In attacking _Pamela's_ morality, _Pamela Censured_ raises a problem inherent in virtually all narrative fiction: stories inevitably lead some readers to imitate the vicious characters rather than the virtuous ones, in spite of any moral statements made by the author or any punishments meted out at the end of the story. Even in "forbidding a silly ostler to grease the horse's teeth," as Alithea says in _The Country Wife_ (III, i), one may very easily teach him "to do't." Such concerns, of course, are not new. From Plato and Horace to the Neo-Humanists of the twentieth century, critics have dwelled in varying degrees on the moral effects of literature. The eighteenth century, reacting against the supposed immorality of the Restoration, often emphasized the _utile_, losing sight of the _dulce_ in its criticism. _Pamela Censured_ in its moral approach bears a striking similarity to Jeremy Collier's _Short View of the Immorality and Profaneness of the English Stage_ (1698): both virtually try to bludgeon to death literary works for inciting immoral actions. In one respect, however, _A Short View_ exercises a bit more control than does _Pamela Censured_. While Collier refuses to quote directly from the offensive literature, affirming that his intention is "rather to kill the _Root_ than _Transplant_ it," the author of _Pamela Censured_ meticulously provides his readers with a compendium of the so-called dirty parts of _Pamela_. Such attention to the morality of literature, moreover, may easily backfire. The anonymous author of _A Vindication of the Stage_ (1698) concludes that Collier's "dwelling so long on the Subject of Debauchery, argues something of Delight and Pleasure in the Case." Likewise, the author of _Pamela's Conduct in High Life_ sees the treatment of sexual immodesty in _Pamela Censured_ as evidence of "how much of the Goat" there is in the author's "Constitution."[4] More importantly, however, _Pamela Censured_--as the first sustained criticism of what is probably the first English novel--amasses much of the moral ammunition which was to be fired at realistic novels during the eighteenth century. Echoes of _Pamela Censured_ may, for instance, be heard in Clara Reeve's _Progress of Romance_ (1785), where Hortensia comments that in reading, "The seeds of vice and folly are sown in the heart,--the passions are awakened,--false expectations are raised.--A young woman is taught to expect adventures and intrigues." Euphrasia, who expresses Clara Reeve's attitudes throughout the work, qualifies this statement, pointing out that these ill effects come from reading novels, but not romances.[5] Indeed, romances do not mislead readers precisely because they are so removed from real life. Moreover, romances morally instruct readers without hazarding the pitfalls inherent in novels. Dr. John Gregory's _Comparative View_ (1765), for instance, concludes that: