Monday, February 19, 2007

Pamela; a story of letters

In reading Pamela, I must say that I could see the parallels between Richardson's style and the novel that is more familiar to us. When I first opened the book, I expected to be bored and exasperated at having to read a collection of letters. But as I read on, the story seized to be just letters to me, but became an actual story I could appreciate. Richardson used the style of narration he chose to tell this love (for lack of a better term) story very well, at least in my opinion.


The title of the story is very interesting to me in that it introduces the main character and also seems to give us a sneak peak of Pamela's fate. I was not exactly certain of what to make of Mr. B's manner of pursuit of the young Pamela. There were moments when I felt that she did have had reason to fear his advances and found myself empathizing with her, considering her position and apparent vulnerability. At other times, I felt that she might have been simply making mountains out of molehills, which probably came from "listening" to the other characters in the story like Farmer Monkton and Mrs. Jewkes. Beside the fact that I had already learned the manner in which the story would end in class, as I read, I could not help but continually worry and wonder along with Pamela, not quite knowing what to expect the next moment. If indeed she would finally lose her virtue to this powerful man we are taught to call Mr. B., and whether all would be lost so to say. But then I closed the book and read the title again, paying closer attention to it, and I could very well predict Pamela's fate.

I see Richardson's announcing to his readers that Pamela's story would not at all end gravely or heart-wrenchingly as a tact that is also used by modern writers today. He lets us know that the story is about "virtue rewarded" The average modern novel, or at least what most of us readers are familiar with usually has some sort of peak into the future, just usually not with as much precision and/or detail. For instance, the summaries of stories that are typically recorded on back pages of novels to stir up the reader's interest. Personally, I would never purchase a novel if I did not have some sort of idea of what it was about. I think this is the same tactic Richardson used to appeal to readers of his time, which shows an area of similarity between the expectations of his readers and of modern readers today.

Pamela also had a number of the common themes including control via power and affluence, the power of "love" and desire. Mr. B. seemed to me to not only serve as a character but as a representative of those who meet their needs by wielding the iron rod of power and control. However, with as much as I have read, I do not see Mr. B as one who merely chases Pamela to have his way with her, but because he desires her and wants to have her by all means. I see him as being so aware of his position and influence that he will not condescend far enough to speak to her as he would to a woman of class or means. This I got from the letters he wrote to her while she was captive, which seemed apologetic and even almost sincere (at least to my ears).

Summarily, in view of all the other works we have read, I see the most evidence of the modern novel in.

1 comment:

thowe said...

Grace makes an interesting point with her description of ""listening" to the other characters in the story like Farmer Monkton and Mrs. Jewkes." Richardson's text is told entirely from (well, for the most part) Pamela's perspective, and yet we do seem to get a sense of others as agents capable of interpreting her--and just as capable of imprisoning her in some way.

I wonder if there's a relationship here between the way many characters constantly seek to interpret Pamela--her motives, her letters, her desires--and the way many of those same characters simultaneously want to control her--whether sexually, filially, or morally. Is interpretation likened to control in this fiction?