‘Middlemarch’ is regarded as one of the great Victorian classics, because George Eliot brought humanity and penetrating psychological depth to the novel.

Earlier in the century readers had squirmed, enthralled, at the horrors of Gothic texts; they had savoured the exquisite prose of Austen; they had alternately wept and laughed their way through Dickens, and had shivered nervously as they wolfed down sensation fiction.

Eliot set herself the huge task of depicting a whole society undergoing a period of momentous change prior to the Reform Bill of 1832.

She included material about politics, religion, social campaigns, the medical profession, the coming of the railway – all interwoven with the relationships of three couples: ardent Dorothea and the withered scholar Casaubon; zealous Dr Lydgate and self-centred Rosamond, and honest Mary Garth and her devoted admirer Fred.

Discussion points:

This novel does not have one specific hero or heroine. Is this a strength or a weakness? Do you feel that Eliot tried to achieve too much in one book?

Why does Eliot describe life in Middlemarch in terms of a web?

Do you have any sympathy with Bulstrode, Casaubon and Rosamond? If so, how do you think Eliot managed to make you feel this way?

‘Middlemarch’ is subtitled ‘A Study of Provincial Life’. If you have read it before and would like a different ‘angle’ consider it alongside Gustave Flaubert’s ‘Madame Bovary’, published in 1856-7 and subtitled ‘Provincial Lives’. Compare and contrast the themes, writing styles and symbolism. Is Rosamond the English Madame Bovary?

The place to discuss Middelmarch is, naturally, the Reading with Open2 forum.

Content last updated: 30/06/2004

Comments