Daniel Deronda에서 본 절대적 선의 결론

Abstract

Eliot’s moral vision is composed of an inflexibility which insists on absolute moral norms and also of a flexibility which questions the absoluteness of the norms and allows judgements to be determined at least in part by the situation and in part by the inner state of conscience. Eliot admits the existence of moral norms, but is sceptical of the norm’s absoluteness, for when a moral loses its value, the moral norm degrades into mechanical actions or hypocritical ritual. As the absoluteness of the moral norm fades away through passage of time and change of environment and psychological state of the man, a flexible position of the moral norm is require in reality. Eliot doubts there are absolute moral norms, she does not set a moral standard by which to judge her characters, nor does she give any central character absolute moral authority. Most of her characters fail to find an ideal moral vision, as Eliot had failed to do so, and she follows the changes taking place in them internally. Her novels are a testing ground for life, where she experiments the moral inflexibility, flexibility and moral mixture of both in the content and form of the novels. The moral conflict of Daniel Deronda shows what is the supreme ‘good’, This study concludes with the determination that Eliot recognizes the need for moral norms but has a moral vision to see that sympathy and understanding of human limitations and emotions are more important than any other values. Since the absoluteness of moral norms on good and evil has been denied, the conclusion can only be relative or ambiguous.