Posted by David Lahti on May 26, 1998 at 17:38:54:
In Reply to: Re: Jones's relevancy to today... posted by angel on May 03, 1998 at 15:25:46:
Angel,
Sorry about the wait, but I don't check this site often. Fielding's style is unique, and I'll leave it to you to decide (or ask your friends) which of the qualities they meant when they said your style was like his. Fielding writes in a very amiable style, almost as if the audience were a close friend of his. He is also very witty, and has that British knack for telling something funny in a nonchalant manner, if you know what I mean. He also has a very great and deep insight into the motivations of people and the good and bad in their character-- hence the novel's purpose as an illustration of human nature (by his own admission). Other aspects of his style, that I can think of at this moment, are more of the same kind of thing: his yarn-spinning or story-telling air which makes you think you should read the book aloud; his objectivity when it comes to explicit judgment of the characters' actions (he leaves that to us); and his personal asides and tangents which serve to heighten the conversational atmosphere of the book. Now, I suppose I should be honest and tell you that there are very obvious aspects of his style which could be considered negative, and so if attached to your own work could mean a shortcoming on your part in the opinion of your writing circle. Most significant of these is his conceit. Fielding is one of those people who joke about their own greatness, but you get the feeling that they really believe what they are saying. In other places, there is no joke-- just a plain statement of his own genius or amazing ability to see into human nature, or write a great story, or trash all of his critics, or describe a situation perfectly, etc. At some points in the book his ing of his own horn becomes somewhat comical. There is a possibility that he, being extremely harshly criticized for his previous works by puritanical moralists of the day, might be overdoing his self-praise in a sort of real to them. Anyway, I hope this gives you something of an idea. Or, you could just read the book yourself-- the first chapter of it will give you a great idea of his style.
As for the character of Tom Jones, he is a human being: full of shortcomings, foibles, and moral weaknesses; but also with a good share of love, generosity, nobility, and courage. He is a mosaic of good and bad qualities, as we all are, and the book is the story of his struggles to surmount his weaknesses in the process of winning, and then maintaining, the love of his life, Phoebe. Unfortunately, as you might guess, he is not very good at surmounting his weaknesses, and so to some (such as Fielding's contemporary Samuel Johnson), Tom Jones is nothing more than an incorrigibly immoral wastrel. Fielding wants us to see past his faults and realize the nobler aspects of his character, however-- that is why the book ends with his becoming married to Phoebe and, presumably, his complete restoration from his earlier debauchery. But, even today people continue to misunderstand Tom Jones. For example, a recent A&E miniseries on the book was great, but in its advertisement Tom is merely called a playboy. But, I should get going. Hope this helps you.
Sincerely,
David.
READ THE GREAT BOOKS
TERM PAPERS, RESEARCH PAPERS, ESSAYS