A study of characterisation in the novels of George Eliot

239.
Maggie Tulliver's choosing to reject Stephen appears to be in acc-
84
ordance with a principle of IIperfect goodness," but her firmly entrenched
habit of renunciation makes her "choice" inevitable. Derona.a's
commitment to the cause of Jewish nationalism appears to be unconstrained,
but George Eliot's identification of hereditary claims with her moral
absolute, duty, leaves him no choice. Thus, her incorporation of the
principles of association and evolutiOnary psychology into her novels
makes for a 108s of freedom for her characters. And the constraining
force of her moral absolute is even more perva~ve.
We are entitled,
therefore, to ask the question: does it create inflexible co-ordinates
which limit the development of character and plot? We have seen that its
operation restricts the range of options George Eliot offers to her
characters and sets out a rigidly defined path of moral development. In
addition, it accounts for the many instances where George Eliot unequivocally
directs the reader to adopt a specific attitude towards her
characters. Someimes these instances are blatant appeals to the reader's
sensibility, but more usually they take the more subtle form of encoded
messages, moral pointers directing the reader's response. George Eliot
certainly controls her characters firmly, but she keeps a restraining
hand on her reader as well.
Let us now examine the co-ordinates of her moral scheme so that we
can determine what limitations they impose on the development of plot
and character.
Throughout the novels we are given the chance to witness certain
characters achieve a superior state of moral awareness. But instead of
their being accorded greater autono~ and greater possibilities for
creative action, their very moral goodness requires that they perform
services which are even, at times, sacrificial of their own develop-