The Lifted Veil, George Eliot

   Adam Bede was required reading for me in my university education. It gave me a certain respect for the author, George Eliot. It's been my intention to return to another of her works. More than ten years has passed since graduation, so it's been more than ten years. A part of the reason for that is that I'm just not fond of literature which is focused on human social schema. In any case, so I happened across the novella, "The Lifted Veil," and gave that a read.
   To summarize, the main character, Latimer, has some clairvoyant abilities. He can sometimes foresee the future and read the minds of others. He foresees his marriage to Bertha, the woman he at once loves, fears, and despises. Yet, he is compelled into her as his will is quite weak.
   Over time, in his marriage to Bertha, his ability to read her mind and the minds of others weakens. The cause of this is unknown. However, it might have something to do with her taking on a maid who has her own abilities. Or, it might have to do with that he tries to avoid using it. He doesn't like reading people's minds. He would rather shut it out. Finally, Bertha tries to poison him. This, too, might be the cause of losing his ability. I suspect that this might be the case since after the discovery of the poison, he flees to another country, and his supernatural gifts return to him.
   The knowledge of the attempted murder comes about after her maid is revived momentarily by a blood transfusion. It is a somewhat odd finale to this novella.
   There's a kind of silly feminist essay about this story called, "Bertha as the Failed Hero?: Analysing The Blood Transfusion Scene in George Eliot’s The Lifted Veil." It argues that Latimer was somehow forcefully penetrating others through his use of clairvoyance. Considering how hard he tried to avoid it, and how it worked on both genders and not just the female, I don't know how well I can buy her arguments. "...man becomes the giver of life to ‘Woman’" and "Thoroughly confined to her role as Other [and apparently little above the rank of a dehumanised animal], Mrs. Archer, in her deathly state, is compelled to accept male penetration in the form of a phallic needle full of blood." It seems to me a rather tenuous relationship. Naturally, Mrs. Archer is dead. We don't know if Meunier chooses her for the experiment because she is a woman or simply out of curiosity to see if the blood can bring back the dead. There is no statistical data to examine to demonstrate whether this is an assault on femininity or a comment thereof. We have no idea if Meunier has done this to a male or female before or if he chooses females only. I wonder if the author, who leaves his (or more likely) her name as 'letitbeprinted' would consider a life saving procedure of blood transfusion from a male nurse or doctor to a female patient a form of rape or sexual assault? I love feminism, but feminism of this form is logically little better than patriarchal religion.
  We also don't know why the maid confesses at last. Perhaps a look into the void of death is a heavy prospect with knowledge of the murder in progress on her conscience. She seemed ready to take it with her to the grave one moment, but not on her second chance of parting the world with such information left unsaid.