Passages pertaining to my discussions: 

She might have compared her experience at that moment to the vague, alarmed consciousness that her life was taking on a new form that she was undergoing a metamorphosis in which memory would not adjust itself to the stirring of new organs. Everything was changing its aspect: her husband's conduct, her husband's conduct, her own duteous feeling towards him, every struggle between them— and yet more, her whole relation to Will Ladislaw.

(Book V, chapter 8)

That was what poor old Peter himself had expected; having often, in imagination, looked up through the sods above him, and, unobstructed by. perspective, seen his frog-faced legatee enjoying the fine old place to the perpetual surprise and disappointment of other survivors.

(Book V, chapter 11)

Question underpinning my discussions on Book II:

What is the significance of the portrayal of two unexpected last wills (By Casaubon and Featherstone) in Middlemarch? 

In Middlemarch, readers witness two deaths of the elders as well as the interesting coincidence that, both left behind a will trying to manipulate the world they left behind. Casaubon was deeply jealous of Ladislaw. With the desire to sever the very possibility of Ladislaw marrying the widowed Dorothea, Casaubon made his last will announcing that Dorothea would not inherit his fortune if she unites with Ladislaw. Featherstone, with the ongoing desire to showcase his financial power, offered all his legacy to his illegitimate son in an unexpected manner. However, while both will were shocking to the ones who reviewed them, neither achieved their intended purposes. The implications lie behind such coincidence are worth some examination.

Firstly, the contrast between intention and outcomes casts a gentle mockery on their over-attention of their own existence. While Featherstone was trying to have one last showoff of his financial power, all his relatives cared about was how they could share the money; and while he imagined his illegitimate son could live in his house enjoying the admiration from other Middlemarch residents, his son sold the house immediately and did not care what his father cared at all. The event turned even more ironic on Causaubon's side. Feeling shocked upon hearing her deceased husband's last will, Dorothea's mind, as described in the passage pertaining to this blog entry, speaks that "Everything was changing its aspect: her husband's conduct, her husband's conduct, her own duteous feeling towards him, every struggle between them— and yet more, her whole relation to Will Ladislaw". In other words, it is Causaubon's attempt to sever Ladislaw from her "alarmed" her that she could develop a romantic relationship with Ladislaw. Not only did Casaubon's will fail to achieve its intended purpose, it actually played the role of a catalyst for Dorothea and Ladislaw's union. Such ironies resulted from Featherstone and Casaobon's over-confidence in their understanding of the people around them.  Both Casaubon and Featherstone seem to feel undoubted that the events would go as they have secretly planned, reflecting that they also unconsciously perceive themselves as the center of their world. However, within the world of Middlemarch, the other characters are just alive as they are, and there is no way for any arrogant individual to comprehend another individual's subtle inner minds entirely.

Secondly, a power dynamic between the live and the dead characters is observed. Featherstone and Casaubon cast their last wills with the desire to manipulate those who stay alive, yet neither could defeat the unexpected flow of reality. The discussion on interpersonal manipulation triggered my thoughts on an earlier theory. The Middlemarch society is viewed as a web in which members play roles that entangle each other. However, the plots relevant to Casaubon and Featherstone made me ponder: are those who are involved in the web aware of their role within it? At least for Featherstone and Casaubon, the answer is a no. They are unaware that once they pass away, they cease to be a flowing element of the pond of Middlemarch, and what is static could hardly successfully control the living parts. The ones who are alive were able to make decisions that push and pull their interrelationships with one another. Nevertheless, once a member is dead and no longer can perform his role, he is to be put into a more passive position. In other words, the powerlessness of a perishable individual is reflected, which softly ridicules their unawareness of it.

This also reminds me of Woloch's theory on Character System. Woloch sees the narrative structure as competition between characters within a novel. But when someone pass away, they also lose the ability to perform the active act of "competing". The narration's space is emptied, for, under most circumstances, novelists would prefer pushing the plot forward with characters who are still alive. In the case of Middlemarch, Dorothea and other Middlemarch continue to be dynamic in exploring their developing storylines. Featherstone and Casaubon had to compromise, performing silently as the footstep for the proceeding chapters.

To conclude, the coincidence of the failure of Featherstone's and Casaubon's last will address the unavailing attempt for people to manipulate others. With the lack of comprehension to others and their emptied position in the world and the novel they are in, the characters' only fate would probably be resting in "perpetual surprise".