Lions in the Path: A Study of George Eliot and Henry James as Theorists of Fiction (review)

223 Shruti Sharma. Lions in the Path: A Study of George Eliot and Henry James as Theorists of Fiction. Karnal: Natraj Publishing House, 1986. 152 pp. In Lions in the Path Shruti Sharma examines the theories of fiction of George Eliot and Henry James. Such a study has value in that both novelists were among the first in England to formulate systematic theories. And as Sharma notes, "James . . . took 'intellectual possession' of the ideas that were made available to him by English, French and American novelists and converted this 'possession' into something which has become the basis of modern fictional art" (104). Comparing Eliot's theory with that of James could thus shed light on the way in which James transformed such ideas into his own "art of fiction," especially since Sharma argues for many similarities in the theories of the two novelists. But while Sharma documents both similarities and differences, he fails to develop the underlying connections between the theories of Eliot and James. In the first chapter, "George Eliot: The Particular Web," Sharma discusses Eliot's theory of the novel, based on her reviews and her fiction. Eliot is a realist insofar as she insists on the artist's fidelity to what he or she observes. Sharma cites Chapter 17 of Adam Bede as Eliot's pronouncement on realism—"a faithful account of men and things"—but cautions that the second part of the statement— "as they have mirrored themselves in my mind"—demonstrates that hers was no "naive realism" in her insistence on the importance of the artist's imagination and sensibility in transforming observation into art. He details the various influences on Eliot's ideas, most notably Coleridge, Wordsworth, and Ruskin, and points out that George Henry Lewes had minimal influence because of his simplistic view of realism and limited understanding of the creative process. Ruskin's stress on the artist's "moral perception" in creating beauty in turn shaped Eliot's vision of the artist's mission to awaken the reader to the subtleties of reality—"the old women scraping carrots." But while the artist must not simply paint "Dutch pictures" of accurately rendered detail, so too must he or she not preach. The artist must observe with feeling, but to insist on feeling is to lapse into didacticism. George Eliot's stress on fidelity of observation and the "fire" of imagination influenced her concept of form, which Sharma describes as "the synthesis of outward appearance and the inward reality of appearance" (31). For Eliot, the form is organic in that it evolves out of the creative process itself, and thus the novelist must be free to choose the narrative technique most appropriate to reflect this duality of "appearances." The discussion of Eliot is on the whole sound, but it is flawed by the repetition of main points—Sharma continually insists that Eliot was not a "naive realist." This tendency appears throughout Lions in the Path, and as a result the reader often fails to get a sense that the argument is moving forward. With Eliot's views defined, Sharma turns his attention to James in Chapters II and III. The second chapter, "Henry James: The Art of Reflection," is devoted to a detailed reading of "The Art of Fiction" as James's definitive statement of his theory. For Sharma, "The Art of Fiction" demonstrates that James is not a "naive realist" who strives for mimetic representation, but instead reveals James's stress on the artist's imagination: "Art not only portrays the reality of life but 224 The Henry James Review the artist gives significant form to the view of reality projected through the work of art" (47). Although Sharma's point is a valid one, I am not sure he needs to give it the space and the stress he does in this chapter. Few critics have argued that James is a "naive realist"; indeed, the critics Sharma cites—such as Geismar— do not reflect current James criticism. Again Sharma's treatment of James's realism tends to belabor the obvious. Sharma, for example, repeatedly insists that the novel is not history. Aside from the fact that Sharma's definition of the historian...