Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
12/Introduction
ascertain,apartfromBeaty’sarticle,whichcontainsaphysical
descriptionoftheHQuarry”andatranscriptofitscontents(cf.
Beaty1957),ithasnotreceivedanycriticalattention.
ThenotebookprovesbeyonddoubtthatGeorgeEliotmeant
tocontinueherexperimentswithdisparateparallelplotlines,
whichsheintroducedinMiddlemarchandperfectedinDaniel
Deronda.Shewasnotdiscouragedbythefactthatthenewform,
melodramaticplotelementsandpredominantlyurbansettingof
herpreviousnovel,DanielDeronda,hadbroughtmixedreviews.
CriticsroutinelyintimatedthatHthereissomethingdisappointing
inthedevelopmentofGeorgeEliot’sowngenius”(Carroll
1971:399).Butinspiteofthepopulardemandthatsheshould
returntodescriptionsofruralandprovincialcommunities,
whichwereregardedashermajorstrength,itappearsthat
GeorgeEliotplannedforhernextnoveltoincorporatesensational
andmelodramaticmotifstoanevengreaterextentthanDaniel
Deronda.
Itappearsthathernewnovelwouldhavebeenaboutaspy
andsetduringtheNapoleonicwars.Atfirstglance,theplot
seemshighlyuncharacteristicforEliot.Inhernotes,Eliot
concentratedonthecharacteroftheprotagonist.HeisCyril
Ambrose,Hamanofinventivepowerinscienceaswellas
philosophy”(Beaty1957:15).2Hislife’sambitionistodevelop
anew,ground-breakingphilosophicsystem.However,Ambrose
wasamarriedmanandhadafamilytosupport.Hisrelative
povertyforcedhimtostopworkingonhisphilosophicalsystem
andsearchformoney-makingopportunitiesthatwouldbring
immediateincome.Asaconsequence,AmbrosewasHmaking
effortstoprevailongovernmenttobuyoneofhisinventions
–namely,adestructivemachinewhichwillgiveanenormous
militaryadvantagetothepowerthatfirstusesit”(18).Hisefforts
bringnoresponsefromthegovernmentandAmbrosebecomes
embittered,feelingthatheiswastingtimethatcouldbeused
forperfectinghisphilosophicalsystem.Asaresult,heisaneasy
victimforRastin,aFrenchsecretagent,posingasawealthy
2
AllquotationsfromthePrincetonnotebookcomefromBeaty’stranscription.
Cf.Beaty(1957).
