GE to John Morley, London, 14 May 1867
Title
GE to John Morley, London, 14 May 1867
Title
GE to John Morley, London, 14 May 1867
Sender
George Eliot
Recipient
John Morley
Date(s)
- 1867-05-14
Place
London
Letter Content
GE to John Morley, London, 14 May 1867
Text: Maggs Brothers Catalogue 328 (July-August 1914), item 1889.
Regents Park.
Your attitude in relation to Female enfranchisement 628 seems to be very nearly mine. . . . I would certainly not oppose any plan which held out any reasonable promise of tending to establish as far as possible an equivalence of advantages for two sexes, as to education and the possibilities of free development. I fear you may have misunderstood something I said the other evening 629 about nature. I meant to urge the [intention of Nature] argument, which is to me a pitiable fallacy. I mean that as a fact of mere zoological evolution, woman seems to me to have the worse share in existence. But for that very reason I would the more contend that in the moral evolution we have [an art which does mend nature.] 630 It is the function of love in the largest sense, to mitigate the harshness of all fatalities. And in the thorough recognition of that worse share, I think there is a basis for a sublimer recognition in women and a more regenerating tenderness in man.
However, I repeat that I do not trust very confidently to my own impressions on this subject. The peculiarities of my own lot have caused me to have idiosyncrasies rather than an average judgment. The one conviction on the matter which I hold with some tenacity is, that through all transitions the goal towards which we are proceeding is a more clearly discerned distinction of function (allowing always for exceptional cases of individual organization) with as near an approach to equivalence of good for woman and for man as can be secured by the effort of growing moral force to lighten the pressure of hard non-moral outward conditions. It is rather superfluous, perhaps injudicious, to plunge into such deeps as these in a hasty note, but it is difficult to resist the desire to botch imperfect talk with a little imperfect writing.
The [Spectator] article 631 is a grandiose specimen of what a journalist can do when not [stating his thoughts in a manner below his capacity] -- for misrepresentation and wriggling.
M. E. Lewes.
Text: Maggs Brothers Catalogue 328 (July-August 1914), item 1889.
Regents Park.
Your attitude in relation to Female enfranchisement 628 seems to be very nearly mine. . . . I would certainly not oppose any plan which held out any reasonable promise of tending to establish as far as possible an equivalence of advantages for two sexes, as to education and the possibilities of free development. I fear you may have misunderstood something I said the other evening 629 about nature. I meant to urge the [intention of Nature] argument, which is to me a pitiable fallacy. I mean that as a fact of mere zoological evolution, woman seems to me to have the worse share in existence. But for that very reason I would the more contend that in the moral evolution we have [an art which does mend nature.] 630 It is the function of love in the largest sense, to mitigate the harshness of all fatalities. And in the thorough recognition of that worse share, I think there is a basis for a sublimer recognition in women and a more regenerating tenderness in man.
However, I repeat that I do not trust very confidently to my own impressions on this subject. The peculiarities of my own lot have caused me to have idiosyncrasies rather than an average judgment. The one conviction on the matter which I hold with some tenacity is, that through all transitions the goal towards which we are proceeding is a more clearly discerned distinction of function (allowing always for exceptional cases of individual organization) with as near an approach to equivalence of good for woman and for man as can be secured by the effort of growing moral force to lighten the pressure of hard non-moral outward conditions. It is rather superfluous, perhaps injudicious, to plunge into such deeps as these in a hasty note, but it is difficult to resist the desire to botch imperfect talk with a little imperfect writing.
The [Spectator] article 631 is a grandiose specimen of what a journalist can do when not [stating his thoughts in a manner below his capacity] -- for misrepresentation and wriggling.
M. E. Lewes.
Signature
M. E. Lewes.
Citation
George Eliot, GE to John Morley, London, 14 May 1867, Complete George Eliot Letters(2026), George Eliot Archive, edited by Beverley Park Rilett. https://GeorgeEliotArchive.org, Accessed September 7, 2026. https://georgeeliotarchive.org/items/show/92812