GE to Sara Sophia Hennell, London, 15 May 1877
Title
GE to Sara Sophia Hennell, London, 15 May 1877
Title
GE to Sara Sophia Hennell, London, 15 May 1877
Sender
George Eliot
Recipient
Sara Sophia Hennell
Date(s)
- 1877-05-15
Place
London
Letter Content
GE to Sara Sophia Hennell, London, 15 May 1877
MS: Yale. Extracts published: Cross, III, 306-308.
The Priory, | 21. North Bank, | Regents Park.
May 15. 77.
Dear Sara
Delightful to have a letter from you once more, and to feel that there is anything you care to say to me!
I have not read, and do not mean to read, Mrs. Chapman's volume, so that I can judge of it only from report. You seem to me to make a very good case for removing the weight of blame from her shoulders and transferring it to the already burthened back of Harriet Martineau.
But I confess, that the more I think of the book and all connected with it, the more it deepens my repugnance -- or rather creates a new repugnance in me -- to autobiography, unless it can be so written as to involve neither self-glorification nor impeachment of others. I like that the "He, being dead, yet speaketh," 670 should have quite another meaning than that.
I agree with you in feeling that James Martineau was deplorably in the wrong in writing that article on his Sister. 671 That was a public affair, and I imagine that so far as it has been remembered it has been generally condemned. Probably J.M. himself has condemned it, but one must hesitate to say that [retraction] was quite practicable and incumbent on him. What his sister thought of his motives was no public concern. [3 words deleted.] You must be quite right in your conclusion that she was the causer of her imputation being made public, for the statement that he was from the very beginning of her success continually moved by jealousy and envy towards her must have come readily to her lips, since she made it to a person so far from intimate with her as I was.
But however the blame may be distributed, it remains a grievously pitiable thing to me that man or woman who has cared about a future life in the minds of a coming generation or generations should have deliberately, persistently mingled with that prospect the ignoble desire to perpetuate personal animosities, which can never be rightly judged by those immediately engaged in them. And Harriet Martineau, according to the witness of those well acquainted with facts which she represents in her autobiography, was quite remarkably apt to have a false view of her relations with others. In some cases she gives a ridiculously inaccurate account of the tenor or bearing of correspondence held with her. One would not for a moment want to dwell on the weaknesses of a character on the whole valuable and beneficent, if it were not made needful by the ready harshness with which she has inflicted pain on others.
No! I did not agree with you about Mrs. Stowe and the Byron case
(though I have good reason to love Mrs. Stowe and think highly of her motives). In my judgement the course she took was socially injurious. I understand by the teaching of my own egoism -- and therefore I can sympathize with -- any act of self-vindicating or vindictive rage under the immediate infliction of what is felt to be a wrong or injustice. But I have no sympathy with self-vindication or the becoming a proxy in vindication deliberately bought at such a price as that of vitiating revelations -- which may even possibly be false. To write a cruel letter in a rage is very pardonable -- even a letter full of gall and bitterness, meant as a sort of poisoned dagger. We poor mortals can hardly escape these sins of passion. But I have no pity to spare for the rancour that corrects its proofs and revises and lays it by, chuckling with the sense of its future publicity.
Neither have you, I am sure. And I have written those sentences rather superfluously, gliding on from Mrs. Stowe to Harriet Martineau.
Be sure that I never connected any wish of yours with the least bit of such mean egoism as I have been referring to. I think that I have not at all misunderstood any serious communication that you have ever made to me.
We are in a crowd of engagements just now. Best love to all from
Your ever lovingly faithful
Pollian.
MS: Yale. Extracts published: Cross, III, 306-308.
The Priory, | 21. North Bank, | Regents Park.
May 15. 77.
Dear Sara
Delightful to have a letter from you once more, and to feel that there is anything you care to say to me!
I have not read, and do not mean to read, Mrs. Chapman's volume, so that I can judge of it only from report. You seem to me to make a very good case for removing the weight of blame from her shoulders and transferring it to the already burthened back of Harriet Martineau.
But I confess, that the more I think of the book and all connected with it, the more it deepens my repugnance -- or rather creates a new repugnance in me -- to autobiography, unless it can be so written as to involve neither self-glorification nor impeachment of others. I like that the "He, being dead, yet speaketh," 670 should have quite another meaning than that.
I agree with you in feeling that James Martineau was deplorably in the wrong in writing that article on his Sister. 671 That was a public affair, and I imagine that so far as it has been remembered it has been generally condemned. Probably J.M. himself has condemned it, but one must hesitate to say that [retraction] was quite practicable and incumbent on him. What his sister thought of his motives was no public concern. [3 words deleted.] You must be quite right in your conclusion that she was the causer of her imputation being made public, for the statement that he was from the very beginning of her success continually moved by jealousy and envy towards her must have come readily to her lips, since she made it to a person so far from intimate with her as I was.
But however the blame may be distributed, it remains a grievously pitiable thing to me that man or woman who has cared about a future life in the minds of a coming generation or generations should have deliberately, persistently mingled with that prospect the ignoble desire to perpetuate personal animosities, which can never be rightly judged by those immediately engaged in them. And Harriet Martineau, according to the witness of those well acquainted with facts which she represents in her autobiography, was quite remarkably apt to have a false view of her relations with others. In some cases she gives a ridiculously inaccurate account of the tenor or bearing of correspondence held with her. One would not for a moment want to dwell on the weaknesses of a character on the whole valuable and beneficent, if it were not made needful by the ready harshness with which she has inflicted pain on others.
No! I did not agree with you about Mrs. Stowe and the Byron case
(though I have good reason to love Mrs. Stowe and think highly of her motives). In my judgement the course she took was socially injurious. I understand by the teaching of my own egoism -- and therefore I can sympathize with -- any act of self-vindicating or vindictive rage under the immediate infliction of what is felt to be a wrong or injustice. But I have no sympathy with self-vindication or the becoming a proxy in vindication deliberately bought at such a price as that of vitiating revelations -- which may even possibly be false. To write a cruel letter in a rage is very pardonable -- even a letter full of gall and bitterness, meant as a sort of poisoned dagger. We poor mortals can hardly escape these sins of passion. But I have no pity to spare for the rancour that corrects its proofs and revises and lays it by, chuckling with the sense of its future publicity.
Neither have you, I am sure. And I have written those sentences rather superfluously, gliding on from Mrs. Stowe to Harriet Martineau.
Be sure that I never connected any wish of yours with the least bit of such mean egoism as I have been referring to. I think that I have not at all misunderstood any serious communication that you have ever made to me.
We are in a crowd of engagements just now. Best love to all from
Your ever lovingly faithful
Pollian.
Signature
Pollian.
Citation
George Eliot, GE to Sara Sophia Hennell, London, 15 May 1877, 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/93997