The primary purpose of this inquiry is to examine the techniques of indirect ethical communication which Fielding invented, adapted, and perfected, and which may be seen at work in his novels, developed to meet what he understood to be the special needs of his readers. His innovations in the fictional communication of ethical value are explained in the context of the widespread agreement in his own time that the direct communication of ethical and religious conviction was difficult, if not impossible, because real conviction depends upon a frank, reasonable, and voluntary assent to the terms of belief.
The enquiry examines two kinds of indirect ethical discourse, which have been termed dialogue and dialectic. Dialogue in fiction consists in the interchange of ideas in conversation, including series of conflicting or complementary examples or illustrations, implicit references to other texts, and encounters between rival definitions of evaluative terms. The focal points of Fielding's dialogues are matters of some moment, such as the duties of charity, temperance, the respect due to the clergy, marriage, prudence, and the origin and scope of law.
Because the reader of satire is invited to compare what is ridiculed with a social normative referent, satire is a kind of dialogue. But certain dialogic patterns are designed to entrap the reader, forcing him to reconsider the assumptions by which he interprets the novels. This process becomes dialectical when the program of reader-implication stimulates an inward turning. The philosophical context includes both the Platonic assumption that the Good is latent in each individual, and the Anglican doctrine of assent lpersonal rsponsibility for belief) . The reader is an appropriate target for the indirect stimulation of the potential faculty of Good Nature, beginning with the reduction of cormnon but erroneous opinion (elenchus), and reaching completion with the Socratic method of "intellectual midwifery" (maieusis), which assists the reader to bring latent ideas into active life.
The enquiry undertakes a close reading of Joseph Andrews and Tom Jones, considering questions of comedy and the admixture of jest and earnest, deliberate artificiality of form, narrative technique, irony, reader response, and ethical discourse. / Thesis / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:mcmaster.ca/oai:macsphere.mcmaster.ca:11375/15586 |
| Date | January 1983 |
| Creators | Berland, Kevin Joel Holland |
| Contributors | Rcebuck, Dr. W.G., English |
| Source Sets | McMaster University |
| Language | en_US |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds