Middlemarch by George Eliot

How hard is Middlemarch to read?

Middlemarch scores 54 out of 100 for difficulty on ReadingRate, making it quite demanding. The score is a weighted composite of nine measures: four of how hard the prose is to parse, five of how hard the meaning is to extract.

Vocabulary: 68 out of 100

George Eliot employs a rich, formal vocabulary with frequent use of sophisticated and sometimes archaic terms (e.g., 'epos,' 'frippery,' 'huckster's,' 'solicitudes,' 'plutocracy,' 'subauditum,' 'geognosis,' 'morbidezza'). While generally understandable through context, the density of such words requires an attentive reader and occasional dictionary consultation, placing it above 'The Great Gatsby' but below the more obscure 'Moby-Dick'.

Sentence structure: 78 out of 100

Middlemarch features long, complex sentences with multiple subordinate clauses, often extending over several lines. George Eliot frequently employs parenthetical phrases and elaborate constructions, demanding sustained reader attention to parse the intricate grammatical relationships. This hypotactic style is reminiscent of Henry James or Proust, though generally more navigable.

Abstraction: 68 out of 100

While grounded in detailed social realism and character interactions, the novel frequently delves into characters' internal moral and philosophical struggles, exploring abstract concepts of duty, faith, and societal expectations. Dorothea's yearning for a 'higher inward life' and Mr. Casaubon's 'Key to All Mythologies' introduce significant intellectual and theoretical content, moving beyond mere social observation.

Information density: 72 out of 100

The text is rich with character psychology, social commentary, and intricate plot developments, often presented through dense paragraphs and detailed descriptions. Eliot layers multiple perspectives and subtle ironies, requiring readers to actively synthesize information and infer unspoken meanings, making it more demanding than 'Lolita' but less overwhelming than 'Ulysses'.

Narrative indirection: 30 out of 100

George Eliot's omniscient narrator frequently provides explicit insights into characters' inner lives, motivations, and societal context, leaving little to the reader's sole inference. For instance, the narrator directly explains Dorothea's 'theoretic' mind and her 'childlike ideas about marriage,' rather than merely showing her actions. While characters like Mr. Brooke are often misunderstood by others, the narrator clarifies his 'rambling habit of mind' and the 'fragments' in his thoughts, making his internal state clear to the reader, placing it closer to '1984' than 'Finnegans Wake'.

Symbolic density: 50 out of 100

The novel employs significant symbolism, such as Dorothea's jewels representing her internal conflict between asceticism and aesthetic appreciation, or Casaubon's 'Key to All Mythologies' symbolizing his sterile scholarship. However, the narrator often explicitly points out these symbolic meanings or uses clear metaphors (e.g., 'cygnet is reared uneasily among the ducklings,' 'cobweb of pre-matrimonial acquaintanceship'), rather than leaving them entirely to reader interpretation. This is more direct than the pervasive, multi-layered symbolism of 'Moby-Dick' or 'The Waste Land'.

Ironic distance: 70 out of 100

The narrator maintains a consistent ironic distance, subtly critiquing characters' self-delusions and societal follies while also evoking sympathy. This is evident in the narrator's observations on Dorothea's idealized view of Casaubon, Mr. Brooke's 'easy smiling way' masking his intellectual superficiality, and Mrs. Cadwallader's sharp, cynical wit. The irony often arises from the gap between characters' perceptions and the narrator's more knowing perspective, similar to 'The Great Gatsby' where Nick's bias shapes the narrative, but here it's the omniscient narrator's sophisticated commentary.

Resolution withholding: 45 out of 100

While the excerpt sets up major plot trajectories like Dorothea's marriage and Lydgate's arrival, it does not leave immediate events ambiguous or resist narrative closure in a radical way. The narrator often foreshadows future developments or comments on the likely outcomes of characters' choices, such as Mr. Casaubon's 'flatness' or the eventual disappointment of Dorothea's hopes. The narrative provides a clear sense of progression, unlike the profound uncertainties of 'Waiting for Godot' or '2666'.

Structural complexity: 35 out of 100

The novel's structure is largely linear and chronological, following the experiences of multiple characters through a consistent omniscient third-person perspective. While the narrative shifts focus between characters (Dorothea, Celia, Fred, Rosamond, Lydgate, etc.), these shifts are clearly signposted and do not involve experimental forms, fragmented chronologies, or unreliable narrators in the manner of 'Ulysses' or 'Infinite Jest.' The chapters progress sequentially, providing a clear, if broad, narrative flow, similar to 'War and Peace' in its epic scope but linear progression.

How Middlemarch is regarded

Middlemarch holds a literary regard score of 91 out of 100, weighing its place in the canon, its critical reception, its influence on other writers, and the standing of its author. Regard is measured separately from difficulty: a demanding book is not necessarily an admired one.

About the author

George Eliot