Joseph Andrews

Joseph Andrews as a Comic

Epic in Prose

Fielding wanted Joseph Andrews to be accepted as a comic epic in

prose. He believed that a comic epic in prose was quite a new genre
and he was keen to explore its possibilities. He also tried to expound
a well-defined theory about it. Combining these ideas of the comic
epic and the prose epic, Fielding evolved a
new genre-comic epic in prose.
In his preface to Joseph Andrews, Fielding has differentiated his
comic epic in prose from both comicromance and a serious
romance; now, a comic romance is a comic epic poem in prose:
differing from comedy, as the serious epic from tragedy; its action
being more extended and comprehensive; containing a much larger
circle of incidents, and introducing a greater variety of characters. It
differs from the serious romance in its fabls and action in this; that as
in the one these are grave and solemn, so in the other they are light
and ridiculous; it differs in its characters by introducing persons of
inferior rank, and consequently of inferior manners, where as the
grave romance set the highest before us: lastly in its sentiments and
diction by preserving the ludicrous instead of the sublime.

Fielding also tells us that like an epic, his comic epic in prose
embraces dignity and solemnity of prose.
The comic epic may also be differentiated from the burlesque. The
comic is strictly confined to the just imitation of nature which to an
accurate observer is sufficiently ridiculous. In the comic epic, while
the character and sentiments must always be perfectly natural, a
certain burlesque drollery in style is permissible in the narrative or
descriptive part.
The comic epic in prose chiefly promises a variety of characters
involved in a very comprehensive action. The novelist's tone is light,
even frivolous, and he gives a mildly satirical, ironical exposition of
the ridiculous. It is not history for it is not superficial study of events,
nor is it a burlesque , for a burlesque distorts while it doesn't.
Behind the frivolous tone of the novelist, there is a strict moral
responsibility which he shares with the writers of the serious epics.
What Fielding was attempting was an entirely new species of
literature.

Having discussed Fielding's theory about a comic epic in

prose, we are now in position to discuss how far Joseph
Andrews conforms to this theory.
1-A comic epic promises a variety of character involved in a
comprehensive action on an epical scale. Joseph Andrews
does take us form the countyside to London, and form there
back to the countryside. But we don't have any
comprehensive picture of life either in the countryside or in
London.
At both the places the action in confined to the personal
involvement of a handful of characters. The action along the
roadside has a more comprehensive sweep. It represents a
miniature picture of the city life as well. But everything is on
small scale.

2-In numerous other ways also, Joseph Andrews, tries to

follow the principles of epic structure. We can take the
example of the famous battle between Joseph and Parson
Adams on the one side and the hounds on the other. The
battle is described in terms of broad comedy, but with the
form of a serious conflict in which our sympathies are
engaged. At one point, Parson Adams flees.
3-The interpolation of the irrelevant-looking tales like the
story of Leonara is according to the traditional epic formula.
This device is common to all narrative of the time, but it also
enjoys the sanction of the epic usage.

Fielding makes use of the formula of

Discovery as outlined by Aristotle and
made much of in the work of the epic
theories. In the scene in which the mystery
of Joseph's and Fanny's parentage is being
straightened out, Fielding makes use of
this sort of discovery. Joseph is recognised
as the child of Mr- Willson by the
strawberry mark which he bears on his
chest.

Fielding takes the exposition of ridiculous

as his special field in his comic epic. In his
preface, he says that the only true source
of the ridiculous is affectation, or pretence.
And this affectation arises form one of two
causes, vanity and hypocrisy. Fielding
observes that it is form the discovery of the
affectation striking the reader with surprise
and pleasure, that the ridiculous emerges;
thus hypocrisy provides a stronger surprise
than vanity, and is more ridiculous, or we
might say funnier.

There is a good deal of vanity and hypocrisy

exposed in Joseph Andrews. In fact even Parson
Adams is not free from vanity. A very interesting
vanity exists in him about the great value of his
sermons. In fact the important scene in the novel,
the seduction scene , is a fine example of
hypocrisy and vanity in the character of Pamela ,
Parson Barnabas , Parson Trulliber , Peter Pounce
,The Squire of False Promises, The Squire of
Floos , Mr. Tow-wouse , Mrs. Tow-wouse , the
surgeon , the lawyer , the justice of peace , are
either vain or hypocritical and they all contribute to
the comedy in Joseph Andrews .

As a realist attempting to comic epic he found

prose with a comic turn given to its phrase a very
suitable medium for himself.

To conclude , thus , in Joseph Andrews , Fielding

applies all the rules of the comic epic. Fielding is a
great artist. The formal principles give unity to his
materials without our being aware of them. Here is
the which conceals art but is the art of a conscious
artist

Joseph Andrews: A Picaresque

Joseph Andrews cant be called a
regular picaresque novel for Fielding
employs elements of this tradition in
an exposition of his own theory of the
Ridiculous. He was writing a comic
epic-poem in pose. He adapts the
picaresque tradition to his own theory
of the novel, which shows the
influence of various other literary
forms besides the picaresque.

However, the picaresque motif helps Fielding to

fulfill his aim of ridiculing the affectations of human
beings. The different strata of society can be
represented through the picaresque mode. The
travelers meet squires, innkeepers, landladies,
persons, philosophers, lawyers and surgeons,
beggars, pedlars and robbers and rogues.
Particular social evils prevalent in the day, and
follies and foibles of human nature in general are
effectively exposed. Fieldings satire is pungent as
he presents the worldly and crafty priests and the
callous, vicious and inhuman country squires.
Malice, selfishness, vanities, hypocrisies, lack of
charity, all are ridiculed as human follies.

The picaresque tradition belongs to Spain

and derived from the word picaro,
meaning a rogue or a villain. The
picaresque originally involved the
misadventure of the rogue-hero, mainly on
the highway. Soon, however, the rogue was
replaced by a conventional hero gallant
and chivalric. The comic element lay in the
nature of the heros adventures, through
which, generally, society was satirized.

The Picaresque novel is the loosest in plot the hero is

literally let loose on the high road for his adventures. The
writer got the opportunity to introduce a large variety of
characters and events. The hero wanders from place to
place encountering thieves an drogues, rescuing damsels in
distress, fighting duels, falling in love, being thrown in prison,
and meeting a vast section of society. The opportunity of
representing a large section of society gave the author the
power of exploring the follies of the widest possible range of
humanity. As the hero meets a gamut of characters from the
country squire to the haughty aristocrat, from hypocrite to illtempered soldiers, the writer is able to introduce with the
least possible incongruity, the saint and the sinner, the
virtuous and the vicious. The writer has a chance to present
the life, culture and morality prevalent in his time, and to
satirize the evils.

Fielding acknowledged his debt to Cervantes,

whose Don Quixote is the best known picaresque
novel in Spanish.
Like the Don and Sancho Panza, Parson Adams
and Joseph set out on a journey which involves
them in a series of adventures, some of them
burlesque, at several country inns or rural houses.
Like the Don, Parson Adams is a dreamy idealist.
But there are differences, too, between Joseph
Andrews and the picaresque tradition, vital enough
to consider Fieldings novel as belonging to the
genre of its own.

The central journey in Joseph Andrews is not mainly a quest

for adventure as it is in the picaresque tradition. It is a sober
return journey homewards. Joseph and Lady Booby are
taken to London and the reader is given a glimpse of
societys ways in that great city.
It is in Chapter 10 of Book I that the picaresque element
enters the novel, with Joseph setting out in a borrowed coat
towards home. The picaresque tradition is maintained uptil
the end of Book III. Joseph meets with the first misadventure
when he is set upon by robbers, beaten, stripped and thrown
unconscious into a ditch. A passing stagecoach and its
passengers very reluctantly convey Joseph to an inn. The
incident gives ample scope to Fielding for satirizing the
pretences and affectations of an essentially inhuman society.

The Tow-wouse Inn provides a grim picture of callous human

beings the vain and ignorant surgeon and the drinking
parson. Once again kindness and generosity come from an
apparently immoral girl, Betty the chambermaid. With the
arrival of Parson Adams, the picaresque journey takes on a
more humorous tone, with plenty of farce. The encounter
with the Patriot who would like to see all cowards banged
but who turns tail at the first sight of danger, leads to the
meeting with Fanny. She is rescued by Adams in proper
picaresque-romance style with hero. Several odd characters
are met on the way such as the hunting squire the squire
who makes generous but false promises. Then comes the
abduction of Fanny and the reintroduction of something
more serious.

We also have the interpolated stories, which

belong to the picaresque tradition. In his use of
this device, Fielding shows how far he has come
from the picaresque school.
To conclude, Joseph Andrews has a rather
rambling and discursive narrative, which makes us
to believe that it is a picaresque novel. But, on the
whole, it is not a picaresque novel rather the
picaresque mode has helped him in the
development of his comic theory that of ridiculing
the affectations of human beings.