Article

George Eliot, poetess

Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the author.

Abstract

The position of George Eliot’s poetry within Victorian poetry and within her own canon is crucial for an accurate picture of the writer, as Wendy S. Williams shows in her in-depth examination of Eliot’s poetry and her role as poetess. Williams argues that even more clearly than her fiction, Eliot’s poetry reveals the development of her belief in sympathy as a replacement for orthodox religious views. With knowledge of the Bible and a firm understanding of society’s expectations for female authorship, Eliot consciously participated in a tradition of women poets who relied on feminine piety and poetry to help refine society through compassion and fellow-feeling. Williams examines Eliot’s poetry in relationship to her gender and sexual politics and her shifting religious beliefs, showing that Eliot’s views on gender and religion informed her adoption of the poetess persona. By taking into account Eliot’s poetess treatment of community and motherhood, Williams suggests, readers come to view her not only as a writer of fiction, an intellectual, and a social commentator, but also as a woman who longed to nurture, participate in, and foster human relationships.

No full-text available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.

ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Book
One of the pastimes of the Rossetti siblings was a game called 'boutsrimés', in which they would compete with one another to compose sonnets from a set of rhymes. Many of the resulting poems were of fairly low quality, as William Michael Rossetti admits in mitigation of one of his own efforts which found its way into the Pre-Raphaelite magazine The Germ: 'This sonnet was one of my bouts-rimés performances. I ought to have been more chary than I was of introducing into our seriously-intended magazine such hap-hazard things as bouts-rimés poems: one reason for so doing was that we were often at a loss for something to fill a spare page. Sometimes, however, the spontaneity of the exercise produced a freshness and immediacy absent from more studied performances.
Chapter
Nobody appreciates George Eliot's poetry. Nowadays our failure to appreciate her poetry is precisely that: a failure to go so far as appreciate it, assess its worth, take its measure by taking our own stand for or against it and so declaring ourselves in the process. That the poems are so pedestrian may tempt us to overlook their real importance, an importance which, for the exceptionally forthright critic here quoted, inheres uniquely in the themes they treat. Reading her or any poet's verse as wrong-footed prose, means decreeing a pseudo equivalence between verse and prose that tilts the balance in prose's favor and handicaps verse just where it is strongest. A nuanced appraisal of Eliot's varying power in both literary media entails respecting the difference between them, which is to say, respecting verse's charter to embody thought and enact emotion within the language that makes it up.
Article
This article examines the concept of “network” in relation to Elizabeth Barrett Browning's Florentine circle of pro-Risorgimento women poets. Concentrating on Aurora Leigh's relation to Theodosia Garrow Trollope's Tuscan newspaper poetry, the essay argues that expatriate women poets represent an alternative history of Victorian poetry based on networks of print and sociability, and that their poetry forges a new model of public poetic agency as that network's cultural effect.
Article
Victorian Poetry 41.4 (2003) 575-584 When Ana Parejo Vadillo and I decided to organize the 2002 conference "Women's Poetry and the Fin-de-siècle," several of my colleagues asked whether this focus on women's writing was not rather old-fashioned now. For many in Britain "women's writing" is seen to signify purely a feminist political stance in which one argues for the value of women's writing against an assumption that it is forgotten or undervalued. Yet this is not just a category created for a late-twentieth-century political gesture, which can therefore be discarded when that act of recuperation is deemed to be over: it is, as we shall see with particular reference to the work of May Kendall, a category which existed to shape poetic identity and a framework for reading in the later nineteenth century. It is the shifting critical currency of the term "women's poetry," within the field of late-Victorian studies, that I want to explore here. The differences between the conception of "women's poetry" represented at Isobel Armstrong, Virginia Blain, and Laurel Brake's 1995 "Rethinking Women's Poetry: 1730-1930" conference and that apparent at the 2002 "Women's Poetry and the Fin-de-siècle" conference might be a useful starting point. Certainly in 1995 the sense in which "women's poetry" was a recuperative term was still in the air. In contrast, the discourse of the forgotten was hardly in evidence by the 2002 conference. But if the 1995 conference was an important marker of that initial moment of rediscovery, it was also to act as a catalyst for the critical trajectory which we followed thereafter. Armstrong and Blain's book is subtitled Gender and Genre, 1830-1900; the emphasis of the volume is on "the poetic investigation of gender and its interplay with genre" (Preface, p. xiv). Charting the involvement of women's poetry in a wide range of discourses and debates has occupied us since. If there was a change apparent in the 2002 conference from the agenda aired in 1995, it might be the subtle twist of the focus from "Gender and Genre" to, more specifically, "Gender as Genre." The debate about the genre of gender was, of course, already apparent in the 1995 conference in the concern of several speakers with the historical role played by the category "women's poetry" and the necessity, to current critical thinking, of understanding the generic qualities of this label. Yopie Prins' published paper from this conference begins by stating the need to "theorize and historicize a category that we assume to be self-evident: namely, the woman poet." Anne Mellor, writing about Romantic literature, adds to this discussion of the woman poet as a generic category by arguing for the need to distinguish between the tradition of the poetess and "female-authored poetry which does not conform to this poetic practice": the tradition of the "female poet." It is this attempt to interrogate the deceptively unified term "women's poetry" which interests me here. The questions raised in these papers have become more and more insistent in our thinking about "women's poetry" as we have moved farther away from the importance of the term as a recuperative one. Susan Brown, in her extremely useful chapter on "The Victorian Poetess" (2000), does much to provide an overview of the recent growth in the number of personas recognized as possible positions for the Victorian woman poet. For Brown, even the one category of the "poetess" contains many possible personas. She goes on to make the chronological claim that "from the 1870s onward, the explicit invocation of the poetess is more critical than poetic" (p. 196). She cites Elizabeth Sharp's 1890 Women Poets of the Victorian Era as an accurate reflection of the "mood of the previous two decades." What we have here, writes Brown, is a "new poetess," "rather like her fictional counterpart the New Woman" (p. 197). This sense of "women's poetry" referring to a multiplicity of established poetic personas became one of the recurring themes of the 2002 conference on fin-de-siècle women's poetry. Brown...
Article
Journal of Women's History 15.1 (2003) 11-27 British women's history of the 1970s and 1980s was spearheaded by feminists with a deep commitment to the women's movement. We confronted a traditional and male-dominated historical profession whose view of history centered on high politics and diplomacy. By contrast, for many, our approach had been through labor history, particularly in the History Workshop movement, and focused on working-class, everyday lives in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Small wonder that women's oppression and exploitation figured large and that the exclusion of women from the work force and formal politics was especially significant. In particular, we recognized the power of marriage, family, and motherhood in determining women's past lives. Following nineteenth-century nomenclature,women's "separate sphere" became a dominant theme, particularly in relation to the nineteenth-century English middle class. To an extent, this was to be expected: each generation looks at the past through its own lens and its history is "always informed by suppositions and judgements." Since then, in both conceptual and empirical terms, the separate spheres paradigm has come under considerable criticism. Among scholars, the main sources of contention have been its chronology, location, and actual practices. A new generation has now shifted their focus from the nineteenth to the eighteenth century, to the world of politics and civil society and to the level of the aristocracy, gentry, and upper middle class. "Racial" and national identity have extended or overtaken gender as a focus of historical analysis, issues where the separate spheres approach seems irrelevant—although, in fact, the division between public and private, as a central part of Western culture, has been a key factor in the imposition—and attraction—of colonial encounters. The debate over separate spheres has been complicated and the terms slippery. Historian Amanda Vickery has argued that "the polarity between home and world is an ancient trope of Western writing." Was, then, the late-eighteenth and early-nineteenth-century usage mainly a reaction against privileged women's increasing incursion into the public, as Vickery has argued? Or has this interpretation overemphasised the unchanging aspects of the division itself? Ann Summers points out that although late-eighteenth-century Enlightenment liberal intellectualism may have opened doors for women, those doors closed with the onset of new forms of professionalism and the growth of more bureaucratic institutions. If we move beyond tracing women into undifferentiated public realms, the discussion may be clarified. The separate spheres paradigm has to be put into context as a special case of the "great divide" in Western culture between the public and the private realms. In this essay, I examine the nature of these fundamental concepts and how they were mapped onto concepts of gender. There follows a brief survey of expectations and practices of gender relations in eighteenth- and nineteenth-centuries Britain and how they have interacted with the public/private divide. Many of the problems scholars have with separate spheres stem from some basic misunderstandings about the parent terms. As the philosopher Jeff Weintraub points out, in discussing public and private, "people not only talk past each other . . . but confuse themselves as well." "Public" and "private" are categories of relationship posed as opposite and mutually exclusive terms. Such a formulation inevitably connotes hierarchy; one condition is evaluated more positively than the other. Within this dualism, people are limited by a falsely universal position. When they are assigned to either category, differential consequences follow in terms of power and access to resources. Such categorizing marks boundaries, providing opportunities for some, constraints for others. Bounded categories tend to become metaphors and are imbedded in language and as images. They are layered onto other, related, dualistic categories such as culture/nature, outside/inside, masculine/feminine, or man/woman. Like many of these binary concepts, "public" and "private" are extremely complicated and shift according to context. They also change...
Article
Scholars of nineteenth-century women's poetry often recount that the sentimental piety – indeed, the quasi-religiosity – of the Victorian “poetess” disappears from women's poetry in the mordant irony of the fin de siècle. Virginia Blain, for instance, has recently identified Mathilde Blind and Constance Naden as representatives of “the new breed of post-Darwinian atheists” that comes to replace an earlier, implicitly Christian feminine tradition associated with Elizabeth Barrett Browning (Blain 332). On a related note, I have recently proposed that George Eliot's Legend of Jubal collections (1874, 1878) present a rather late instance of this poetess tradition (LaPorte 159–61). In what follows, I would like to argue that fin-de-siècle iconoclasts such as Blind and Naden actually work hard to reclaim and redeem some of the prominent religious elements of the mid-century poetess tradition, and that Eliot's unusual combination of sentimental piety and religious skepticism gives them a particularly useful model for doing so.
Article
In voices, time and accident may occasion great alteration. —Charles Burney, The Present State of Music in France and Italy