She was distinctively a moral teacher in her books.  The novel was never to her a work of art alone.  The moral purpose was always present, always apparent, always clear and emphatic.  There was something to teach for her whenever she took the pen in hand; some deep lesson of human experience, some profound truth of human conduct, some tender word of sympathy for human sorrow and suffering.  She seems to have had no sympathy with that theory which says that the poet and the novelist are to picture life as it is, without regard to moral obligations and consequences.  In this respect she was one of the most partisan of all partisans, an absolute dogmatist; for she never forgot for a moment the moral consequences of life.  She was one of the most ardent of modern preachers, her books are crowded with teaching of the most positive character.  In her way she was a great believer, and when she believed she never restrained her pen, but taught the full measure of her convictions.  She did not look upon life as a scene to be sketched, but as an experience to be lived, and a moral order to be improved by sympathy and devotedness.  Consequently the artist appears in the teacher’s garb, the novelist has become an ethical preacher.  She does not describe life as something outside of herself, nor does she regard human sorrows and sufferings and labors merely as materials for the artist’s use; but she lives in and with all that men do and suffer and aspire to.  Hers is not the manner of Homer and Scott, who hide their personality behind the wonderful distinctness of their personalities, making the reader forget the author in the strength and power of the characters described.  It is not that of Shakspere, of whom we seem to get no glimpse in his marvellous readings of human nature, who paints other men as no one else has done, but who does not paint himself.  Hers is rather the manner of Wordsworth and Goethe, who have a theory of life to give us, and whose personality appears on every page they wrote.  She has a philosophy, a morality and a religion to inculcate.  She had a vast subjective intensity of conviction, and a strong individualism of purpose, which would not hide itself behind the scenes.  Her philosophy impregnates with a strong personality all her classic utterances; her ethics present a marked purpose in the development of her plots and in her presentation of the outcome of human experience; and her religion glows in the personal ardor and sympathy of her noblest characters, and in their passion for renunciation and altruism.

Her ethical passion adds to the strength and purpose of George Eliot’s genius.  No supreme literary creator has been devoid of this characteristic, however objective and impersonal he may have been.  Homer, Virgil, Dante, Cervantes, Shakspere, Scott, were all earnest ethical teachers.  The moral problems of life impressed them profoundly, and they showed a strong personal preference for righteousness.  The literary masters of all times and countries have