Henry fielding

1.2 Criticism of Fielding's epistolary novel An Apology for the Life of Mrs. Shamela Andrews.

The following entry presents criticism of Fielding's epistolary novel An Apology for the Life of Mrs. Shamela Andrews. Hailed by Sheridan Barker as the “best parody in English literature,” Henry Fielding'sShamela is the best known of a number of novels written in the 1740s that satirized Samuel Richardson's hugely popular 1740 novel, Pamela. Fielding's sixty-page book condenses and imitates Richardson's two-volume epistolary novel, poking fun at the original work's narrative method and pretense at moralizing. The heroine of Pamela is a paragon of virtue, a servant girl who resists the sexual advances of her master, and Richardson's purpose with the novel was to “cultivate the Principles of Virtue and Religion in the Minds of the Youth of Both Sexes.” Fielding's heroine Shamela, on the other hand, is an artful minx who uses her “Vartue” to rise in the world. By poking fun at every aspect of Richardson's method and message, Fielding exposes the hypocrisy of contemporary mores. The work is more than a simple parody of Richardson, however, as Fielding lampoons political figures, the clergy, and contemporary writers. Shamela also marked a turning point in the modern novel, as it prepared the way for Fielding's more complex and ambitious work, Joseph Andrews, which launched the tradition of comic fiction in English literature.
Although Fielding had published a number of plays, poems, and essays by 1741, he was struggling financially. His theatrical career had come to an end in 1737 because of the controversy stirred up by his dramatic satires, and that year he began preparing to qualify as a barrister in order to support his family. He also took on translation work and in 1739 launched a newspaper, the Champion, for which he wrote a number of essays that satirized politics, law, literature, religion, and government. As he inveighed against all manner of societal excesses and corruption in the Champion, Fielding was in fact preparing himself for the pointed satire that was to come in Shamela. In 1740, three books appeared that particularly irked Fielding. In addition to Richardson's Pamela, there was An Apology for the Life of Colley Cibber, a book full of grammatical mistakes and misused words, and Conyers Middleton's Life of Cicero, which was obsequiously dedicated to Prime Minister Robert Walpole's Privy Seal, Lord Hervey. Shamela satirizes all three of these works by imitating their content and style. In early 1741 when Fielding found himself in a “sponging house” because of his debts, he dashed off the manuscript of Shamela, which he published anonymously. Richardson suspected that Fielding was the author of the parody, and never forgave him. A year later Fielding would publish Joseph Andrews, which inaugurated his career as a novelist.
Fielding takes special care to parody even the smallest details of Richardson's work, and the form of Shamela closely follows that of Pamela. The novel is introduced by the “author,” one Conny Keyber who claims he presents the “authentick Papers” of the heroine of Richardson's novel. Keyber dedicates his work to “Miss Fanny,” a parody of Middleton's dedication to the supposedly effeminate Lord Hervey. He also includes letters to the editor congratulating him on his fine work, just as Richardson had appended letters in praise of his novel to his second edition of Pamela. The novel begins with a letter from the gullible Parson Thomas Tickletext, who, overcome by the loveliness of Pamela, writes to his friend, Parson J. Oliver, enthusiastically recommending the novel. Oliver, however, has in his possession certain letters that reveal the true nature and history of Richardson's heroine. Oliver explains that Pamela's name is actually Shamela and transmits her authentic correspondence. There follows a series of letters written between the various characters in the novel: Shamela; her unwed mother, Henrietta Maria Honora Andrews; Squire Booby, the master of Booby Hall; Booby's housekeeper and Shamela's confidante, Mrs. Lucretia Jervis; Booby's more loyal housekeeper, Mrs. Jewkes; and the Reverend Arthur Williams. The letters reveal that Shamela, formerly a servant in Booby's household, becomes his wife by supposedly resisting his attempts to seduce her and flaunting her “Vartue.” She has done this with the help of Mrs. Jervis, who pretends to help Booby to win Shamela but who actually aids Shamela in her designs on his worldly goods. In the meantime Shamela has an affair with Reverend Williams, which according to Parson Oliver, is eventually found out. Events and characters in the novel parallel Pamela,but things are seen in a very different light, with Parson Williams appearing as a scheming rogue, Mr. Booby as a fool, and Pamela as a calculating hussy.
As a parody of Pamela, Shamela aims to overturn what Fielding considered to be the sententious moralizing of Richardson's novel. Richardson claims that Pamela is a model of virtue, whose chastity is rewarded, but Fielding in his novel equates morality with expediency, as Shamela behaves as she does in order to secure material comforts for herself. Throughout the novel Shamela uses words such as “feign,” “act,” and “pretend.” She tempts Booby but pretends to do so unwittingly, thus retaining her virtuous image, resisting him in order to appear virtuous and lure him into marriage and elevate herself socially. Shamela is not the virtuous woman Richardson supposes but rather a calculating, conniving creature. While Fielding parodies Richardson's views on morality and virtue, at the same time he presents his own moral message about hypocrisy and feigned goodness. His criticism of hypocrisy extends also to the clergy (represented by Parson Williams), the gentry (in Squire Booby), and the political establishment. The theme of faith versus good works is also explored in the character of the parson. Fielding with his novel attacks corruption on many levels, from the perversion of language to the exploitation of the nature of decency and uprightness for political purposes. Fielding published Shamela anonymously, but upon its publication he was widely suspected as being the author of the parody. Because of the enormous success of Pamela, Fielding's burlesque enjoyed considerable notoriety, and indeed it spawned several other, lesser satires of Richardson's novel. Shamela was hardly a critical success upon initial publication, however, and it was not only until the early twentieth century that scholars began taking it seriously as a work of literature. Early discussions of the novel centered on its authorship, and it was not until the 1950s that Fielding's authorship of Shamela was established. Subsequent analyses have explored issues such as the nature of Fielding's parody; the work's complex, multi-layered satire of contemporary values and politics; the similarities and differences between Shamela and Pamela; the anticipation in the novel of themes elaborated upon in Joseph Andrews; the satire's concern with sexuality, gender, literacy, and class; the idea of authenticity; and Fielding's political attitudes. Reading Samuel Richardson’s novel Pamela, Or, Virtue Rewarded, as we recounted in my previous review of it, is not for the faint of heart; but we are happy to say that it was all made worthwhile just this past week as we listened to a Naxos AudioBooks recording of Henry Fielding’s masterful parody fittingly entitled Shamela. Many know Fielding for Tom Jones, but his satirical powers are at full and outrageous height in Shamela. In a quarter of the number of pages found in the original story, Fielding highlights and lampoons all of Richardson’s characteristic tropes, transforming Miss Pamela Andrews from a paragon of female virtue into an archetypical scheming hussy. The great irony is that, as shamefully vicious as Shamela maybe, she is a great deal more fun to listen to than her saintly prototype. Central to Richardson’s sentimental plot was Pamela’s virtue. By virtue, readers must understand two things: her honesty and her virginity. Understandably, Pamela insists on protecting these, since they are her only means for attracting a worthy and, hopefully, wealthy suitor. Because these two meanings of virtue are at the heart of the conflict in Pamela, Fielding places them squarely at the heart of his comedic retelling. Shamela, as her name implies, is anything but honest. In her letters to her mother, she makes it plain that her every action toward Squire Booby (Mr. B’s new name) is aimed at provoking the young man’s sexual passion as a means to coerce him into marriage. Accordingly, her protestations against that gentleman’s sexual advances, while they mirror Pamela’s, are all pretense. She would like nothing better than for her employer to seduce her, but not before she secures a share of his fortune for herself. As she tells Mrs. Jervis: “…Fellows have often taken away in the Morning, what they gave over Night. No, Mrs. Jervis, nothing under a regular taking into Keeping, a settled Settlement, for me, and all my Heirs, all my whole Liftetime, shall do the Business-or else crosslegged, is the Word…”. Of course, as the quote with which we opened this review indicates, Shamela is no virgin anyway! As you might have guessed, Pamela is not the only character whose personality Fielding changes for comedic effect-all the major characters are the opposite of their originals. Mr. B is a fool, Mr. Williams is a lascivious skamp, Mrs. Jervis is a coconspirator, and, best of all, Pamela’s parents are low-class trash. Indeed, while the original Pamela’s father writes ad nauseum to his daughter about her Christian duty, Shamela’s father is serving time in prison. And Shamela’s mother is little better. Readers are told she “sold Oranges in the Play-House,” a not so subtle way to say she was a prostitute. In fact, Shamela’s mother-whose regal name, Henrietta Maria Honora Andrews, belies her tawdry lifestyle-steals this story’s spotlight, for it was her corrupting influence that produced Shamela. As a result, Shamela repeatedly articulates pithy proverbs of vice in her letters to her mother, as if to illustrate just how well she has been schooled. For example, she writes, “What a foolish Thing it is for a Woman to dally too long with her Lover’s Desires; how many have owed their being old Maids to their holding out too long”. When things go sour between mother and daughter, however, the result is a venomous act of retaliation on the part of Mrs. Andrews: the publication of her daughter’s letters-an act to which we owe Fielding’s “corrected” version of events. Since Richardson’s Pamela was aimed at didactically preaching the rewards of virtue, then Fielding’s parody presumes to take the same stance, mocking the original Pamela for its sexual lewdness, its rather scathing portrayal of the vices of the upper class, and its encouragement of disobedience in servants. Ironically, however, the two authors actually manage to achieve the same end-the condemnation of hypocrisy-just through very different means: Richardson through sentimentalism, Fielding through satire. Fortunately, Jane Austen was a fan of both authors, and she perfectly combines and tempers, sentimentalism and satire in her novels by adding a healthy portion of realism. True, her early short works like “Love and Friendship” and “Lesley Castle” lean more toward the absurdities of Fielding, but by Lady Susan, she has already learned to soften her satire with realism, making it clear she supports virtue and condemns vice, but not at the cost of her sense of humor. She, like Fielding, enjoys a good laugh at the follies of others, but that is because she doesn’t like to take herself or others too seriously. After all, the ability to laugh was just as important to the Austen family as the ability to pray. That said, I highly recommend the audio recording of this hilarious work, which I award five bright stars. After listening to Pamela, you will laugh out loud when you hear the same voices transform their accents, grammar, and diction, bringing to life the scandalous characters and conflicts that make Shamela an impressive example of parodic humor.
In this paragraph we have reached Richardson’s novel Pamela, or virtue rewarded, the sole novel on this course’s reading list. For those who have not gone through the reading experience themselves, we will first introduce you shortly to the main narrative and the most important themes in this novel. A few key elements will be more elaborately discussed further and we hope we can convince every one of the novel’s highly dubious status concerning its moral. The protagonist of Pamela, or virtue rewarded is Pamela, a fifteen year old servant who shares her life-story through letters and diary entries. The main narrative deals with Mr. B who tries to seduce Pamela, but she shows determination to refuse him. The novel is correctional and Mr. B evolves to finally propose marriage to Pamela, thus having gained an interest in both her mind and body, rather than merely her body. Pamela then attempts to adapt to high society and builds up a successful relationship with her husband. There are a number of themes we can distinguish in the novel, the most important ones are love, virtue, money, gender and class distinctions. Different notions of love are distinguished in this ‘love story’. Pamela engages in familial love towards her parents, in her letters and continuously throughout her writing. Sisterly love is found between Pamela and Mrs. Jervis, who share a deep friendship. The false love of Mr. B for Pamela finally transforms into true love hereby granting a ‘fairy-tale-ending’. Pamela is above all very much concerned with the preservation of her virtue, which she keeps on repeating constantly. While Mr. B wants to fulfill his ‘needs’, Pamela continues to refuse any offers of money or goods in exchange for sexual pleasures, therefore keeping herself virtuous. The moral of the novel would be that this virtuous behaviour turns out to be rewarded, since Mr. B loves Pamela all the more for her consistency in the end. The notion of money in the novel is very ambiguous. We most certainly link this to Mr. B who tries to persuade Pamela to give up her virtue in return for money, clothes and jewelry, and furthermore bribes and manipulates everyone else around him. However, Pamela’s attitude towards money and material objects in general is not always straightforward. Pamela is continuously stressing how poor her parents are which supposedly prides her. This sharply distinguishes her from her master, who is evidently better off. Between the two there is an enormous gap, since their class differences separate them. The gender difference complicates their relationship even further since Pamela is powerless in comparison to her master. The first two editions of Pamela were published anonymously. The title page stated Richardson to be the printer of the book - he was a successful printer and printed all his own novels - but the letters were supposedly found and edited by an anonymous editor. This contributed to the alleged authenticity of the letters as a “found manuscript” and constituted the figure of Pamela as a soap opera-like character that people could really identify with. Since she was put forward to be an example of good behaviour and virtue, it was necessary that as many readers as possible could identify with her. When Pamela was first published, however, it not only evoked a wave of admiration and swooning amongst its esteemed readers, it also inspired a series of parodies and what were, according to Samuel Richardson, misreadings of the novel. Richardson was unpleased to learn that part of his audience doubted Pamela’s good intentions, her sincerity and even her virtue. Highly upset about these interpretations of his work, Richardson edited the next editions of Pamela. He continuously attempted to guide the reader through the novel and control the conclusions that he thought should be drawn after reading this work. He added a preface that stated which moral values the reader should read into Pamela. He also enclosed a summary of the letters that the book consists of, stressing the main issues they touch upon. Additionally, he altered the manner of speech of the protagonist, Pamela, after having received comments that since she was to be an example for young ladies, she should speak and write in a way that was to be admired by everyone. All his attempts at controlling the readers’ interpretations were in vain: the interpretation of the novel remains a controversial topic today. Pamela’s letters serve as a catalyst to reform both the character of Mr. B and the reader of the novel, who is supposed to evolve with Mr. B as he reads them. Within the novel, these letters provide Pamela with a means to pour out her heart and seek the much-needed guidance of her parents. She uses her letters as a platform to record her true feelings and her version of the encounters between herself and her master. To Mr. B the letters are items of both frustration and admiration. He increasingly values Pamela, who wrote the letters, but is at the same time slightly tormented by the fact that he cannot control what she writes. When she is imprisoned, the letters evolve into diary entries. This symbolizes how she increasingly loses freedom and is therefore forced to rely upon herself as an authoritative figure more and more. Pamela was intended to function as a communal code of conduct or, at least, provide guidelines in terms of letter-writing.
There seem to be a number of problems in Pamela’s behaviour that indicate multiple possible interpretations of the novel’s moral, therefore many works have been written as a response to Richardson’s. Some of the works inspired by Pamela were probabilistic sequels, whereas others gave proof of a mocking undertone. A well-known work in this respect is An Apology for the Life of Mrs. Shamela Andrews, written by Henry Fielding. Shamela was published less than a year after Richardson’s Pamela and offers a satirical version of the latter. It represents the self-proclaimed real account of the events which took place in the novel by Richardson. Shamela, which is Pamela’s so-called real name, is said to be the actual seducer instead of Squire Booby, who represents the character of Mr. B, such as is illustrated in the next section: (…) ‘thank your Honour for your good Opinion,’ says I and then he took me by the Hand, and I pretended to be shy: ‘Laud,’ says I, ‘Sir, I hope you don’t intend to be rude'; ‘no’, says he, ‘my Dear’, and then he kissed me, ’till he took away my breath —-and I pretended to be Angry (…) By rewriting Richardson’s novel, Fielding reveals his frustrations with the hypocrisy of the main female character. Pamela is represented as the very essence of chastity and humility, but as becomes clear in Shamela, her behaviour is nothing but false pretence. She projects a virtuous image of herself in order to seduce.
Squire Booby and climb the social ladder. In the introduction to Shamela, Fielding explains what inspired him to write a satire: An apology for the life of Mrs. Shamela Andrews. In which, the many notorious falsehoods and misrepresentations of a book called ‘Pamela’ are exposed and refuted; and all the matchless arts of that young politician, set in a true and just light.Pamela repeatedly feels the need to express her pride in respect to her parents’ poverty and her own virtuousness. According to her, poor living conditions are to be preferred above selling one’s virtue to the highest bidder. What is strange, however, is the frequency at which she repeats this matter over and over. She regularly inserts people’s words of praise for herself and at times this comes across as presumptuous such as the section below, which originates from one of Pamela’s letters, illustrates: (…)She told me I was a pretty wench, and that everybody gave me a very good character, and loved me; and bid me take care to keep the fellows at a distance; and said, that I might do, and be more valued for it, even by themselves.(…) Another example of Pamela’s need to justify her actions and acquire praise for them occurs at the moment when she is allowed to leave the house of her late mistress. With her future life in mind, she divides her belongings into three piles. One pile is consecrated to gifts of her former mistress, a second one consists of the luxurious presents her master offered her and the final pile contains her own personal belongings. Almost dramatically Pamela declares that she cannot take any objects from the first two piles with her and strongly emphasizes to be proud of her poor origins. Despite her affirmed pride, she does take a few gifts with her for so- called practical reasons. The reason why Pamela does not take more presents with her seems to be her concern for what other people might think: ‘(…) for poor folks are envious as well as rich (…)’ .Furthermore, Pamela proves to be very materialistic throughout the novel. She constantly stresses that here poor origins and low status are something to be proud of, it appears as if she needs to convince herself of that exactly. Her materialistic attitude is apparent in her behaviour regarding clothes and appearance in general. On all occasions Pamela tries her very best to wear the nicest clothes she thinks suitable for the occasion. Not only nowadays do we consider her interestin fine clothing to be not so virtuous and innocent at all, but Mr B implies that in those days her attitude was ambiguous too: ‘who is it you put your tricks upon? I was resolved never to honour you again with my notice; and so you must disguise yourself, to attract me, and yet pretend, like an hypocrite as you are-’ ‘I beseech you sir,’ said I, ‘do not impute disguise and hypocrisy to me. I have put on no disguise.’ ‘What a plague’ said he, for that was his word, ‘do you mean then by this dress?’ The main cause of Pamela’s virtuous behaviour is her Christian upbringing. God appears to be the only higher power to which she submits. Pamela claims that her main concern is to remain chaste, so that her soul would not be lost. She resolutely wards off Mr. B.’s impure intentions, which ultimately results in him asking for her hand in marriage. However, as indicated there are some serious flaws in Pamela’s behaviour that clash with religious ideals. The moral lesson to be deduced seems to be that chaste behaviour leads to a marriage with a wealthy man. Pamela’s virtue is rewarded, because her master realises the errors of his ways after reading her letters and starts developing romantic feelings for her instead of mere lust. Nevertheless, the implied guidelines are far from those in Christian faith. In Pamela the ultimate achievement seems to be a beneficial marriage, whereas, in terms of religion, it would be to obtain a place in heaven. Therefore it could be said that the intended morality of the story is somewhat overshadowed by a materialistic fairy-tale-style ending, like Cinderella but with a touch of Beauty and the Beast. Another anti-Christian element in Pamela is to be found in a not always subtle sexual undertone. The sole purpose of Mr. B.’s flirtatious actions towards his servant is to lure her into profligate behaviour and despite the didactic purpose of inserting such behaviour, its presence would be disapproved of by religious standards. According to Christianity, the body is to be erased until marriage, after which sexuality should solely serve as a means to procreation. To make matters worse, Pamela seems to be highly concerned with wearing fine clothes in order to please her master, whom she still occasionally compliments despite his initial vile behaviour. In short, the intended morality in Pamela is at times ambiguous, because the authority of Pamela as an example for virtue is repeatedly undermined. The faith she invests in God is not represented in her strong wish to be accepted by members of the higher social classes, nor in her materialistic tendencies.