The History of Tom Jones - Essay Example

?Resistance to psychologization in The History of Tom Jones Introduction: Alexander Welsh in his book Strong representations: narrative and circumstantial evidence in England (1992) has observed that protagonist of the novel Tom Jones can never be considered criminally guilty because he never intends for commission of any wrong. For Welsh, Tom is essentially good and his “relentless goodness” has also evoked the element of doubt in him that the protagonist of the novel does “lacks psychology” (Macpherson 123). Another critic, James has also supported Welsh’s observation and has gone to a further extent by in order to explain the lack of psychology in Tom’s character by stating that “… Fielding derives intentions from circumstantial evidence, “reconstructing the mind from the outside, in from the ‘the Fact’ in evidence to the motive” (James; Cited in Macpherson 123). Keeping in accord to the theme of argument in the paper that the narrator in the novel The History of Tom Jones often withholds information about the psychological traits of his character these observations are highly relevant. The limits of psychologization in the novel not only stops emergence of Tom Jones are a complete human character but also it affects the constructional themes of the novel from the perspectives of theme, narrative and characterization. The character of Tom Jones in the novel deserves special critical treatment and discussion because he can be regarded as a bridge between the themes of conventional medieval romanticism and the future course of the tradition of novel writing with special focus on the analysis of human psychology. While the narrator has quite carefully resisted the temptation of indulging within the psychologization of the protagonist by withdrawing information about his interior thoughts, on the other hand, he also has provided subtle hints to the traits of psychological disturbance of the character under specific situations. Observing this trait feature in Fielding’s writing, Evans Lansing Smith has quite aptly suggested that “Henry Fielding’s novel … stands at a crucial turning point in our survey of the hero in literature. While looking backwards to the traditions of the medieval romance, Tom Jones carries the conventional symbolism of the Classical epic … forwards into the future, anticipating a long line of novels in our tradition which combine realistic or historical detail and mythic symbolism” (Smith 195). The relevance of Psychologization in the context of novel writing: The critics like Frances Ferguson are of opinion that psychologization of characters in novels not only helps readers to follow aesthetics of the narrative from the perspective of an outsider, but at the same time it helps them to receive understanding of the characters as well as flow of the novel from quite a personalized perspective. One of the basic principles regarding the technique of novel writing is to incite readers to enjoy tension of characterization and plot development. A novelist can effectively use his narrative skills to develop the tension by emphasizing on the psychologization of characters. Frances Ferguson in this context has opined that narration of the psychological complexity of character in a novel “…does not at all directly express mental states but rather relies on the contradiction built into the formal stipulation of them. Psychological complexity, that is, pits the stipulated mental state against one’s actual mental state …. Psychology is the ongoing possibility of the contradiction between what one must mean and what one wants to mean” (Ferguson; Cited in Macpherson 123). This observation not only attracts attention in the context of explaining Fielding’s narrative retrain of Tom’s character, but at the same time also finds support from Dr. Johnson’s special emphasis on the importance of explaining characters in terms of manner and nature (Watt 261). Ian P. Watt explains that “‘Character of manners’, of course, Johnson ranked much lower on the grounds that although ‘very entertaining … they are to be understood by a more superficial observer than characters of nature, where a man must dive into the recesses of the human heart’” (Jonson; Cited in Watt 261). The restrain of psychologization adopted by Fielding in The History of Tom Jones makes the protagonist more of a “character of manner” than a “character of nature.” Consequently, the limitation of Tom as a character of manner in the novel also limits the scope of enjoying the “contradiction between what one must mean and what one wants to mean” (Ferguson; Cited in Macpherson 123) for a reader. In his preface to James Joyce’s masterpiece Ulysses, a critic has attempted to compare and contrast between the two novels by Joyce and Fielding and consequently has reflected regarding Tom and the way he has emerged through Fielding’s narrative that “Tom’s life may often be influenced by events which have happened earlier in his history, but his mind in, relatively speaking, independent of the past. He is always free to make new decisions: the old Tom does not greatly impinge upon the new. He is aware of himself as a continuing moral consciousness, but at any one time the mind of Tom Jones in the mind that exists wholly in the here and now” (Joyce 18). It is due to this reason that though Fielding in the very introductory chapter of his novel has claimed that “The provision … which we have here made is no other than Human Nature” (Fielding 52), however, has failed to construct Tom as a character of nature. The restrain of Psychologization in Tom Jones: Tom as a protagonist of Fielding’s novel, since the very beginning, has been portrayed as a character of action rather than of intention. While the psychological aspects that resulted in the action or the state of mind after commission of an act on Tom’s part has not been provided with much attention from the novelist, on the other hand we also find evidence that the narrator is quite positive regarding the audience’s reaction regarding the depiction of Tom’s nature as a person of action: “As to what he urged on this occasion, as I am convinced most of my readers will be much able advocates for poor Jones, it would be impertinent to relate it. Indeed, it was not difficult to reconcile to the rule of right action which it would have been impossible to deduce from the rule of wrong” (Fielding 149). Tom, throughout course of the novel, has not only remained as an individual who is seeking for the right action, however, consequently he also has failed to become a human being due to his quest for righteousness. It seems that Fielding’s restrain of psychologtization in the novel has only developed Tom as a person of unfailing morality. He appears to be like a projection of mythical knights, who were ready to sacrifice their everything in order to complete their quest but the human side of them often remained hidden, unrecognized, unacknowledged: “In some ways, Tom Jones is a fiction devised to illustrate a fiction, or a copy of an archetype: it is a typological figure of the Judeo-Christian paradigm of Fall, Exile, and Redemption (from Genesis to Revelation)” (Smith 195). The journey of Tom Jones can be considered as the journey of Adam from the Garden of Eden. Sophia can be regarded as the Eve, whose fall takes Tom along with her to the underworld and finally they are left with one another to survive their plight. Depiction of Tom as a character of action: Prior to introduce the protagonist in the novel, the author has used the device to narrate various phases of Tom’s ancestry to convince the audience regarding the factors that influenced development of the character as a man of actions. Once the audience in introduced to little Tom, while on one hand, the psychological aspects of his nature are carefully ignored by the novelist, on the other hand repeated stress has been provided regarding Tom’s indulgence into a particular action. Tom’s intimacy with Mr. Western in this context can be cited as an example. The narrator has not explained the reasons or the psychological craving that made Tom intimate to Mr. Western. All he has mentioned is that the kind of attention that Tom received from Mr. Western and his wish to have a son like Tom played the role of a catalyst in this affinity. A modernist reader can automatically argue that there must be some void in Tom’s psychology that made him search for such attention at an increasing rate. However, the narrator has entirely omitted from mentioning or discussing the emotional void that developed within Tom since his very childhood. Tom Jones is indeed a man of several talents and these are the only factors that the narrator has capitalized on to suggest that the protagonist was so highly appreciated among others, including Sophia: “The amiable Sophia was now in her eighteen year, when she is introduced in this history. Her father, as hath been said, was fonder of her than any other human creature. To her, therefore, Tom Jones applied, in order to engage her interest on the behalf of his friend the gamekeeper” (Fielding 161). Irrespective of the narrator’s conscious effort to restrain psychologization, an important communality between Tom and Sophia’s character has been revealed. Tom’s affinity towards Mr. Western and the high favoritism of Sophia’s father for his daughter make it clear that both the characters always enjoy special attention. Due to the narrator’s conscious avoidance of psychologization in the novel readers do not have any other way to know the magnitude and desperation for attention seeking of these two characters but when it comes to understanding the psychological aspects of both Tom and Sophia, this information in definitely important. Tom’s emotional affinity for Sophia in his adolescence has not been hidden by the author but the nature of his mental state, magnitude of his emotional state have not been discussed by the author. Keeping in accord to his aim to project Tom as a man of action, Fielding has attempted to show that to which extent Tom is ready to take risk for Sophia’s happiness as well as to earn her favoritism. Sophia though maintained her “highest degree of innocence and modesty” (Fielding 168), however, could not help changing her previous interpretation of Tom: “To say the truth, Sophia … discerned that Tom, though an idle, thoughtless, rattling rascal, was nobody’s enemy but his own …” (Fielding 167). In the context of understanding the parameters of psychologization in the novel these elements become important. First, Tom, irrespective of all his talents was considered nothing but another rascal by Sophia though she used to pity him, however, could not express her sentiments properly or even declined from acknowledging them due to the traditional moral virtue. It is due to the same reason when she finally started to change her perception regarding Tom, still she under pressure of virtue and innocence refused to acknowledge it to the best she can. Second, Tom on the other hand, has also been so preoccupied with his own problems and despised himself, he never had the chance to acknowledge his intentions or emotional surges. If we think from this perspective the narrator’s refusal for psychologization in the novel has been to some extent correct. However, keeping in mind the contemporary social restrains and so-called moral obligations to maintain virtue, emergence of the man of action over man of intent can be considered as more obvious. The restrain of psychologization in the novel, however, might be justifiable for other characters as they belonged very much under restrains of the social conventions. In case of Tom Jones the restrain of psychologization is not completely justifiable because the protagonist cannot be categorized as a prototype of the conventional structure. Thus, Sheldon Sacks’ observation in this context seems to be highly revenant as he states that “To have evaluated actions, characters, and thoughts as he did in Tom Jones, Fielding must have been deeply committed in judging action according to the motive of its agent; he must have identified motives largely with the passion; and he must have reconciled the practical judgments he made with his conviction about the springs of action by assuming that passion were not uniformly selfish but that some were benevolent, others maleficent” (Sacks 117). Conclusion: The restrain of psychologization in The History of Tom Jones does not entirely provide the impression that it a narrative of human life; rather it more provides the impression that the novel is actually a fairytale or mythological narrative. The narrator’s conscious resistance to psychologization in the novel, while on one hand yields such impressions to a reader’s psyche that Tom cannot be identified just another human being, on the other hand, absence of the commonplace automatically provides the narrative with a dramatic overtone. The characters in the novel do not also show the features of a round character; rather they have followed a pattern and consequently it becomes easy for reader to predict actions in the novel. However, there is no denial of the fact that irrespective of his conscious efforts to resist psychologization in the novel the narrator provided readers with subtle hints of characters mental state but never has attempted to elaborate it. The tone of myth and epic and restrain of psychologization in the novel though have given it a dramatic tone and made it stopped it from appearing as such a narrative that does not have any connection of realism with that of life’s course, however, there is no denial of the fact that the author has attempted to provide a comprehensible understanding of contemporary socio-cultural scenario. The narrative has been used effectively by Fielding to explore the horizons of human existence within the socio-cultural and socio-political situation of that time. Unlike a drama the author has also attempted narrate the progressive course of the protagonist’s life considering the vast expanse of time. Finally, it can be said that though restrain of psychologization in The History of Tom Jones has made the text appear far removed from reality and the narrative style is replete with elements of drama, however, Fielding’s narrative can be regarded as a novel with dramatic tone. Works Cited Joyce, James. “Chapter One”. Ulysses. London: Taylor & Francis. 1968. Fielding, Henry. The History of Tom Jones. London: Derby. 1861. Original From: The Harvard University. 1861. Macpherson, Sandra. Harm's way: tragic responsibility and the novel form. Baltimore, Maryland: The Johns Hopkins University Press. 2010. Sacks, Sheldon. Fiction and the Shape of Belief. California: The University of California Press. 1964. Smith, Evans Lansing. The hero journey in literature: parables of poesis. Lanham, Maryland: The University Press of America. 1997. Watt, Ian P. The rise of the novel: studies in Defoe, Richardson and Fielding. 2nd Ed. California: The University of California Press. 2001. Read More