From the first, Richardson’s disguise as editor is little more than half-hearted. Its purpose was at first partly commercial, permitting advertising in the preface. Four ladies urged him on, so, Richardson confesses, he “struck a bold stroke in the preface... having the umbrage of the editor’s character to screen [him] self behind.”[15] But the author nevertheless threw rather distinct shadows on the screen. His preface speaks of the book altogether as a work of fiction: the editor has “set forth” social duties; he has “painted” vice and virtue, “drawn” characters, “raised,” “taught,” “effected,” and “embellished with a great variety of entertaining incidents.” Yet, suddenly, the editor also seems to have done nothing more than to have “perused these engaging scenes,” written a preface, and gotten them into print. Richardson cannot quite give the imaginary author substance. “These sheets” have accomplished all the wonders claimed for them, not “the author of these sheets.” Richardson speaks not of _the_ author, but of _an_ author, of authors in general. The implication hangs over the preface, and is strengthened by de Freval’s letter, that the editor himself has worked up the story from the barest details of real life (which is, of course, what Richardson did). De Freval continues to speak of the work entirely as of creative writing. The epistolary style is aptly devised; the book will become a pattern for this kind of fiction; it is contrived for readers of all tastes. But, quite in contradiction, de Freval also implies that the editor has shown him the author’s original work, together with certain editorial changes necessary to protect the real Pamela and Mr. B. The second letter, presumably Webster’s, toys with the suggestion that a young woman actually wrote the letters which Richardson edits: “let us have _Pamela_ as _Pamela_ wrote it.” But this is only in play. Although the writer disparages “_Novels_,” the note which heads his letter when it first appeared in _The Weekly Miscellany_ speaks of the “Author of Pamela” who has “written an _English Novel_,”[16] and his opening remarks are clearly those of a critic speaking of fiction. Hill’s first letter goes solidly for the conclusion that an author, a man of genius, wrote the book. The heading, “To the Editor of _Pamela_”, is Richardson’s only attempt to bring Hill’s letter into his already wavering line. In the fifth edition, however, he introduces this letter with his only straight statement that an author, distinct from the editor, is involved, an author who begged the editor not to include flattery.