Henry Fielding Books

So I was getting ready to reread Don Quijote (1605)(Miguel de Cervantes 1547-1616) in the excellent Burton Raffel translation and as I was looking for information about the book and author, saw repeated references to Fielding's Joseph Andrews. I'd read his Tom Jones a couple of years ago and found it kind of tough sledding, but when I stumbled upon this one at a library book sale for a quarter, it seemed a stroke of destiny.

The parallels with Don Quijote are readily apparent. First of all, the book consists of a series of humorous travel adventures; second, the travellers involved seem too innocent to survive in the harsh world that confronts them. When Joseph Andrews, the naive footman of Lady Booby, deflects the amorous advances of both her Ladyship and Slipslop, the Lady's servant, he is sent packing. Upon his dismissal, Joseph, along with his friend and mentor Parson Adams, an idealistic and good-hearted rural clergyman, who essentially takes the physical role of Sancho Panza but the moral role of Quijote, sets out to find his beloved but chaste enamorata, Fanny Goodwill, who had earlier been dismissed from Lady Booby's service as a result of Slipslop's jealousy. In their travels they are set upon repeatedly by robbers, continually run out of funds and Adams gets in numerous arguments, theological and otherwise. Meanwhile, Fanny, whom they meet up with along the way, is nearly raped any number of times and is eventually discovered to be Joseph's sister, or maybe not.. The whole thing concludes with a farcical night of musical beds, mistaken identities and astonishing revelations.

I've seen this referred to as the first modern novel; I'm not sure why, in light of it's obvious debt to Cervantes. But it does combine those quixotic elements with a seemingly accurate portrayal of 18th Century English manners and the central concern with identity and status do place it squarely in the modern tradition.

At any rate, it is very funny and, for whatever reason, seemed a much easier read than Tom Jones. I recommend it unreservedly.

GRADE: B+

Who doesn't like a good rouse now and again? They keep our mind sharp and the system of checks and balances working like they should be... sometimes though, things go exactly as the trickster wants. In the spoof novel, Shamela by Henry Fielding, the story of a devious and intelligent Shamela, later renamed Pamela by her employer, and her quest for status and glory.
The story was written as a rebuttal to the novel Pamela and how Fielding believes the young women really acted in her situation. The novel is a very quick read, taking me no more then an hour tops, and the entire story was told through letters between Shamela and her mother. Some of the story, just like in its serious counterpart, is lost because of this style, leaving much up to the interpretation of the reader.
The novel is much like a modern day soap opera, with affairs, plots, hidden alliances, and hidden agendas. I believe that this is most geared towards women readers of the time, and the richer men, to know how things really work when a women wants status and power. It puts men into a bad light, casting us as mostly uncaring and aloof from other people. This was a common occurrence in all Victorian literature though, men were always the villain.
The plot was better then most of the era though, seduce the rich, handsome, stupid, controlling... you get the point, lord of the manner into marrying the poor maid. Shamela goes about pulling him in little by little with her cunning and devices until finally he breaks down and, out of what I assume is more lust then anything else, agrees to marry her. Then she gets caught having an affair with a priest. Ah, the circle of lust.
Despite the flaws of the lapsing system of writing, it was a good story that was well told and deserved to be preserved... unlike the bore-fest that is Pamela.

One might infer from its title, The Tragedy of Tragedies, or The Life and Death of Tom Thumb the Great, that this play might not actually be drama of a dignified and serious character. If so, one would be entirely right. Henry Fielding's three-act, madcap comedy ridicules contemporary tragedies; simultaneously, its copious footnotes parody eighteenth century literary criticism. The courageous hero and killer of giants, the diminutive Tom Thumb, is beloved by all, even passionately so by the King's daughter, and the King's wife as well, and for that matter by a captive giantess too. His tragic death - swallowed by a bovine - has few parallels.

This play began as Tom Thumb in 1730, on stage for forty nights (a considerable run, as most plays in the eighteenth century were staged for only a few days). A year later Fielding released a revised version, now with the lengthy title The Tragedy of Tragedies, or The Life and Death of Tom Thumb the Great. It proved equally successful.

The characters include King Arthur, his wife Queen Dollallolla, their daughter the Princess Huncamunca, Tom Thumb, Lord Grizzle (rival to Tom Thumb), the giantess Glumdalca, the ghost of Gaffer Thumb, and various servants like Noodle, Doodle, and Foodle. Fielding describes Queen Dollallolla in the Dramatis Personae as wife to King Arthur, and mother to Huncamunca, a woman entirely faultless, saving that she is a little given to drink, a little too much of a virago towards her husband, and in love with Tom Thumb.

The Tragedy of Tragedies, or The Life and Death of Tom Thumb the Great is often found in anthologies of eighteenth century English plays. I recommend the Everyman edition, The Beggar's Opera and Other Eighteenth Century Plays, edited by David Lindsay (ISBN 0460873148).

I found this to be a rather boring classic. I just couldn't really get interested in it enough to not be confused. I didn't even understand what happened in the end. I stayed confused for most of the book. I started over several times but still couldn't keep up with who was speaking who they were speaking about. So I can't recommend this book. Sorry.

The Turn of the Screw is an alright novel if you like that sort of reading, it requires in depth dissection of everything said, and you get no real answers in the end, which is what I really didn't like, though I have theories of my own. After the initial read I was very disappointed, I had been told that it was a great novel; however, after discussing the book in my American novels class, many things were revealed to me that I had not noticed before.

For those of you that don't like dissecting books and just want to sit down and enjoy a good read, I really don't recommend this story. However if you enjoy picking stories apart you will love this book. For me it was a 50/50 toss up book, not great but not bad either.

Two words, Holy Moly, this is definitely one of Henry James's masterpiece, concentrating on the Victorian era, the ambiguity of the vague responses given by his characters will keep us guessing until the very end on whether the protagonist is mentally unstable or not.

Taking place around the late 1900s in England, James centers his story on the diary of an unnamed governess. This piece is somewhat of an antithesis of another familiar story also about a governess, Jane Eyre. In the story, much of Miller's governess contrasts the characteristics of Jane Eyre. Aside from this fact, what makes Miller's work truly spectacular is his character development and narrative, which all contribute to his ambiguity. Because he uses an outsider within the story to narrate the diary of the governess, the details within the book are subject to be biased or inaccurate in view. As a result, with each sentence we are forced to wonder if this really happened the way it was told, or if it was twisted in some shape or form. Moreover, as the reader slowly learns of the dual interpretations of whether the governess be insane or not, our interest is piqued in finding the right answer. However, all of Miller's dialogue is refined In such a way where skeptics can see it as a point refuting the believers and vice versa.

Even at the conclusion of the book, many of us are still left guessing, which makes for one of the best mystery endings I have ever read. Not only is the reader left clueless as to the true mental stability of the governess, but Miller sparked a debate in which to this day literary critics all over the world are still debating over.

If you love a good gothic, mystery type of book, this is one that you cannot miss! some people may be stunned as to the complexity and depth of the writing as it is so complex with a labyrinth of turns. It will hold those interested spellbound until the book is finished and more!

It's hard to know how to rate this. Of course, it's ridiculously presumptuous for me to give a classic of English literature anything less than the full rating, but honestly? It's hard to read. The sentences are so elliptical, and the sensibilities of the narrator so difficult for a modern reader to intuit, that I finally rated it for its appeal to a casual reader. Reading it now, I didn't really suffer any thrills of horror. The ghost story really hasn't been the same since Stephen King started writing. Instead, what struck me was the flightiness of the governess, her daisy-chains of inference, and at least two instances where she reports things to the housekeeper as facts that contradict elements of her own narrative. That's the beauty of the story for me, the deftness with which James instills doubt about the credibility of his narrator. So, as a foundation of the horror genre and part of the English lit cannon, may every library contain at least one copy. But it's probably best actually read in the context of a class, where it can be appreciated for its structure and significance and no one will expect reading it to actually be fun.

Is it fair to review a book one has not finished? Well, I did not finish it, probably read one-third of the book. It's hard going, long sentences packed with commas, which became so confusing I could not begin to understand them. I understood about 1 in 3 sentences. It felt really good to put this book down.

I hope high schools are not assigning this for reading. It would be enough to turn students OFF to reading! Maybe it's available in Cliffs Notes.

On perusing a bookshelf in a Boston shop some 15 years past, my eye was taken by a paperback by one Henry Fielding and I was persuaded that though I had reached a fair age, I had not yet read anything by that august personage who had graced the curricula of so many English courses in my university days, which had been sadly terminated by the fact of the necessity of earning a living. Though I purchased this object of my fascination, it was not till recently that I actually did retrieve the volume from its dusty repose on an attic bookshelf and had recourse to reading it. Much to my surprise, it resembled such drab writings as "The Vicar of Wakefield" not in the least---those writings redolent of optimism and Pollyanna-like characters who insist on giving lectures on the goodness of Man while undergoing the tortures of the d--ned----but was admirably cynical and indeed not at all uneasy in the presence of sex, crime, and malfeasance in general, with which the book's "hero", Jonathan Wild, is blessed with an inordinate ability to partake of. The main character's rise and fall may be considered the main topic of the novel. While the reader is still forced to suffer a large portion of lecture and soliloquy thanks to the 18th century tendency to partake of such in every writing, big or small, the story itself is quite humorous and the reader may encounter there more than a diminutive speck of enjoyment, reaching the last page having observed that life, whether then or now in our less-insalubrious 21st century, is indeed much the same, the only difference being that debtors of those more abrupt times went to prison and the malfeasants of that era tended to end their short life spans at the end of a rope, while today, they serve but a short time in government rest homes and then return to their previous status of `honored citizen'. The characters in Fielding's novel, written two hundred years before my entrance onto the world stage, emerge vividly, endowed with such amusing names as Heartfree, Tishy Snap, Bagshot, Fireblood, and Miss Straddle, and while some of their adventures and conversations may seem to modern readers somewhat contrived and relying perhaps overmuch on deus ex machina, they are not far removed from many a Hollywood production, whose very existence could not be imagined in the author's time. Keeping in mind the tribulations of modern readers, not used to such peregrinations of oratory during the course of novels, I would say that a devotion to English literature would better lead to enjoyment of such a work than a preference for modern style in which dialogue might be deemed more natural. Nevertheless I will end my overlong diatribe on JONATHAN WILD by saying that it was meant as a satire of a Robert Walpole, a corrupt "great man" in politics of the time, and of all such men who aspire to greatness, and I beg my readers' pardon for attempting to write a review in a style not my own, but wish to remind them that if they found it tedious they may also find the said novel a bit too much, but if, on the other hand, they found it amusing, they may very well find more than a small amount of pleasure in Fielding's work itself and join me in suggesting that for this novel, though I have kept the interests of the general reader in mind as I awarded the prize, three stars are not quite sufficient.

Henry Fielding's novel Jonathan Wild - out of print since 1982? Bummer. Jonathan Wild was a real organizer of a group of thieves (i.e., prigs), but Fielding invented considerable portions of this novel. Enraged by the acclaim given to dishones but "great" men (that is, men who had achieved success for their benefit, while often doing harm to others), Fielding set out to chronicle, in the most flowery and euphemistic terms possible, the life and times of Jonathan Wild, Esq. As a foil, Thomas Heartfree, who is nearly ruined by Wild, is introduced. As characters, they are stick figures, but that is intentional. Fielding sets to battle ridiculous extremes of good and evil, with good emerging triumphant in the end.

It might emerge as a tedious harangue on the virtues of a good life, but Fielding's skill as a writer makes this impossible. His elaborate sentences demand close attention, and their rewards are great. Intricate and well thought-out, they are fascinating in and of themselves. The story is witty, well-balanced, and constantly amusing. The morality and writing of the story have aged well, the former largely because of the latter, and Jonathan Wild is a quite good, though most likely minor, narrative of infamy and saintliness.

The cover of this book shows a noose totally unlike that used by Pierrepoint or any other British executioner - one cannot help wondering if the rest of the book is as full of such glaring errors. I shall not be wasting my money.

Unlike those learned gentlemen who practice the judging of a book by its cover, I have read this work. It is a fascinating and compassionate account of a family dedicated to reshaping execution from torture to a death as quick and painless as possible. A second goal was to carry out the sentence with as little trauma to the body as possible, to spare the family yet another indignity.
Unlike recent inept and intenionally cruel Iraqi hangings done at the direction of the US government, the Pierrepoint family practiced and rehearsed the final moments so that only a few seconds elapsed between the executioner's entering the chamber and the drop. Pierrepoint also desribes his awakening, and his eventual joining of the British movement to outlaw the barbaric practice of capital punishment.

I had to read this book for a college fiction class. I thought it wouldnt get any worse then this. However to my surprise this book was quite enjoyable in a classical kind of way! My professor said that this is supposed to be one of the first novels ever written and I was surprised that it had all the basics of a great modern read. Love,Sex,and Betrayel.

If you have to read this book dont be discourgaged its not all that bad. (smile)

It is, in my opinion, probably more noteworthy for its portrayal of the human spirit and for its satire of virtually everything associated with the 18th century than it is for overall literary value. Fielding was suffering from, sadly, fatal, health problems when he wrote this, but that serves to free him from any traditional parameters of restraint. He glances at nearly every conceivable arena of 18th-century life, and his satire is uncanny. It is, however, a tedious read unless: 1-you truly enjoy Fielding; 2-you are interested in 18th-century English literature; 3-you are interested in the literary genre of travel books; or, 4-you are interested in masterful satire. Additionally, if you are a student and you have been required to read this, you will unfortunately find few resources available to help you in your understanding of this book.