British Culture - User contributions [en]

Tom Jones

2010-01-20T12:52:53Z

A.schmitz: Created page with '== Henry Fielding´s ''The History of Tom Jones, A Foundling '' == “Henry Fielding´s ''Tom Jones'' is both one of the great comic masterpieces of English literature and a maj…'

== Henry Fielding´s ''The History of Tom Jones, A Foundling
'' ==

“Henry Fielding´s ''Tom Jones'' is both one of the great comic masterpieces of English literature and a major force in the development of the novel form.”(Nestvold) ''Tom Jones'' was first published in 1749 when the novel as a genre was only beginning to be recognized. The novel ''Clarissa'' by S. Richardson appeared only a year before, and for the most part in intellectual circles prose fiction was not considered a worthy pursuit. The sanctioned genres of the first half of the eighteenth century were verse and drama (ibid).

Other novelists still followed the seventeenth century tradition of claiming their fiction was fact, or at least that their tales were moral tracts. They emphasized the instructional rather than the fictional aspect. Fielding was the first major novelist who did not try to convince his readers that what they were reading is actually real (ibid). Fielding tried to define and explain this new genre in the introductory chapters preceding the individual books in ''Tom Jones''. He calls it a “heroical, historical prosaic poem” (IV,1) or a “prosaic-comi-epic writing” (V,1). (ibid) “In defining the novel as an epic genre, Fielding emphasized its function in presenting a broad picture of an era, but one, unlike verse epic, in which primarily the weaknesses of humanity are put on display.”(ibid) According to Fielding, the appropriate subject of the novel is human nature rather than ghosts and fairies. For him there is no space to introduce the supernatural. He rather follows the rules of probability (ibid).
According to Nestvold ''Tom Jones'' contains many conventional narrative elements as ostensibly picaresque form, inserted narrative and the discovery of true identity. Fielding was influenced by drama, his former working field.He began his career as a playwright, a journalist, and a lawyer. He accidently became a novelist, because of the closure of the theatres in London (Chu). The influence of drama on Fielding´s novels was in formal structural elements and the most obvious influence on ''Tom Jones'' was the intricacies of the plot, which are the typical confusions of comedy (Nestvold).

'''The Characters in Tom Jones
'''
In his writing Fielding does not try to create utterly good or evil characters; instead he simply depicts them as what they are: human beings (Chu). According to Rexroth Fielding is constructing a character to demonstrate a thesis and that thesis is humanity (675). The novel is not about showing an ideal character, but to show a human character with all its flaws. “He writes about human nature as it is, instead of showing us how it ought to be.” (Chu) For Fielding the human nature consists of good and evil (ibid). He had to combat the expectations of his days that required novels to be morally written. And so he created characters that were contrasting the predominant characters of the novels in his days, which were too good to be true, like Pamela or Clarissa (ibid).
“Not unlike any of us, Tom Jones, the protagonist, is rather human. He sometimes errs, but is essentially good.[…] Undeniably, his impulsive and affectionate nature gets him involved in many of his problems. But, at the same time, his actions are basically governed by benevolence and generosity.”(ibid)
Fielding frequently uses the method of contrasting pairs to manage his huge cast of characters: Tom is opposed to Blifil, Sophia to Molly and later Lady Bellaston, and Allworthy to Squire Western. The same technique is used with the minor characters: the tutors of Tom and Blifil are Thwackum, representing blind respect for authority, and Square, representing abstract ethics (Nestvold).

'''The Plot'''

The neatly constructed plot reflects a basic eighteenth century faith in the order of the world (Nestvold). It is highly symmetrical in design. One can see neo-classical elements in it, especially if you use Hilles theory. He tries to compare the structure of the plot to an architectural figure and describes it as shaped like a Palladian mansion (788). This is an abstract thought, but if you look at it as an architectual figure it may become clearer. This figure has the architectural shape of a mansion with its two wings and the central building.

Tom Jones is divided into eighteen books which can be redivided into three parts with six books each. The first six books are set in Somerset(the left wing of the mension) and give the cause of the action: Tom´s open, sensual nature; the conflict with Blifil; the misunderstanding with Squire Allworthy; Tom´s love for Sophia and their separation. The next six are set in the open road (the central building) and contain both consequences of the first six and the incidents and details which will bring about a resolution. The last six are set in London (the right wing of the building) and plunge Tom into disastrous circumstances through his actions and get him out of them again (Hilles/Nestvold).(I am sorry, I wanted to include a diagram but I could not.)This symmetry is characteristic for the early eighteenth century as one can see in its architecture and gardens. Fielding combines traditional neo-classical norms and esthetics with a new literary genre.

'''The moral double standard
'''

The moral assumptions exhibited in the novel are frankly sexist by today´s standards. “The characterization of Tom Jones displays a tolerance for virile young manhood: he is a sensual youth, easily succumbing to temptation of a sexual nature. This tolerance does not work the other way around, however; the heroine Sophia is virginal and pure, while the women who indulge in sensual pleasures are either tramps like Molly or hypocrites like Lady Bellaston.”(Nestvold) Fielding creates a moral double standard where the hero can be sensual and have affaire and still gets a happy ending whereas the female heroin has to be chaste and moral. His frank acceptance of male sensuality was regarded by many contemporaries with disapproval (ibid), because novels had to be moral.

'''Bibliography'''

'''Chu, Charles S.J.''': Artifice of Moral Teaching in Fielding´s Tom Jones. http://ir.lib.au.edu.tw/dspace/bitstream/987654321/55/1/019704173180.pdf

'''Hilles, Frederick W.''': Art and Artifice in Tom Jones. In: Henry Fielding Tom Jones. A Critical Edition. The Authoritative Text. Contemporary Reactions. Criticism. 2nd Edition.Sheridan Baker (ed.). The University of Michigan.1995.p.786-800.

'''Nestvold, Ruth''': Henry Fielding´s The History of Tom Jones, A Foundling. http://www.ruthnestvold.com/tomjones.htm

'''Rexroth, Kenneth''': Tom Jones. In: Henry Fielding Tom Jones. A Critical Edition. The Authoritative Text. Contemporary Reactions. Criticism. 2nd Edition.Sheridan Baker (ed.). The University of Michigan.1995.p.675-677.

Amelia

2009-12-13T22:04:26Z

A.schmitz: Created page with '== Henry Fiedling´s ''Amelia'' == ''Amelia'' is one of the late works of Henry Fielding and his last novel. It was published on the 18th of December 1751 (Banerji 224). This no…'

== Henry Fiedling´s ''Amelia'' ==

''Amelia'' is one of the late works of Henry Fielding and his last novel. It was published on the 18th of December 1751 (Banerji 224). This novel represents Fielding´s changed attitude towards brothels, prostitution, adultery, and the loose living (Dickie 115). According to Dickie his early works were shaped by his notorious libertinism and impiety of his youth (ibid.). Now he tries to deal with the loose living in a different way.

In ''Amelia'' Fielding tried to used sentimentality which he before had often criticized and despised, e.g. in Richardson (Banerji 236). And for the first time he put an idealized woman figure at the center of his fiction (Dickie 115). But this novel was not a success, it was criticized for its imperfection and low style (Banerji 225). And indeed, Fielding made many mistakes which The London Magazine calls “glaring anachronisms” in his novel (ibid.). A famous mistake is, that he has forgotten to mention that the nose of his heroine, which was destroyed during an accident, had been fixed afterwards (ibid.). This mistake enabled many of Fielding´s enemies and critics to make fun of him and his novel. “In a culture in which flattened or disfigured noses were the funniest of all deformities and inevitably associated with syphilis, Fielding´s noseless heroine provoked a torrent of travesties and lewd commentaries that turned Amelia into a whore.” (Dickie 116) So there was a huge gap between Fielding´s intention to draw the picture of an ideal and moral woman and the way people, and especially critics have read the novel. According to Dickie, Fielding´s intention was to show that Amelia´s bodily imperfection is a verification of her virtue. For him her looks were not as important as her charming personality (117). But than again one asks oneself why he corrected his mistake in later editions and stresses the fact that her nose was fixed and everything that is left is a tiny scar which rather added to her beauty (Banerji 228).

There is another character in the novel who has a deformed nose, and that is Blear-Eyed Moll who is a prostitute. And “most critics describe Moll as a purely negative foil, a particularly vivid embodiment of the depravity and brutal absurdity of the world, an emblem of everything that Amelia is not.”( Dickie 121) Even if Fielding wanted to draw an ideal picture of Amelia, on tends to associate her with Moll, and by this she gets a negative connotation (ibid.) According to Dickie “Amelia is a gravely compromised exemplar of female chastity […].”(ibid. 119) And indeed, Amelia is not as ideal as one supposes. “At several points the narrator suddenly looks us in the eye to declare that Amelia is vain and easily flattered just like every other woman. She feels a secret satisfaction at the compliments of Mrs. Ellison.”(ibid. 129) For Dickie this uncertain handling of sexual morality is not surprising, because almost anywhere else Fielding treated chastity rather skeptically (119). Fielding even suggests that chastity is something unnatural and he creates many very likable lewd women characters throughout his early works (ibid. 120). But as I mentioned above this view on sexuality has changed in his later works. Still one can see that it is difficult for Fielding to create an ideal character, and thus Dickie concludes that he fails in his attempt to do so (116).

According to Banerji many critics have seen autobiographical aspects in this novel.E.g. Fielding´s first wife Charlotte should have been the model for Amelia. “Many circumstances in Amelia´s life history as related in the novel, for example, her living with her widowed mother and sister at the time Booth courted her, her mother´s bequest of the bulk of her property to her and the chequered course of her married life, leave little room for doubt that Fielding´s beautiful and devoted first wife was the original of the heroine of his last novel.”(Banerji 231) Charlotte too had an accident where her nose was damaged (ibid. 230). Still Banerji warns that “[…] it would be hazardous to carry the identifications any further than this, though one is greatly tempted to read something of the history of Fielding´s own life in Booth´s experiences.”(231)

Bibliography

Banerji, H.K.: Henry Fielding. Playwright, Journalist and Master of the Art of Fiction. His Life and Works. Russell & Russell. NY.1962.

Dickie, Simon: Amelia, Sex, and Fielding´s Woman Question. In: Henry Fielding (1707-1754). Novelist, Playwright, Journalist, Magistrate. A Double Anniversary Tribute. Claude Rawson (ed.). University of Delaware Press. 2008.

Earl of Mar and the '15

2009-11-03T12:06:33Z

A.schmitz:

The Earl of Mar and the ´15

The organizer and leader of the rebellion in Scotland was the Earl of Mar. He was a former pro-Unionist and Secretary of State for Scotland in Queen Anne´s last ministry (Szechi p.77). One of the reasons for the rebellion seems to be Mar´s political ambitions. According to Szechi and Nicholson he was trying to maintain his power (p.77).

Mar had been a supporter of the Treaty Union and had helped ensure the easy transition of the monarchy to the House of Hanover. When he was rejected by George I, because the Whigs convinced the king that Mar had Jacobite sympathies, his only hope of a political future was by switching his support to the exiled House of Stewart (Nicholson). His reputation for changing sides when it suited him earned him the sobriquet ‘Bobbing John’ (Nicholson).

The Jacobite standard was raised on 6 September 1715 in the north-east Highlands. There was wide support for the rebellion and the Jacobite forces initially vastly outnumbered the British government forces. If Mar had taken swift and vigorous action success would have been certain (Nicholson). But he had no idea how to run an army, still less how to conduct a military campaign. Hence the advances the rebels made and the success they scored in September and October 1715 in northern and western Scotland, such as the Master of Sinclair´s Burntisland raid, were almost entirely due to the dash and initiative of his subordinates. Instead of attacking the tiny government garrison in Scotland as soon as he had the opportunity, Mar camped at Perth and awaited French reinforcement (Szechi p.77).

The Duke of Argyll, commander of the government forces in Scotland, had a much smaller number of men than Mar alone. Another Jacobite army in the south also wasted time and instead of attacking Argyll, marched into England with the intention of raising Lancashire (Nicholson).

The Mar´s and Argyll´s armies encountered each other at Sherrifmuir on 13 November in an indecisive clash that glaringly reveals the nature of the Jacobite failure in the ´15 (Szechi p.78). They had failed to seize the moment. Mar could have destroyed Argyll´s army but instead of attacking the last bits he withdrew from the field claiming victory – leaving Argyll´s army battered but intact (Szechi p.78).

Not only Mar had failed in seizing the moment. The exiled Stewart ‘king’, James VIII of Scotland, did not land in Scotland until 22 December 1715 by which time the government had regained the initiative. The Duke of Argyll had received reinforcements of battle-hardened Dutch troops (Nicholson). By February 1716 it was clear that Argyll had more than sufficient forces to crush the Jacobites if they dared to offer battle (Szeci p.78).
On 4 February 1716 James admitted defeat and returned to France with Mar (Szechi p.78/Nicholson).

Bibliography:
Szechi, Daniel: The Jacobites.Britain and Europe 1688-1788.Manchester University Press.1994.
Nicholson, Len: www.biggrowl.co.uk/JACOBITE.HTM

Earl of Mar and the '15

2009-11-03T12:05:43Z

A.schmitz: Created page with 'The Earl of Mar and the ´15 The organizer and leader of the rebellion in Scotland was the Earl of Mar. He was a former pro-Unionist and Secretary of State for Scotland in Queen…'

The Earl of Mar and the ´15

The organizer and leader of the rebellion in Scotland was the Earl of Mar. He was a former pro-Unionist and Secretary of State for Scotland in Queen Anne´s last ministry (Szechi p.77). One of the reasons for the rebellion seems to be Mar´s political ambitions. According to Szechi and Nicholson he was trying to maintain his power (p.77).

Mar had been a supporter of the Treaty Union and had helped ensure the easy transition of the monarchy to the House of Hanover. When he was rejected by George I, because the Whigs convinced the king that Mar had Jacobite sympathies, his only hope of a political future was by switching his support to the exiled House of Stewart (Nicholson). His reputation for changing sides when it suited him earned him the sobriquet ‘Bobbing John’ (Nicholson).

The Jacobite standard was raised on 6 September 1715 in the north-east Highlands. There was wide support for the rebellion and the Jacobite forces initially vastly outnumbered the British government forces. If Mar had taken swift and vigorous action success would have been certain (Nicholson). But he had no idea how to run an army, still less how to conduct a military campaign. Hence the advances the rebels made and the success they scored in September and October 1715 in northern and western Scotland, such as the Master of Sinclair´s Burntisland raid, were almost entirely due to the dash and initiative of his subordinates. Instead of attacking the tiny government garrison in Scotland as soon as he had the opportunity, Mar camped at Perth and awaited French reinforcement (Szechi p.77).

The Duke of Argyll, commander of the government forces in Scotland, had a much smaller number of men than Mar alone. Another Jacobite army in the south also wasted time and instead of attacking Argyll, marched into England with the intention of raising Lancashire (Nicholson).

The Mar´s and Argyll´s armies encountered each other at Sherrifmuir on 13 November in an indecisive clash that glaringly reveals the nature of the Jacobite failure in the ´15 (Szechi p.78). They had failed to seize the moment. Mar could have destroyed Argyll´s army but instead of attacking the last bits he withdrew from the field claiming victory – leaving Argyll´s army battered but intact (Szechi p.78).

Not only Mar had failed in seizing the moment. The exiled Stewart ‘king’, James VIII of Scotland, did not land in Scotland until 22 December 1715 by which time the government had regained the initiative. The Duke of Argyll had received reinforcements of battle-hardened Dutch troops (Nicholson). By February 1716 it was clear that Argyll had more than sufficient forces to crush the Jacobites if they dared to offer battle (Szeci p.78).
On 4 February 1716 James admitted defeat and returned to France with Mar (Szechi p.78/Nicholson).

Bibliography
Szechi, Daniel: The Jacobites.Britain and Europe 1688-1788.Manchester University Press.1994.
Nicholson, Len: www.biggrowl.co.uk/JACOBITE.HTM