Concept 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 the 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.

Joseph Andrews as A Social Satire

       Henry Fielding is widely studied today as one of the chief begetters of the modernist movement in novel and as a master who embodied in realistic prose a panoramic survey of the contemporary society. With the novelty and vitality of the writings of Henry Fielding exerted a major influence on the succeeding writers and dominated the English fiction until the end of the 19th century.

         Fielding’s brilliant tour de force Joseph Andrews is an astounding encapsulation of the 18th century English social life and manners. It mirrors with rare force and realism, the blemishes of mankind in its true face. The novel, in its entirety, is an impassioned satire on the moral and social ills that beset the 18th century English society. In this novel we are confronted with a chameleonic society that frequently changes its appearance to gratify personal lusts of various kinds. The social life portrayed by Fielding is scrutinized in every facets of this society. The novel depicts human beings camouflaged in various shades of vanity, hypocrisy and narcissism. Here, Fielding essentially becomes a spokesman of his age and seeks to come out strongly against the affected behavior of the so-called respectable society of the day. The reader becomes a witness of characters who have a life of their own, but it is the essence of humanity, distilled through Fielding’s own vision. It is presented to us through the lines:

 “I describe not men, but manners, not an individual, but species”.

          Fielding's exploration begins with his survey on the nature and temperament of women of his time. Women of all classes were snobbish and amorous to some extent . The sensuality of women is reflected at its best through the representatives like Lady Booby, Mrs. Slipslop and Betty. Lady Booby feels greatly attracted by Joseph’s manliness and personality and seeks in vain to evoke his sexual response to gratify her sensual appetite. Mrs. Slipslop also follows her mistress’ path and tries to win Joseph as a lover. Even Betty falls in love with Joseph and seeks in vain to have sexual gratification from him. All these amorous intentions show a fair picture of the amoral side of the 18th century women.

      The society that Fielding portrays in Joseph Andrews is extremely inhuman, callous, indifferent, uncharitable and narcissistic. The insensitive hardness of this society is clearly exposed in the stage-coach scene in which we find inhuman stubborness. When Postillion tells the Coachman that someone is groaning within a ditch, he bids the postillion to "Go on, Sirrah, we are confounded late”. Then there is a lady who reacts in a contemptible manner, when  Postillion relates Joseph’s nakedness : "O Jesus, a naked Man! Dear Coachman, drive on and leave him". Thus both the coachman and the lady decide to leave Joseph to his own lot, the coachman because he is behind schedule, and the lady because she cannot tolerate the idea of aiding a naked man. Seeing the gentlemen, Joseph appeals to them and details the circumstances of his situation, upon which an old gentleman cries: "Robbed! Let us make all the haste imaginable, or we shall be robbed too", showing again a similar willingness as the others have displayed to abandon Joseph. In addition, the other gentleman, who studies law, deems that they should not abandon Joseph at all, although for contemptible reasons. Although he agrees with the rest that "he wished they had past by without taking any notice",  his final conclusion is  that they would be held accountable for murder if Joseph died in that situation  and he therefore thought “it adviseable to save the poor creature's life, for their own sakes”. Although Joseph does require clothing to fight against the cold in his enfeebled state, both the lawyer and the older gentlemen do not condescend to vouchsafe any assistance. The coachman also declines, in spite of his  two large coats, because of  fears that  "they should be made bloody" At last, it is the postillion, "a lad who hath been since transported for robbing a hen-roost,  voluntarily strips off a great coat, his only garment" and swore 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 incident gives ample scope to Fielding for satirizing the pretences and affectations of an essentially inhuman society.

        Fielding also provides some glimpses of the chaotic, greedy, opportunistic and insincere sides of the 18th century society. The chaotic side is exposed by the robbery incident. It is also revealed by the incident in which a villain attempts to rape Fanny. Human greed is exposed by the characters of the surgeons and the clergymen. The surgeon refused to treat Joseph because was unable to pay fees. The clergymen of the time were the most selfish and materialistic. Parson Barnabas and Parson Trulliber are the true embodiments of corrupt clergy. Then there is a squire who is fond of hunting hares, tries to satisfy his lustful desire for Fanny taking advantages of her poor condition. The insincerity of the society is also revealed by the depiction of the justices, who were as dishonest as the clergymen and the squires. Justice Frolick, for instance, goes out of his way to send Joseph and Fanny to prison, without any trial, only to satisfy a whim of Lady Booby.

       In brief, Joseph Andrews is a fine social document that represents an inclusive picture of the 18the century English society. The novel directs its satire not only against particular individuals but also against the follies and vices of the entire society.