Abstract
A common critical procedure in examining Murdoch’s writing has been to measure her novels against her philosophy, to consider (for example) whether the behaviour of her characters and the events depicted in her plots exemplify or compromise her ethical principles. This is understandable given the remarkable clarity and consistency of her moral philosophy over four decades, the similarity between the scenarios repeatedly presented in her novels and the issues dealt with in her nonfiction, and perhaps also because of an implicit hierarchy which prevails in contemporary critical practice whereby theoretical pronouncements are privileged over fictional practice.