Arabella!! Please get over yourself, and out of those books part 2

As stated in my last blog Arabella's mind has been twisted by being held in such seclusion by her father's doing. All she had to do was read and study romance books, and that she did, to the point that her perception of reality is distorted. I already stated that she pulled a major embarrassing stunt on poor Mr. Hervey, now her next crazy and arrogant assault would be carried out on the marquis' gardener.

" When she walked in the garden, had frequent opportunities of seeing this young man, whom she observed with a very particular attention. His person and his air had something, she thought, very distinguishing. When she condescended to speak to him"-22

So when she roamed the garden, the garden im sure he labored over to make beautiful, she would watch him "with a very particular attention". So she was paying him close attention, more than he paid her. Somehow she took this situation and twisted it into a crazy scenario of obsessive love for her.

"She remained perfectly convinced that he was some person of quality, who disguised in the habit of a gardener, had introduced himself into her father's service, in order to have an opportunity of declaring a passion to her which must must certainly be very great, since it had forced him to assume an appearance so unworthy of his noble extraction"-22

So she thinks that he only took this job because he was so in love with her! How full of herself is she?

"She often wondered, indeed that she did not find her name carved on trees, with some mysterious expressions of love"-23

Arabella is so far gone into her books that she thinks he will resort to such childish antics to express himself. Arabella's head is so far up her own tail that she thinks the garedener should fall ill because he can't express his love for her openly. She has her mind made up that she must reject his offer of love, the offer of love that he hasn't even offered her. Before the gardener even held a real conversation with Arabella she has decided that she will "banish him from her presence."-23 because he may think that in time he will be able to have her. I just found this so comical. I don't know if Lennox is poking fun at the over acting found in romance novels, or she is just using these encounters to show that Arabella is self centered. I'm sure by the time I finish the book I'll know.

Arabella!! Please get over yourself, and out of those books part 1

In my last post we saw how Arabella broke down the physical description of Mr. Hervey. She was intrigued by him and assumed he was of some significant status because of his attire. When Mr. Hervey just so happens to ride across Arabella one day she has it in her fairy tale mind that he is so infatuated with her beauty that he is going to take her. As a matter of fact he didn't even know that it was her, he just saw the figure of a woman who looked fair.

"Mr. Hervey, who happened to be at some distance, observing a lady on horseback, who made a very graceful figure, he rode up to her in order to have a nearer view."-19

All the dude wanted to do was see who this hot chick was from afar. Doing what men do, he scoped her out and got a little closer to see the goods. It just so happened to be Arabella. Lennox even goes on to say

"Arabella suddenly seeing him, and observing he was making up to her, her imagination immediately suggested to her that this insolent lover had a design to seize her person"-19

She screamed and caused a humiliating scene for Mr. Hervey. I thought this was genius as far as plot distortion because I just knew that they were going to have some type of romantic encounter, but she monkey wrenched that from the getup. She is so full of herself to think that she is so beautiful that he became so madly in love with her that he had to kidnap her. She called hin a ravisher. She is so indulged in her make belive books that her perception of reality is distorted to the highest degree. After reading that part I felt sorry for poor Mr. Hervey because his reputation had to suffer from such a stupid incident

Am I seeing materialistic/arrogant similarities in Arabella, Pamela, and Syrena???

In the opening of The Female Quixote we are told that Arabella has just turned seventeen and hasn't had many opportunities for men to approach her. Not even two paragraphs in, the story's focus jumps to a description of a man Arabella notices watching her.

" This gentleman was young, gay handsome, and very elegantly dressed; She blushed with a very becoming modesty; and, pleased with the unusual appearance of so fine a gentleman;"-Page 8

The way she examines Mr. Hervey from the intro may be a clue to her character. Early in reading I think I am seeing some resemblances of Pamela and Syrena's materialistic qualities and superficial characteristics in Arabella. The way she described Mr. Hervey could've just been an honest observation of him but what pushed it over the edge to me was that right after his description is given, Lennox jumps to Arabella's outfit description.

"Her dress, tho singular, was far from unbecoming. All the beauties of her neck and shape were set off to the greatest advantage by the Fashion of her gown, which in the manner of a robe, was made to fit tight to her body; and fastened on the breast with a knot of diamonds" -9

Now clearly we see that she definitely has some materialistic ways. Even though she is of a higher status her arrogance is what stands out when Lennox states she wore a "Sarsenet hood, somewhat in the form of a veil, with which she sometimes wholly covered her face, WHEN SHE SAW HER SELF BEHELD TOO MUCH ATTENTION"-9

If she's at church the focus should be on the word and the preacher or minister or whoever is delivering the word. What type of person would draw so much attention to themselves in such a place. She's wearing a tight fitting gown as we read on page eight, and was fastened at the breast which probably revealed some cleavage. It seems to me that she wants, likes, and bathes in the attention that she is getting at church.

Francis Burney's usage of the epistolary Novel

Evelina displays another creative way to use the epistolary technique. Early on in reading I am seeing how the story is about Evelina but it's not being told through the mind or eyes of Evelina like Pamela or Anti Pamela. Its like lady Howard is kind of narrating the story through her letters to Rev. Villars. It gives the novel a creative twist because it's like we're learning about Evelina's actions and characteristic developments at the same time he is. It gives a very current feel to the novel, we're not omniscient in this novel so we don't know how Evelina will turn out as a person or what is going to happen to her, which builds up anticipation because I have no idea of what this book is really about yet.

It seems as though we are watching Evelina develop into a woman through the eyes of her designated guardian. I just though that was another cool way to use the epistolary technique in a novel, paralleled to Haywood's and Richardson's.

"Syrena's gettin a lil sloppy on the pimpin"

Throughout the story Ms. Tricksy stressed the importance of being above the average pretty woman and avoiding men's passes. Syrena started out doing well in carrying out these stealthy gold digger maneuvers. As the story unravels I'm beginning to see some Ms. Tricksy's teachings ignored by Syrena. she already broke the rules by continuing her conversations with Vardin after her mother told her to leave him alone. She pacified her self by saying that she was only still talking to Vardine to see what extra gifts she could squeeze out of him. - she broke the master pimp's rule and we see how that turned out for her.-mistake one

"Syrena's impatience would suffer her to wait no longer, and having enquir'd where Lord R-- lodged, for he kept no House in Town, drest herself in as alluring a manner as she could, and went to make him a Visit."- A direct violation of pimpin rule number two.

"she (ms. tricksy) told her that none but those who were not ashamed to be thought common, ever went to visit Men at their Lodgings"

Once again Syrena pacifies her mind with sloppy, childish notion. "she imagined that going to him in that manner, would give him a high Idea of the extreme Passion she had flatter'd him with, and that also it would make her seem to act without Disguise, and that she was too innocent even to know there was any indecency in what she did.

This quote from the narrator goes on to confirm the stubbornness and the naivety unfolding in Syrena that I previously suspected would be her downfall,"So all the Arguments Mrs. Tricksy made use of were to no purpose; the pert Baggage told her she was capable of managing now for herself, and would walk with Leading-Strings no longer." Syrena's hard head, I think, is going to bring an embarrassing end to the dynamic duo's pimpin reign.

(Sorry for the lack of page numbers but I ended up having to read the story off the internet.)

Is Syrena falling for the oke-doke???

Everyone knows from the first few pages of the story that Syrena was bred from birth to be a man eater, but as the plot rolls on I'm beginning to get the inkling that Syrena is not the machine her mother built her to be, and "mamma" feels the same.

"Dear child, I received your letters,and am very much surprised to find you have gone so far in a love intrigue, in such short a time:" (65)

Syrena is mind blown over the fact that her admirer watches her and offers her fine stockings. I think this story is going to end up showing that Syrena's mother's "gold digging" teachings have actually made Syrena naive and in too much of a rush to find love and riches. Syrena is falling for every line Vardine drops on her. I noticed that she begins to have some reservations about her mother's advice of not seeing him anymore.

"and that if I could once be brought to love him, he would make me a happy woman"(68)

"why then said she, must I be debarr'd from speaking to a man that loves me?" (71)

I think that Syrena is beginning to use the material things that she is offered as a way to continue rendezvousing with Vardine. "A little conversation with him sometimes would certainly instruct me better how to behave to the sex, than a thousand lessons-besides i might get some small presents from him." (71)

" I shall hear what he has to say and it may be managed so as to get something from him"(71)

I believe this direct defiance is a sign of Syrena's future tear from her mother's mind control, because for a minute wee see that she has some type of feelings for the man outside of his financial concerns. He tells her all these sweet things and how much he loves her and even gives her money. But as soon as she expects to receive the other portion of money from him he bounces. Not only does he bounce, he does it in such a way that says to me as a reader WOW!! Did he just play her like that??!! Then he sends a letter which may be true about him having to leave because of his position in the army but he will "renew" his acquaintance with her (82). I haven't finished reading the whole story yet but I know there's more to this than we see.

The Virtuous Syrena

I have to say that I am not even half way through Anti Pamela, but the first two pages have tickled me more than I expected. The story's first paragraph begins very blatantly with the line "Her mother, though in very mean , Circumstances, when she was born, flatter'd herself with great things, from the growing beauties of her sweet babe;"(53) The story is already showing the greed and conniving ways of the mother will be bred into Syrena with lines like, "Being therefore left entirely to the care of a parent, who had been a woman of intrigue." (53) With just these few lines I can see where this story is going, as far as being anti Pamela. I think that its very funny and very entertaining. The Virtues of Syrena are polar opposites of Pamela's virtues.

"The girl was not out of her bib and apron, before she instructed her in lessons, which she had the wicked satisfaction to find, her pupil knew not only how to observe , but also improve." (53) This is my favorite line so far! It seems as though this story could've been written in our era as comedic response to Pamela! If I were Richardson I'd be pissed off if someone paralleled my book in this fashion because it's honestly a little more entertaining. I think the intro of the characteristics of the women is genius. I don't know why the more sinister virtues appeal to me so much more than Pamela's "innocent" virtues. Maybe it's because I didn't fully believe in Pamela's innocence that makes this so much more acceptable, maybe I just don't believe that women of our time are so virtuous. I know times were different back then, but I can't help but to apply these stories to our time and things that I know. In fact at the time these stories were written I think that's what made them so popular; people applied them to their own lives. The authors succeeded in creating something that makes the readers pull characters and themes out of the book, rather than become a part of the book.

In the few pages I've read, I can tell that I'm going to enjoy this reading more than Pamela (sorry Richardson). I think that Richardson would have had to reverse the importance of the innocent and angelic virtues of Pamela to get the message across more thoroughly to our generation. The newer version would've been more like a pretty, sleazy, whorish woman has been sleeping with Mr. B while occupying the job of his servant. He likes it, she likes it. The day comes for him to choose a bride to be. He walks in the room, casually passes her, and proposes to the quiet, conserved, virgin woman next to her. This would be the 2009 version of anti Pamela. In my mind its just more believable than the perfect, virtuous angel Richardson created.

Pamela: Does she secretly love master and his money?

"I went up soon after, and new dress'd myself, taking possession, in a happy moment, I hope of my two bundles as my good master was pleased to call them ; and so put on fine Linen, silk shoes, and fine white cotton stockens, a fine quilted coat, a delicate green mantua silk gown and coat; A french Necklace, and a lac'd head, and handkerchief, and clean gloves;" (302-303)

She did thank God afterwards, but I'm puzzled about her materialism because she says she thanked God "for being able to put the dress on with so much comfort"(303)


Richardson was genius for the idea of using letters as the dialogue median in this novel. Doing so confuses readers as to what a novel is or what literary devices make a book a novel. I was confused about it myself until we spoke about it in class. Richardson definitely created a new genre of novel with this technique.


The character Pamela is very open with her parents in her letters. In fact she's too open, she explains too much about the way her master wants her. This made me wonder was she upholding this image of innocence to her parents, or was she gloating the fact that a man of status wanted her? Another incling I got was that she's secretly enjoying the measures her master is taking to capture her heart. I think of black slaves or servants who faced the same kinds of harassment and they pondered killing their master with acts like spitting in his milk, escaping, or some way of expressing a deep hatred for him. Pamela's account seems too lily and "ha ha haa, he wants to marry me but I'll resist him because I'm a perfect virgin with morals and virtues! I haven't finished the book yet, so I haven't come to a definite conclusion but these are some of the thoughts I had while reading.


Richardson is silently injecting lots of morals into the story so far, with issues of Pamela supposedly being a simple, modest, virgin, who doesn't need materialistic things but she's indulged in finer clothing, and happy when master buys her or her family material things. This again makes me think she's enjoying the chase of her master a little too much. At times seems as if she's wondering how far will he go to please her. I'll have to finish the book to figure it out though.

Act of Anne: Punish the Pirates!!!!

"And that if any other Bookseller,Printer, or other Person whatsoever, from and after the TenthDay of April, One thousand seven hundred and ten, within thetimes Granted and Limited by this Act, as aforesaid, shall Print,Reprint, or Import, or cause to be Printed, Reprinted, or Importedany such Book or Books, without the Consent of the Proprietor orProprietors thereof first had and obtained in Writing, Signedin the Presence of Two or more Credible Witnesses; or knowingthe same to be so Printed or Reprinted, without the Consent ofthe Proprietors, shall Sell, Publish, or Expose to Sale, or causeto be Sold, Published, or Exposed to Sale, any such Book orBooks, without such Consent first had and obtained, as afore-said, Then such Offender or Offenders shall Forfeit such Book orBooks, and all and every Sheet or Sheets, being part of suchBook or Books, to the Proprietor or Proprietors of the Copythereof, who shall forthwith Damask and make Waste-Paper ofthem: And further, That every such Offender or Offenders, shallForfeit One Peny [sic] for every sheet which shall be found in his,her, or their Custody"

This was one of the most outstanding paragraphs of the essay. It's so bold and to the point that you can't misunderstand it if you're an author of the time. It shows the frustration of the writers of the time, as well as their seriousness about making their money. This paragraph clearly shows how we form the copyright laws of today. Don't sell my books if I didn't give you my consent, you can't sell my ideas without paying me, simple and plain.

This was a law to be set for the booksellers and printers. Someone had to come up with a way of controlling who has the authority to print and reprint books for profit. Monitoring who gets the permission to make the profit from the book was also in dire need. I can only imagine that if I had written a book, and I go to another part of town and I see a book station selling my book and they're holding all the profits without contacting me, there's going to be some sort of confrontation or possibly an altercation. This portion of the essay almost seems as if it grew out of anger of lack of control of who profits from an author's creations. It's almost a threat but more so a warning.

"And further, That every such Offender or Offenders, shallForfeit One Peny [sic] for every sheet which shall be found in his,her, or their Custody."

This sentence is pure genius! It reminds me of today's DVD bootlegging law that states after being found with so many bootlegged copies, you can receive two years per DVD (I think it's two years). It also favors the weapons law that states if a felon is caught with a loaded weapon, If there's over ten loaded bullets, he or she can receive up to ten years per bullet. Such a harsh punishment should deter most copiers and sellers. A penny per page, I'm sure can be quite expensive. If each book has three hundred pages and he or she is caught with twenty books you do the math, and back then a penny was worth a lot more than it is today.

"Then such Offender or Offenders shall Forfeit such Book orBooks, and all and every Sheet or Sheets, being part of suchBook or Books, to the Proprietor or Proprietors of the Copythereof, who shall forthwith Damask and make Waste-Paper ofthem."

LOL! On top of the penny per page penalty, you have your whole collection torn up and trashed. So in the end an offender would pay a penny per page, then have to watch his books be torn up and thrown into the garbage. I'm positive illegal copying of books declined after this harsh proposition. I totally agree and understand the motive that would bring about such an proposal, people should be in control of their art, and if there's profit to be made, the author of that art should be first to collect, as well as decide who and who can't sell that art.

The Tatler

These series of papers show the opinions and views of and in the coffeehouses of the time. I was often confused because of the different points of views expressed from page to page. The Tatler seems much like today's magazines. They covered broad topics and shed light on occurring events of the time.

However I did find the Female Tatler paper Interesting. Although men were supposed to be the dominant writers of the time, I found it interesting that a woman could create a somewhat successful paper aimed at, but not only for women. Women's perspectives are expressed in the female version of The Tatler. Although the Female Tatler had a short run (1709-1710) it was satirical, witty, and creative. It once again shows women's ability to enter what may be considered a masculine art and proving to be more than capable of matching or even exceeding the men's talent. I found the idea of creating Mrs. Crackenthorpe very intelligent as far as marketing and promotion. It gave the paper character. The phrase "A lady who knows everything" only added to the creativity of the paper. The phrase actually would give it more of an edge on the alternate paper The Tatler. I'm assuming The Female Tatler was in some competition with The Tatler considering The Female Tatler released publications on the days that The Tatler didn't. It would've snatched a few fans of The Tatler who wanted to read more news throughout the week, as well as the female audience that The Tatler most likely excluded or ignored in it's sexist practices.

Response to Sheila's Perception of 18th Cent. Women

Sheila I understand exactly what you're saying about the women in these stories. They do seem a little air-headed for the choices of men they desire. The men also seem one dimensional in the way they treat women in these readings. However, you have to remember what the authors are doing as far as the mechanics of the stories. The authors are trying expose their messages through the actions of their characters. By Behn and Gay creating such characters shows us they probably have similar messages in their works. I think that you are on to something when you stated, "I have noticed a common theme of the "sweet" girls always falling for the asshole guys." I assume that it's no coincidence that this occurs in both pieces and I understand your obvious disliking of that aspect in both stories.

In your article you stated that the authors made you question eighteenth century women and I see your point, but I have to disagree. When writing, you really can only write about what you know. Therefore, maybe these two authors have this perception of women because of their personal experiences with women. What I'm saying is that just because these two wrote about air-headed women in the eighteenth century, doesn't mean it represents all women in the eighteenth century. A better analogy would be, if me and some random guy wrote two separate stories but they had one common theme, all the women are twenty five years old and they are money hungry, cut throat, liars. When students two hundred years from now read our stories, should they conclude that all twenty five year old women in our time were money hungry, cut throat, liars? Maybe just the twenty five year old women that we knew were money hungry, cut throat, liars. So it does make sense to definitely say there's something going on with the women's characters in these stories that suggests some type of shallow sense of romance but to generalize all the women of the century Is a bit harsh. But I did enjoy reading your blogs, I must add and I definitely respect your comments and points of view of the readings.

Peachum's Greed: Government's Deeds

THROUGH all the Employments of LifeEach Neighbour abuses his Brother;Whore and Rogue they call Husband and Wife:All Professions be-rogue one another:The Priest calls the Lawyer a Cheat,The Lawyer be-knaves the Divine:And the Statesman, because he's so great,Thinks his Trade as honest as mine.

I feel like this passage embodies the entire theme of the story. It's comical but sad. The lengths people go to obtain material or financial luxuries. The Peachum's lack of compassion for others is truly classic in this story. It symbolizes Gay's perception of people's selfishness and greed of the time, and also their abuse of power.
Both evils still lurk and thrive in today's politics. We see police officers extorting criminals, lawyers extorting criminals, lawyers extorting police officers, vice versa and etc. Today's elite operate with the same morals and code of ethics as the Peachum's did then. I call it the Bush complex. It comes in effect when a person achieves a high level of financial income and still takes from, and abuses those with less. It seems like it's not about the profit anymore it seems to be about evil.

The Peachum's personify and perpetuate the system of greed and selfishness of government. I could be reading too deep into the story but this is how I perceived it. At the time of the story's creation, Gay couldn't come right out and say "the powers that be are greedy and evil thieves", so it seems he tied it into a storyline of love and romance. Similar to how the SNL (Saturday Night Live) cast portray Bush's erroneous accusations of Saddam's WMD's. It's definitely comical but underneath the costumes and punch lines lies a serious bitter truth.

My saying goes, if the poor steal from the poor, I guarantee the rich feed the rich. This story solidifies such a quote. The Peachum's are already financially stable, yet they seek to suck others dry and scam for more wealth.

Polly loves MacHeath so she marries him, the Peachum's so deeply hateful don't say they want her to get a divorce, they want to him jailed executed so his wealth can spread to their family. It seems the Peachum's goal is to scam the life out of others, kill them if they don't pay up, and control their surroundings. Very similar to government in a lot of ways, which is what I think Gay was subliminally inserting into this play which is why plays became more political after this one.

Backlash from the Opera
The Beggar's Opera was the first example of political satire that led to the Licensing Act of 1737. The success of the opera encouraged new writers such as Henry Fielding to begin political drama works. As a result, the theatre enjoyed a few years of political satirical works, until the Licensing Act discouraged political writing.
Political propaganda within the opera was only one issue that met the objection of the public. Dr. Thomas Herring argued that the "favorable presentation of criminals" was morally unacceptable. Critics also argued that the opera was "a debased form of entertainment," a representation of "the declining taste" of the public. The critics were correct; theatre as entertainment was changing. A venue once distinguished as a high-brow, was drawing new audience members from lower classes.51 Critics claim that this melting pot of the middle and upper classes paved the way for a decline in the integrity of art and a growing movement called Sentimentalism.-http://www.umich.edu/~ece/student_projects/beggars_opera/theater.html#set