Critical Analysis of George Eliots Silly Novels by Lady Novelists

George Eliots 1856 publication, Silly Novels by Lady Novelists is an aesthetic and cultural critique of

womens writing. Having worked as a journalist prior to publishing fiction, Eliots critical voice is one of

commanding authority and confident assertion. Her title marks her tone of dissatisfaction with these

silly novels and firmly establishes her subject of criticism. It is also important to note that her initial

anonymity allows for a positioning outside the gendered sphere of criticism rather than marking her as a

female subject. This anonymity, in combination with her authoritative lexis, grants her the adoption of a

masculine persona, separating her from the novelists she is critiquing. This allows for a vantage point

outside the restricted field of womens writing, which, as Eliot demonstrates, leads to unfair critique from

male readers.

The evocation of a critical voice in Eliots essay is specifically achieved through scientific language. Her

criticism of the species and of silly novels frames her essay almost as a scientific observation or field

study, aptly tying in to her preference for realism over idealism. 1 This tone is established in the opening

line, which positions these novels as a genus and presents them as a case study for criticism.2 In contrast

to the frothy, the prosy, the pious, or the pedantic, Eliots writing here results from empirical and

observatory study.3 Opposing the critique that Eliot avoids her proposition for how to improve the female

novel until the end, I argue that her linguistic, structural, and stylistic tactics for criticising the silly

novel is in itself a demonstration of how female novelists may better conduct their writing.

By categorising the silly novels into sub-species, Eliot simultaneously creates a structure for her criticism

and exposes the conformity in womens writing. For example, the mind-and-millinery species, is

typified by a heroine who is usually an heiress, probably a peeress in her own right.4 Eliots use of

1
George Eliot, Silly Novels by Lady Novelists in Westminster Review, October 1856, p. 140.
2
Ibid.
3
Ibid.
4
Ibid., p. 140.
1
excessive adverbs of likelihood, along with loaded adjectives to describe stock characters, gestures

towards the predictability of these novels, creating a sarcastic tone through her demonstration of romantic

tropes. While the nineteenth century was generally considered a time of opportunity for female writers,

Eliot suggests that women are squandering their chances by producing outdated and implausibly ideal

narratives. Her tone becomes one of bitter contempt, almost of mourning, as she relates the species as

most pitiable5 and the least readable.6

Before reaching the crux of her argument, Eliot devotes herself to pages of bombastic descriptions of this

silliness in an attempt to mimic, and then renounce, these conventions.7 Positioning her audience as the

readers of these novels, we must again be showered with descriptions of archetypal heroines, whom Eliot

characterises through a gratuitous stream of positive adjectives:

Her eyes and her wit are both dazzling; her nose and her morals alike free from any tendency to

irregularity; she has a superb contralto and a superb intellect; she is perfectly well-dressed and

perfectly religious; she dances like a sylph.8

Whilst evidently parading these conventions for later critique, Eliots syntactic tendency to prolong

description and delay judgement for several passages is also a wider reflection on the female novel

market. Despite the rise in female publication, Eliot points to the extended period in which we are delayed

the progression of the female novel. Having contributed to the elevation of novel writing towards the end

of the century, Eliot sets an example by remarking, Great writers [] have modestly contented

themselves with putting their experience into fiction, and have thought it quite a sufficient task to exhibit

men and things as they are.9 This motion towards realism signals Eliots now celebrated view of the

integrity of observing human life and reproducing these observations in literary form.

5
Ibid., p. 148.
6
Ibid., p. 159.
7
Ibid., p. 140.
8
Ibid., p. 140.
9
Ibid., p. 149.
2
Following her critique of the oracular novel, which is characterised not only by lofty purposes but by the

novelists assumption that her intellect is apt for dealing with them, Eliot advocates a negotiation of

female intelligence. She suggests that the female writer is representing herself unfairly by misusing her

intellect to assume authority where she should privilege modesty. Rather than using her intellectual

advantage to explore human psychology, She mistakes vagueness for depth, bombast for eloquence, and

affectation for originality,10 thus restricting her advancement outside the gendered sphere and

confirm[ing] the popular prejudice against the more solid education of women.11 Intelligence is treated

as vanity, and, to the detriment of female novelists being taken seriously, it reconfirms the inferior status

of women in producing pioneering novels.

Eliot suggests a break from stereotypes in her assertion that, A really cultured woman [] does not

make [knowledge] a pedestal from which she flatters herself that she commands a complete view of men

and things.12 As she argues, education does not grant omniscience, and women should not become

inflated by their access to academic and literary realms. At this point, Eliot reaches the core of her

argument: that women should utilise their intellectual properties to evolve beyond the tropes of archaic

romances and to channel their thinking into literary representations of reality as experienced first-hand.

Eliot proposes the alternative method of favouring unadorned language, faithful observation, and the

execution of themes that are grounded in real life.

In conclusion, I have aimed to demonstrate Eliots evocation of a critical voice through her assertive tone

in condemning silly novels and encouraging realism as a means to heighten the esteem of female writers.

As Eliot notes in her final paragraph, No educational restrictions can shut women out from the materials

of fiction.13 Structurally, Eliot journeys from demonstration, to critique, to suggestion, to positive

10
Ibid., p. 155.
11
Ibid., p. 154.
12
Ibid., p. 155.
13
Ibid., p. 162.
3
assertion, and her conclusion is ultimately a declaration that women can and will do more. Her lexis

remains markedly scientific as she compares literature to crystalline masses and reiterates the

significance of the right elements in creating a sincere novel. 14 The semantic field of scientific study is

left to linger in the readers minds as a reminder of the precedence of astute observations in forming a

novel that will exceed the gendered codes laid out for them.

14
Ibid.
4
 Bibliography

Eliot, G., Silly Novels by Lady Novelists in Westminster Review, October 1856