richmond
Letter Content
GE to Sara Sophia Hennell, Richmond, 2 March 1857
MS: Yale. Extract published: Cross, I, 433-434.
Richmond | March 2. 1857.
Dear Sara
I began -- oddly enough, you will perhaps think -- by reading through the "Answers of Infidelity," those being the most interesting part of the book to me. Some of your own passages I think very admirable, -- and one of them made me cry, which is always a sign of the highest pleasure writing can give me. But in many of the extracts, I think Infidelity cuts a very poor figure. Some are feeble, some bad, and terribly discrepant in the tone of their thought and feeling from the passages which come fresh from your own mind.
The disadvantage arising from the perpetual shifting of the point of view, is a disadvantage, I suppose, inseparable from the plan, 811 which I cannot admire or feel to be effective, though I can imagine it may be a serviceable form of presentation to some inquirers. The execution I do admire. I think it shows very high and rare qualities of mind -- a self-discipline and largeness of thought, which are the highest result of culture. The "Objections of Christianity," which I have also read, are excellently put, and have an immense advantage over the "Answers of Inf[idelit]y" in their greater homogeneity.
The first part I have only begun, and glanced through, and at present have no other observation to make than that I think you might have brought a little more artillery to bear on Christian morality. But nothing is easier than to find fault -- nothing so difficult as to do some real work.
Mr. Lewes did not make a [mistake] about Isaac Taylor. 812 He read aloud to me that passage which you call [poor,] feeling it to be very eloquent, and I agreed with him. I was afraid you would be distressed for Mr. Baillie, but you must expect people to be provoked into severity by the tone of those advertisements.
Don't let your soul be moved by newspaper criticisms. If you knew well what sort of books the Spectator praises, in those short notices, you would not care about its blame. 813 It is only as a question of sale that such notices are at all important, and even in that light, they can't stop the sale of a book that really lays hold of the readers' minds. One person who has admired and enjoyed tells another, and by and bye Athenaeum, Spectator and Co. are forgotten. On the other hand, no dithyrambs of "Mr. Gigadibs" 814 can make a bad book successful.
Neither Mr. Lewes nor I can see the logicality of that passage about the eyes as an argument against design. Herbert Spencer is coming to dine with us to-day, and I shall ask him to use his spectacles to it. But since we are not absolute blockheads, I think there must be an imperfection in the statement.
This note is scribbled under difficulties of head, and George is shaking the table with wrapping up parcels, 815 so that I had better leave off before I reach the climax of utter unintelligibility.
We never see proofs of the [Leader,] so you must not be surprized at false concords in Latin, 816 or any other exquisite infelicity.
Ever thine
Marian.
MS: Yale. Extract published: Cross, I, 433-434.
Richmond | March 2. 1857.
Dear Sara
I began -- oddly enough, you will perhaps think -- by reading through the "Answers of Infidelity," those being the most interesting part of the book to me. Some of your own passages I think very admirable, -- and one of them made me cry, which is always a sign of the highest pleasure writing can give me. But in many of the extracts, I think Infidelity cuts a very poor figure. Some are feeble, some bad, and terribly discrepant in the tone of their thought and feeling from the passages which come fresh from your own mind.
The disadvantage arising from the perpetual shifting of the point of view, is a disadvantage, I suppose, inseparable from the plan, 811 which I cannot admire or feel to be effective, though I can imagine it may be a serviceable form of presentation to some inquirers. The execution I do admire. I think it shows very high and rare qualities of mind -- a self-discipline and largeness of thought, which are the highest result of culture. The "Objections of Christianity," which I have also read, are excellently put, and have an immense advantage over the "Answers of Inf[idelit]y" in their greater homogeneity.
The first part I have only begun, and glanced through, and at present have no other observation to make than that I think you might have brought a little more artillery to bear on Christian morality. But nothing is easier than to find fault -- nothing so difficult as to do some real work.
Mr. Lewes did not make a [mistake] about Isaac Taylor. 812 He read aloud to me that passage which you call [poor,] feeling it to be very eloquent, and I agreed with him. I was afraid you would be distressed for Mr. Baillie, but you must expect people to be provoked into severity by the tone of those advertisements.
Don't let your soul be moved by newspaper criticisms. If you knew well what sort of books the Spectator praises, in those short notices, you would not care about its blame. 813 It is only as a question of sale that such notices are at all important, and even in that light, they can't stop the sale of a book that really lays hold of the readers' minds. One person who has admired and enjoyed tells another, and by and bye Athenaeum, Spectator and Co. are forgotten. On the other hand, no dithyrambs of "Mr. Gigadibs" 814 can make a bad book successful.
Neither Mr. Lewes nor I can see the logicality of that passage about the eyes as an argument against design. Herbert Spencer is coming to dine with us to-day, and I shall ask him to use his spectacles to it. But since we are not absolute blockheads, I think there must be an imperfection in the statement.
This note is scribbled under difficulties of head, and George is shaking the table with wrapping up parcels, 815 so that I had better leave off before I reach the climax of utter unintelligibility.
We never see proofs of the [Leader,] so you must not be surprized at false concords in Latin, 816 or any other exquisite infelicity.
Ever thine
Marian.
Signature
Marian.
Citation
George Eliot, GE to Sara Sophia Hennell, Richmond, 2 March 1857, 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/94093