Passage pertaining to my discussion: 

Passage from Book Four, Chapter 42

“But the resolved submission did come; and when the house was still, and she knew that it was near the time when Mr. Casaubon habitually went to rest, she opened her door gently and stood outside in the darkness waiting for his coming up-stairs with a light in his hand. If he did not come soon she thought that she would go down and even risk incurring another pang. She would never again expect anything else. But she did hear the library door open, and slowly the light advanced up the staircase without noise from the footsteps on the carpet.” (427)

Question: How does the passage reflect the power dynamic in the Casaubon’s' marriage? 

Eliot presents the Casaubon’s marriage as a struggle, albeit a predictable one. Upon Dorothea’s disillusionment in Rome, she feels that the affection and emotional investment in the marriage are “wasted” (425), and that it is a “perpetual struggle of energy and fear” (389), suggesting that she perceives marriage as inhibiting and straining. Casaubon continuously entraps himself in a web of “suspicion and jealousy” (419) towards Dorothea “constantly at weaving work” (419). Ironically, Dorothea’s coping mechanism to this stifling relationship is repeated submission, evident in the conflict between Ladislaw and Casaubon, and in Casaubon’s impassivity towards Dorothea in the excerpt. Any discord between herself and Casaubon appears so unbearable that she almost feels compelled to appease Casaubon, even more devastating than repressing her emotions. Her determination is highlighted in the word “resolved” (427), and the fact that she would “even risk incurring another pang” (427), another disappointment. Besides, her meticulous attention and heightened sensitivity to Casaubon’s activity, like a predator waiting for her prey.  This obsession is exemplified in how she knows when he “habitually went to rest”(427), realizes that “the house is still” and detects the supposedly faint sound of the library door opening and Casaubon advancing the staircase, and it further reinforces Dorothea’s strong desire to reconcile with Casaubon. To Dorothea, restoring peace through submission is so urgent that she willingly puts aside her own frustration over her marriage. How Dorothea “opened her door gently and stood outside in the darkness waiting for his coming up-stairs with a light in his hand.” (427) is also intriguing. Again, “gently” (427) paints a side of her rarely displayed before us before the marriage, in juxtaposition with her former passionate and outspoken self before marriage. The line could also be interpreted literally and figuratively. Not only does the literal reading highlight her eagerness to reconcile with Casaubon, it also reveals Dorothea’s role as the active one in the Casaubon's power dynamic. She always “opened her door” and is constantly “waiting”, despite their physical and metaphorical stairs that separate them. His act of distancing himself from Dorothea suggests his reluctance to abandon his “suspicious impressions” towards Dorothea and empathizing with her. Figuratively, Casaubon’s “coming up-stairs” is almost like a ray of hope to forlorn Dorothea, who wagers on eternal disappointment as she resolves to “never expect again anything else” (427) and stands in metaphorical darkness and despondence. The “light in his hand” (427), symbolizing Casaubon’s attempt to reconnect with Dorothea, resurrects and liberates her from metaphorical darkness. However, it is unclear from this excerpt whether Casaubon, too, desires reconciliation or whether the inevitable direct confrontation necessitated their reconciliation, since it happens when Casaubon habitually rests. Again, a stark contrast being Dorothea and Casaubon is presented, with Dorothea actively resolving conflicts, and Casaubon remaining passive. 

This episode is particularly significant as it depicts the pattern in which dissonance is often resolved between the two. Any attempt at reconciliation is almost always initiated by Dorothea, by form of submission. Interestingly, this passage also portrays the predictability of their marriage and the story plot itself. The repetition of “did” in “did come” (427) and “did hear” (427) is particularly telling. The line “the resolved submission did come” almost suggests that Dorothea’s submission is the anticipated outcome, to both Dorothea herself and the readers. “Come”also implies Dorothea’s submission had not resulted in any true enlightenment from Dorothea’s end about Casaubon’s mentality, it was merely an effort of mental readjustment and “meditative struggle”. (427) Her act of waiting itself also hints that Dorothea is almost certain that Casaubon will eventually come upstairs. The narrator’s repetition of “did” does not only characterize how conflicts are resolved in the Casaubons as predictable, but also sheds light on the predictability of plots in novels. The emphasis created with the repetition of “did” seems to be a reply and confirmation of the readers’ internal speculation as to how the plot of Middlemarch will unfold. This resonates with Warhol’s comment on how fiction readers form “formula-based speculations” (Warhol, 81) around fiction. Eliot seems to be satisfying the readers’, and Dorothea, the audience and actor of the event’s preconceptions of the progression of events, and also discussing the predictable nature of fiction. Dorothea’s “resolved submission” (427) being an anticipated outcome to Casaubon’s emotional abuse by both Victorian readers and Dorothea herself also suggests that this pattern may not only be specific to Casaubon's marriage, but a general pattern of (Hammerton, 8) Victoria marriages. At the time, perhaps wives are always expected to concede, and this cycle of submission and reconciliation, albeit without a deepened understanding, are destined to perpetuate, both within and outside the fictional world. 

Warhol, Robyn R. Having a Good Cry: Effeminate Feelings and Pop-Culture Forms. Ohio State University Press, 2003.

Eliot, George. Middlemarch. Asher, 1873.

James Hammerton. "Victorian Marriage and the Law of Matrimonial Cruelty." Victorian Studies 33.2 (1990): 269-92. Web.