The Daily times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1886-1889, 1889-12-08
OUR LIBRARY.
Literary Table Talk.
. of Our Il,ruTu.

The systematic mutual deception Of
the present day IN the intercourse Of
people with each other that has tabooed
certain class OF books, l would sup
pose. had operated to prevent your
ma ming the best novel in the English
language. if you had not included in
your list Joseph Andreys. As you
did mention Joseph Andre,rs, presume
that Tom Jones" merol ~ escaped your
memory at she moment. Where Is its
equal But it's too strong for this age.
BELvIDERE HILL.
The above is from a valued CORE
spondent. and may we'll be made the
text Of our weekly literary Table Talk.
Some of the most discerning and jul
dicious literary critics in the language
have expressed the same opinion as our
ACKNOWLEDGMENT that Tom Jones
ia the most admirable novel in English
literature. In the point of skilful ar
rangement its plot is generally accepted
as model, and as picture Of manners
it may possibly have been equailed, but
il has certainly never been surpassed.
Thackeray could find no words too
strong TO describe the admiration in
which he held it. We referred some
weeks ago to the regret which he ex-
presses in the preface of Pendennis.
that this age should be 50 squeamish as
to frown upon the robust freedom and
directness Of the Fielding method OF
laying bare human nature in,its grossest
animalism as well as in it's heavenly re
finement. Ii is just this feeling that has
barred from the general reading they
deserve the three great novels OF this
author. whose name IS 40 illustrlOus
but whose works are only familiar to q
certain class OF men OF literary tastes.
As literary performance. Tom Jones
is, as our correspondent very justly IN
Inmates. superior in the genius which
il displays to Joseph Andrelcs. being on
a much more ambitious aud extended
scale Of effort IN every way. The
books which we mentioned III the list
which we recently gave, were not go
much those which we considered the
most remarkable in the language as
those which had been read by us with
special interest, pleasure or instruc-
ton. As a work of extraordinary
greatness, we would give Gib0on :
Decline and FHi preference over
Macaulay's fascinating history. To a
certain extent the same principle that
led us To name the latter rather than
the former. influenced US to select
Joseph Andreics from among the novels
Of Fielding. Not improbably. too, "a
distaste for the prim and Numbering
Richardson, who was expressly rldl-
culed in this novel, had something to
do with our choice. Furthermore, our
admiration for the character Of ParsOn
Adams who is. on the whole, the most
life like creation OF Fielding, had. we
are confident. very important weight
in moving US to pass by Tom Jones and
TO express preference for the much lees
celebrated. and in reality much less
meritorious work, Joseph Andrecs.
ALTHOUGH Fielding has always been
considered the :oaTsest of all the Eng
lish novelists. and We think justly 10.
yet this quality in him does not rep |
as much as might be supposed. lie
may be indicate. but yet he ls never
vulgar. because he does not love coarss-
ness for itself. 1t was part Of his ma
ture, and being as much a part OF bis
nature AS his humor and pathOs, 1t al
was expresses itself in hearty, robust,
and healthy way. and ther fore Is no
more offensive than the occasional
grossness of Shakespeare and the old
writers.
As we read his novels, we say to our
selves in reference to their author ::
Here is a man so full of the animal
spirit, both in its lowest and highest
phases, so full of rolliching and unre-
strained impulses of every kind. that
he pOurs out the whole wealth of his
moral, intellectual. and physical being
in the most promiscuous and indiscrlm-
mating profusion. with all the uncon-
seriousness Of child of nature untram-
meled by rule or conventionality. That
faint of ,ulgarity which we detect in
Defoe's novels, more particularly IN
ROrdnd. is absent. Indulgence 10
coarseness for mere love of what IL
offensive TO refined tastes is not dlscoy-
cred in the works of Fielding as upon
almost every page of SleTnes Iris'
tram Shaadg. There are no sig
and suggestive illusions, expressed
with all the exquisite ingenu-
ity of the highest literary art,
to be found in his novels. Nor is there
IN them the sickening disposition to
employ the grossest images or to dwell
upon the grOssest details that was the
popularity of Swift. His most indeii.
cate scenes are drawn without the
slightest establishment or distortion
as simply part OF the drama OF life,
which he was presenting as faithfully
as his genius allowed. He could have
replied with far more consistency to
truth than SterDe that he inserted all
that was foul in his novels in spirit Of
perfect innocence but such reply
as that would only come from the lips Of
a man who knew in his own mind that
he was speaking falsely.
1t seems strange that SO many readers
who, so far form setting the seal of con-
demnatiOn on some Of the most proml-
nent contemporary books, have read
them with avidity. should draw their
skirts away, metaphorically speaking.
from Fielding, who was not cOnsciously
or Intentionally coarse. His works are
full of knowledge of human passions
and emotions aud all the varied springs
of existence. These works show the
most acute discrimination into the DIFF
ferent shades of character, aud bound
less observation of the innumerable
phases Of social and individual life.
Furthermore, their style is flexible,
masculine. peTspicuous and inexhausti-
BILE in verbal resources.
Beside the illustriOus figure of Field
ing. however marred by defects and
blemlshes, how puny, how odious APP
pear that class of writers Of the present
age, whose only stock in trade is NOR
bid and vulgar prurieDcy, and whose
only claim to attention lies in the silly
distortion OF English words, and in an
disregard of English clloca-
ton.
IL spite of the popularity of several
novels recently published. that might
be mentioned. which in our judgment
should have been put under the ban OF
The law "a ohSrpup literature and thpre-