'Pamela' in Richardson's 'Pamela'

[SwiftianSoldier]

Hello everyone, I just registered to this site a few minutes ago with an interest of discussing literary texts with other people online. I'm aged 20, and studying English and History in university at the moment, and have discovered myself to have a much more interest in older works of literature rather than the crap produced today. My favorite writer, as my name probably suggests, is Jonathan Swift.

Most recently I have been reading 'Pamela', by Richardson, and as I progress through my reading of this text, I am getting irritated with the main protagonist, Pamela. There is little doubt in my mind now, that she appears to be vain, hypocritical, and the object of her own sorrows. While she may keep her physical 'virtue', I think she does so in an unvirtual manner. I definitely do not see her as the perfect little doll face that every young lady should aspire to.
I understand that the nature of the narration, being predominately told from Pamela's eyes, causes complications in the narrative and that her repeated comments on how everyone loves and adores her could be a literary necessity to emphasise her appeal to those around her, rather than intending for her to appear vain, and we are told ourselves that Richardson's plan in the writing of the text is instructional as to how young ladies should behave. I grow increasingly irritated as I read through this book, and I will provide examples if / when this thread picks up, as to why I feel as I do.
Basically, to those of you who ave read 'Pamela', what do you make of her?

N.B. I am only on Journal Day 25 or so, at the moment.

[dfloyd]

written as a series of letters. Because the protaganist writes the letters, we only know of her side of the story. And she is only 15 years old at the time the letters begin. Considered by some to be the first novel written in English, it is only read by some for its content as a history of the novel.

Richardson's other novel, Clarissa, is a better read in that he allows other characters to be included in Clarissa's letters. The epistolary format was extremely popular in the 18th century, but it is somewhat tedious for the modern reader.

Perhaps you started too far bck in the history of the novel. You might try Humphrey Clinker by Smollet as your starting point into the English novel.

Others feel that the History of Tom Jones, a Foundling is the real first English novel since it contains a protagnist, a heroine, a conflict, and a climax. Don't criticisize Richardoson too much, and just read it as an episode in the evolution of the novel.

I am certain you will find Tom Jones more to your liking. But even Fielding wrote a tedious novel entitled Amelia. Tom Jones and Joseph Andrews will show you how the novel rapidly progressed into its better known form.

The American patriot, author of the Declaration of Independence, ambassador, and President of the United States found Tom Jones to be a work of genius.

[OrphanPip]

Pamela, Pamela, Pamela, anyone who works in 18th Century studies can't avoid that novel. The novel was ground breaking in a special way, it took the epistolary form in English to an extreme it had never been attempted in. So, Richardson tries some funny experiments, like Pamela always talking about how everyone is always saying how great she is. There's also those funny little episodes of "writing to the moment" where Pamela starts narrating in the present.

Politically it was quite progressive for the time. The idea that a low born girl could be virtuous and deserving of being raised up in society was not a common one. Richardson also does his best to represent Pamela realistically, and the novel is a key point in the movement towards psychological realism (If you pay close attention, Pamela's cultural references are Biblical and folk tales, the Classical never appears). You are actually expected to think of Pamela's motivations and her interior virtue. Prior to Richardson you really only see that degree of realism in some moments of Defoe. And Richardson became such an international sensation in Europe that he arguably influenced the course of European prose as a whole.

I'll admit, I'm not a Pamelist, I am much more inclined to the opinions of the anti-Pamelist. The novel becomes pretty unbearable after their marriage and it starts to become an instruction manual for the perfect 18th Century wife.

If you are annoyed by Pamela you might like Fielding's Shamela, it's very short and worth reading while Pamela is still fresh in your mind.

Also, feel free to talk about anything 18th Century, because it's rare I ever encounter anyone on here talking about the period. I'm better versed in the theatre of the period, although I'm familiar with most of major novels too.

[SwiftianSoldier]

Thank you for the responses gentlemen.
I definitely do agree with you, 'dfloyd' with regards to Pamela's age and the nature of the narration, that we essentially only get to see things from her perspective and how she interprets certain events. It would be hard to emphasise Pamela's virtue without sounding somewhat vain, through her eyes, so this may be just a literary problem to the device used, rather than willingly want to portray her in such a light.
I've heard 'Clarissa' as a much better read, but I probably wouldn't be reading it anytime soon, or at least not until I get through the college material that I have to read as manditory.
The course in which this text pertains to, that I am doing, is 'The Birth of Narratives: The Rise of The Novel' so I certainly expect the essay questions to be more about the social and political background etc., and the rise and development of the novel rather than dissecting the novel and interpreting it. So your idea of 'Pamela' being read for the history of the novel.

Indeed OrphanPip, apparently the first 'bestseller' as well? With china and the like being dedicated to the work. I definitely agree with your idea of psychological realism in this text. I have just finished Volume I, and looking back I would say her affection for Mr. B can be seen from the start, in a way, even if she does not consciously realise it. I myself would interpret her refusal to leave Bedfordshire until she has finished Mr. B's garment as a mere excuse for her to stay longer. And deciding not to flee Lincolnshire because of two bulls seems ridiculous to me after her having said she would rather die than lose her virtue. To me, she screams a vain, confused and paranoid child that loves attention, but I suppose she is a child. And I know that Richardson made edits to the work numerous times to combat his critics, but I definitely don't see Pamela in the shining light of innocence.
The next book I will be reading is Fielding's 'Shamela' :P.
The books on my course are as follows:
1. Daniel Defoe, Robinson Crusoe

2. Aphra Behn, Oronooko

3. Samuel Richardson, Pamela

4. Henry Fielding, Joseph Andrews and Shamela

5. Jonathan Swift, Gulliver’s Travels

6. Laurence Sterne, Tristram Shandy

So far I have read 'Robinson Crusoe', 'Oronooko', 'Gulliver's Travels' and half of 'Pamela'. Other texts of Swift that I have read are 'Tale of a Tub' and his essay 'A modest Proposal', so I suppose I will get brownie points in my essays for comparing these briefly to 'Gulliver's Travels'.

I personally can't stand Austen, on a side note. I don't know if it was perhaps a bad introduction to her work, but I read some of 'Sense and Sensibility' and I could not stand it, haha.

[OrphanPip]

It's a good reading list, I'd probably add some variety with something like Caleb Williams or Castle of Otranto so you could get a sense of the movement towards the gothic novel. And maybe end it with Fanny Burney's Evelina because she forms a good bridge between Fielding and Richardson.

I imagine your prof is working off the model of the "rise of the novel" made famous by Ian Watt back in the 70s. Critics have been chipping away at his model for decades, but it is still a very compelling vision, and the predominant view in academia. If your library has a copy of The Rise of the Novel you might benefit from giving it a quick read through. It's short and easy to read.

Michael McKeon is the current top critic working in the development of prose, but his books are dense with theory and will probably give you a bit of a headache. He does have a more nuanced approach to the history of the novel in English, and if you want to really get into the contextual debates about truth and fiction it is worth looking at. They also could serve as a sort of improvised weapon if the need arises, since they are quite large.

[Charles Darnay]

I find Pamela a completely irritating character. I gave up on her after the part with the bull.....that was just too much, and really justifies what Fielding does in both Joseph Andrews and Shamela.

My dislike for Pamela was only heightened when I read Clarissa: anything good about Pamela, Clarissa does better, and Clarissa is a far superior protagonist to Pamela, and Lovelace a better antagonist than B.

As for your reading list, Tristram Shandy is the best one on there. I cannot speak highly enough about that book, it is the most fun you will have with a book.