What do you think?
Rate this book
Amelia by Henry Fielding "The Annotated Classic Edition" Sentimental Novel
This is an EXACT reproduction of a book published before 1923. This IS NOT an OCR'd book with strange characters, introduced typographical errors, and jumbled words. This book may have occasional imperfections such as missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. that were either part of the original artifact, or were introduced by the scanning process. We believe this work is culturally important, and despite the imperfections, have elected to bring it back into print as part of our continuing commitment to the preservation of printed works worldwide. We appreciate your understanding of the imperfections in the preservation process, and hope you enjoy this valuable book.
602 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1751
30 people are currently reading
2,497 people want to read
About the author
Henry Fielding
2,657books376followersHenry Fielding was born in Somerset in 1707. The son of an army lieutenant and a judge's daughter, he was educated at Eton School and the University of Leiden before returning to England where he wrote a series of farces, operas and light comedies.
Fielding formed his own company and was running the Little Theatre, Haymarket, when one of his satirical plays began to upset the government. The passing of the Theatrical Licensing Act in 1737 effectively ended Fielding's career as a playwright.
In 1739 Fielding turned to journalism and became editor of The Champion. He also began writing novels, including: The Adventures of Joseph Andrews (1742) and Jonathan Wild (1743).
Fielding was made a justice of the peace for Westminster and Middlesex in 1748. He campaigned against legal corruption and helped his half-brother, Sir John Fielding, establish the Bow Street Runners.
In 1749 Fielding's novel, The History of Tom Jones was published to public acclaim. Critics agree that it is one of the greatest comic novels in the English language. Fielding followed this success with another well received novel, Amelia (1751).
Fielding continued as a journalist and his satirical journal, Covent Garden, continued to upset those in power. Throughout his life, Fielding suffered from poor health and by 1752 he could not move without the help of crutches. In an attempt to overcome his health problems, Henry Fielding went to live in Portugal but this was not successful and he died in Lisbon in 1754.
Fielding formed his own company and was running the Little Theatre, Haymarket, when one of his satirical plays began to upset the government. The passing of the Theatrical Licensing Act in 1737 effectively ended Fielding's career as a playwright.
In 1739 Fielding turned to journalism and became editor of The Champion. He also began writing novels, including: The Adventures of Joseph Andrews (1742) and Jonathan Wild (1743).
Fielding was made a justice of the peace for Westminster and Middlesex in 1748. He campaigned against legal corruption and helped his half-brother, Sir John Fielding, establish the Bow Street Runners.
In 1749 Fielding's novel, The History of Tom Jones was published to public acclaim. Critics agree that it is one of the greatest comic novels in the English language. Fielding followed this success with another well received novel, Amelia (1751).
Fielding continued as a journalist and his satirical journal, Covent Garden, continued to upset those in power. Throughout his life, Fielding suffered from poor health and by 1752 he could not move without the help of crutches. In an attempt to overcome his health problems, Henry Fielding went to live in Portugal but this was not successful and he died in Lisbon in 1754.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews
October 4, 2022
Amelia Harris a beautiful rich girl meets a handsome poor boy our William Booth, naturally they fall madly in love. However her mother a well -to- do widow of course doesn't like the match (conflict needed to makes it interesting).She considers Booth, an officer in the British Army a fortune hunter, people are so distrustful. Amelia nevertheless elopes with William anyway. Resulting no surprise, in being cut off by Mrs. Harris; delighting her evil sister and rival Betty, the young couple live day to day with little money.Booth while trying to be a good Samaritan, helping a man in a street brawl, a monumental mistake... he is arrested and sent to prison by the Justice of Peace Thrasher, an appropriate name for his character.There William finds an old acquaintance Miss Mathews, from his home town shockingly is there for murder; but by luck the victim recovers ( an unfaithful lover the dog). The two become more than good friends, further complicating the life of our weak hero.Receiving money for bail by some admirer of Miss Mathews also gets the soldier Booth out of imprisonment too.Then William leaves London with his army unit on the ship Lovely Peggy, a misnomer if there ever was one . A savage storm naturally sinks the unlucky vessel no dull story here and Booth is rescued just in time. He fights bravely in Gibraltar, during the Spanish siege though wounded twice, but surviving with the aid of faithful Amelia , the poor Captain arrives back in England without a job since with the war over, he's not wanted in the military. Financially desperate William a gambler gets into a crooked card game and loses 50 pounds, soon afterwards he's back in jail for nonpayment of debts...ouch (the third time)Booth a good man no charlatan yet naive , is always getting into trouble, including a duel. The couple has a friend Dr.Harrison, a clergyman who helps them still everything looks bleak a sick fellow inmate, in danger of expiring he thinks, confesses to Dr. Harrison and Booth that Amelia's sister Betty has absconded with her inheritance, in a conspiracy with him and a lawyer (imagine a crooked attorney!) , when their mother succumbs, yet can they prove it? This is the huge question, the answer well you will have to read the book to find out. A lively , entertaining novel written by a talented writer that knew the world and all its encompassing pitfalls...you have to keep a wary eye open.
November 25, 2012
I did not read this (extremely sketchy-looking) version, but goodreads doesn't have the Broadview edition, so whatever.
Oh man, this book. The female characters thing tripped me up again because the impossibly good titular character (a patient Griselda for a new era!) is married to a total deadbeat who cheats on her within the first 30 pages. I hated him with an impressive intensity, and he is the hero of the book, so that caused me some problems. Amelia is a masochist who stays with her stupid husband for some inexplicable reason, and the one assertive, educated woman in the book is an object of derision. I thought you were awesome, Mrs. Atkinson! Also, suck it, Henry Fielding. You're just jealous that your sister was good at languages.
Oh man, this book. The female characters thing tripped me up again because the impossibly good titular character (a patient Griselda for a new era!) is married to a total deadbeat who cheats on her within the first 30 pages. I hated him with an impressive intensity, and he is the hero of the book, so that caused me some problems. Amelia is a masochist who stays with her stupid husband for some inexplicable reason, and the one assertive, educated woman in the book is an object of derision. I thought you were awesome, Mrs. Atkinson! Also, suck it, Henry Fielding. You're just jealous that your sister was good at languages.
January 29, 2017
In Fielding’s earlier novels (Joseph Andrews and Tom Jones), the story ends happily with our hero and heroine getting married, but the reader may well wonder what happened to them after their marriage. For all Fielding’s benevolence, the world in which he places his characters is an unsafe one.
There are always plenty of people ready to cheat, rob or slander his heroes. There are women of easy virtue seeking to seduce our hero, and male satyrs ready to rob the heroine of her chastity, by seduction or by force. The law is ready to be exploited against our heroes and to deprive them of their liberty. However, somehow the institution of marriage apparently offers them a barrier that magically protects them from the vice of others, and the book ends accordingly.
The world of Amelia is a very different one, although in a way it is actually the world of Joseph Andrews and Tom Jones viewed from a different perspective. This is a far less safe world, reflected in the fact that our hero and heroine are already married at the beginning of the book, and will continue to face threats to their happiness and security throughout.
The last Book of Jonathan Wild takes place in a prison, a fitting moral setting for the end of a novel about a rascally anti-hero. In Amelia it is the first three Books of the novel that take place in a prison, and this time the hero is there through no fault of his own. Indeed, we are taken on a tour of the prison, and we soon see that people who are locked up are those who do not have the money to buy their way out, regardless of innocence.
Suddenly the world looks like a far less just place, and indeed the prison acts as a metaphor for the society in which Captain Booth and his wife Amelia move around in. Most of the time Captain Booth is literally confined within a small area of London that he is unable to leave without being arrested for his debts. Indeed he is arrested a couple of times, thanks to duplicitous behaviour on the part of others.
The prison lies in people’s minds too, trapped by their own vices, or by wrong-headed philosophies and values. For the virtuous, the prison is here one of desperate poverty and debt, and being at the mercy of those who would take advantage of them. Notably when Captain Booth is finally freed from prison in Book Four, it is not due to his own virtues or a sudden act of justice, but actually due to his vices. He has an extramarital affair with Miss Matthews, a former acquaintance of his who is in prison after attempting to murder her lover.
Miss Matthews is able to find acquittal thanks to another possible lover, and she agrees to buy the Captain out of prison too. The appearance of Amelia puts an end to her hopes of a prolonged affair with the Captain, though he will be given much cause to rue his indiscretion throughout the rest of the book.
While in prison, Captain Booth relates the history of his relationship with Amelia. After overcoming opposition from her mother, they marry. However, they are disinherited, and Booth depends on the charity of the benevolent Dr Harrison to find him a suitable position. Unfortunately Harrison is called abroad, and Booth soon fritters away his good position and his money, leaving the family in debt.
What is notable about Booth’s story is that it is related by an unreliable source. Booth is naïve and good-hearted, and we will soon discover that many of the people whom he praises in his tale are actually not good people at all. For once Fielding mostly discards the habit of giving his characters comic names that reflect their virtues and vices. Here the characters have neutral common names, and the reader is obliged to take time to work out the true worth of the book’s characters, just as Booth and Amelia have to do, albeit we are given more direction from the omniscient author.
Hence Colonel Bath is honourable in Booth’s account, but proves to be an aggressive bully who equates honour with violence. Colonel James is not the generous friend of Booth’s that he first appears to be, but is actually a selfish womaniser with designs on Amelia. Both men are married to wives, who seem virtuous at first, but who are every bit as snobbish, deceitful and licentious as their husbands.
Indeed other characters in the book will also prove hard to read. Mrs Ellison appears to be a kindly landlady, but is actually working with the unnamed peer to ensure the seduction of Amelia, and she is by no means his first victim. The peer seems philanthropic and loving towards children, but only a means of seducing their mothers. Trent is happy to lend Booth money, but proves to be a cynical pimp and blackmailer.
There are more virtuous characters. However, even some of those are flawed. Mrs Atkinson is a good friend to Amelia, but she is not above exploiting Amelia’s name to get favours from the unnamed lord. Booth may be our hero, but he is weak-willed, and capable of wasting his fortune, and of gambling and infidelity.
It is not for nothing that one of the other great symbols of the novel is a masquerade, where everyone hides behind masks, and the occasion is used for extra-marital assignations and rather more sinister acts of rape. This is a world in which people are not what they seem. Many of them genuinely do have good qualities and this makes it harder for the Booths to discern that they are nonetheless bad people.
There are a few exemplars of virtue in the book. Mr Atkinson is loyal to the Booths, and loving toward Amelia. Dr Harrison too is a model of Christian benevolence and instruction, though readers are likely to find his long speeches and letters rather prosy and sermonising. It is not for nothing that Fielding includes a scene at the masquerade where a diatribe by Harrison about chastity is read aloud to a group of degenerate nobles who laugh at the sentiments.
As ever, the heroine is beyond reproach in Fielding. He is not wholly judgmental about women who lapse, but he still holds on to the idea that a true heroine should have a higher standard of virtue than his hero. If Booth seems undeserving of Amelia, we should remember that nobody could be worthy of such a paragon. Feminists will not find much to admire in Amelia therefore.
They may derive more hope from Mrs Atkinson, who is a genuinely well-educated lady, and who frequently spars with Dr Harrison. Fielding uncharacteristically leaves it open as to whether he personally believes that women should receive a good education. However, while Mrs Atkinson sometimes forgets herself during her arguments, she is a sympathetic character, and her arguments in favour of female education are certainly sensible.
The main theme of the immoral activities that fill the remainder of the book is the question of marital infidelity. Many of the couples seen in the book are entirely faithless towards one another. The men get bored and move on to new women. The women in turn have affairs, or help to procure women for the men. It is this which leads to a corruption of morals, with the characters stopping at nothing to indulge their appetites.
Hence the rest of the book is devoted to Amelia’s attempts to avoid falling into the clutches of a variety of vicious men, including the unnamed lord, Colonel James and Trent. The various machinations of these corrupt men will lead to the constant endangerment of both the Booths, with the Captain frequently at risk of ruination himself, as the philanderers try to get him out of the way.
Captain Booth is also part of this fallen world. Early in the novel, he falls prey to the charms of Miss Matthews, and is obliged to spend a good deal of time trying to conceal details of this from Amelia, unnecessarily since she already knows. This further complicates Booth’s predicament, since he has to cope with the manoeuvres of the discarded Miss Matthews to win him back.
There is a severe price to pay then for all marital infidelities, even those committed by people who are not especially vicious or depraved. This is further emphasised in the story of Mrs Atkinson and her first husband Mr Bennett. Mrs Atkinson was raped by the unnamed lord, and this led to her husband’s death and some guilt on her part. The importance of Amelia maintaining her chastity then is not just a matter of prudishness, but of self-preservation.
While Fielding may condemn infidelity here, he is less harsh on second marriages. There is some discussion about whether remarriage constitutes infidelity or even bigamy, but Fielding (who himself remarried) comes down on the side of favouring remarriages. Hence Mrs Bennett is able to become Mrs Atkinson without any judgment.
One of the other corrupting influences on Captain Booth is his fatalistic philosophy. Booth has turned his back on Christianity and adopted a more fatalistic view of the world in which everything is decided by providence, and vices and virtues do not exist. This view (which is tantamount to atheism in Fielding’s eyes) serves Booth badly, and is one of the reasons why he is feckless with money and faithless to Amelia. It is only at the end of the book that he is able to read some sensible sermons and adopt the proper Christian view of life.
Such a conclusion is a little strange, since this is not a world in which Christian justice is seen in abundance. The virtuous suffer many cruel deprivations, and the vicious are able to prosper, albeit at cost to their soul. It is the first Fielding novel in which a happy ending is genuinely in doubt, until a final plot device restores Amelia to her mother’s inheritance.
Amelia is certainly not as important in its influence on the development of the English novel as Joseph Andrews and Tom Jones. However, in some ways it is more anticipatory of the future direction of the novel. Its one-word title (in the style of Richardson) is more typical of future novel names than the longer verbose titles that Fielding usually employed. Fielding gives his characters realistic names, and a mixture of virtues and vices, rather than setting them up as cardboard cut-outs who serve as mere exemplars of certain traits.
The structure of the book is forward-looking too. It is not a birth-to-marriage book, but one that begins in the middle. It contains several passages that break up the conventional chronology of the story, notably the second and third Books. Fielding employs different voices, with three of the Books narrated by characters of varying reliability. Admittedly it still looks back in some ways, and is structured around Virgil’s Aeneid, albeit loosely.
Fielding also suppresses his authorial voice to a greater degree. There is still a fair amount of commentary from him, but he sets aside only one chapter to have his fireside chat with the reader (employed in the first chapter of every Book in Tom Jones). To a greater degree, he also allows the story to tell itself. Notably the plot is far less tightly-constructed than in earlier books. Indeed it follows a repetitive circle of intrigues against the Booths, reflecting the vicious circle in which our heroes are trapped.
In spite of its anticipation of later novels, Amelia is something of a forgotten work by Fielding, and it deserves to be better known. It is an under-rated work, and one that showed its author to be a gifted writer who still had many ideas and innovations to offer the world.
There are always plenty of people ready to cheat, rob or slander his heroes. There are women of easy virtue seeking to seduce our hero, and male satyrs ready to rob the heroine of her chastity, by seduction or by force. The law is ready to be exploited against our heroes and to deprive them of their liberty. However, somehow the institution of marriage apparently offers them a barrier that magically protects them from the vice of others, and the book ends accordingly.
The world of Amelia is a very different one, although in a way it is actually the world of Joseph Andrews and Tom Jones viewed from a different perspective. This is a far less safe world, reflected in the fact that our hero and heroine are already married at the beginning of the book, and will continue to face threats to their happiness and security throughout.
The last Book of Jonathan Wild takes place in a prison, a fitting moral setting for the end of a novel about a rascally anti-hero. In Amelia it is the first three Books of the novel that take place in a prison, and this time the hero is there through no fault of his own. Indeed, we are taken on a tour of the prison, and we soon see that people who are locked up are those who do not have the money to buy their way out, regardless of innocence.
Suddenly the world looks like a far less just place, and indeed the prison acts as a metaphor for the society in which Captain Booth and his wife Amelia move around in. Most of the time Captain Booth is literally confined within a small area of London that he is unable to leave without being arrested for his debts. Indeed he is arrested a couple of times, thanks to duplicitous behaviour on the part of others.
The prison lies in people’s minds too, trapped by their own vices, or by wrong-headed philosophies and values. For the virtuous, the prison is here one of desperate poverty and debt, and being at the mercy of those who would take advantage of them. Notably when Captain Booth is finally freed from prison in Book Four, it is not due to his own virtues or a sudden act of justice, but actually due to his vices. He has an extramarital affair with Miss Matthews, a former acquaintance of his who is in prison after attempting to murder her lover.
Miss Matthews is able to find acquittal thanks to another possible lover, and she agrees to buy the Captain out of prison too. The appearance of Amelia puts an end to her hopes of a prolonged affair with the Captain, though he will be given much cause to rue his indiscretion throughout the rest of the book.
While in prison, Captain Booth relates the history of his relationship with Amelia. After overcoming opposition from her mother, they marry. However, they are disinherited, and Booth depends on the charity of the benevolent Dr Harrison to find him a suitable position. Unfortunately Harrison is called abroad, and Booth soon fritters away his good position and his money, leaving the family in debt.
What is notable about Booth’s story is that it is related by an unreliable source. Booth is naïve and good-hearted, and we will soon discover that many of the people whom he praises in his tale are actually not good people at all. For once Fielding mostly discards the habit of giving his characters comic names that reflect their virtues and vices. Here the characters have neutral common names, and the reader is obliged to take time to work out the true worth of the book’s characters, just as Booth and Amelia have to do, albeit we are given more direction from the omniscient author.
Hence Colonel Bath is honourable in Booth’s account, but proves to be an aggressive bully who equates honour with violence. Colonel James is not the generous friend of Booth’s that he first appears to be, but is actually a selfish womaniser with designs on Amelia. Both men are married to wives, who seem virtuous at first, but who are every bit as snobbish, deceitful and licentious as their husbands.
Indeed other characters in the book will also prove hard to read. Mrs Ellison appears to be a kindly landlady, but is actually working with the unnamed peer to ensure the seduction of Amelia, and she is by no means his first victim. The peer seems philanthropic and loving towards children, but only a means of seducing their mothers. Trent is happy to lend Booth money, but proves to be a cynical pimp and blackmailer.
There are more virtuous characters. However, even some of those are flawed. Mrs Atkinson is a good friend to Amelia, but she is not above exploiting Amelia’s name to get favours from the unnamed lord. Booth may be our hero, but he is weak-willed, and capable of wasting his fortune, and of gambling and infidelity.
It is not for nothing that one of the other great symbols of the novel is a masquerade, where everyone hides behind masks, and the occasion is used for extra-marital assignations and rather more sinister acts of rape. This is a world in which people are not what they seem. Many of them genuinely do have good qualities and this makes it harder for the Booths to discern that they are nonetheless bad people.
There are a few exemplars of virtue in the book. Mr Atkinson is loyal to the Booths, and loving toward Amelia. Dr Harrison too is a model of Christian benevolence and instruction, though readers are likely to find his long speeches and letters rather prosy and sermonising. It is not for nothing that Fielding includes a scene at the masquerade where a diatribe by Harrison about chastity is read aloud to a group of degenerate nobles who laugh at the sentiments.
As ever, the heroine is beyond reproach in Fielding. He is not wholly judgmental about women who lapse, but he still holds on to the idea that a true heroine should have a higher standard of virtue than his hero. If Booth seems undeserving of Amelia, we should remember that nobody could be worthy of such a paragon. Feminists will not find much to admire in Amelia therefore.
They may derive more hope from Mrs Atkinson, who is a genuinely well-educated lady, and who frequently spars with Dr Harrison. Fielding uncharacteristically leaves it open as to whether he personally believes that women should receive a good education. However, while Mrs Atkinson sometimes forgets herself during her arguments, she is a sympathetic character, and her arguments in favour of female education are certainly sensible.
The main theme of the immoral activities that fill the remainder of the book is the question of marital infidelity. Many of the couples seen in the book are entirely faithless towards one another. The men get bored and move on to new women. The women in turn have affairs, or help to procure women for the men. It is this which leads to a corruption of morals, with the characters stopping at nothing to indulge their appetites.
Hence the rest of the book is devoted to Amelia’s attempts to avoid falling into the clutches of a variety of vicious men, including the unnamed lord, Colonel James and Trent. The various machinations of these corrupt men will lead to the constant endangerment of both the Booths, with the Captain frequently at risk of ruination himself, as the philanderers try to get him out of the way.
Captain Booth is also part of this fallen world. Early in the novel, he falls prey to the charms of Miss Matthews, and is obliged to spend a good deal of time trying to conceal details of this from Amelia, unnecessarily since she already knows. This further complicates Booth’s predicament, since he has to cope with the manoeuvres of the discarded Miss Matthews to win him back.
There is a severe price to pay then for all marital infidelities, even those committed by people who are not especially vicious or depraved. This is further emphasised in the story of Mrs Atkinson and her first husband Mr Bennett. Mrs Atkinson was raped by the unnamed lord, and this led to her husband’s death and some guilt on her part. The importance of Amelia maintaining her chastity then is not just a matter of prudishness, but of self-preservation.
While Fielding may condemn infidelity here, he is less harsh on second marriages. There is some discussion about whether remarriage constitutes infidelity or even bigamy, but Fielding (who himself remarried) comes down on the side of favouring remarriages. Hence Mrs Bennett is able to become Mrs Atkinson without any judgment.
One of the other corrupting influences on Captain Booth is his fatalistic philosophy. Booth has turned his back on Christianity and adopted a more fatalistic view of the world in which everything is decided by providence, and vices and virtues do not exist. This view (which is tantamount to atheism in Fielding’s eyes) serves Booth badly, and is one of the reasons why he is feckless with money and faithless to Amelia. It is only at the end of the book that he is able to read some sensible sermons and adopt the proper Christian view of life.
Such a conclusion is a little strange, since this is not a world in which Christian justice is seen in abundance. The virtuous suffer many cruel deprivations, and the vicious are able to prosper, albeit at cost to their soul. It is the first Fielding novel in which a happy ending is genuinely in doubt, until a final plot device restores Amelia to her mother’s inheritance.
Amelia is certainly not as important in its influence on the development of the English novel as Joseph Andrews and Tom Jones. However, in some ways it is more anticipatory of the future direction of the novel. Its one-word title (in the style of Richardson) is more typical of future novel names than the longer verbose titles that Fielding usually employed. Fielding gives his characters realistic names, and a mixture of virtues and vices, rather than setting them up as cardboard cut-outs who serve as mere exemplars of certain traits.
The structure of the book is forward-looking too. It is not a birth-to-marriage book, but one that begins in the middle. It contains several passages that break up the conventional chronology of the story, notably the second and third Books. Fielding employs different voices, with three of the Books narrated by characters of varying reliability. Admittedly it still looks back in some ways, and is structured around Virgil’s Aeneid, albeit loosely.
Fielding also suppresses his authorial voice to a greater degree. There is still a fair amount of commentary from him, but he sets aside only one chapter to have his fireside chat with the reader (employed in the first chapter of every Book in Tom Jones). To a greater degree, he also allows the story to tell itself. Notably the plot is far less tightly-constructed than in earlier books. Indeed it follows a repetitive circle of intrigues against the Booths, reflecting the vicious circle in which our heroes are trapped.
In spite of its anticipation of later novels, Amelia is something of a forgotten work by Fielding, and it deserves to be better known. It is an under-rated work, and one that showed its author to be a gifted writer who still had many ideas and innovations to offer the world.
July 16, 2021
Um livro que me divertiu mais que o suposto, pois penso que nesta obra o humor talvez não fosse o objectivo do autor, ou pelo menos não nas situações em que me ri... É que durante a leitura foram tantas as vezes que os personagens desmaiaram de "comoção" que para mim começou mesmo a tornar-se ridículo e a fazer-me rir... Parecia que toda a gente desmaiava a todo o momento, por tudo e mais alguma coisa! 😂 E não ficou por aí.
Bom, mas vamos por partes. Escrevo esta review três anos após ter lido o livro e ainda me lembro da história, por isso talvez não tenha sido tão mau quanto me pareceu na altura 😁. Mas ainda assim, achei-o um clássico bastante fraquinho.
Começou até de forma bastante interessante e diferente em relação aos clássicos meus conhecidos desta época. Amélia (protagonista que dá título a esta obra) havia ido contra os desejos da sua família e fugido para casar com William Booth. No livro acompanhamos a história deste casal recém casado que "enfrentou tudo e todos" em nome do seu amor.
O autor inicia esta narrativa com o nosso "herói" encarcerado e aparentemente vítima de injustiça (um herói que seguramente merece mesmo muito estas aspas). Logo no início é exposto e confesso o seu grande, valoroso e puro amor pela sua esposa Amélia, e também logo no ínício é exposto como este personagem é um imbecil, porque
Mas se nalguns momentos iniciais me "irritei" com ele, acabei a história irritada com Amélia, que é tão boazinha e suporta tanto, que nem dá pena.
Se num primeiro momento me pareceu que a abordagem do autor ao papel da mulher iria ser inovadora para o seu tempo, por termos uma heroína que escolhe fugir para casar por amor, no final não fiquei nada com essa sensação. A única personagem feminina com alguma relevância intelectual aparece no texto como motivo de zombaria (a Mrs Atkinson).
Esta foi a última obra de Henry Fielding. Diz-se que o autor utilizou em Amélia a estrutura da Eneida de Virgílio, com o intuito de transportar a epicidade desse clássico para o romance sentimental ou doméstico. Teria feito isto em resposta a Samuel Richardson o seu maior rival e a outros autores que o criticavam. Não conheço a Eneida o suficiente para poder opinar sobre isso (falha a ser corrigida em breve se tudo correr bem!).
Poderá este paralelismo à Eneida ser verdadeiro e interessante de descobrir? Ou poderá a ironia ser o real objectivo do autor, até porque de facto ele é mais conhecido exactamente pelo seu humor? Assim de facto, esta obra já teria mais alguma piada ou valor para mim, mas tal como a li e entendi na altura, ficou só na memória como um livro bem fraquinho.
Bom, mas vamos por partes. Escrevo esta review três anos após ter lido o livro e ainda me lembro da história, por isso talvez não tenha sido tão mau quanto me pareceu na altura 😁. Mas ainda assim, achei-o um clássico bastante fraquinho.
Começou até de forma bastante interessante e diferente em relação aos clássicos meus conhecidos desta época. Amélia (protagonista que dá título a esta obra) havia ido contra os desejos da sua família e fugido para casar com William Booth. No livro acompanhamos a história deste casal recém casado que "enfrentou tudo e todos" em nome do seu amor.
O autor inicia esta narrativa com o nosso "herói" encarcerado e aparentemente vítima de injustiça (um herói que seguramente merece mesmo muito estas aspas). Logo no início é exposto e confesso o seu grande, valoroso e puro amor pela sua esposa Amélia, e também logo no ínício é exposto como este personagem é um imbecil, porque
Mas se nalguns momentos iniciais me "irritei" com ele, acabei a história irritada com Amélia, que é tão boazinha e suporta tanto, que nem dá pena.
Se num primeiro momento me pareceu que a abordagem do autor ao papel da mulher iria ser inovadora para o seu tempo, por termos uma heroína que escolhe fugir para casar por amor, no final não fiquei nada com essa sensação. A única personagem feminina com alguma relevância intelectual aparece no texto como motivo de zombaria (a Mrs Atkinson).
Esta foi a última obra de Henry Fielding. Diz-se que o autor utilizou em Amélia a estrutura da Eneida de Virgílio, com o intuito de transportar a epicidade desse clássico para o romance sentimental ou doméstico. Teria feito isto em resposta a Samuel Richardson o seu maior rival e a outros autores que o criticavam. Não conheço a Eneida o suficiente para poder opinar sobre isso (falha a ser corrigida em breve se tudo correr bem!).
Poderá este paralelismo à Eneida ser verdadeiro e interessante de descobrir? Ou poderá a ironia ser o real objectivo do autor, até porque de facto ele é mais conhecido exactamente pelo seu humor? Assim de facto, esta obra já teria mais alguma piada ou valor para mim, mas tal como a li e entendi na altura, ficou só na memória como um livro bem fraquinho.
December 21, 2016
Fielding's single best book is probably Joseph Andrews but this one is notable because he moved on from satirizing the nascent modern novel form and instead used it to peddle his views on certain social issues of the time.
That leads to some rather long dialog passages in which (in the guise of conversation) expository lectures are given on the justice system, its penal arm, specifically debtors' prison, the police of the time (you'll recall Fielding founded the Bow Street Runners), Christian virtue (the discussion of whether a widow's remarriage still counts as adultery is particularly jaw-dropping to the modern jaw), etc., etc.
Amelia herself is impossibly virtuous and considerate to everyone. Her husband Captain Booth is perhaps more the main character, and though we want to sympathize with him, his feckless inability to manage his family's affairs starts to wear. Additionally his wife is sufficiently beautiful that she is continuously under siege from Booth's erstwhile friends and acquaintances, which further hobbles his decision making (there are frequent allusions to Othello).
In the end (this is not a book where too much giveaway is a problem), the restoration of a swindled inheritance saves Booth from even having to work as hard as accepting a sinecure army commission, so it's happily ever after.
That leads to some rather long dialog passages in which (in the guise of conversation) expository lectures are given on the justice system, its penal arm, specifically debtors' prison, the police of the time (you'll recall Fielding founded the Bow Street Runners), Christian virtue (the discussion of whether a widow's remarriage still counts as adultery is particularly jaw-dropping to the modern jaw), etc., etc.
Amelia herself is impossibly virtuous and considerate to everyone. Her husband Captain Booth is perhaps more the main character, and though we want to sympathize with him, his feckless inability to manage his family's affairs starts to wear. Additionally his wife is sufficiently beautiful that she is continuously under siege from Booth's erstwhile friends and acquaintances, which further hobbles his decision making (there are frequent allusions to Othello).
In the end (this is not a book where too much giveaway is a problem), the restoration of a swindled inheritance saves Booth from even having to work as hard as accepting a sinecure army commission, so it's happily ever after.
June 14, 2022
“O, heavens! thou sweetest creature! what, not once upbraid me for bringing this ruin on thee?" - Well, quite. In the style of all Fielding’s heroines, Amelia is impossibly good natured, obliging and forgiving of the man she loves.
I normally ADORE these half-angel women of his creation and the good-hearted boys they follow around, but there was something very sad about Amelia’s unwavering attachment to a gambling addict who is more concerned with valour than his children being fed. Sure, William is absolutely in love with Amelia, but really how couldn’t he be? She’s the best of wives, the best of mothers, beautiful and comforts HIM when he brings ruin on their family.
I’m not sure if Fielding intended for this book to be so unsettling. But unlike his other capers, the protagonist in this tale is not just threatened by pantomime villains, but mostly by the foolishness of her own husband. I’m thankful Thackeray rewrote Amelia’s story in Vanity Fair, he gave her the life she truly deserved.
I normally ADORE these half-angel women of his creation and the good-hearted boys they follow around, but there was something very sad about Amelia’s unwavering attachment to a gambling addict who is more concerned with valour than his children being fed. Sure, William is absolutely in love with Amelia, but really how couldn’t he be? She’s the best of wives, the best of mothers, beautiful and comforts HIM when he brings ruin on their family.
I’m not sure if Fielding intended for this book to be so unsettling. But unlike his other capers, the protagonist in this tale is not just threatened by pantomime villains, but mostly by the foolishness of her own husband. I’m thankful Thackeray rewrote Amelia’s story in Vanity Fair, he gave her the life she truly deserved.
April 17, 2011
More like 3.5 stars. Slightly sloggish, but seems to me to be one of Fielding better works. Tom Jones being his best known novel, Amelia is a strong counter to the direction and characters represented in Tom Jones. While some may react to what could be perceived as misogyny in the book, I found an overall feminist sentiment. Fielding's female characters in Amelia are intelligent and strong (even in Amelia herself, as she forgives William copious wrongs, is strong in her convictions). Granted Amelia is a little too good in her behavior for my perceptions. Maybe Fielding was not going for realism in her characterization? Only Fielding can truly answer that. Fielding stands out as one of my favorites from the 1700's, he is somewhat more accessible than his contemporaries (Richardson for one).
October 21, 2012
I believe this to be the best of Fielding's works, although scholars disagree with me almost to a person. I was able, with one Fielding scholar, able to show why the maturity, understanding, depth of feeling and social consciousness in its pages raised it to the height of the uthor's works. And changing that one person's informed impression assured me that it could be done with others. Just not by me. It hasn't the humor of Tom Jones or Joseph Andres, but then it didn't need to be. If one could read this without an expectation that it is the third in a triad of riotous novels by Feilding, one might see what I think it is.
March 1, 2010
Decent book. Probably could have been improved by being shorter.
October 5, 2020
3.5 stars. An easy to read, entertaining, overly long novel about the strength of love. Mr. Booth, an officer and gentleman who is poor, marries the lovely and rich Amelia. However her mother is displeased with Amelia marrying a financially poor man and stops supporting Amelia. Mr. Booth finds himself in debtors prison where he meets the beautiful Miss Matthews. Mr. Booth continues to incur gambling debts and his wife, Amelia, continues to love Mr Booth. Whilst Mr. Booth can be a bit too much of a ladies man, he also continues to love his wife.
I prefer Fielding’s book, ‘The History of Tom Jones�, due to the more interesting plot.
I prefer Fielding’s book, ‘The History of Tom Jones�, due to the more interesting plot.
September 9, 2014
Free download available at .
Opening lines:
The various accidents which befel a very worthy couple after their uniting in the state of matrimony will be the subject of the following history. The distresses which they waded through were some of them so exquisite, and the incidents which produced these so extraordinary, that they seemed to require not only the utmost malice, but the utmost invention, which superstition hath ever attributed to Fortune: though whether any such being interfered in the case, or, indeed, whether there be any such being in the universe, is a matter which I by no means presume to determine in the affirmative. To speak a bold truth, I am, after much mature deliberation, inclined to suspect that the public voice hath, in all ages, done much injustice to Fortune, and hath convicted her of many facts in which she had not the least concern. I question much whether we may not, by natural means, account for the success of knaves, the calamities of fools, with all the miseries in which men of sense sometimes involve themselves, by quitting the directions of Prudence, and following the blind guidance of a predominant passion; in short, for all the ordinary phenomena which are imputed to Fortune; whom, perhaps, men accuse with no less absurdity in life, than a bad player complains of ill luck at the game of chess.
3* Tom Jones
2* Amelia
TR Joseph Andrews
Opening lines:
The various accidents which befel a very worthy couple after their uniting in the state of matrimony will be the subject of the following history. The distresses which they waded through were some of them so exquisite, and the incidents which produced these so extraordinary, that they seemed to require not only the utmost malice, but the utmost invention, which superstition hath ever attributed to Fortune: though whether any such being interfered in the case, or, indeed, whether there be any such being in the universe, is a matter which I by no means presume to determine in the affirmative. To speak a bold truth, I am, after much mature deliberation, inclined to suspect that the public voice hath, in all ages, done much injustice to Fortune, and hath convicted her of many facts in which she had not the least concern. I question much whether we may not, by natural means, account for the success of knaves, the calamities of fools, with all the miseries in which men of sense sometimes involve themselves, by quitting the directions of Prudence, and following the blind guidance of a predominant passion; in short, for all the ordinary phenomena which are imputed to Fortune; whom, perhaps, men accuse with no less absurdity in life, than a bad player complains of ill luck at the game of chess.
3* Tom Jones
2* Amelia
TR Joseph Andrews
November 22, 2019
Or The Misadventures of Billy Booth. I'm not sure I would have wanted to live in 18th century England. The country appears to have been divided mainly into equal parts of hapless innocent virgins, wealthy immoral rakes and libertines, and decent chaps who spend most of their lives in debtors' prisons. Lieutenant on half pay William falls into the last of these categories, his desirable wife Amelia ( although she has a little more upstairs) into the first. Felt more like Smollett than Fielding at times, but I really enjoyed it as it dealt with the perils of "happy ever after" rather than sticking to "boy meets girl".
June 29, 2019
‘Amelia� was a book written by Henry Fielding only two years after the publication of ‘Tom Jones� but it’s so very different in tone and purpose that it could seem to be from a different author. The book started a paper war which included people like Christopher Smart, Tobias Smollett and John Hill. It’s also a novel which hasn’t had the life of fame of Fielding’s other books. I was a little nervous of this novel, hearing of its grim and dour tone. I also had experience with this book, having tried it twice and not managed to get past the second book (of twelve).
Where the main takeaway from this book tends to be the dramatic shift in tone so shortly after ‘Tom Jones�, what is most interesting are the many experiments that Fielding tries in the novel, the first of which was the reason I had so much difficulty reading the book on my first two attempts. Despite the title, the first book doesn’t feature Amelia at all but introduces us to William Booth, his incarceration in Newgate and his meeting with Miss Matthews, a former lover. The second and third books consist of Booth telling the story of how he met and married Amelia and the people who helped and hindered them on the way.
The fact is, that these three books consist of one-hundred-and-fifty pages of almost constant telling. Lacking the comic subject matter, the telling is fairly average eighteenth-century storytelling and rather lacklustre compared to the joy that is ‘Tom Jones�. However, in the next few books, we meet the characters we had been told about in Booth’s story and they are not exactly as described. Booth described Amelia as full of emotion but with an inner strength whereas, when she comes ‘on stage� is a fluttering, flustered and emotional mess; Booth’s best friend is rather more creepy and uncertain than he first appears, and Dr Harrison, the noble advisor, is rather pricklier and more censorious then pictured. Those first pages were not just simple telling but a very interesting form of showing, the reader is being shown how Booth’s ability to read the characters around him is deeply flawed.
From then on, the reader spends the rest of the book in the knowledge that nobody is quite what they seem. We were aware that the book had ideas in this direction from the beginning, as Booth is let into Newgate, the characters inside were equally duplicitous but now we are on the alert for such behaviour outside Newgate as well. Those early chapters in Newgate were really well written as well, the short pen-sketches of the inmates have a vivacity that points to Dickens, it’s such a pity Fielding doesn’t get his Dickens pen out for any of the main characters.
…And that’s the key flaw of the book. Fielding is a comic writer to his very marrow but his worldview has changed so much, and the intention for the novel is so different that he can’t play to his strengths. There is the usual intrusive narrator but it doesn’t intrude enough, and those intrusions don’t have any of the playfulness, bombast or sly wit that they do in Fielding’s other works. An intrusive narrator without those things serves more as a hinderance to the book and serve to drag it down.
The book works better when it is dealing in facades and masks. Fielding is very good at showing a character who seems to have the best intentions but then showing the little slips that reveal something more. Miss Matthews, at the beginning is clearly not following Booth’s story the way he intends it to be heard, Sir James (Booth’s ‘great� friend) lets slip moments of his selfishness and lasciviousness, the kindly landlady, Mrs Ellinson acts suspiciously erratically - and the reader is trained to watch out for these slips of masks.
What doesn’t work as well are the characters who are supposed to be sincere. Aside from the fact that almost no-one in this world is, the people who are, are mostly uninteresting. Amelia was based on Fielding’s wife Charlotte, just as Sophia in Tom Jones was but Sophia was opinionated and took action whereas Amelia is a sappy, dull swoon machine. Booth is a little more interesting, and I could imagine Tom Jones growing up to be him but like Tom, he’s so very stupid and fails to spot the most obvious traps which makes him hard to root for also.
There are some good little moments; the writer in the sponging house who is lazy because he sometimes only writes for five hours a day (and is also near illiterate), the very surprising praise for dancing masters who teach people who not to make their limbs a burden and Mrs Ellinson’s comment that “I would rather leave out the first two syllables of ‘gentleman� than the last�. I was amused that Raneleigh was a terrible place of debauch but Vauxhall was almost heaven on Earth - because Fielding was friends with Vauxhall’s owner. I also enjoyed the overtly comic wrap-up informing us what happened to everyone, even if it didn’t fit the overall tone of the book.
In trying to branch out into a serious tale of social issues (and almost universal depravity), Fielding made a bold experiment which didn’t quite come off. Had he lived, this book may be seen as an important transitioning work to a darker, deeper set of novels which made the genre a more complex and flexible form. As he wrote relatively little and died shortly after, this novel only shows a great writer not quite hitting his mark.
Where the main takeaway from this book tends to be the dramatic shift in tone so shortly after ‘Tom Jones�, what is most interesting are the many experiments that Fielding tries in the novel, the first of which was the reason I had so much difficulty reading the book on my first two attempts. Despite the title, the first book doesn’t feature Amelia at all but introduces us to William Booth, his incarceration in Newgate and his meeting with Miss Matthews, a former lover. The second and third books consist of Booth telling the story of how he met and married Amelia and the people who helped and hindered them on the way.
The fact is, that these three books consist of one-hundred-and-fifty pages of almost constant telling. Lacking the comic subject matter, the telling is fairly average eighteenth-century storytelling and rather lacklustre compared to the joy that is ‘Tom Jones�. However, in the next few books, we meet the characters we had been told about in Booth’s story and they are not exactly as described. Booth described Amelia as full of emotion but with an inner strength whereas, when she comes ‘on stage� is a fluttering, flustered and emotional mess; Booth’s best friend is rather more creepy and uncertain than he first appears, and Dr Harrison, the noble advisor, is rather pricklier and more censorious then pictured. Those first pages were not just simple telling but a very interesting form of showing, the reader is being shown how Booth’s ability to read the characters around him is deeply flawed.
From then on, the reader spends the rest of the book in the knowledge that nobody is quite what they seem. We were aware that the book had ideas in this direction from the beginning, as Booth is let into Newgate, the characters inside were equally duplicitous but now we are on the alert for such behaviour outside Newgate as well. Those early chapters in Newgate were really well written as well, the short pen-sketches of the inmates have a vivacity that points to Dickens, it’s such a pity Fielding doesn’t get his Dickens pen out for any of the main characters.
…And that’s the key flaw of the book. Fielding is a comic writer to his very marrow but his worldview has changed so much, and the intention for the novel is so different that he can’t play to his strengths. There is the usual intrusive narrator but it doesn’t intrude enough, and those intrusions don’t have any of the playfulness, bombast or sly wit that they do in Fielding’s other works. An intrusive narrator without those things serves more as a hinderance to the book and serve to drag it down.
The book works better when it is dealing in facades and masks. Fielding is very good at showing a character who seems to have the best intentions but then showing the little slips that reveal something more. Miss Matthews, at the beginning is clearly not following Booth’s story the way he intends it to be heard, Sir James (Booth’s ‘great� friend) lets slip moments of his selfishness and lasciviousness, the kindly landlady, Mrs Ellinson acts suspiciously erratically - and the reader is trained to watch out for these slips of masks.
What doesn’t work as well are the characters who are supposed to be sincere. Aside from the fact that almost no-one in this world is, the people who are, are mostly uninteresting. Amelia was based on Fielding’s wife Charlotte, just as Sophia in Tom Jones was but Sophia was opinionated and took action whereas Amelia is a sappy, dull swoon machine. Booth is a little more interesting, and I could imagine Tom Jones growing up to be him but like Tom, he’s so very stupid and fails to spot the most obvious traps which makes him hard to root for also.
There are some good little moments; the writer in the sponging house who is lazy because he sometimes only writes for five hours a day (and is also near illiterate), the very surprising praise for dancing masters who teach people who not to make their limbs a burden and Mrs Ellinson’s comment that “I would rather leave out the first two syllables of ‘gentleman� than the last�. I was amused that Raneleigh was a terrible place of debauch but Vauxhall was almost heaven on Earth - because Fielding was friends with Vauxhall’s owner. I also enjoyed the overtly comic wrap-up informing us what happened to everyone, even if it didn’t fit the overall tone of the book.
In trying to branch out into a serious tale of social issues (and almost universal depravity), Fielding made a bold experiment which didn’t quite come off. Had he lived, this book may be seen as an important transitioning work to a darker, deeper set of novels which made the genre a more complex and flexible form. As he wrote relatively little and died shortly after, this novel only shows a great writer not quite hitting his mark.
January 10, 2016
This book is fine, but a bit of a disappointment. I so loved Tom Jones, and this book feels like its poor relation. I found it to be occasionally amusing, but overall not funny or insightful enough to be a great satire. On the other hand, it has a serious and almost pedantic tone sometimes - but not enough to be a serious novel. I'm not sure that Fielding means for us to model ourselves after titular character Amelia, or not. I can't tell if he really likes Amelia and her husband William, or not. Fielding is too subtle, or maybe too unfocused. The biggest problem, though, is that our main characters are very passive. Fortune comes and goes, events swirl, but nothing is ever done or decided or implemented by the Booths. They are both very dull and idea-less. That all being said, the book isn't terrible. There are entertaining and surprising passages, and I was more than willing to make it to the end. It's just that this isn't really Fielding's best work.
March 31, 2016
This book held so much promise: it had a different framework, layout, storytelling device, and set of characters who weren't the assholes I hate so much in 18th century literature, but rather opportunistic scheming asses with touches of nobility and purpose, some of whom "seduce" rather than "rape." Charming.
But it fell on its face. True, there were setpieces that were indeed intriguing and fascinating, but the exposition in between these scenes was dreadfully boring.
Most sorely missing was a quality editor with a hatchet, who could have hacked out hundreds and hundreds of pages, and just kept the forward-momentum pieces. It might have been a masterpiece.
Also standing in its favor was good engagement from the writer, and quality philosophizing on the complexities of man.
So it was a good book, almost pretty good, not quite very good, but could have been great.
Trim a little!
But it fell on its face. True, there were setpieces that were indeed intriguing and fascinating, but the exposition in between these scenes was dreadfully boring.
Most sorely missing was a quality editor with a hatchet, who could have hacked out hundreds and hundreds of pages, and just kept the forward-momentum pieces. It might have been a masterpiece.
Also standing in its favor was good engagement from the writer, and quality philosophizing on the complexities of man.
So it was a good book, almost pretty good, not quite very good, but could have been great.
Trim a little!
April 29, 2013
This early 20th century novel doesn't follow the standard formula of most 19th century novels of similar type. It begins with a married couple and follows their misadventures and eventual salvation, rather than relating the usual boy-chases-girl until he wins her over and they settle down together. It was interesting to see how Fielding would be able to inject enough drama and suspense to make the story comparable, but I think he did an excellent job. I did have one little picky complaint, and that is the unvarying doormat personality of the wife. I know it isn't too far fetched from the reality of the times, but it really grates on one's 21st century nerves at times.
March 22, 2015
I really enjoyed Tom Jones and Joseph Andrews, so I am disappointed I did not enjoy this more. The hero is not very appealing, and the heroine is a bit too saccharine, and the plot seems somewhat contrived. The satire is less biting and the jokes fewer than in Fielding's other novels. Nevertheless, just when I felt ennui descending, the narrative periodically fizzed with some entertaining passages (I loved the classical disquisitions, though annoyingly my edition scrambled or omitted the Greek text). This was just enough to save it from demotion from 3 stars to 2, but for my money Tom or Joseph provide far more entertainment than Amelia.
August 3, 2011
Amelia is the may-pole that the rest of the characters dance around. She is the calm point in the midst of turmoil. The only level-headed person - even more remarkable given that she is also the most beautiful. Nearly everyone else is caught up in a frenzy of plotting to bring about the seduction of members of the opposite sex. Fortunes wax and wane like the tides, people in and out of debtors prison like jack-in-the-boxes.
June 7, 2013
I spent waaay more time slogging through this than necessary, hoping for some brilliance and entertaining insights about the period. Instead I'm left with a flat perplexity, a truly under whelmed feeling of HUH? The decadence, moral corruption and bizarre ethics of the time make me wonder how England ever rose to such prominence. But then as a westerner I suppose that is why we are where we are today.
August 6, 2012
I enjoyed reading this novel. It shows the interpersonal relationships between people. The scheming and plotting against Captain Booth and Amelia was shown throughout. They experienced misfortune and betrayal while finding and maintaining their happiness within each other. I was thankful for the happy ending and they showed kindness and love to their enemies even at the end.
September 28, 2015
This book was not quite as fun and entertaining as Tom Jones, and I liked the "hero" (I am definitely using that term loosely) even less than Tom. The heroine was even more annoyingly perfect than Sophie. Is it strictly necessary for every man who sees her to fall madly in love with her? And she was way too nice and forgiving. Her husband needed to be smacked - seriously.
October 9, 2012
Very boring and I got tired of how misogynistic it was. After weeks of only reading a few pages at a time I think it might be time to let it rest for a bit. It was my first exposure to Henry Fielding; so far, not impressed.
October 7, 2012
The characters were very annoying in their relationships with each other.Amelia was so devoted to a man that she loved very much to the point of ignoring his very deep flaws.She was almost too good tohis major bad. I did find relief in the ending as so much suffering should be rewarded.
January 22, 2014
La plus noire encre du destin était pour moi,
Et quand il a écrit mon nom, il a fait un pâté.
Si ton ennemi a faim, donne-lui à manger; s'il a soif, donne-lui à boire: ne rendant point le mal pour le mal, ni injure pour injure, mais, au contraire, bénissant...
Et quand il a écrit mon nom, il a fait un pâté.
Si ton ennemi a faim, donne-lui à manger; s'il a soif, donne-lui à boire: ne rendant point le mal pour le mal, ni injure pour injure, mais, au contraire, bénissant...
January 29, 2016
Interesting look at how the middle classes struggled to survive in England in the 1700s. Women had just a few choices to find resources; scrounge to sell something (many times, all their clothes), seamstress, maid, wife or whore.
October 7, 2013
Better than if Richardson had written it.
November 24, 2013
Great book, I couldn't put down. Fielding is one of my favorite 18th Century English writers.
July 2, 2016
Not as good as Fielding's other novels, but if you're interested in the 18th century still a must-read.
August 16, 2016
god, these 18th century novels all seem exactly the same!
January 28, 2023
Amelia, the last work of Henry Fielding, is the fruit of his later years, and reflects Fielding as the critic of the legal administration and social machinery. It is very different in spirit from Tom Jones.
It lacks the gaiety and high spirits of its predecessor.
The book is full of astringent conclusions and disenchantment and here we have Fielding's attack against law-courts and the evils that are associated with courts.
In this book which opens with a court-scene, where people are summarily sentenced, we come across prison-scenes, and find life full of misery and guilt. Behind ‘Tom Jones', there was the author's jovial youth and mellowness, while the Fielding of Amelia is a far older man�..
Comparison with ‘Tom Jones� reveals Amelia as a falling off in what we think of as Fielding's characteristic brilliance.
Gone are the hearty, broad humour, the bold and free description, the pulsing zest for life. The incandescent quality of his world --- that exhalation of his joy in creating is dulled.
In this novel, Fielding in a satiric vein expresses vibrantly what he saw as a magistrate and justice of peace --- the unkindness, unpleasantness, ailment and venality. Here the movement proceeds specifically towards realism. The corrupt laws of court are attacked.
Ineffectual agents of law are exposed, and the court presided over by Mr. Thrasher, who cannot read the laws he must construe and administer, is a scene of open bribery and shameful unfairness.
In the severe realism of scenes of this kind, in his denunciation of duels and gambling, and in his dealing with all moral questions, Fielding has turned a Puritan.
There is in this novel less humour, less joviality, fewer assortments than before, but in the more grim passages, Fielding is at his happiest. None of his women-characters have the polish and lovability of Amelia. She is drawn from life, and in her the novelist paints, with affectionate faithfulness and intelligence, the fragile insight born of love and knowledge, the charms of a feminine woman, devoid of the sugared namby-pambyism that Richardson could never resist, and of the conservative touches that make Sophia Western never anything more than a pretty shadow.
Amelia is the rarest of winning characters in literature, the utterly good person who is believable.
It lacks the gaiety and high spirits of its predecessor.
The book is full of astringent conclusions and disenchantment and here we have Fielding's attack against law-courts and the evils that are associated with courts.
In this book which opens with a court-scene, where people are summarily sentenced, we come across prison-scenes, and find life full of misery and guilt. Behind ‘Tom Jones', there was the author's jovial youth and mellowness, while the Fielding of Amelia is a far older man�..
Comparison with ‘Tom Jones� reveals Amelia as a falling off in what we think of as Fielding's characteristic brilliance.
Gone are the hearty, broad humour, the bold and free description, the pulsing zest for life. The incandescent quality of his world --- that exhalation of his joy in creating is dulled.
In this novel, Fielding in a satiric vein expresses vibrantly what he saw as a magistrate and justice of peace --- the unkindness, unpleasantness, ailment and venality. Here the movement proceeds specifically towards realism. The corrupt laws of court are attacked.
Ineffectual agents of law are exposed, and the court presided over by Mr. Thrasher, who cannot read the laws he must construe and administer, is a scene of open bribery and shameful unfairness.
In the severe realism of scenes of this kind, in his denunciation of duels and gambling, and in his dealing with all moral questions, Fielding has turned a Puritan.
There is in this novel less humour, less joviality, fewer assortments than before, but in the more grim passages, Fielding is at his happiest. None of his women-characters have the polish and lovability of Amelia. She is drawn from life, and in her the novelist paints, with affectionate faithfulness and intelligence, the fragile insight born of love and knowledge, the charms of a feminine woman, devoid of the sugared namby-pambyism that Richardson could never resist, and of the conservative touches that make Sophia Western never anything more than a pretty shadow.
Amelia is the rarest of winning characters in literature, the utterly good person who is believable.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.