Pamela, Shamela, and Anti-Pamela and All New Perspectives

Eliza Haywood’s Anti-Pamela and Henry Fielding’s Shamela both take Richardson’s original Pamela to new grounds with an altering perspective on what later became accepted as a conduct book. Following the plot closely, Fielding’s work satirically (and may I enforce hilariously) traces the adventures of Shamela in a mock form of Pamela. In it, we see all of the same characters, i.e. Squire (but here, Mr. Booby), Miss. Jervis, etc, and even the same scenarios, such as Mr. B’s attempted rape, and the marriage. On the other hand, in a somewhat more serious tone than Fielding, Haywood tells the tale of a different kind of Pamela personality all together. The star of her tale is Syrena, who is well aware of her social status, but is also aware of how to use it to her advancement and sexual advantage. While both of these mock tales of the original give a different perspectives, so too is the perspective in which each tale is told, and such perspective can certainly be seen to drive its specific narrative forward. That is, in Pamela, we have a tale told in epistolary form primarily from the perspective of Pamela herself—with only a few letters exchanged by her parents, and they are featured very early on in the tale. In Shamela, Fielding opens up the perspective of letter writing to include the letters of other characters such as Mrs. Jervis, Arthur Williams, etc. Finally, in Anti-Pamela, in addition to exclusively epistolary form of the other two texts, there is also a third person narrative perspective featured.

In class recently, we have speculated on the effects of having a single narrator and her series of letters to tell the tale. Of course, the epistolary form was quite popular for Richardson, as he had used it to write guides on letter writing. Pamela’s letters are a personal account of her virtuousness and offer her take of the events as they unfolded. Sometimes, we speculated on the timeliness of her letters, and questioned if she was holding back details from her parents. Furthermore, we doubted her honesty at some points, especially in the scene with Mr. B disguised in her dressing room.

Fielding addresses these issues of a single person narrative of letters, and suggests a collection of multiple letters to various people offers a more comprehensive picture on how the events unfolded—it also enables the much funnier version of how the events played out. For example, in Letter VII, Mrs. Jervis writes to Shamela’s mother letting her know that the Squire is taking her to the Lincolnshire Estate. As she details the event, she mentions that Shamela had previously a bastard child there from Parson Williams. She says, “The Squire, who thinks her a Pure Virgin,…resolved to send her into Lincolnshire,…were Miss had her small one by Parson Williams about a Year ago. This is a Piece of News communicated to us by Robin Coachman, who is intrusted by his Master to carry the Affair privately for him” (249). Putting the humor of these lines aside, Fielding is strongly suggesting potential back stories behind Pamela’s single handed letters, and he is very suspicious that a woman in such a vulnerable position could remain so virtuous. Pamela obviously wouldn’t tell her mother that she had a bastard child, but a servant certainly would (just as Parson Williams’ servant told the servants) thus reinforcing the need for letters from multiple characters.

Fielding also addresses Pamela’s ability to write such sophisticated and prompt letters in the original, and mocks the scenes where such issues are most apparent for readers. For example, in his version, with Shamela and Mr. Booby, of the scene in the bedroom where he is disguised, Shamela writes to her mother, “Mrs. Jervis and I are just in Bed, and the Door unlocked; if my Master should come----Odsbob! I hear him just coming in at the Door. You see I write in present Tense, as Parson Williams says” (247). In a footnote, Ingrassia notes that indeed Fielding is parodying Richardson’s “writing to the moment” he describes of Pamela’s letters. Furthermore, Shamela’s letters are far less sophisticated in language Pamela’s, thus illustrating Fielding’s doubt in Pamela’s ability to be so perfect as a lower class servant.

Haywood’s letter perspective illustrate also illustrate her doubts in entrusting in Richardson’s original narrative technique of Pamela. In fact, in the introduction to our Broadview edition, Ingrassia affirms Haywood’s doubts towards Pamela’s ability to write being from lower class. She notes, “the shift in narrative form underscores Haywood’s recognition that a servant, no matter how privileged, would never have the time to write so many letters” (41). Thus, Haywood is more realistic in terms of time, as well as in her ability to offer a more comprehensive alternative version to Pamela’s story. The story is told from the perspective of a third person narrator, who relays the events in between the letters of Syrena and her mother. For example, in one instance, the narrator inserts, “Hithero, Syrena had disguised nothing either of her Behavior or Sentiments from her Mother; but a very little Time made her alter her Conduct at that Point, and practice on her some of those Lessons of Deceit, she had so well instructed her in” (69). Accordingly, here, the narrator acts as an intermediator to tell readers whether or not she was faithful in her letters. Moreover, like Fielding, she places the mother as the root of deception. Shamela’s mother tells her not to cheat with Parson Williams until the “knot is tied” with the Squire, thus illustrating the mother’s role in breeding such corruption; here, Syrena’s mother is also responsible for Syrena’s ability to play conniving and deceitful roles with various men throughout the tale. We would not know any of these things if we were to rely on the single handed narrator technique Richardson uses in his original perfectly virtuous tale.

Accordingly, the difference in perspective of each drives the plot forward and works with the particular message each other is attempting to drive forward. Fielding is rather suspicious of a tale told exclusively from a single narrator’s point of view, and includes multiple perspectives to move the short plot forward. Haywood not only does not rely on letters of differing authors to tell Syrney’s story, but she also employs the third person perspective of the outside narrator as an additional spectator. The differences in each author’s way of telling the story illustrates the importance of perspective and the experimentation happening with the new genre form that can potentially facilitate moral instruction (Richardson), or offer alternative perspectives through satire and mockery.