Pamela vs. Anti-Pamelists: 18th-Century Virtue Debate
The Conflict Between Pamelists and Anti-Pamelists in 18th-Century Literature
This essay aims to expose the conflict that arose in the mid to late 18th century following the publication of Samuel Richardson’s Pamela (1740). The novel centers on the concept of virtue, a highly important issue at the time. This essay will explain the ideas of those who supported Pamela’s concept of virtue, led by Samuel Richardson, and those who opposed them, led by Henry Fielding.
Understanding *Pamela* and its Reception
Pamela is an epistolary novel and a bildungsroman, chronicling Pamela’s journey from maid to lady. During this period, the idea of social mobility based on virtue was appealing, as social class at birth was becoming less rigid. The story is didactic: virtue leads to success. Epistolary novels often explored social conflicts and the rewards of virtue, including the reformation of rakes. Pamela was initially met with critical acclaim and popularity, largely due to its moral purpose. However, it also sparked a debate about whether Pamela was truly virtuous, given the association of virtue with chastity. This conflict divided writers into Pamelists and Anti-Pamelists.
Richardson sought perfection, defining virtue in terms of female chastity and moral excellence. Conversely, Henry Fielding, a self-declared Anti-Pamelist, wrote two novels attacking Pamela: Shamela and Joseph Andrews. Richardson’s Pamela limits virtue to chastity, while Fielding’s Joseph Andrews embraces a broader, classical sense of virtue (achieving one’s full human potential, both physically and mentally).
The Pamelist Perspective: Defending Virtue and Social Mobility
Pamelists defended Pamela, using her as a model of the ideal woman: virtuous, chaste, kind, and generous. Pamela, a devout and sentimental young woman, worked as Lady B’s maid due to her parents’ poverty. Lady B provided Pamela with an education. After Lady B’s death, Mr. B, her employer of a higher social class, began to show a more intimate interest in Pamela. She initially resists his advances, remaining pure and chaste. Eventually, she admits her attraction, loves him, and marries him.
Examples of Pamela’s purity and innocence are evident in her letters to her parents. For instance, in Letter 1, she describes Mr. B’s courtship: “and took me by the hand… for a blessing upon him.” Later, she writes, “I have been scared out of my senses; for just now…only to my father and mother.”
The lower classes saw Pamela as a symbol of hope. Unlike typical lower-class characters in other works, who were often portrayed as beggars or criminals, Pamela’s social advancement through marriage, while maintaining her virtue, offered a positive representation. Her education, unusual for someone of her social standing, further obligated her to uphold the moral standards she had been taught. As she writes in Letter 1: “Be faithful and diligent: and do as you should do… you may look into any of her books to improve yourself, so you take care of them.”
The Anti-Pamelist Critique: Accusations of Manipulation and Double Standards
Anti-Pamelists held the opposite view. They believed Pamela manipulated Mr. B, using her apparent innocence to secure a higher social position. They also rejected the idealization of lower-class behavior, considering them inherently inferior. These detractors accused the novel of double standards and argued that Pamela’s communication relied on victimhood.
This perceived victimhood is evident in Pamela’s elaborate phrases. For example, in Letter 1, she states: “I know, dear father and mother, I must give you both grief and pleasure: and so I will only say, pray for your Pamela; who will ever be your most dutiful daughter.”
Conclusion: A Dichotomy of Virtue and Social Prejudice
The existence of these two opposing viewpoints demonstrates the 18th-century dichotomy regarding virtue. It also highlights the societal treatment of women and the prejudices they faced, as they were constantly subject to debate and analysis. The sentimental novel, with its emphasis on virtue, prompted the exploration of new emotional horizons, embraced by some and rejected by others.