Related Video Shorts 0 Upload your video. Try the Kindle edition and experience these great reading features: Share your thoughts with other customers. Write a customer review. There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later. Kindle Edition Verified Purchase. There's a problem loading this menu right now.
Get fast, free shipping with Amazon Prime. Your recently viewed items and featured recommendations. View or edit your browsing history. Get to Know Us. English Choose a language for shopping.
Amazon Music Stream millions of songs. The rest of my lack of satisfaction was the execution of Maggie's relationships with her brother Tom and her cousin Lucy's beau Stephen. My impression of the book before reading was that it was often interpreted as a tribute to Eliot's relationship with her own estranged brother. Not much of a gesture at bridge-mending if read in that light, really. Tom is a pig-headed, self-righteous thrower of stones at animals whose only virtues are the most generic ones of young English manhood. His characterisation seems more of an explanation and justification of estrangement, rather than a tribute to a tragically spoilt relationship.
I think Eliot could have kept the essentials of Tom's character while making him somewhat more appealing. I didn't think much of Stephen, either. Maggie has a very serious dilemma between love and duty on his account and I feel that the this dilemma has possibly gone in the opposite direction since Victorian days so that duty, for once, is more rather than less of a contender than romance, which undercuts the dilemma.
Stephen is one of those "If you loved me you would! If you don't run away with me I'll do something drastic and terrible! But I thought it was absurd that Maggie should even consider for a moment screwing over her cousin for such nonsense, so all the epic grandness of her actions in renouncing Stephen and the way it brought out Eliot's theme of self-denial didn't do much for me. Perfectly fine George Eliot rural stuff makes up much of the novel, with all that quaint idiosyncratic textural detail, but I found the last pages a real drag.
Review below was my way of deciding whether to round up or down and it was this or housecleaning. My thoughts during the 1st half: The author is drawing an interesting picture of a rural middle class ish community. She seems to be being fair, and her philosophical asides are brief, insightful, and funny. There are also some funny scenes I'm thinking of the packman making a sale. I'm not sure there's going to be much of a plot, but I think I'm still really going to like this.
Roughly the 2nd half: There is a plot and it's entirely centered on a romance. The philosophical asides are more heavy-handed now. I get the point about the societal mores, but that doesn't make me actually care about these two characters. And it's really frustrating when the author keeps mentioning a main character's wretched circumstances. If her tongue's in her cheek it doesn't seem like it, so am I supposed to think THIS is what wretchedness looks like?!
To be fair, a few bits are still funny, and the author shows good and bad qualities of most of her characters. And the characters thought things were wretched, and people at the time the time I'm wanting to read about would have taken all this seriously. Contrived to make a point. Throw this book across the room I came so close to bestowing 4 stars on this book. The contrast between the two storylines made apparent where my interests as a reader lie. In my defense, this love triangle had everything: Well played, George Eliot. It was such a crazy love triangle that Eliot probably didn't know how to resolve it view spoiler [ except by killing the MPDG and her brother hide spoiler ].
And for that frustrating cop-out on the last page, I hereby give this story 3 stars. It took forever seven months to plod through this long and wordy book. I actually stopped reading for a while when I got bogged down in a long, philosophical discourse in the middle of the book. Maggie Tulliver lives near a small village in England.
Smart and emotional, Maggie adores her stuck-up, proud and self-righteous brother. He, in turn, is highly critical of Maggie and her ways. I could not understand why Maggie loved her brother so much that she would willingly give up two men because of the fear of her brother's disapproval. Obviously, the book does not end well. This book is considered one of George Eliot's best book. But, like Middlemarch, I probably won't reread it since I don't care for Eliot's style of writing. This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. In the first volume of her autobiography, Simone de Beauvoir reveals that this book and Paul et Virginie were among her favorites when she was in her early teens.
Interestingly, both are romantic tragedies which end up with the heroine drowning, in dramatic fashion, close to her loved one.
Hands up everyone who thinks this means de Beauvoir was attracted to destructive relationships. Okay, you can stay and clean the erasers.
Mar 01, K. Daring and marvelous in some respects - particularly the early chapters portraying the main character's tempestuous childhood - but it grows a bit fragmented and soap operaish in the final third and spirals into an unsatisfying conclusion. A beautiful classic, a harsh study of the condition of women in the 19th century. I'm just so glad I didn't live then! Maggie is a very interesting character, strong willed, clever, tragic. Her brother was a twat! It didn't do very much for my moral, but I'm glad I listened to the audiobook. I must admit that I was not drawn into the novel as much as I was for Middlemarch, however Eliot's writing provides insight into her society in a rather unique way.
This is a slow-starter but once I got into it I was hooked. Maggie and her family are extremely well-drawn characters, as are her potential mates - a tribute to the power of the author. Tom's friend Bob and Mrs. Glegg are two more characters with serious depth and are fine additions to the cast. In short, all non-incidental characters are well rounded, believable individuals with the exception of Lucy.
She is critical to the plot but just never came across as a real person to me. This work was a p This is a slow-starter but once I got into it I was hooked. This work was a pleasure to read, giving a clear insight into times now gone forever. It uses vernacular in a natural and convincing manner, and sprinkles humor liberally throughout the primarily serious tome.
The primary negative for me was that Maggie's dilemma did not resonate. I could follow the arguments alright but the never-ending and repetitious internal debates and second-guessing were simply too much. Maggie is a strong and interesting literary character who, in the end, as may have been foreseen, is a heroine. I am sorry the narrator was never identified, and a link to the introductory paragraphs given; it would have made for a nice closure.
Felt like a disappointing start after reading Middlemarch which is paced so beautifully. We follow around Tom and Maggie as children for nearly half of the novel, a foundation which is definitely necessary - but must it have been that long?
I found their childhood fights to be repetitive, starting inevitably with Maggie's clumsiness and ending inevitably in Maggie's tears. Once we entered the financial downfall of the family, the pacing felt more balanced, and I found Maggie's return to society a Felt like a disappointing start after reading Middlemarch which is paced so beautifully. Once we entered the financial downfall of the family, the pacing felt more balanced, and I found Maggie's return to society after her downfall to be particularly compelling. Dickens's Little Dorrit and this felt like one of the first times I really understood a character's compulsion to act "dutifully," because of how aptly Eliot links it with future guilt and unhappiness.
As for the ending It didn't sit well with me last night when I first read it, and I am still unimpressed. It felt like Eliot resorted to a Deus ex Machina when there was potential for something much tighter, where the author's hand was less obvious in resolving the many crises. Tom did not deserve to have Maggie as a sister: I have never read any George Elliot novels before, and have to confess to coming to this book expecting not to like it much. This is a very carefully constructed novel - a Bildungsroman set in the early 19th century. Heroine Maggie Tulliver is the daughter of a rather foolish, but prosperous mill-owner and his even more foolish though good-natured wife.
Mr Tulliver dotes on his dark haired child who shares his hot temper, while his wife is sadly puzzled by her daughter. Maggie craves the love an I have never read any George Elliot novels before, and have to confess to coming to this book expecting not to like it much. Maggie craves the love and approval of her less intellectual but much more practical brother Tom but her impetuous nature causes frequent clashes between them.
The key incident in the novel, divided into seven "books", is a family disaster which effectively marks the end of childhood for Tom and Maggie at the start of book 3. It was at this point that I began to enjoy the novel: I had found the description of Tom and Maggie's childhood dull - I think mainly due to the author's rather ironic tone, which made it hard for me to enter into the feelings of Tom and Maggie - at that point I was comparing George Elliot very unfavourably with one of my favourite female writers, Rumer Godden, who excelled in portraying the joys and troubles of childhood.
I found the second two thirds of the book much more satisfying - a tragicomic succession of disasters befall the Tullivers, which the author uses to point up the strengths and weaknesses of the provincial society of the period, but Maggie becomes more interesting as she turns first to asceticism and then to love, first with the son of her family's worst enemy, and finally with a new and even more dangerous man. This edition has been edited by A. Byatt and she has done an excellent job: Although this novel has its faults I will certainly look forward to reading some of the author's other works now.
The scene where Maggie has a run-in with the gypsi This is the second book of Eliot's I've read -- I finally got around to reading it long after Middlemarch , which is one of my all-time favorites and when I finished Floss , I wasn't sorry that I hadn't gotten to it sooner. Still, this book has plenty of the moments Eliot does so well -- those lines that state flat-out some complicated truth about the nature of transactions between human beings or human feeling: The brilliance of GE: Plotting covetousness and deliberate contrivance in to compass a selfish end are nowhere abundant in the world of the dramatist.
It is easy enough to spoil the lives of our neighbours without taking so much trouble; we can do it by lazy acquiescence and lazy omission, by trivial falsities for which we hardly know a reason, by small frauds neutralized by small extravagances, by maladroit flatteries, and clumsily improvised insinuations. All people of broad, strong sense have The brilliance of GE: All people of broad, strong sense have an instinctive repugnance to the men of maxims; because such people early discern that the mysterious complexity of our lives is not to be embraced by maxims, and that to lace ourselves up in formulas of that sot is to repress all the divine promptings and inspirations that spring from growing insight and sympathy.
And the man of maxims is the popular representative of the minds that are guided in their moral judgment solely by general rules, thinking that these will lead them to justice by a ready-made patent method, without the trouble of exerting patience, discrimination, impartiality, — without any care to assure themselves whether they have the insight that comes from a hardly earned estimate of temptation, or from a life vivid and intense enough to have created a wide fellow-feeling with all that is human.
This novel contains may biographical connections to Eliot's own life, esp. Eliot considers Darwin's The Origin of the Species which she read while reaching the final stages of this book. She also considers the Development Theory. Might mention things that are considered spoilers!
Anyways, I hope I like a different Eliot book better. The Mill on the Floss Illustrated: She loves him more than everything in the world, but she is also afraid of him. I'm tempted to say really foul-mouthed things about Tom Tulliver here, but I'll restrain myself. View all 4 comments.
Tulliver, because during the childhood period they're the only characters tolerable. But then as the story moves forward you find these two intolerable as well. Thing is, the characters are flawed in a way that is not acceptable; they're either too good or too bad! And even him, only a little. All through the book I Might mention things that are considered spoilers! All through the book I was like this: Maggie ruined all possibilities of a real happiness, a probable happiness, because of her incomprehensible love for her brother Tom.
She even left Stephen to come back to Tom who didn't accept her until they both died. Why did they have to die?! It wasn't the best ending ever, you know.
I'm not saying the book was bad, because it wasn't. It's just that it wasn't my cup of tea. It had its moments. But most of the time I was ready to punch every character. This is Eliot's second work, and one that, in my opinion, does not compete with Silas Marner, but is rich and interesting in a way that makes this timeless.
Eliot is a master of incising to the root of societal ills, whether it be the oppression of women, the disenfranchisement of the poor, the superficiality of church ladies in Victorian England This particular work did not impress me as much as some of her o This is Eliot's second work, and one that, in my opinion, does not compete with Silas Marner, but is rich and interesting in a way that makes this timeless.
This particular work did not impress me as much as some of her others in that the story is disjointed, has massive sections that are unnecessary, and lags severely in several parts. I do not recommend skipping her long prose sections, however, some of which contain beautiful imagery or these random pearls of wisdom that modern writers just don't write anymore! For a lover a classic literature, this is a good read.
But I would more highly recommend Middlemarch or Silas Marner. I hate to admit I struggled many times to maintain momentum reading this novel, but it does get better and better towards the end. These are quotes, not from that magnificently romantic letter: If you love me, you are mine. Who can have so great a claim on you as I have?
My life is bound up in your love. There is nothing in the past that can annul our right to each other; it is the first time we have eith I hate to admit I struggled many times to maintain momentum reading this novel, but it does get better and better towards the end. There is nothing in the past that can annul our right to each other; it is the first time we have either of us loved with our whole heart and soul. The place where you are is the one where my mind must live, wherever I might travel. And remember that I am unchangeably yours — yours not with selfish wishes, but with a devotion that excludes such wishes.
I think I'm getting used to Eliot's style, and I dont' mind the philosophical rabbit trails nearly as much. Her writing is deeply insightful and moving at times. It is a sad book for much of the time, but never without a feeling of hope and faith, so that it doesn't feel depre I think I'm getting used to Eliot's style, and I dont' mind the philosophical rabbit trails nearly as much. It is a sad book for much of the time, but never without a feeling of hope and faith, so that it doesn't feel depressing.
I thought the ending was very fitting, and ties things up nicely, although there is unpleasantness. I'm tempted to say really foul-mouthed things about Tom Tulliver here, but I'll restrain myself. And about Stephen Guest!
Also, three-quarters of the women. Good, occasionally extremely powerful, but not half as amazing as Middlemarch or Daniel Deronda. Maggie is heartbreaking, and her story feels more like a c18 heroine's than any other Eliot I've read -- entrapment and misery and misunderstandings, everywhere. Eliot hasn't I'm tempted to say really foul-mouthed things about Tom Tulliver here, but I'll restrain myself.
Eliot hasn't got the narratorial voice down yet, either, so there isn't as much leavening compassion, despite all the "Poor Maggie"s. Still glad I read it, though. Without spoilers, all I can say is that I was very irritated with the ending.