GENERAL INTRODUCTION.
GENERAL INTRODUCTION.
There are few amusements more dangerous for an author than
the indulgence in ironic descriptions of his own work. If the irony is
depreciatory, posterity is but too likely to say, "Many a true word is
spoken in jest;" if it is encomiastic, the same ruthless and ungrateful
critic is but too likely to take it as an involuntary confession of folly and
vanity. But when Fielding, in one of his serio-comic introductions to Tom
Jones, described it as "this prodigious work," he all unintentionally
(for he was the least pretentious of men) anticipated the verdict which
posterity almost at once, and with ever-increasing suffrage of the best judges
as time went on, was about to pass not merely upon this particular book, but
upon his whole genius and his whole production as a novelist. His work in other
kinds is of a very different order of excellence. It is sufficiently
interesting at times in itself; and always more than sufficiently interesting
as his; for which reasons, as well as for the further one that it is
comparatively little known, a considerable selection from it is offered to the
reader in the last two volumes of this edition. Until the present occasion
(which made it necessary that I should acquaint myself with it) I own that my
own knowledge of these miscellaneous writings was by no means thorough. It is
now pretty complete; but the idea which I previously had of them at first and
second hand, though a little improved, has not very materially altered. Though
in all this hack-work Fielding displayed, partially and at intervals, the same
qualities which he displayed eminently and constantly in the four great books
here given, he was not, as the French idiom expresses it, dans son assiette, in
his own natural and impregnable disposition and situation of character and
ability, when he was occupied on it. The novel was for him that assiette; and
all his novels are here.
Although Henry Fielding lived in quite modern times,
although by family and connections he was of a higher rank than most men of
letters, and although his genius was at once recognised by his contemporaries
so soon as it displayed itself in its proper sphere, his biography until very
recently was by no means full; and the most recent researches, including those
of Mr Austin Dobson—a critic unsurpassed for combination of literary faculty
and knowledge of the eighteenth century—have not altogether sufficed to fill up
the gaps. His family, said to have descended from a member of the great house
of Hapsburg who came to England in the reign of Henry II., distinguished itself
in the Wars of the Roses, and in the seventeenth century was advanced to the
peerages of Denbigh in England and (later) of Desmond in Ireland. The novelist
was the grandson of John Fielding, Canon of Salisbury, the fifth son of the
first Earl of Desmond of this creation. The canon's third son, Edmond, entered
the army, served under Marlborough, and married Sarah Gold or Gould, daughter
of a judge of the King's Bench. Their eldest son was Henry, who was born on April
22, 1707, and had an uncertain number of brothers and sisters of the whole
blood. After his first wife's death, General Fielding (for he attained that
rank) married again. The most remarkable offspring of the first marriage, next
to Henry, was his sister Sarah, also a novelist, who wrote David Simple; of the
second, John, afterwards Sir John Fielding, who, though blind, succeeded his
half-brother as a Bow Street magistrate, and in that office combined an equally
honourable record with a longer tenure.
Fielding was born at Sharpham Park in Somersetshire, the
seat of his maternal grandfather; but most of his early youth was spent at East
Stour in Dorsetshire, to which his father removed after the judge's death. He
is said to have received his first education under a parson of the
neighbourhood named Oliver, in whom a very uncomplimentary tradition sees the
original of Parson Trulliber. He was then certainly sent to Eton, where he did
not waste his time as regards learning, and made several valuable friends. But
the dates of his entering and leaving school are alike unknown; and his
subsequent sojourn at Leyden for two years—though there is no reason to doubt
it—depends even less upon any positive documentary evidence. This famous
University still had a great repute as a training school in law, for which
profession he was intended; but the reason why he did not receive the even then
far more usual completion of a public school education by a sojourn at Oxford
or Cambridge may be suspected to be different. It may even have had something
to do with a curious escapade of his about which not very much is known—an
attempt to carry off a pretty heiress of Lyme, named Sarah Andrew.
Even at Leyden, however, General Fielding seems to have been
unable or unwilling to pay his son's expenses, which must have been far less
there than at an English University; and Henry's return to London in 1728-29 is
said to have been due to sheer impecuniosity. When he returned to England, his
father was good enough to make him an allowance of L200 nominal, which appears
to have been equivalent to L0 actual. And as practically nothing is known of
him for the next six or seven years, except the fact of his having worked
industriously enough at a large number of not very good plays of the lighter
kind, with a few poems and miscellanies, it is reasonably enough supposed that
he lived by his pen. The only product of this period which has kept (or indeed
which ever received) competent applause is Tom Thumb, or the Tragedy of
Tragedies, a following of course of the Rehearsal, but full of humour and
spirit. The most successful of his other dramatic works were the Mock Doctor
and the Miser, adaptations of Moliere's famous pieces. His undoubted connection
with the stage, and the fact of the contemporary existence of a certain Timothy
Fielding, helped suggestions of less dignified occupations as actor,
booth-keeper, and so forth; but these have long been discredited and indeed
disproved.
In or about 1735, when Fielding was twenty-eight, we find
him in a new, a more brilliant and agreeable, but even a more transient phase.
He had married (we do not know when or where) Miss Charlotte Cradock, one of
three sisters who lived at Salisbury (it is to be observed that Fielding's
entire connections, both in life and letters, are with the Western Counties and
London), who were certainly of competent means, and for whose alleged
illegitimacy there is no evidence but an unsupported fling of that old maid of
genius, Richardson. The descriptions both of Sophia and of Amelia are said to
have been taken from this lady; her good looks and her amiability are as well
established as anything of the kind can be in the absence of photographs and
affidavits; and it is certain that her husband was passionately attached to
her, during their too short married life. His method, however, of showing his
affection smacked in some ways too much of the foibles which he has attributed
to Captain Booth, and of those which we must suspect Mr Thomas Jones would also
have exhibited, if he had not been adopted as Mr Allworthy's heir, and had not
had Mr Western's fortune to share and look forward to. It is true that grave
breaches have been made by recent criticism in the very picturesque and
circumstantial story told on the subject by Murphy, the first of Fielding's
biographers. This legend was that Fielding, having succeeded by the death of
his mother to a small estate at East Stour, worth about L200 a year, and having
received L1500 in ready money as his wife's fortune, got through the whole in
three years by keeping open house, with a large retinue in "costly yellow
liveries," and so forth. In details, this story has been simply riddled.
His mother had died long before; he was certainly not away from London three
years, or anything like it; and so forth. At the same time, the best and
soberest judges agree that there is an intrinsic probability, a consensus (if a
vague one) of tradition, and a chain of almost unmistakably personal references
in the novels, which plead for a certain amount of truth, at the bottom of a
much embellished legend. At any rate, if Fielding established himself in the
country, it was not long before he returned to town; for early in 1736 we find
him back again, and not merely a playwright, but lessee of the "Little
Theatre" in the Haymarket. The plays which he produced
here—satirico-political pieces, such as Pasquin and the Historical
Register—were popular enough, but offended the Government; and in 1737 a new
bill regulating theatrical performances, and instituting the Lord Chamberlain's
control, was passed. This measure put an end directly to the "Great
Mogul's Company," as Fielding had called his troop, and indirectly to its
manager's career as a playwright. He did indeed write a few pieces in future
years, but they were of the smallest importance.
Babita patel
01-Oct-2023 11:58 AM
Nice
Reply