Since 1997, you’ve been coming to BarnesandNoble.com to discuss everything from Stephen King to writing to Harry Potter. You’ve made our site more than a place to discover your next book: you’ve made it a community. But like all things internet, BN.com is growing and changing. We've said goodbye to our community message boards—but that doesn’t mean we won’t still be a place for adventurous readers to connect and discover.

Now, you can explore the most exciting new titles (and remember the classics) at the Barnes & Noble Book Blog. Check out conversations with authors like Jeff VanderMeer and Gary Shteyngart at the B&N Review, and browse write-ups of the best in literary fiction. Come to our Facebook page to weigh in on what it means to be a book nerd. Browse digital deals on the NOOK blog, tweet about books with us,or self-publish your latest novella with NOOK Press. And for those of you looking for support for your NOOK, the NOOK Support Forums will still be here.

We will continue to provide you with books that make you turn pages well past midnight, discover new worlds, and reunite with old friends. And we hope that you’ll continue to tell us how you’re doing, what you’re reading, and what books mean to you.

Reply
Frequent Contributor
PeterP
Posts: 27
Registered: ‎06-14-2007
0 Kudos

Tom Jones - Books One and Two

How is everyone doing?
Last night, I did what I hadn't done before - I Googled Tom Jones. Aside from the singer who, I guess, is making a comeback, there is actually a good article on the book. There is a very succinct and accurate plot summary, if anyone finds that useful.
Books One and Two introduce quiet a few characters and more are coming in Book Three and Four. In the first books we get the facts of Tom’s birth and a pretty thorough introduction to two households at different levels of the social spectrum - Squire Allworthy's and the school teacher, Partridge's, along with the wildcard of Jenny Jones. We also witness the birth of Tom's double/rival Master Bilifil, the legitimate off-spring of Squire Allworthy's sister. Is it remarkable that Allworthy is moved to give Tom his own given name? So that that our Tom has two names awkwardly joined together? Or perhaps one could really speak of one and a half names? Is the countryside’s suspicion that Allworthy really is the father important?
Scribe
Laurel
Posts: 5,747
Registered: ‎10-29-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Tom Jones - Books One and Two

I'm listening to an unabridged reading of the book, complete with Handel's music. I think I'm half-way through. I think I fell asleep a few times, so the summary will be helpful to me. Very enjoyable book!
"Truth must of necessity be stranger than fiction, for fiction is the creation of the human mind, and therefore is congenial to it." ~~G.K. Chesterton
Frequent Contributor
PeterP
Posts: 27
Registered: ‎06-14-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Tom Jones - Books One and Two

There is nothing like falling asleep to a good book.




Laurel wrote:
I'm listening to an unabridged reading of the book, complete with Handel's music. I think I'm half-way through. I think I fell asleep a few times, so the summary will be helpful to me. Very enjoyable book!

Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Tom Jones - Books One and Two

I'm nearly done Book 2 -- I have very limited reading time these days, but am enjoying TJ so far. Lots of things I had forgotten from my first reading, what, about 40 years ago?

BTW, Peter, you didn't give us the URL for that great summary you found. Do you still have that, and if so can you post it?
_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Frequent Contributor
PeterP
Posts: 27
Registered: ‎06-14-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Tom Jones - Books One and Two

40 years!
You are a bit ahead of me in that department. The other evening I was trying to explain to my children (blank stares) the special joy of rereading - that it is almost a compesation for other things that pass us by as we get older. But to be able to mark with a book how we have changed or haven't, what we have learned or haven't, how the world has changed...all that is an experience like no other.
I will put up the URL in my next post.






Everyman wrote:
I'm nearly done Book 2 -- I have very limited reading time these days, but am enjoying TJ so far. Lots of things I had forgotten from my first reading, what, about 40 years ago?

BTW, Peter, you didn't give us the URL for that great summary you found. Do you still have that, and if so can you post it?

Frequent Contributor
CallMeLeo
Posts: 513
Registered: ‎11-08-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Tom Jones - Books One and Two - Mr. Allworthy

Is it remarkable that Allworthy is moved to give Tom his own given name? So that that our Tom has two names awkwardly joined together? Or perhaps one could really speak of one and a half names? Is the countryside’s suspicion that Allworthy really is the father important?

What is remarkable is Allworthy's attitude for the infant. It is so opposite of everyone else's. He is an unusually kind man who has lost his beloved wife and three children.

I don't believe the countryside's suspicion of Mr. Allworthy as the possible father is so very important, at least not to the plot, other than that their talk is spiteful, inflamed by Mr. Allworthy's lenient treatment of Jenny Jones, and proves that few are safe from accusation and public opinion. I find it is another example of the inconstancy of opinion and feeling almost everyone has displayed since the discovery of the foundling.

I enjoy the small portraits of human nature, the ironic truths Fielding gives us. Mrs. Wilkins is one of my favorites. She prudently mimics the sentiments of her employers, but releases her frustation by tyrannizing over the village:

"It is my intention, therefore, to signify, that, as it is the nature of a kite to devour little birds, so is it the nature of such persons as Mrs. Wilkins to insult and tyrannize over little people. This being indeed the means which they use to recompense to themselves their extreme servility and condescension to their superiors; for nothing can be more reasonable, than that slaves and flatterers should exact the same taxes on all below them, which they themselves pay to all above them. Bk1, Ch6"





PeterP wrote:
How is everyone doing?
Last night, I did what I hadn't done before - I Googled Tom Jones. Aside from the singer who, I guess, is making a comeback, there is actually a good article on the book. There is a very succinct and accurate plot summary, if anyone finds that useful.
Books One and Two introduce quiet a few characters and more are coming in Book Three and Four. In the first books we get the facts of Tom’s birth and a pretty thorough introduction to two households at different levels of the social spectrum - Squire Allworthy's and the school teacher, Partridge's, along with the wildcard of Jenny Jones. We also witness the birth of Tom's double/rival Master Bilifil, the legitimate off-spring of Squire Allworthy's sister. Is it remarkable that Allworthy is moved to give Tom his own given name? So that that our Tom has two names awkwardly joined together? Or perhaps one could really speak of one and a half names? Is the countryside’s suspicion that Allworthy really is the father important?

Frequent Contributor
PeterP
Posts: 27
Registered: ‎06-14-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Tom Jones - Books One and Two - Mr. Allworthy

Thanks for your thought provoking observations - especially when you speak of the small portraits of human nature. Isn't it the compelling nature of these portraits that accounts for some of the extraordinary richness of the book? At this point we are reminded of Fielding's grounding in Classical Culture - his connection the Augustan world of Pope and Dryden and ultimately to Homer, Horace, etc., and the tradition of character portraits. In a way, there are no unconsidered characters - even the so-called minor roles are introduced in such a way that they offer another glimpse into the diversity and commonality of human nature as Fielding conceived it.









CallMeLeo wrote:
Is it remarkable that Allworthy is moved to give Tom his own given name? So that that our Tom has two names awkwardly joined together? Or perhaps one could really speak of one and a half names? Is the countryside’s suspicion that Allworthy really is the father important?

What is remarkable is Allworthy's attitude for the infant. It is so opposite of everyone else's. He is an unusually kind man who has lost his beloved wife and three children.

I don't believe the countryside's suspicion of Mr. Allworthy as the possible father is so very important, at least not to the plot, other than that their talk is spiteful, inflamed by Mr. Allworthy's lenient treatment of Jenny Jones, and proves that few are safe from accusation and public opinion. I find it is another example of the inconstancy of opinion and feeling almost everyone has displayed since the discovery of the foundling.

I enjoy the small portraits of human nature, the ironic truths Fielding gives us. Mrs. Wilkins is one of my favorites. She prudently mimics the sentiments of her employers, but releases her frustation by tyrannizing over the village:

"It is my intention, therefore, to signify, that, as it is the nature of a kite to devour little birds, so is it the nature of such persons as Mrs. Wilkins to insult and tyrannize over little people. This being indeed the means which they use to recompense to themselves their extreme servility and condescension to their superiors; for nothing can be more reasonable, than that slaves and flatterers should exact the same taxes on all below them, which they themselves pay to all above them. Bk1, Ch6"





PeterP wrote:
How is everyone doing?
Last night, I did what I hadn't done before - I Googled Tom Jones. Aside from the singer who, I guess, is making a comeback, there is actually a good article on the book. There is a very succinct and accurate plot summary, if anyone finds that useful.
Books One and Two introduce quiet a few characters and more are coming in Book Three and Four. In the first books we get the facts of Tom’s birth and a pretty thorough introduction to two households at different levels of the social spectrum - Squire Allworthy's and the school teacher, Partridge's, along with the wildcard of Jenny Jones. We also witness the birth of Tom's double/rival Master Bilifil, the legitimate off-spring of Squire Allworthy's sister. Is it remarkable that Allworthy is moved to give Tom his own given name? So that that our Tom has two names awkwardly joined together? Or perhaps one could really speak of one and a half names? Is the countryside’s suspicion that Allworthy really is the father important?



Contributor
rdm68
Posts: 14
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Tom Jones - Books One and Two

On the subject of re-reading, here's a passage I read yesterday from DHLawrence's final book, Apocalypse:

"A book lives as long as it is unfathomed. Once a book is fathomed, once it is known, and its meaning is fixed or established, it is dead. A book only lives while it has power to move us, and move us differently; so long as we find it different every time we read it. Owing to the flood of shallow books which really are exhausted in one reading, the modern mind tends to think every book is the same, finished in one reading. But it is not so. The real joy of a book lies in reading it over and over again, and always finding it different, coming upon another meaning, another level of meaning. It is, as usual, a question of values: we are so overwhelmed with quantities of books that we hardly realise any more that a book can be valuable, valuable like a jewel, or a lovely picture, into which you can look deeper and deeper and get a more profound experience every time."
Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Tom Jones - Books One and Two

Thanks RDM - a profound passage from a profound writer:smileyhappy:.



rdm68 wrote:
On the subject of re-reading, here's a passage I read yesterday from DHLawrence's final book, Apocalypse:

"A book lives as long as it is unfathomed. Once a book is fathomed, once it is known, and its meaning is fixed or established, it is dead. A book only lives while it has power to move us, and move us differently; so long as we find it different every time we read it. Owing to the flood of shallow books which really are exhausted in one reading, the modern mind tends to think every book is the same, finished in one reading. But it is not so. The real joy of a book lies in reading it over and over again, and always finding it different, coming upon another meaning, another level of meaning. It is, as usual, a question of values: we are so overwhelmed with quantities of books that we hardly realise any more that a book can be valuable, valuable like a jewel, or a lovely picture, into which you can look deeper and deeper and get a more profound experience every time."


Frequent Contributor
PeterP
Posts: 27
Registered: ‎06-14-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Tom Jones - Books One and Two

Yes.
You all have me thinking about Lawrence. I have only a dim recollection of what I read when I was very young. Have you ever noticed that something that hasn't been in your mind for a long time will suddenly start popping up in all kinds of contexts? last night I was reading Tom Paulin on William Hazlitt (and looking into Hazlitt on Hogarth) and up pops Lawrence again. I guess I know what I should read - but what should I read? Any suggestions?





rdm68 wrote:
On the subject of re-reading, here's a passage I read yesterday from DHLawrence's final book, Apocalypse:

"A book lives as long as it is unfathomed. Once a book is fathomed, once it is known, and its meaning is fixed or established, it is dead. A book only lives while it has power to move us, and move us differently; so long as we find it different every time we read it. Owing to the flood of shallow books which really are exhausted in one reading, the modern mind tends to think every book is the same, finished in one reading. But it is not so. The real joy of a book lies in reading it over and over again, and always finding it different, coming upon another meaning, another level of meaning. It is, as usual, a question of values: we are so overwhelmed with quantities of books that we hardly realise any more that a book can be valuable, valuable like a jewel, or a lovely picture, into which you can look deeper and deeper and get a more profound experience every time."


Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Tom Jones - Books One and Two

[ Edited ]
My favourite Lawrence is Sons and Lovers which is a marvellous portrayal of the effect of the Oedipus complex upon his early life, together with excellent descriptions of the Nottinghamshire countryside and the lives of coal mining families at the turn of the century. I know (knew) the area well so can vouch for its authenticity. And I suppose you ought to read Lady Chatterley's Lover just to see what all the fuss was about:smileyhappy:.

I vaguely remember Hazlitt's Lectures on English Comic Writers and that there is an essay on Hogarth in that book. I can't remember whether he also wrote on Fielding? I like his biting wit on his contemporaries in The Spirit of the Age ('Wit is the salt of conversation, not the food.'). Better to be his friend rather than an enemy, although he said 'I like a friend better for having faults that one can talk about.' :smileyhappy:



PeterP wrote:
Yes.
You all have me thinking about Lawrence. I have only a dim recollection of what I read when I was very young. Have you ever noticed that something that hasn't been in your mind for a long time will suddenly start popping up in all kinds of contexts? last night I was reading Tom Paulin on William Hazlitt (and looking into Hazlitt on Hogarth) and up pops Lawrence again. I guess I know what I should read - but what should I read? Any suggestions?





rdm68 wrote:
On the subject of re-reading, here's a passage I read yesterday from DHLawrence's final book, Apocalypse:

"A book lives as long as it is unfathomed. Once a book is fathomed, once it is known, and its meaning is fixed or established, it is dead. A book only lives while it has power to move us, and move us differently; so long as we find it different every time we read it. Owing to the flood of shallow books which really are exhausted in one reading, the modern mind tends to think every book is the same, finished in one reading. But it is not so. The real joy of a book lies in reading it over and over again, and always finding it different, coming upon another meaning, another level of meaning. It is, as usual, a question of values: we are so overwhelmed with quantities of books that we hardly realise any more that a book can be valuable, valuable like a jewel, or a lovely picture, into which you can look deeper and deeper and get a more profound experience every time."



Message Edited by Choisya on 08-18-2007 08:40 AM
Frequent Contributor
PeterP
Posts: 27
Registered: ‎06-14-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Tom Jones - Books One and Two

Yes.
Hazlitt discusses Hogarth a great deal - where you have mention and there is even a separate essay published in an old Oxford Classic that may be out-of-print. Hazlitt refers to Fielding a lot - and I think with some ambivalence - but I have to sort it out.

Paulin quotes this, which I like - "As he (Hazlitt) explains in 'Old English Writers and Speakers', the mark of the 'genuine English intellect' is the way it constantly combines as Hogarth and Fielding do, 'truth of external observation with strength of internal meaning'.

And speaking of quote – I know there is a passage “somewhere” in which Hazlitt cites Molière, Fielding, and Hogarth, all in one or two sentences – (at least I think so).

Well, I owe you a quote, Choisya.

Thanks for the tips on Lawrence.
Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Tom Jones - Books One and Two : Hazlitt on Fielding

[ Edited ]
Peter: I found these titbits in the Lectures on Comic Writers:

That 'Moliere is almost an English author, quite a barbare [barbarian!], in all in which he excels.'

That 'Fielding's Comedies are very inferior to his novels...in both plot and character'. They are 'excellent in style in which his novels are deficient.' The only dramas that 'retain possession of the stage are The Mock Doctor, which is a tolerable translation from Moliere's Medecin Malgre lui and the burlesque Tom Thumb.' So it would seem that Fielding did use/know of Moliere's stuff.




PeterP wrote:
Yes.
Hazlitt discusses Hogarth a great deal - where you have mention and there is even a separate essay published in an old Oxford Classic that may be out-of-print. Hazlitt refers to Fielding a lot - and I think with some ambivalence - but I have to sort it out.

Paulin quotes this, which I like - "As he (Hazlitt) explains in 'Old English Writers and Speakers', the mark of the 'genuine English intellect' is the way it constantly combines as Hogarth and Fielding do, 'truth of external observation with strength of internal meaning'.

And speaking of quote – I know there is a passage “somewhere” in which Hazlitt cites Molière, Fielding, and Hogarth, all in one or two sentences – (at least I think so).

Well, I owe you a quote, Choisya.

Thanks for the tips on Lawrence.



Message Edited by Choisya on 08-18-2007 04:26 PM
Contributor
rdm68
Posts: 14
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Tom Jones - Books One and Two



PeterP wrote:
Yes.
You all have me thinking about Lawrence. I have only a dim recollection of what I read when I was very young. Have you ever noticed that something that hasn't been in your mind for a long time will suddenly start popping up in all kinds of contexts? last night I was reading Tom Paulin on William Hazlitt (and looking into Hazlitt on Hogarth) and up pops Lawrence again. I guess I know what I should read - but what should I read? Any suggestions?

Besides Sons & Lovers, I'd highly recommend Women in Love, and his short stories. Also, his non-fiction Studies in Classic American Literature - a group of essays about Hawthorne, Melville etc. - are irresistible.

And his novella, The Man Who Died, is a superb counterpoint to The DaVinci Code.
Contributor
rdm68
Posts: 14
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Tom Jones - Books One and Two : Hazlitt on Fielding



Choisya wrote:
Peter: I found these titbits in the Lectures on Comic Writers:

That 'Moliere is almost an English author, quite a barbare [barbarian!], in all in which he excels.'

That 'Fielding's Comedies are very inferior to his novels...in both plot and character'. They are 'excellent in style in which his novels are deficient.' The only dramas that 'retain possession of the stage are The Mock Doctor, which is a tolerable translation from Moliere's Medecin Malgre lui and the burlesque Tom Thumb.' So it would seem that Fielding did use/know of Moliere's stuff.




PeterP wrote:
Yes.
Hazlitt discusses Hogarth a great deal - where you have mention and there is even a separate essay published in an old Oxford Classic that may be out-of-print. Hazlitt refers to Fielding a lot - and I think with some ambivalence - but I have to sort it out.

Paulin quotes this, which I like - "As he (Hazlitt) explains in 'Old English Writers and Speakers', the mark of the 'genuine English intellect' is the way it constantly combines as Hogarth and Fielding do, 'truth of external observation with strength of internal meaning'.

And speaking of quote – I know there is a passage “somewhere” in which Hazlitt cites Molière, Fielding, and Hogarth, all in one or two sentences – (at least I think so).

Well, I owe you a quote, Choisya.

Thanks for the tips on Lawrence.



Message Edited by Choisya on 08-18-2007 04:26 PM


I wonder what he meant by that (that Moliere is "almost an English author"). Trying to define the differences between English and French anything is always slippery, but Moliere seems so quintessentially French... Any idea what Hazlitt had in mind?
Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Tom Jones - Books One and Two : Hazlitt on Fielding & Moliere

Peter can probably throw more light on this but I think what Hazlitt meant was that Moliere wasn't as 'refined' as other French authors of his day and used more of the earthiness of English 17th century writing, like that of Fielding. Hazlitt was rather contemptuous of the refined writers who followed Fielding and this too, to touch on the subject again, was one of Lawrence's complaints about writing after the 17th century. If you look at English Literature from Chaucer to Fielding you will find a certain frankness, which some now call vulgarity, but which was in fact part of the common speech and expression of the times. This frankness disappeared during the Regency period and 'refinement' of language, the 'comedy of manners' and excessive politeness entered literature and life. It was the literary equivalent of covering up the legs of pianos:smileysurprised:. The very mannered novels of Jane Austen are a good example of this latter style. At least I think this is what Hazlitt was getting at:smileyhappy:. I look forward to Peter's comments.

(Hazlitt very much admired Hogarth and the 'Grand Style' of painting and this was also followed by the more refined and restrained styles of Reynolds and Gainsborough. I think it was Hazlitt who said of Hogarth that 'all of human life is there' and that only Shakespeare equalled him.)




rdm68 wrote:


Choisya wrote:
Peter: I found these titbits in the Lectures on Comic Writers:

That 'Moliere is almost an English author, quite a barbare [barbarian!], in all in which he excels.'

That 'Fielding's Comedies are very inferior to his novels...in both plot and character'. They are 'excellent in style in which his novels are deficient.' The only dramas that 'retain possession of the stage are The Mock Doctor, which is a tolerable translation from Moliere's Medecin Malgre lui and the burlesque Tom Thumb.' So it would seem that Fielding did use/know of Moliere's stuff.




PeterP wrote:
Yes.
Hazlitt discusses Hogarth a great deal - where you have mention and there is even a separate essay published in an old Oxford Classic that may be out-of-print. Hazlitt refers to Fielding a lot - and I think with some ambivalence - but I have to sort it out.

Paulin quotes this, which I like - "As he (Hazlitt) explains in 'Old English Writers and Speakers', the mark of the 'genuine English intellect' is the way it constantly combines as Hogarth and Fielding do, 'truth of external observation with strength of internal meaning'.

And speaking of quote – I know there is a passage “somewhere” in which Hazlitt cites Molière, Fielding, and Hogarth, all in one or two sentences – (at least I think so).

Well, I owe you a quote, Choisya.

Thanks for the tips on Lawrence.



Message Edited by Choisya on 08-18-2007 04:26 PM


I wonder what he meant by that (that Moliere is "almost an English author"). Trying to define the differences between English and French anything is always slippery, but Moliere seems so quintessentially French... Any idea what Hazlitt had in mind?


Contributor
rdm68
Posts: 14
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Tom Jones - Books One and Two : Hazlitt on Fielding & Moliere



Choisya wrote:
Peter can probably throw more light on this but I think what Hazlitt meant was that Moliere wasn't as 'refined' as other French authors of his day and used more of the earthiness of English 17th century writing, like that of Fielding. Hazlitt was rather contemptuous of the refined writers who followed Fielding and this too, to touch on the subject again, was one of Lawrence's complaints about writing after the 17th century. If you look at English Literature from Chaucer to Fielding you will find a certain frankness, which some now call vulgarity, but which was in fact part of the common speech and expression of the times. This frankness disappeared during the Regency period and 'refinement' of language, the 'comedy of manners' and excessive politeness entered literature and life. It was the literary equivalent of covering up the legs of pianos:smileysurprised:. The very mannered novels of Jane Austen are a good example of this latter style. At least I think this is what Hazlitt was getting at:smileyhappy:. I look forward to Peter's comments.

(Hazlitt very much admired Hogarth and the 'Grand Style' of painting and this was also followed by the more refined and restrained styles of Reynolds and Gainsborough. I think it was Hazlitt who said of Hogarth that 'all of human life is there' and that only Shakespeare equalled him.)




I wonder what he meant by that (that Moliere is "almost an English author"). Trying to define the differences between English and French anything is always slippery, but Moliere seems so quintessentially French... Any idea what Hazlitt had in mind?







That’s a very good point. I’ve often wondered about the rather strange divide in English literature. The novels of the 19th century, from Jane Austen onward, reflect a sort of teacup-and-saucer “refinement” that certainly has its charms – the charms of Victorian culture – but strongly contrasts with the heartier, earthier Englishness reflected in the works of Fielding, Defoe, Shakespeare, Chaucer, and probably tracing back to the literature of the Anglo-Saxons. I think a lot of people today are drawn to the gentility of Austen’s world (at least as portrayed in the movies and TV series based on her works) and think of it as expressing the quintessence of “Englishness”, but it’s actually a relatively recent development in the evolution of the English character - at least as reflected in literature.
Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Tom Jones - Books One and Two

There was an interesting set of posts on rereading in, I think, the Community room. Some people (I include myself) are avid rereaders; others can't understand how, having read a book, one could ever want to read it again when there are so many new books yet to be read.

I think either one is a rereader or one isn't, and the aren'ts will never understand the joys of the ares.


PeterP wrote:
40 years!
You are a bit ahead of me in that department. The other evening I was trying to explain to my children (blank stares) the special joy of rereading - that it is almost a compesation for other things that pass us by as we get older. But to be able to mark with a book how we have changed or haven't, what we have learned or haven't, how the world has changed...all that is an experience like no other.
I will put up the URL in my next post.






Everyman wrote:
I'm nearly done Book 2 -- I have very limited reading time these days, but am enjoying TJ so far. Lots of things I had forgotten from my first reading, what, about 40 years ago?

BTW, Peter, you didn't give us the URL for that great summary you found. Do you still have that, and if so can you post it?




_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Tom Jones - Books One and Two - Mr. Allworthy

Nice post, Leo. I agree that Allworthy lives up to his name.

CallMeLeo wrote:
Is it remarkable that Allworthy is moved to give Tom his own given name? So that that our Tom has two names awkwardly joined together? Or perhaps one could really speak of one and a half names? Is the countryside’s suspicion that Allworthy really is the father important?

What is remarkable is Allworthy's attitude for the infant. It is so opposite of everyone else's. He is an unusually kind man who has lost his beloved wife and three children.

I don't believe the countryside's suspicion of Mr. Allworthy as the possible father is so very important, at least not to the plot, other than that their talk is spiteful, inflamed by Mr. Allworthy's lenient treatment of Jenny Jones, and proves that few are safe from accusation and public opinion. I find it is another example of the inconstancy of opinion and feeling almost everyone has displayed since the discovery of the foundling.

I enjoy the small portraits of human nature, the ironic truths Fielding gives us. Mrs. Wilkins is one of my favorites. She prudently mimics the sentiments of her employers, but releases her frustation by tyrannizing over the village:

"It is my intention, therefore, to signify, that, as it is the nature of a kite to devour little birds, so is it the nature of such persons as Mrs. Wilkins to insult and tyrannize over little people. This being indeed the means which they use to recompense to themselves their extreme servility and condescension to their superiors; for nothing can be more reasonable, than that slaves and flatterers should exact the same taxes on all below them, which they themselves pay to all above them. Bk1, Ch6"





PeterP wrote:
How is everyone doing?
Last night, I did what I hadn't done before - I Googled Tom Jones. Aside from the singer who, I guess, is making a comeback, there is actually a good article on the book. There is a very succinct and accurate plot summary, if anyone finds that useful.
Books One and Two introduce quiet a few characters and more are coming in Book Three and Four. In the first books we get the facts of Tom’s birth and a pretty thorough introduction to two households at different levels of the social spectrum - Squire Allworthy's and the school teacher, Partridge's, along with the wildcard of Jenny Jones. We also witness the birth of Tom's double/rival Master Bilifil, the legitimate off-spring of Squire Allworthy's sister. Is it remarkable that Allworthy is moved to give Tom his own given name? So that that our Tom has two names awkwardly joined together? Or perhaps one could really speak of one and a half names? Is the countryside’s suspicion that Allworthy really is the father important?




_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

On Fielding's Names

I am fascinated by Fielding's names.

Some are obviously straightforward. Allworthy is indeed all worthy. Thwackum indeed thwacks 'em.

Other names may be a bit more tongue in cheek. Square, for example, seems to be a crooked (not in a dishonest sense, but in a non-straight sense).

Bridget, according to one source, means "exalted one". In Irish mythology she was the goddess of fire, poetry and wisdom.

Partridges are timid, shy birds, and probably have characteristics better known to those who are familiar with them. But they are hunted by the aristocracy, which may be an appropriate element here.

Given that he is so deliberate in some of his naming, is he more casual in other instances, or are there hidden (or obvious that I'm not seeing) meanings to Jenny Jones, Deborah Wilkins, and others?
_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Users Online
Currently online: 41 members 687 guests
Please welcome our newest community members: