Samuel Richardson's Introduction to PamelaRichardson, Samuel
General
Samuel Richardson's Introduction to Pamela
Richardson, Samuel
Richardson, Samuel, 1689-1761. Pamela
7. That the Words, _p. 305._ _Foolish Thing that I am_, had better be
_Foolish that I am_. The same Gentleman observes by way of _Postscript_,
that Jokes are often more severe, and do more Mischief, than more solid
Objections; and would have one or two Passages alter’d, to avoid giving
Occasion for the Supposition of a double Entendre, particularly in two
Places which he mentions, _viz._ _p. 175. and 181_.
_He is pleased to take notice of several other Things of less Moment,
some of which are merely typographical; and very kindly expresses, on
the Whole, a high Opinion of the Performance, and thinks it may do a
great deal of Good: For all which, as well as for his Objections, the
Editor gives him very sincere Thanks._
_Others are of Opinion, That the Scenes in many Places, in the Beginning
especially, are too low; and that the Passions of Lady _Davers_, in
particular, are carried too high, and above Nature._
_And others have intimated, That _Pamela_ ought, for Example sake, to
have discharg’d Mrs. _Jewkes_ from her Service._
_These are the most material Objections that have come to hand, all
which are considered in the following [_del._ 5th] {Extracts from some
of the most beautiful} Letters [_del._ 5th] {that have been written in
any Language}:_
[8th adds change 4]
The Gentleman’s Advice, not to alter _Pamela_ at all, was both
friendly, and solidly just. I run in, with full Sail, to his
Anchorage, that the low Scenes are no more out of Nature, than the
high Passions of proud Lady _Davers_. Out of Nature, do they say?
’Tis my Astonishment how Men of Letters can read with such absent
Attention! They are so far from _Out_ of _Nature_, They are absolute
_Nature herself_! or, if they must be confess’d her _Resemblance_;
they are _such_ a Resemblance, at least, as our _true Face_ gives
our _Face_ in the _Looking-glass_.
I wonder indeed, what it is, that the Gentlemen, who talk of _Low_
Scenes, wou’d desire should be understood by the Epithet?---Nothing,
properly speaking, is _low_, that suits well with the Place it is
rais’d to.----The Passions of Nature are the same, in the _Lord_,
and his _Coach-man_. All, that makes them seem different consists in
the _Degrees_, in the _Means_, and the _Air_, whereto or wherewith
they indulge ’em. If, in painting Distinctions like these, (which
arise but from the Forms of Men’s Manners, drawn from _Birth_,
_Education_, and _Custom_) a Writer _falls short_ of his Characters,
there his Scene is a low one, indeed, whatever high Fortune it
flatter’d. But, to imagine that Persons of Rank are above a Concern
for what is thought, felt, or acted, by others, of their Species,
between whom and themselves is _no Difference_, except such as was
owing to Accident, is to reduce Human Nature to a Lowness,--_too
low_ for the _Truth_ of her _Frailty_.--
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account