Joseph Andrews as a
Picaresque Novel:
The title page of Henry Fielding’s first novel reads as follows: “The
history of the adventures of Joseph Andrews and of his friend Mr. Abraham
Adams, Written in imitation of the Manner of Cervantes, Author of Don Quixote.” The
allusion to Cervantes and his masterpiece Don Quixote is significant as it
shows Fielding’s indebtedness to Cervantes. Parson Adams is indeed a truly
Quixotic figure, and the structure of the book also follows Cervantes’
picaresque model. Joseph Andrews is a novel of adventures met while travelling
on the road. Joseph loses his employment in Lady Booby’s service in London, on
his way home to the country to his sweetheart Fanny, he meets Parson Adams.
Together they run all kinds of adventures meeting a host of characters from low
and middle-class layers of society: innkeepers, chambermaids, country squires
and clergymen.
The picaresque tradition belongs to Spain and derived from the
word “picaro”, meaning a rogue or a villain. The picaresque
originally involved the misadventure of the rogue-hero, mainly on the highway.
Soon, however, the rogue was replaced by a conventional hero – gallant and
chivalric. The comic element lay in the nature of the hero’s adventures,
through which, generally, society was satirized.
Fielding’s affinity with picaresque model appears first of all in the representation of rogue and villainy; secondly, in the humorous style which often takes a mock-heroic turn, and in the geniality of temperament; thirdly, in the portrait of characters of certain lower classes of men and women; and finally, in the humorous or satiric descriptions of the contents of the chapters and the introduction of side stories or episodes into the main narrative.
Thus, the journey in Joseph Andrews is not a mere picaresque
rambling, a device solely for the purpose of introducing new adventures such as
we find in the classic picaresque story, , but an allegorical journey, a moral
pilgrimage, from the vanity and corruption of the city-life to the relative
naturalness and simplicity of the country. The picaresque motif helps Fielding
to fulfill his aim of ridiculing the affectations of human beings. The
different strata of society can be represented through the picaresque mode. The
travelers meet squires, innkeepers, landladies, persons, philosophers, lawyers
and surgeons, beggars, pedlars and robbers and rogues. Fielding’s satire is
pungent as he presents the worldly and crafty priests and the callous, vicious
and inhuman country squires. Malice, selfishness, vanities, hypocrisies, lack
of charity, all are ridiculed as human follies.
The Picaresque novel is the loosest in plot – the hero is
literally let loose on the high road for his adventures. The hero wanders from
place to place encountering thieves and rogues, rescuing damsels in distress,
fighting duels, falling in love, being thrown in prison, and meeting a vast
section of society. As the hero meets a gamut of characters from the country
squire to the haughty aristocrat, from hypocrite to ill-tempered soldiers, the
writer is able to introduce with the least possible incongruity, the saint and
the sinner, the virtuous and the vicious. The writer has a chance to present
the life, culture and morality prevalent in his time, and to satirize the
evils.
Fielding acknowledged his debt to Cervantes, whose Don Quixote is
the best known picaresque novel in Spanish.
Like the Don Quixote and Panza, Parson Adams and Joseph set out on
a journey which involves them in a series of adventures, some of them
burlesque, at several country inns or rural houses. Like the Don, Parson Adams
is a dreamy idealist. But there are differences, too, between Joseph Andrews
and the picaresque tradition, vital enough to consider Fielding’s novel as
belonging to the genre of its own.
The central journey in Joseph Andrews is not mainly a quest for
adventure as it is in the picaresque tradition. It is a sober return journey
homewards. Joseph and Lady Booby are taken to London and the reader is given a
glimpse of society’s ways in that great city.
It is in Chapter 10 of Book I that the picaresque element enters
the novel, with Joseph setting out in a borrowed coat towards home. The
picaresque tradition is maintained uptil the end of Book III. Joseph meets with
the first misadventure when he is set upon by robbers, beaten, stripped and
thrown unconscious into a ditch. A passing stage-coach and its passengers very
reluctantly convey Joseph to an inn. The incident gives ample scope to Fielding
for satirizing the pretences and affectations of an essentially inhuman
society.
The Tow-wouse Inn provides a grim picture of callous human beings
– the vain and ignorant surgeon and the drinking parson. Once again kindness
and generosity come from an apparently immoral girl, Betty the chambermaid.
With the arrival of Parson Adams, the picaresque journey takes on a more
humorous tone, with plenty of farce. The encounter with the “Patriot” who would
like to see all cowards banged but who turns tail at the first sight of danger,
leads to the meeting with Fanny. She is rescued by Adams in proper
picaresque-romance style with hero. Several odd characters are met on the way –
such as the hunting squire – the squire who makes false promises. Then comes
the abduction of Fanny – and the reintroduction of something more serious.
We also have the interpolated stories, which belong to the
picaresque tradition. In his use of this device, Fielding shows how far he has
come from the picaresque school.
To conclude, Joseph Andrews has a rather rambling and discursive
narrative, which makes us to believe that it is a picaresque novel. But, on the
whole, it is not a picaresque novel rather the picaresque mode has helped him
in the development of his comic theory – that of ridiculing the affectations of
human beings.
“Joseph Andrews” a comic epic in prose:
It is true that we can term “Joseph
Andrews” as a ‘comic epic poem in prose’ because
it has almost all the prerequisites that are important for labeling it as
a ‘comic epic poem in prose’.
Fielding himself termed it as a ‘comic
epic poem in prose’ in the “Preface to Joseph Andrews”. The impetus for the novel, as Fielding claims in the
preface, is the establishment of a genre of writing "which I do not remember to have been hitherto
attempted in our language",
defined as the "comic epic
in prose": a work of prose
fiction, epic in length and variety of incident and character. Fielding
has combined the ideal of ‘comic epic’ and the ‘prose
epic’ to produce what he termed as ‘comic epic poem in
prose’.The comic tone of the novel is
enhanced by the mock-heroic style, for Fielding admitted burlesque in the
diction. It is instrumental in heightening the ridiculous nature of situation
and affectations.
A heroic epic has
a towering hero, grand theme, a continuous action, a journey to
underworld, wars, digressions, discovery, high seriousness, a high moral lesson
and bombastic diction in it and in“Joseph Andrews” there
is an ordinary hero, a journey from one place to another place, mock-wars,
digressions, discovery, humour, a high moral and a bombastic
diction in it. Unlike a heroic epic, the hero of “Joseph
Andrews” is an ordinary boy. He is a foot-man of Lady
Booby who has fallen in love with him. But Joseph is very virtuous and
chaste and therfore is dismissed from his job. We can call “Joseph
Andrews” as “The Odyssey on the road” because
both the works, Homer’s “Odyssey” and Fielding’s “Joseph
Andrews” in the first place involve a journey. Like
Odysseus, Joseph Andrews after the displeasure of a lady, sets out on his way
home and meets with many misfortunes on the way. So it would be fairly
justified to call Joseph Andrews “ an epic of the highway full of adventures, horseplay and not too
decent fun.”
Through the journey of
Joseph, Fielding satirizes the society of the day and ridicules them. The
corrupt and hypocritical clergy, Parson Trilluber and Parson Barnabas, individual
like Lady Booby and Mrs. Slipslop, the Squire of Fools and the Squire of False
Promises have been satirized.
The element of wars and conflicts is very important in an epic and it is no exception in “Joseph Andrews”. First of all, there is a conflict between lusty advances of lady Booby and Mrs. Slipslop and chastity of Joseph. Also there is a conflict between generosity of Parson Adams and misely Parson Trulliber and Mrs. Tow- Wouse.Then we see some real action in the form of a war in an inn where Joseph was insulted by the host. Parson Adams was annoyed and challenged the host. There started the first war between both the parties. The funny situation of the bloody fight in which Parson Adams gets doused in hog’s blood is described in Homeric terms. Then Parson Adams rescues Fanny from a ruffian and then, a squire attacks Parson Adams with his hounds and a fierce battle is fought between hunter’s hounds and parson Adams. Joseph’s encounter with the dogs let loose on Parson Adams is described in epic-style. Similarly There are many other epical elements in the novel to call it a comic epic.
Another epic convention is the use of digression. There are two major digressions in “Joseph Andrews”. There are, seemingly, irrelevant stories of Leonara and Mr. Wilson. Epic writers considered them as embellishments. Fielding, however, makes the interpolations thematically relevant. For, these are not irrelevant in reality.
The formula of discovery, as described by Aristotle, an essential element of an epic, has also been used by Fielding. In the end of the novel, we see that Joseph is recognized to be Mr. Wilson’s child and Fanny as the sister of virtuous Pamela.
High seriousness is an important element in epic. But in “Joseph Andrews” there is a great deal of comedy and humour, because it is a comic epic novel; indeed in Joseph Andrews the comic point of view is sustained throughout the novel. But behind this comedy, there lies a serious purpose of reformation. We have a gamut of vain and hypocritical characters in Parson Trilluber, Parson Barnabas, passengers in the stage-coach, Mr. Tow-wouse, Mrs. Slipslop, Peter Pounce and the various Squires. The surgeon and the lawyer and the magistrate are also some other example of hypocrisy and vanity. Each of these characters provides a great deal of humour and amusement under a serious purpose.
The element of wars and conflicts is very important in an epic and it is no exception in “Joseph Andrews”. First of all, there is a conflict between lusty advances of lady Booby and Mrs. Slipslop and chastity of Joseph. Also there is a conflict between generosity of Parson Adams and misely Parson Trulliber and Mrs. Tow- Wouse.Then we see some real action in the form of a war in an inn where Joseph was insulted by the host. Parson Adams was annoyed and challenged the host. There started the first war between both the parties. The funny situation of the bloody fight in which Parson Adams gets doused in hog’s blood is described in Homeric terms. Then Parson Adams rescues Fanny from a ruffian and then, a squire attacks Parson Adams with his hounds and a fierce battle is fought between hunter’s hounds and parson Adams. Joseph’s encounter with the dogs let loose on Parson Adams is described in epic-style. Similarly There are many other epical elements in the novel to call it a comic epic.
Another epic convention is the use of digression. There are two major digressions in “Joseph Andrews”. There are, seemingly, irrelevant stories of Leonara and Mr. Wilson. Epic writers considered them as embellishments. Fielding, however, makes the interpolations thematically relevant. For, these are not irrelevant in reality.
The formula of discovery, as described by Aristotle, an essential element of an epic, has also been used by Fielding. In the end of the novel, we see that Joseph is recognized to be Mr. Wilson’s child and Fanny as the sister of virtuous Pamela.
High seriousness is an important element in epic. But in “Joseph Andrews” there is a great deal of comedy and humour, because it is a comic epic novel; indeed in Joseph Andrews the comic point of view is sustained throughout the novel. But behind this comedy, there lies a serious purpose of reformation. We have a gamut of vain and hypocritical characters in Parson Trilluber, Parson Barnabas, passengers in the stage-coach, Mr. Tow-wouse, Mrs. Slipslop, Peter Pounce and the various Squires. The surgeon and the lawyer and the magistrate are also some other example of hypocrisy and vanity. Each of these characters provides a great deal of humour and amusement under a serious purpose.
Every epic has a moral lesson in it and this is no exception with a comic epic. Fielding’s views on morality are practical, full of common sense and tolerance, liberal, flexible and more realistic. These are devoid of prudish and rigid codes. Fielding wanted to tear the veil of vanity and hypocrisy.
The use of grand, bombastic and elevated language is an important element in an epic. It has heroic diction. But in “Joseph Andrews” we see that Fielding has used prose for poetry because it brings us close to the real and actual life and it is much more suitable for Fielding’s purpose of dealing with comic epic. However, his use of prose is very good, up to the mark and apt for his novel.
So, we can conclude that the
theory of the ‘comic epic poem in prose’ as described
by Fielding in the preface of “Joseph Andrews” manifests
itself in the novel. Fielding has assimilated the rules and adapted them to his
way of writing so well that we are not consciously aware of the formal
principles which give unity to his materials. According to Thornbury, “Joseph
Andrews” by Fielding is: “An art which conceals art,
but is the art of a conscious artist.”
Realism in Joseph Andrews:
Realism means conceiving
and representing the things as they are. Henry Fielding is widely
regarded as the first great realist in English novel. He is among the few
writers who, despite the wideness of their scope are capable of observing the
demands of reality with perpetual ease. His novels hold up to view a
representative picture of his age. He is as authentic a chronicler of his day
as Chaucer was of the later 14th century.
It is true that
Richardson and Defoe have some claim to have brought realism to English
fiction, it is Fielding who can be called the real pioneer in realistic mode of
novel writing. Fielding reacted against Richardson’s
sentimentalism as a falsifying influence on the study of reality, although he
does not reject sentimentalism altogether. “His desire”,
says Cazamian, “is to give sentiment its right place; but also to
integrate it in an organic series of tendencies where each contributes to
maintain a mutual balance.”
Fielding’s realism is
called “universal realism” as well as global. As
Fielding says in the Preface to “Joseph Andrews”:“I believe I might aver
that I have writ little more than I have seen.”
Fielding’s novels present the fairly comprehensive picture of
English society in 18th century. Though Fielding does not give us material
about the environment of the people, yet their mental and moral
characteristics are displayed with “power of realism”.
The landlords, landladies, doctors, lawyers, clergyman, postilions and coachmen
– all go towards making the picture of society as comprehensive as possible. Fielding
rejects burlesque and caricature, inspiring laughter with humour and amazing
realism. The novel is infused with compassion, comedy, and a heightened sense
of realism, which together turn into a vivid manifestation of the cankers of
the society.
The eighteenth century
society which appears on the pages of “Joseph Andrews” is not
very pleasant picture. It is marked by an astounding callousness and
selfishness. The insensitive hardness of such a
society is brilliantly portrayed by stage-coach passengers who are reluctant to
admit the naked wounded Joseph on account of various pretexts. Only the
poor postillion offers a great coat “his only garment”, and
vows that he would rather remain in a shirt than “suffer a
fellow-creature to lie in so miserable a condition.” The surgeon, who
is summoned to look at Joseph’s wounds at the inn, refuses to come out of his
comfortable bed for a mere foot passenger. Parson Trulliber,
who uses his Christian teachings to speak against beggars and refuses to lend
Adam even a few shillings, scornfully declares: “I know what
charity is better than to give it to vagabonds.”
We have also flashes
of kindness amongst this all repressive inhumanity. Parson
Adams, the postilion, the reformed Mr. Wilson, Betty the
chambermaid and four peddlers are only ones to act with generosity.
The society is divided into clear cut classes – the high and the low. Dudden notices a " gulf which seems to separate the classes–the ‘high people' from the ‘low people..."
The society is divided into clear cut classes – the high and the low. Dudden notices a " gulf which seems to separate the classes–the ‘high people' from the ‘low people..."
The two classes
may have dealings with one another in private, as Fielding tells us, but
they scrupulously refuse to recognize each other in public. The rich
regard themselves as the better and superior in every sense to the
poor. Lady Booby could not think in her wildest dreams of admitting Adams to
her table, for she considers him to be badly dressed. Mrs. Slipslop does not
deign to recognize a ‘nobody’ like Fanny at an inn. While Fielding exposes such
behaviour to ridicule, we realize the hollow pretension of a society which
indulged in so much of affectation.
The professional classes in general show a marked inefficiency and indifference. They do not take their work seriously. Parson Barnabas, Parson Trulliber, the rural magistrate, the Lawyer Scout – all are the illustration of the corrupt and selfish aristcracy of the day. Parson Adams is merely one good being against so many bad clergymen.
In his novel, Fielding has concentrated more on the countryside. But the little that he describes of town society is enough to give us its characteristics. The wealthy society of the town shows a high degree of degeneracy. The story of Mr. Wilson and Leonora as well as Joseph short stay in London provide us with the clear idea about the vulgarity, degeneration of morals, the vanity and hypocrisy which infested town society.
Fielding represents human nature as truthfully as he presents the society. Fielding effuses realism into his characters and his vivid dialogues. He presents before us the complete reality and does not intentionally ignore anything. In his Preface Fielding writes: “I have scarce a character or action produced which I have not taken from my own observations and experience.”
The professional classes in general show a marked inefficiency and indifference. They do not take their work seriously. Parson Barnabas, Parson Trulliber, the rural magistrate, the Lawyer Scout – all are the illustration of the corrupt and selfish aristcracy of the day. Parson Adams is merely one good being against so many bad clergymen.
In his novel, Fielding has concentrated more on the countryside. But the little that he describes of town society is enough to give us its characteristics. The wealthy society of the town shows a high degree of degeneracy. The story of Mr. Wilson and Leonora as well as Joseph short stay in London provide us with the clear idea about the vulgarity, degeneration of morals, the vanity and hypocrisy which infested town society.
Fielding represents human nature as truthfully as he presents the society. Fielding effuses realism into his characters and his vivid dialogues. He presents before us the complete reality and does not intentionally ignore anything. In his Preface Fielding writes: “I have scarce a character or action produced which I have not taken from my own observations and experience.”
Fielding does not
project realistic picture of society for mere entertainment. He has
a moral purpose behind the realism. To laugh making out of
folly is his professed aim. He satirizes people in order to
reform them:“I have endeavored to laugh at mankind, out to their follies and
vices.”
Fielding shows
a broad tendency of realism in “Joseph Andrews”. Social,
psychological, individual as well as moral reality can be seen
in the novel.
“As a painter of real
life, he was equal to Hogarth; as a mere observer of human nature he was little
inferior to Shakespeare.”
He not merely presented society but also criticized it in order to
make the world a better place to live in.
Parson Adams: Character Analysis
Although Fielding's first novel bears the title Joseph Andrews, its main interest centers in Parson Adams. The immense popularity enjoyed by the novel can be fully attributed to him. In fact, it is difficult to imagine even the existence of this novel without the endearing figure of the absent–minded Parson Adams. “If he is not the real hero of the book”,says Dobson,”he is undoubtedly the character whose fortunes the reader follows with the closest interest.”
Although Fielding's first novel bears the title Joseph Andrews, its main interest centers in Parson Adams. The immense popularity enjoyed by the novel can be fully attributed to him. In fact, it is difficult to imagine even the existence of this novel without the endearing figure of the absent–minded Parson Adams. “If he is not the real hero of the book”,says Dobson,”he is undoubtedly the character whose fortunes the reader follows with the closest interest.”
Dudden remarks:“The agreeable youngman, Joseph may be the
centre of plot; but it is the ‘old foolish parson’ that is the centre of
interest.”
Adams is one of the most original creations; Fielding himself
claims that he is ‘not to be found in any book now extant’. Fielding
explains in his preface that he has made Adams a clergyman "since
no other office could have given him so many opportunities of displaying his
worthy inclinations”. While all other characters remain
types, Adams emerges as an individual. He is a positive force not
only as a clergyman who puts his principles of charity into practice, but as a
man who manages to confront the physical obstacles of the world in the most
awkward ways, and prides himself rather too much as a teacher of Latin and as a
writer of sermons.
Adams’ physical appearance is really interesting. He has a “comical
face, with bearded chin and deeply wrinkled cheeks”, a
fist “rather less than the knuckle of an ox”, with a wrist, ”which
Hercules would not have been ashamed of”. His legs are so long that
they almost touch the ground when he drives on his horse’s back. He usually
wears a “tattered old cassock” and a “periwig” on
his head. In addition, he is in the habit of snapping his fingers. He has so
shabby an appearnce that Parson Trulliber mistakes him for a hog-dealer.
Adams serves as the novel's moral touchstone;Fielding
bestowed on his exemplary parson, childlike innocence: “He is an
innocent … so completely sincere in his beliefs and actions that he can’t
imagine insincerity in other; he takes everyone he meets at face-value”. Adams
is a dreamy idealist;he is as ignorant of the world of his own day “as
an infant just entered into it could possibly be”. The devious
ways of contemporary mankind are quite beyond his comprehension. Being naïve
and guileless he is constantly imposed upon. He is easily taken in by the
sentimental bragging of pseudo-patriot as by the pious platitudes of hypocrical
Parson Trulliber. Adams’ endless tribulations at the hands of others serve as
an index of society’s alienation from ethical and moral codes.
Although simpelton and naïve , Adams is a man of
exceptional learning. Educated at the university of Cambridge, he has made
himself familiar with many languages, and, in particular, has acquired masterly
knowledge of the Greak and Latin:
“Mr. Abraham Adams was an excellent
Scholar. He was a perfect Master of the Greek and Latin Languages; to which he
added a great Share of Knowledge in the Oriental Tongues...”
His favourite author, however, is
Aeschylus and he carries a transcript of Aeschylean tragedies for more than
thirty years. With the modern literature --- except a few books of
divinity---he does does not have even a nodding acquaintance. The history of
last thousand years is to him almost a blank.
Parson Adams is only a curate. He lives in the parsonage in Sir
Thomas Booby’s parish.He is about fifty years old and has a wife and six
children whom he can barely support on his very small income as a curate. He
considers all his parishioners, especially Joseph and Fanny, as his children. In
contrast with Parson Trulliber and Barnabas, Parson Adams is extremely sincere in his
profession .He gets a very small income from the church but his virtue remains
utterly uncontaminated. He refuses to become a puppet in the hands of Lady
Booby when the latter forbids him to publish the banns of Joseph’s marriage with Fanny .
Fielding has made Adams a comic character . He has made
him absent-minded and given him amusing mannerisms. However this does not
detract Adams’ greatness as a true Christian. Simple, kind, generous and
courageous, Adams is the epitome of true feeling and goodness of heart. Adams’
impulses always prompt him to help anyone in distress.He is ever ready and ever
willing to fight for the right cause. Although fifty years of age, Adams is
magnificently strong and healthy. He knows how to use his huge fists in
defending others.
Adams’s generosity, friendliness, and bravery appear to be tied to
one another, as indeed they ought to be according to Fielding’s moral scheme.
In Adams, however, bravery is excessive because he does not regulate it with
prudence; “Simplicity,” or naïveté, is certainly more present in Adams’s
character than in any other in the novel
Parson Adams establishes a sort of unadorned criterion of
simplicity against vanity and hypocricy of most of the other characters. He is
a bundle of contradictions, a delightful mixture of scholarship and simplicity,
and pedantry and credulity. He is eccentric and forgetful; he often leaves his
hat and his sermons (which he intends to sell) behind, and has to return for
them.He lands into misadventure after misadventure - he wanders from inn to inn
without the means to pay his bills, he is beaten, swindled and mocked at, he is
involved in hilarious nightly adventures -but he never loses his innate dignity
and goodness. Martin C. Battestin sees in Adams "the Christian hero,
the representative of good nature and charity, which form the heart of
morality."
We can sum up above discussion in the words of Dudden: “Adams
emerges from testing adventures and experiences with his sweet temper unsoured,
his honourable character unsullied, and his innate dignity unimpaired”
Theme
of Morality in Joseph Andrews
Henry Fielding undoubtedly holds moral views
far-ahead of his times. Morality is an approval or adherence to principles that
govern ethical and virtuous conduct.
Fielding was accused of being immoral in his
novels. Dr. Johnson called his novels “vicious and corrupting”.
Richardson echoed the “charge of immorality” against
him. Modern critics, however, has justified Fielding and gave him a credit of “an
estimable ethical code”. Strachey declared him a “deep,
accurate, scientific moralist”. Indeed neither “Joseph Andrews” nor “Tom
Jones” strikes the modern sensibility as ‘low’ or ‘immoral’ either in
purpose or in narration. Behind the truthful portrait of life, lies his broad
moral vision. His aim was to correct mankind by pointing out their blunders: “I have endeavored to laugh at mankind, out to
their follies and vices.”
Fielding reacted sharply against the code of
ethics as incited by Richardson in “Pamela”. He feels that Pamela’s
virtue is an affectation and a commodity, exchangeable for material benefits.
Virtue cannot and should not be to chastity alone. Mere external respectability
is not morality. For Fielding: “Chastity without goodness of heart is without value.”
A truly virtuous man is disregardful of
material benefits. He is devoid of an affectation.
He finds:
“A delight in the happiness of mankind and a
concern at their misery, with a desire, as much as possible, to procure the
former and avert the latter …”
Fielding’s moral vision is much wider that
Richardson’s. Morality is no longer equated with chastity or outward decorum.
It is broad enough to include every aspect of human behaviour. One’s
intentions, instincts, motives are equally important in judging a man.
In “Joseph Andrews” we are confronted with a chameleonic society that quickly
changes its appearance to gratify personal lusts. Fielding’s aim was to show human beings
camuoflaged in various shades of vanity and hypocrisy and it is done ruthlessly
and wittily in “Joseph Andrews”.
The stage-coach scene is perhaps the best
illustration of Fielding’s concept of morality. In it we are confronted the
haughty passengers which are all models of hypocrisy. The coachman simply bids
the postillion to "Go
on, Sirrah, we are confounded late”. The lady reacts in
a contemptible manner: "O Jesus, a naked Man! Dear Coachman,
drive on". The old gentleman deems: "Let us
make all the haste imaginable, or we shall be robbed too".In addition there a lawyer who “wished they had past by without taking any
notice", although his final
advice is “to save the poor creature's life, for their own sakes”.
At last, it is the postillion, “ who hath been since transported for
robbing a hen-roost, voluntarily strips off a great coat, his only
garment" and swears that he would rather remain in a shirt
than "suffer a fellow-creature to lie in so miserable a
condition". Here Fielding shows the contrast between the attitude
of the rich passengers and that of the poor Postillion. What sets him
apart is not his class, but the fact that he alone dismisses his own comfort
and he is the only person who considers Joseph a "fellow-creature" worthy
of such rescue. Fielding emphatically declares: "High
People" are "People of Fashion", but
that they are not "higher in their Dimensions" nor
in "their Characters". The journey undertaken by Joseph and
Parson Adams reveals vanity or hypocrisy at every stage.
It is significant that Parson Adams jumps with
joy at the reunion of Fanny and Joseph. It reflects an ability to sympathize
with other’s feelings. Simple, kind, generous and courageous, Adams is the
epitome of true feeling and goodness of heart which is a vital aspect of
Fielding’s concept of morality. Adams’ impulses always prompt him to help
anyone in distress. He saves Fanny’s virginity two times.
“He is an innocent … so completely sincere in
his beliefs and actions that he can’t imagine insincerity in other; he takes
everyone he meets at face-value”.
Kindness achieved supreme importance in
Fielding’s moral code. A good and a moral man takes joy in helping others.
Fielding says: “I don’t know a
better definition of virtue, than it is a delight in doing good.”
Fielding is as liberal in ridiculing
affectation as he is hard on the lack of charity. Adams’ definition: “A generously disposition to receive the poor”, is the simple test employed to men
by Fielding to check their capability of charity. When Parson Adams asks
for some shillings to Parson Trulliber, he declares in frenzy: “I know what charity is better than to give it
to vagabonds.”
This shows 18th century’s clergy’s degeneracy,
who is reluctant to give some shillings. The rich Parson Tulliber, Mrs.
Tow-wouse, Lady Booby and Peter Pounce lacks natural kindness whereas the poor
postilion, Betty and Pedler are true Christians, for they are ready to help
other man in distress asking nothing in return. But Mrs. Tow-wouse scornfully
declares: “Common charity my
foot.”
Fielding is against the prudish morality which
considers sex as an unhealthy and dangerous for human life. He favours a
healthy attitude towards sex. But he does not approve of Lady Booby’s desire
for Joseph nor does he favour Mr. Slipslop’s extreme whims. But Betty’s desires
spring from a natural heart and feeling. It is worth noticing that Betty is
free of hypocrisy. She acts as ordered by her nature.
“She is good-natured generosity and
composition.”
Summing up, Fielding’s concept of morality is
realistic, tolerant, broad and fairly flexible. Modern opinion has vindicated
the moral vision of Fielding as healthy, wide and practical.
Theme of Love and
Marriage in Pride and Prejudice:
Pride and Prejudice is
one of the most popular novels of Jane Austen due to its multi-dimensional
versatility of themes. Andrew H. Wright remarks: “ She (Jane Austen)
develops themes of the broadest significance, the novels go beyond social
record, beneath the didactic, to moral concern, perplexity and commitment”
One of the most
important themes of Pride and Prejudice, love and marriage, is also the
central theme of the novel. The oft-quoted opening sentence of the novel
demonstrates this basic theme: “It is a truth universally acknowledged
that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife”
It is true that the
chief preoccupation of Jane Austen’s heroines is getting married and life is a
matrimonial ceremony for them. Pride and Prejudice dramatizes the economic
inequality of women, showing how women had to marry undesirable mates in order
to gain some financial security. Marriage was a significant social concern in
Jane Austen’s time and she was fully conscious of the disadvantages of being
single as she wrote to her niece Fanny Knight, “Single women have a
dreadful propensity for being poor….which is one very strong argument in favour
of matrimony”.
Through five marriages,
Jane Austen defines good and bad reasons for marriage. Charlotte – Collins,
Lydia – Wickham, Jane – Bingley and Elizabeth – Darcy are the four newly-weds.
The old marriage is that of Mr. and Mrs. Bennet.
The marriage of Mr. and
Mrs. Bennet is the worst example of its kind in the novel. They are pole
apart in their thoughts and temperaments. Their marriage is shown to be a
disaster, with the wife playing the part of a fool and the husband retreating
to live an uninvolved life. Jane Austin says about this marriage:
" Her (Elizabeth’s) father captivated by youth and beauty … had married a woman whose weak understanding and illiberal mind had very early in their marriage put an end to all real affection for her “. Their marriage lacks "emotional compatibility and intellectual understanding". The Bennet’s marriage ends in mutual forbearance.
" Her (Elizabeth’s) father captivated by youth and beauty … had married a woman whose weak understanding and illiberal mind had very early in their marriage put an end to all real affection for her “. Their marriage lacks "emotional compatibility and intellectual understanding". The Bennet’s marriage ends in mutual forbearance.
Charlotte and Collins are the first newly-weds. Charlotte agrees to marry Collins solely for her financial security. It is relatively her advancing age that hastens her engagement. Charlotte tries to justify her position by giving argumentative reasons to Elizabeth: “I am not romantic you know, I never was, I ask only a comfortable home”. Thus, to Charlotte, marriage is an economic transaction undertaken in self-interest.
The runaway marriage of
Lydia-Wickham is based on mere superficial qualities as sex, appearance, good
looks and youthful flirtation. The passion between the unprincipled rake,
Wickham and the flighty Lydia is bound to cool, and in their unhappy conjugal life,
mutual toleration is the nearest approach that can be expected.
The marriage between
Jane and Bingley is a successful marriage of its kind. Jane Austen expresses
her opinion about this marriage through the words of Elizabeth:
"All his (Bingley) expectations of felicity, to be rationally founded, because they had for basis the excellent understanding, and super excellent disposition of Jane, and a general similarity of feeling and taste between them."
However, unlike Darcy and Elizabeth, there is no planning in their relationships. Both the characters are too gullible and too good-hearted to ever act strongly against external forces that may attempt to separate them. So, their marriage is in between success and failure.
"All his (Bingley) expectations of felicity, to be rationally founded, because they had for basis the excellent understanding, and super excellent disposition of Jane, and a general similarity of feeling and taste between them."
However, unlike Darcy and Elizabeth, there is no planning in their relationships. Both the characters are too gullible and too good-hearted to ever act strongly against external forces that may attempt to separate them. So, their marriage is in between success and failure.
The fifth and final
example of marriage is that of Elizabeth and Darcy. It is a kind of an ideal
marriage based on the true understanding and cross examinations. According
to Jane Austen , the courtship of Darcy and Elizabeth is a perfect union which
sums up the purpose of her novel. Although it begins with the pride and
prejudice; it passes through many stages as "it converts from full
hatred to complete admiration and satisfaction" . For Darcy,
Elizabeth is no longer the woman who is "not handsome enough to
tempt (him)", as he has admitted that “… it is many
months since I have considered [Elizabeth] as one of the handsomest women of my
acquaintance.”. Also for Elizabeth , he is no longer "the last
man in the world whom (she) could ever be prevailed on to marry" but
he becomes the "man who in disposition and talents , would most
suit her" .
Thus the theme of love
and marriage is very aptly exemplified in Pride and Prejudice. Beginning with
the arrival of Bingley and Darcy, both single men “in possession of a
good fortune”, the novel traces the courtship of Jane-Bingley and
Elizabeth-Darcy through various misunderstandings and hindrances, before they
are happily married to each other. We can sum up above discussion in the words
of Elizabeth: “There can be no doubt that it is settled between us
already that we are to be the happiest couple in the world.”
Irony in Pride and Prejudice:
One of the most prominent features of the literary style of Jane
Austen is her frequent use of irony. In fact, in no other book is her use of
irony more pronounced than in Pride and Prejudice. In Pride and Prejudice, Jane
Austen employs a variety of irony, verbal, thematic, situational, and
dramatic.
The title of the novel contains a hidden strain of thematic
irony. Jane Austen subtly introduces an inversion in the thematic
foibles, ‘Pride’ and ‘Prejudice’ and the characters they belong to. It is Darcy
who is supposed to have the pride and Elizabeth who is supposed to have the
prejudice. But in their misunderstandings with each other they accuse each
other of excessive pride and prejudice.
Verbal irony is present in profusion in Pride and Prejudice.
The oft-quoted opening sentence of the novel is one of the finest example of
verbal irony: “It is truth universally acknowledged that a single man
in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife”. The
statement in fact encapsulates the ambitions of the empty headed Mrs. Bennet,
and her desire to find a good match for each of her five daughters. Sometimes
the characters are unconsciously ironic, as Mrs. Bennet and Mr. Collins. Mr.
Bennet and Elizabeth serve to directly express the author's ironic opinion.
Although Mr. Bennet is basically a sensible man, he behaves strangely because
of his sarcasm with his wife. Mr. Bennet cruelly mocks his wife’s
silliness with the comments as “…you are as handsome as any of them,
Mr. Bingley might like you the best of the party”. Elizabeth is to
some extent similar to her father’s cynicism. At the second ball, not only does
she reject Darcy’s request to dance with her, but also mocks him with
comments like “Mr. Darcy is all politeness”, and “I
am perfectly convinced by it that Mr. Darcy has no defect”. Her
speeches crackle with irony that is filled with pep and display vibrant
humor.
Dramatic irony is at work when the audience knows something that
the character doesn’t, is seen mainly through Elizabeth and Darcy. Elizabeth is
critical of Jane’s blindness to others’ faults. This criticism is filled
with irony, because Elizabeth herself is blind to the true character of Darcy
because of her prejudice against him. Also, Darcy was blind to his love when he
declines to dance with Elizabeth. In addition, when the Gardiners are talking
about a future mistress of Pemberley, they don’t know that Darcy had proposed
to Elizabeth and that she could have been that mistress now. This gives a clear
example of a dramatic irony.
The focal point of the story’s situational irony is Darcy’s
falling in love with Elizabeth. Mr.Darcy, who once called Elizabeth “tolerable;
but not handsome enough to tempt (him)”, gets captivated by her fine
countenance, and ends up admitting that “… it is many months since I
have considered [Elizabeth] as one of the handsomest women of my acquaintance.” Likewise,
Elizabeth, who starts out hating Mr. Darcy with a passion, ends up marrying
him. There is a fine streak of irony in her
response to Charlotte’s engagement and her own subsequent leniency towards
materialism at the first sight of Pemberley: “To be mistress of
Pemberley might be something!" Elizabeth tells Mr. Collins that
she is not the type of a woman to reject the first proposal and accept the
second but does exactly this when Darcy proposes her second time.
Mr. Collins advises to Mr Bennet, talking of Lydia's elopement:"You
ought certainly to forgive them as a Christian, but never to admit them to your
sight, or allow their names to be mentioned in your hearing." Mr
collins is being unconsciously ironic, his idea of 'forgiveness' isn't really
forgiving at all.
Irony in character is even more prominent than irony of
situation. It is ironical that Elizabeth who prides herself on her perception
and disdains Jane’s blindness to realities, is herself blinded by her own
prejudice. Darcy always thought himself to be a gentleman but his own proposal
to Elizabeth is quite ungentlemanly. Wickham is graceful to look at, but at
heart he is an unredeemed villain. The Bingley Sisters hate the Bennets for
their vulgarity but are themselves vulgar in their behaviour. Lady Catherine de
Bourgh views herself to be a graceful lady, but is an equally self-conceited
and haughty woman. Mr. Collins always boasts of himself as a clergyman,
but is an ironical portrait of self-satisfied sycophancy and pomposity. Thus,
the novel abounds in irony of characters.
To conclude, the irony of Jane Austin is not tinged with any
bitterness, nor does she reflect her cynicism. Rather her irony can be
termed comic. Irony is used by Jane Austin in Pride and Prejudice to
expose the hypocrisy and pretentiousness of contemporary English society. Andrew
H. Wright very aptly remaks that irony, at the hands of Jane Austen, is the “instrument
of a moral vision.”
Pride and Prejudice:
Title
“Pride and Prejudice” was first written in 1797 under the title “First
Impressions”. It was later revised and published under the title “Pride
and Prejudice” in 1813.
First impressions do play an important role in the novel.
Elizabeth is misled in her judgment of both Darcy and Wickham. Her attitude
towards both the characters is only a result of the First Impressions. But if
we study the novel deeply, we find that “Pride and Prejudice” is
an apt title. The first impressions only last for the first few chapters of the
novel while pride and prejudice permeate the soul of the novel. The
novel is about the pride of Darcy and the prejudice of Elizabeth caused by
their mutual misunderstanding.
Earlier in the novel, Mary describes Pride as “…a common
failing. Human nature is particularly prone to it”. Mr. Darcy stands as the
most obviously proud character. Wickham tells Elizabeth that he has a ‘filial
pride’ and we tend to agree with Mrs. Bennett’s complaint that “He
walked here and he walked there, fancying himself so very great”.
His haughty manners at the ball gave people a very bad impression
of his personality, especially Elizabeth, whom he considered as “tolerable;
but not handsome enough to tempt (him)”. Lady Catherine, Miss Bingley
and even Elizabeth Bennett constitute the other proud characters. While Lady
Catherine’s patronizing behavior and Miss Bingley’s rudeness are due to their
social class, Elizabeth can be deemed proud on the account that she has high
respect for herself and this is best displayed when Elizabeth refers to Darcy:
“And I could easily forgive his pride, if he had not mortified mine.” Being
rejected by him at the ball, her prejudice mounts up and from the start; she
willfully misinterprets all his utterances and actions.
Darcy’s pride stemming from the superiority of intellect, his
noble ancestry and his enormous riches prejudices him strongly against
Elizabeth’s family and her low connections. Although “he had never been
bewitched by any woman as he was by her”, Darcy feels beneath his dignity
to admit to his love for her. Even when he can repress his feelings no longer
and does propose to Elizabeth, “he was not more eloquent on the subject
of the tenderness than on pride”. He is considerably humbled
when he is rejected without ceremony, and Elizabeth’s words “had you
behaved in a more gentlemanlike manner” and her criticism of his
self-conceit affect him deeply.
Elizabeth’s refusal initiates a process of introspection and self
analysis in Darcy. Consequently, he emerges as a man who has gone
through a considerable transition. This is revealed by his long explanatory
speech to Elizabeth towards the end of the novel. The greatest proof of this
transition is in his remaining firm in his choice of Elizabeth even after
Lydia-Wickham elopement which draws from Elizabeth the acknowledgement- “indeed
he has no improper pride. He is perfectly amiable.”
In Elizabeth, the intelligent and self-assured young woman too we
see the interesting compound of Pride and Prejudice. Her initial prejudice
against Darcy arises from injured pride. At the Natherfield ball she overhears
Darcy calling her, “tolerable; but not handsome enough to tempt(him)”.
From that evening Elizabeth is left with no cordial feeling towards Darcy. In
addition, Elizabeth is prejudiced in favour of Wickham, charmed by her fine
countenance, pleasing addresses and his flattering attentions.
Elizabeth's judgments about other characters' dispositions are
accurate but only half of the time. While she is correct about Mr.
Collins and how absurdly self-serving and sycophantic he is and about Lady
Catherine de Bourgh and how proud and snobbish she is, her first impressions of
Wickham and Darcy steer her incorrectly. When Charlotte tries to show
Elizabeth the agreeable side of Mr. Darcy, Elizabeth cries out in a disdainful
manner: “To find a man agreeable whom one is determined to hate! Do not
wish me such an evil”. It is only when she reads Darcy’s letter that
her eyes are opened to the true characters of both Darcy and Wickham.
In fact Darcy’s letter introduces in Elizabeth the same
self-criticism that Darcy too undergoes. Thus Elizabeth realizes her folly in
trusting her first impressions and states, "how despicably have I
acted. I, who have prided myself on my discernment! - I, who have valued myself
on my abilities."
In sum, the title, “Pride and Prejudice” very
aptly points to the theme of the novel. The protagonists have been tangling
with pride and prejudice throughout the novel. They also struggled to put down
their pride and get rid of their prejudice. However, to say that Darcy is proud
and Elizabeth is prejudiced is to tell but half of the story. The fact is that
both Darcy and Elizabeth are proud and prejudiced. The novel makes clear the
fact the Darcy’s pride leads to prejudice and Elizabeth’s prejudice stems from
a pride in her own perceptions.
In a nut-shell, the appropriateness of the title, Pride and
Prejudice is indeed unquestionable and it bears immense significance to the
plot, thematic concerns and the characterization in the novel.
Jane
Austen’s Limited Range:
Jane
Austen as a novelist has stringently set her limits which she seldom oversteps.
She was amazingly aware of which side her genius lay and she exploited it
accordingly without any false notions of her capabilities or limitations. As
Lord David Cecil points out, she very wisely stayed "within
the range of her imaginative inspiration." Her imaginative inspiration was as severely limited
as, for example, Hardy's or Arnold Bennett's. Her themes, her characters, her
background setting -everything has a well-etched range within which she works,
and works exquisitely. Jane Austen herself referred to her work as “Two
inches of ivory.” In a letter to her niece, Fanny Knight, Jane Austen
wrote, “Three or four families in a country village is the very thing
to work on.”
Although she works on a very small canvas, yet she has widened the
scope of fiction in almost all its directions. Her stories are mostly indoor
actions where only family matters are discussed. However, her plots are perfect
and characterization is superb.
Critics have labeled her novels belonging to a narrow range of
themes and characterization. Even in her limited world, Austen restricts
herself to the depiction of a particular class of country gentry. She excludes
the matters of lower class and hardly touches aristocracy. For instance, she
has discussed Lady Catherine only for the purpose of satire. The same sort of
story is repeated, subject matters are very much the same in all her novels,
confined to the gentry class – servants, laborers and yeomanry rarely appear in
her novels.
Her nephew James Austen-Leigh, alludes to her limited range:
“She was always careful not to meddle with matters with which she
did not thoroughly understand”.
There is no terrible happening in Jane Austin’s novels. Everything
happens in a civilized manner. The extreme severity in “Pride and Prejudice” is
elopement of Lydia with Wickham.
Charlotte Bronte was constrained to observe about Jane Austen:
Charlotte Bronte was constrained to observe about Jane Austen:
"She ruffles her reader by nothing vehement, disturbs him by
nothing profound. The passions are perfectly unknown to her : she rejects even
a speaking acquaintance with that stormy sisterhood."
Charlotte Bronte
believes that Jane Austen is not concerned with the deep morals and she is an
author of the surface only: “Her business is not half so much with the
human heart as with the human eye, mouth, hands and feet.”
Andrew H. Wright points
out that there is very little religion discussed in her novels, politics is not
mentioned too. There are no adventures found in her books, no abstract ideas
and no discussion of spiritual or metaphysical issues.
Macaulay declares that her characters are commonplace, “yet
they are all as perfectly discriminated from each other as if they were the
most eccentric of human beings.” Sir Walter Scott appreciates the
precision of her Art and its merit:“That young lady has a talent for describing
the involvement of feelings and characters of ordinary life which is to me the
most wonderful I have ever met with.”
G.H. Lewes pays glowing tribute to her:“First and foremost, let
Jane Austen be named, the greatest artist that has ever written... Her circle
may be restricted, but it is complete. Her world is a perfect orb, and vital
sphere.”
Pride and Prejudice like her other novels has a narrow physical
setting in which she lived. The story revolves around Netherfield, Longbourn,
Hunsford, Meryton and Pemberley. It seems to be an irony of the history that
when the Romantic Poets were discovering the beauties of nature, Jane Austen
confined her characters within the four walls of the drawing room. Her heroines
also famously never leave the family. Edward Fitzgerald states: “She
never goes out of the Parlour.”
Jane Austen’s
limitations stemmed from the choice of her themes: love, marriage and
courtship. All of her six novels deal with same theme of love and marriage.
There are pretty girls waiting for eligible bachelors to be married to.
Another limitation is
the feminisation of her novels. Men do not appear except in the company of
women. All the information about Darcy is proved through Elizabeth’s point of
view. Hence, the reader looks at Darcy through Elizabeth’s eye.
However her novels are
profound in the psychological delineation of her characters. She is able to
capture superbly, the subtlety of thoughts and reflexes of her characters. We
can sum up above discussion in the words of Virginia Woolf: “Jane
Austen is the mistress of a much deeper emotion than appears on the surface.”
Hardy’s Philosophy or
Tragic Vision of Life:
Hardy, the novelist, was essentially a poet and an artist rather
than a philosopher. Hardy was primarily a story-teller and should be viewed
more as chronicler of moods and deeds than a philosopher. He repeatedly
affirmed that the 'Views' expressed in his novels were not his convictions or
beliefs; they were simply "impressions" of the moment. In The
Return of the Native, Hardy proves a dismal view of life in which
coincidence and accident conspire to produce the worst of circumstance due to
the indifference of the Will.
In order to understand Hardy’s philosophy, we should have a fair
idea of Hardy’s biography. Hardy lived in an age of transition. The industrial
revolution was in the process of destroying the agricultural life, and the
subsequent shifting of population caused a disintegration of rural customs and
traditions. It was a period when fundamental beliefs — religious, social,
scientific, and political — were shaken to their core and brought in their
stead the "ache of modernism." The new philosophies failed to satisfy
the emotional needs of many people. As a young man, Hardy read Darwin's Origin
of the Species and Essays and Reviews (the manifesto of some
radical clergymen), both of which influenced Hardy’s attitude toward religion
profoundly. He found it difficult, if not impossible, to reconcile the idea of
a beneficent and benevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient deity with the fact of
omnipresent evil and the persistent tendency of circumstances toward
unhappiness.
Hardy's novels can be best understood in the light of the author's
fatalistic outlook on life, for Hardy fluctuates between fatalism and
determinism. Fatalism is a view of life which acknowledges that there is some
malignant power that controls the universe, and which is out to thwart and
defeat men in their plans. It is especially hostile to them who try to assert
themselves and have their own way. Determinism, on the other hand, acknowledges
that man's struggle against fate is futile and man is but puppet in the
hands of destiny. In Tess of D’urbervilles, we are told that, “Justice
was done, and President of Immortals(in Aeschylean phrase) had ended his sport
with Tess.” In The Return of the Native, Hardy again
reminds us that, “What a sport for Heaven this woman Eustacia was!”
In Hardy's novels, then,
Fate appears in the form of chance and coincidence, nature, time and woman.
None is Fate itself, but rather all of these are manifestations of the Immanent
Will. Fateful incidents are the forces working against men in their efforts to
control their destinies. In addition, Fate appears in the form of nature as a
powerful agent, that affects the lives of the characters. Those who are most in
harmony with their environment can find some solace, but those who are
indignant and rebellious, it destroys all their happiness.Eustacia suffers in
The Return of the Native, because of her direct confrontation with Edgon Heath,
which symbolizes nature. In the end Eustacia laments:
“How I have tried
and tried to be a splendid woman, and how destiny has been against me. I do not
deserve my lot…O, cruelty of putting me into this ill-conceived world. I was
capable of much; but I have been injured and blighted and crushed by things
beyond my control.”
Hardy remarks: “What
of Immanent Will and its designs? It works unconsciously as heretofore, Eternal
artistries in circumstance.”
In Hardy's considered
view, all life is suffering. Man suffers from the moment of his birth upto his
death. Happiness is only occasional, it is never the general rule:
"Happiness is but
an occasional episode in a general drama of pain".
There is none who gets
more than he deserves but there are many who get much less than what they
deserve. Not only man suffers, but all life suffers. Suffering is writ
large on the face of nature. A ruthless, brutal struggle for existence is waged
everywhere in nature. All nature is red in tooth and claw and life
lives upon life. Thus all life, including human life, is subject to this law of
suffering and none can escape the operation of this law.
Hardy’s characters are
also a prey to irony of circumstance. Right things never happen at the right
time: they happen either not at all, or too late, when their happening brings
nothing but misery and suffering in their train. The heroines of Hardy, like
Tess and Eustacia, as well as his male characters, like Clym, Henchard, Angel,
Alec are all the victims of the irony of circumstance. In ill-conceived scheme
of things there is nothing but “strange oschestra of victim shriek and
pain.” Almost all of the Hardy’s characters are susceptible to this
omnipresent evil power.
In The Return of the
Native, Hardy suggests the philosophy of Rustic Resignation. Man must be
resigned to one’s lot. It is useless to complain or resist for nothing can
refom “ill-conceived scheme of things.” If he is rash,
hot-headed and obstinate, like Henchard or Eustacia, he can bring about his own
downfall. On the other hand, if he is contended ang resigned to his own lot
like Thomasin, he can make much of his limited opportunities.
Summing up, Hardy’s
philosophy in The Return of the Native is certainly ‘twilight’ and gloomy one
but it is not too much pessimistic, for pessimism implies negation of life, a
wish not to have been born at all. It is only in his last novel “Jude of Obscure”
that some cynicism enters, and Hardy becomes pessimistic otherwise he is an
acute realist. “My practical philosophy”, says Hardy, “is
distinctively meliorist”, an honest facing of human suffering. “If
a way to the better there be, it implies good look at the worst.” Hardy
is a humanist, a poet who wants men to turn from nature to their own kind for
“There at least discourse trills around
There at least smells abound
There same-time are found
Life-Loyalties.”