Joseph Andrews

Henry Fielding

Description

English Literature boasts three comic worthies - three great creations that will live for ever. Pickwick and Falstaff are better known, but Parson Adams, who bestrides Joseph Andrews like a colossus, is of the same company, the favourite of every reader who encounters him in these picaresque pages. He lives, and so do all the rest of the wonderful characters, for seldom was a novel so rich in incident and all round excellence. Says George Saintsbury: 'The hero and heroine are surprisingly human where most writers would have made them sticks. And the rest require no allowance. Lady Booby, few as are the strokes given to her, is not much less alive than Lady Bellaston. Mr. Trulliber, monster and not at all delicate monster as he is, is also a man, and when he lays it down that no one even in his own house shall drink when he "Caaled Vurst," one can but pay his maker the tribute of that silent shudder of admiration which hails the addition of one more everlasting entity to the world of thought and fancy. And Mr. Tow-wouse is real and Mrs Tow-wouse is more real still, and Betty is real and the coachman, and Miss Grave-airs and all the wonderful crew from first to last.'

Sujets

• Picaresque novel
• Bildungsroman
• Roman d'apprentissage

Informations

• Publié par: Read Books Ltd.
• Date de parution: 05 avril 2022
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9781528797399
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 2 Mo

Extrait

JOSE PH ANDREWS
THE COMPLETE EDITION
By
HENRY FIELDING

First published in 1742





Copyright © 2021 Read & Co. Classics
This edition is published by Read & Co. Classics, an imprint of Read & Co.
This book is copyright and may not be reproduced or copied in any way without the express permission of the publisher in writing.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Read & Co. is part of Read Books Ltd. For more information visit www.readandcobooks.co.uk


Contents
HENR Y FIELDING
By Henry Aus tin Dobson
GENERAL IN TRODUCTION
NOTE TO GENERAL IN TRODUCTION
AUTHOR 'S PREFACE
VOLUME I
BOOK I
CHAPTER I
CHAPTER II
C HAPTER III
CHAPTER IV
CHAPTER V
CHAPTER VI
C HAPTER VII
CH APTER VIII
CHAPTER IX
CHAPTER X
CHAPTER XI
C HAPTER XII
CH APTER XIII
C HAPTER XIV
CHAPTER XV
C HAPTER XVI
CH APTER XVII
CHA PTER XVIII
BOOK II
CHAPTER I
CHAPTER II
C HAPTER III
CHAPTER IV
CHAPTER V
CHAPTER VI
C HAPTER VII
CH APTER VIII
CHAPTER IX
CHAPTER X
CHAPTER XI
C HAPTER XII
CH APTER XIII
VOLUME II
BOOK II — Continued
C HAPTER XIV
CHAPTER XV
C HAPTER XVI
CH APTER XVII
BOOK III
CHAPTER I
CHAPTER II
C HAPTER III
CHAPTER IV
CHAPTER V
CHAPTER VI
C HAPTER VII
CH APTER VIII
CHAPTER IX
CHAPTER X
CHAPTER XI
C HAPTER XII
CH APTER XIII
BOOK IV
CHAPTER I
CHAPTER II
C HAPTER III
CHAPTER IV
CHAPTER V
CHAPTER VI
C HAPTER VII
CH APTER VIII
CHAPTER IX
CHAPTER X
CHAPTER XI
C HAPTER XII
CH APTER XIII
C HAPTER XIV
CHAPTER XV
C HAPTER XVI


HENR Y FIELDING
By Henry Aus tin Dobson
An English novelist and playwright, born at Sharpham Park, near Glastonbury, Somerset, on the 22nd of April 1707. His father was Lieutenant Edmund Fielding, third son of John Fielding, who was canon of Salisbury and fifth son of the earl of Desmond. The earl of Desmond belonged to the younger branch of the Denbigh family, who, until lately, were supposed to be connected with the Habsburgs. To this claim, now discredited by the researches of Mr J. Horace Round ( Studies in Peerage , 1901, pp. 216–249), is to be attributed the famous passage in Gibbon’s Autobiography which predicts for Tom Jones —“that exquisite picture of human manners”—a diuturnity exceeding that of the house of Austria. Henry Fielding’s mother was Sarah Gould, daughter of Sir Henry Gould, a judge of the king’s bench. It is probable that the marriage was not approved by her father, since, though she remained at Sharpham Park for some time after that event, his will provided that her husband should have nothing to do with a legacy of £3000 left her in 1710. About this date the Fieldings moved to East Stour in Dorset. Two girls, Catherine and Ursula, had apparently been born at Sharpham Park; and three more, together with a son, Edmund, followed at East Stour. Sarah, the third of the daughters, born November 1710, and afterwards the author of David Simple and other works, survived he r brother.
Fielding’s education up to his mother’s death, which took place in April 1718 at East Stour, seems to have been entrusted to a neighbouring clergyman, Mr Oliver of Motcombe, in whom tradition traces the uncouth lineaments of “Parson Trulliber” in Joseph Andrews . But he must have contrived, nevertheless, to prepare his pupil for Eton, to which place Fielding went about this date, probably as an oppidan. Little is known of his schooldays. There is no record of his name in the college lists; but, if we may believe his first biographer, Arthur Murphy, by no means an unimpeachable authority, he left “uncommonly versed in the Greek authors, and an early master of the Latin classics,”—a statement which should perhaps be qualified by his own words to Sir Robert Walpole in 1730:—
“ Tuscan and French are in my head; Latin I write, and Greek—I read.”
But he certainly made friends among his class-fellows—some of whom continued friends for life. Winnington and Hanbury-Williams were among these. The chief, however, and the most faithful, was George, afterwards Sir George, and later Baron Lyttelton of Frankley.
When Fielding left Eton is unknown. But in November 1725 we hear of him definitely in what seems like a characteristic escapade. He was staying at Lyme (in company with a trusty retainer, ready to “beat, maim or kill” in his young master’s behalf), and apparently bent on carrying off, if necessary by force, a local heiress, Miss Sarah Andrew, whose fluttered guardians promptly hurried her away, and married her to some one else ( Athenaeum , 2nd June 1883). Her baffled admirer consoled himself by translating part of Juvenal’s sixth satire into verse as “all the Revenge taken by an injured Lover.” After this he must have lived the usual life of a young man about town, and probably at this date improved the acquaintance of his second cousin, Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, to whom he inscribed his first comedy, Love in Several Masques , produced at Drury Lane in February 1728. The moment was not particularly favourable, since it succeeded Cibber’s Provok’d Husband , and was contemporary with Gay’s popular Beggar’s Opera . Almost immediately afterwards (March 16th) Fielding entered himself as “Stud. Lit.” at Leiden University. He was still there in February 1729. But he had apparently left before the annual registration of February 1730, when his name is absent from the books ( Macmillan’s Magazine , April 1907); and in January 1730 he brought out a second comedy at the newly-opened theatre in Goodman’s Fields. Like its predecessor, the Temple Beau was an essay in the vein of Congreve and Wycherley, though, in a measure, an advance on Love in Severa l Masques .
With the Temple Beau Fielding’s dramatic career definitely begins. His father had married again; and his Leiden career had been interrupted for lack of funds. Nominally, he was entitled to an allowance of £200 a year; but this (he was accustomed to say) “any body might pay that would.” Young, handsome, ardent and fond of pleasure, he began that career as a hand-to-mouth playwright around which so much legend has gathered—and gathers. Having—in his own words—no choice but to be a hackney coachman or a hackney writer, he chose the pen; and his inclinations, as well as his opportunities, led him to the stage. From 1730 to 1736 he rapidly brought out a large number of pieces, most of which had merit enough to secure their being acted, but not sufficient to earn a lasting reputation for their author. His chief successes, from a critical point of view, the Author’s Farce (1730) and Tom Thumb (1730, 1731), were burlesques; and he also was fortunate in two translations from Molière, the Mock Doctor (1732) and the Miser (1733). Of the rest (with one or two exceptions, to be mentioned presently) the names need only be recorded. They are The Coffee-House Politician , a comedy (1730); The Letter Writers , a farce (1731); The Grub-Street Opera , a burlesque (1731); The Lottery , a farce (1732); The Modern Husband , a comedy (1732); The Covent Garden Tragedy , a burlesque (1732); The Old Debauchees , a comedy (1732); Deborah; or, a Wife for you all , an after-piece (1733); The Intriguing Chambermaid (from Regnard), a two-act comedy (1734); and Don Quixote in England , a comedy, which had been partly sketched at Leiden.
Don Quixote was produced in 1734, and the list of plays may be here interrupted by an event of which the date has only recently been ascertained, namely, Fielding’s first marriage. This took place on the 28th of November 1734 at St Mary, Charlcornbe, near Bath ( Macmillan’s Magazine , April 1907), the lady being a Salisbury beauty, Miss Charlotte Cradock, of whom he had been an admirer, if not a suitor, as far back as 1730. This is a fact which should be taken into consideration in estimating the exact Bohemianism of his London life, for there is no doubt that he was devotedly attached to her. After a fresh farce entitled An Old Man taught Wisdom , and the comparative failure of a new comedy, The Universal Gallant , both produced early in 1735, he seems for a time to have retired with his bride, who came into £1500, to his old home at East Stour. Around this rural seclusion fiction has freely accreted. He is supposed to have lived for three years on the footing of a typical 18th-century country gentleman; to have kept a pack of hounds; to have put his servants into impossible yellow liveries; and generally, by profuse hospitality and reckless expenditure, to have made rapid duck and drake of Mrs Fielding’s modest legacy. Something of this is demonstrably false; much, grossly exaggerated. In any case, he was in London as late as February 1735 (the date of the “Preface” to The Universal Gallant ); and early in March 1736 he was back again managing the Haymarket theatre with a so-called “ Great Mogul’s Company of English C omedians.”
Upon this new enterprise fortune, at the outset, seemed to smile. The first piece (produced on the 5th of March) was Pasquin, a Dramatick Satire on the Times (a piece akin in its plan to Buckingham’s Rehearsal ), which contained, in addition to much admirable burlesque, a good deal of very direct criticism of the shameless political corruption of the Walpole era. Its success was unmistakable; and when, after bringing out the remarkable Fatal Curiosity of George Lillo, its author followed up Pasquin by the Historical Register for the Year 1736 , of which the effrontery was even more daring than that of its predecessor, the ministry began to bethink themselves that matters were going too f