I

In 1744 appeared a now almost forgotten two-volume book, anonymously published, called The Adventures of David Simple: Containing An Account of his Travels Through the Cities of London and Westminister, In Search of A Real Friend. This first of the so-called "humanitarian" novels was written "By a Lady" who, in her preface, apologized for "the many Inaccuracies … in the Style, and other Faults of the Composition." The modest author was Sarah Fielding, spinster sister of Henry Fielding, noted playwright, editor, and novelist.

In 1744, however, the noted Henry Fielding was neither a practicing playwright, editor, nor novelist. He was a struggling lawyer, laboring against handicaps to establish himself in his new profession. Not only was his gout getting ever more painful, but, in 1744, he had to endure the sight of his much-loved wife "daily languishing," wrote Murphey, "and wearing away" before her husband's eyes. She died in November of this year.¹

One would think that Fielding had already enough on his mind without having to cope with a false assertion made by contemporary critics. David Simple was—the report ran—a novel by Henry Fielding. The error needed to be corrected. Thus, when David Simple appeared in a second edition in 1744, Fielding replaced his sister's preface with his own, and commented therein, "the real and sole Author of this little book, … is a young woman … nearly and dearly allied to me." What is of greater interest—and surprising, in view of his so many domestic and professional pressures—is the fact that Fielding took the time extensively to revise his sister's text. He said in his preface that his part was this: "[T]wo or three Hints which arose on the reading of it, and some little Direction as to the Conduct of the second Volume, much the greater Part of which I never saw till in Print, were all the Aid she received from me." He remarked, further, that "by comparing the one [edition] with the other, the Reader may see … the Share I have in this little Book, as it now stands." A collation of the two editions reveals the following most noteworthy types of revision.²

The Use of Pronouns

Fielding often made improvements in the use of pronouns, by eliminating vagueness of reference, ambiguity of reference, or, with relative pronouns, in correcting the case. In Volume I, I counted twenty-one pronoun changes; in Volume II, seven. Not all the changes are by modern standards necessary. For example: "Voice that uttered" (1, 16) to "Voice which uttered."³

Tightened Sentence Construction

Revisions which resulted in tightened sentence constructions—like the reduction of a clause to a phrase, or a phrase to a word—are numerous and were much needed. Example: "Mr. Daniel Simple, who kept a Mercer's shop on Ludgate-hill" (1, 1) to "Mr. Daniel Simple, a mercer on Ludgate-hill." Many loose and verbose constructions are similarly telescoped. Occasionally even a very slight change will betray this same urge for economy of expression. For instance, in one tense moment in the novel, "David," according to Sarah Fielding, "stood like one struck dumb" (1, 239). Henry Fielding took this out and wrote, "David was struck dumb."

Changes Actuated by Fielding's Knowledge of Law

Changes in several passages are interesting because they show Fielding somewhat ostentatiously parading his new legal knowledge. The most entertaining of these changes appears in a passage where David Simple's monstrously evil brother, Daniel, was contemplating forging a will more in his favor. Fielding revised extensively. The revised version corrects nothing. All it does is rearrange a few constructions in order to permit the insertion of additional information presumably gratifying to a legal mind. One sentence for example: "[Daniel] was greatly puzzled what he should do for Witnesses, which, as he had slily pumped out of an ingenious young Gentleman, his acquaintance, who was Clerk to an Attorney, were necessary to the signing a will" (1, 7. See, also, 1, 11, 31, 217-218).

Elevation of Diction

Sarah Fielding had written: "… he [Daniel] would not turn away his servants to please his [brother's] Maggots" (1, 26). This would not do. Fielding's undeniably more elegant revision reads: "… he would not turn away all his Servants to gratify his humours." Another example: "… he thought he could never go through" (1, 27) to "he despaired of mustering sufficient Spirits to go through." Henry Fielding could himself be a trifle verbose, if the greater number of words resulted in a greater elegance of expression.

Correction or Qualification of Fact

When David Simple paid for lodgings in an inn, the rent, according to Sarah Fielding, was "one Guinea" (1, 245); "two Guineas," insisted Henry Fielding. Evidenced here, in such a qualification or correction made for the sake of realism, is an interesting type of change. Some of these changes are quite subtle, and in their whimsical tolerance remind us, more than almost any other emendation, that the editor was also the creator of Parson Adams and Tom Jones: for example, (A) "This Couple led a life above their Quality" (1, 26) to "This Couple led a Life little to be envied"; (B) "No Circumstance of Time, Place, or Station, made a Man either good or bad" (1, 38) to "… made a Man absolutely either good or bad"; (C) "… to have been tempted to such an Action … would then have appeared in the most dishonourable Light" (1, 59) to "… might possibly have appeared in the most dishonourable Light"; (D) "Nature had certainly thrown in some Vices to Women's Minds, lest Men should have more Happiness than they are able to bear" (1, 73) to "… lest good Men should have more Happiness than they are able to bear."

One notes the ironic overtones in some of these changes.

The Insertion of Irony

Here was Fielding's most characteristic and pervasive contribution to David Simple. His was a sharper irony than his sister's, more masculine, as it were, and thus not entirely consistent in tone with hers. Two supporting instances suggest themselves. The one concerns David's reaction to a story of a husband who abused his wife. "The Goodness of David's Heart," wrote Sarah Fielding, "could not conceive how it was possible for good Usage to make a Man despise his Wife, instead of returning Gratitude and Good-humour for her Fondness" (1, 96-97). A wry comment is, in the revised copy, added: "[David] never once reflected on what is perhaps really the Case, that to prevent a Husband's Surfeit or Satiety in the Matrimonial Feast, a little Acid is now and then prudently thrown into the Dish by the Wife."

The other example involves a young couple (a brother and sister) whom David is befriending. Because these young people had not been prepared by their very respectable upbringing in any way to earn their bread—Sarah Fielding made much of this point—they had been reduced to beggary. And even in beggary they had not been successful because of the competition with the real professionals. The sister, Camilla, disliked the only alternative remaining: to join a profession even older than beggary—the oldest, in fact. Indeed, she was distressed to find that, "amongst the Men I had but one Way of getting anything from them" (11, 39). Our editor revised this. "Amongst Men," he caused Camilla to say, "I had but one way of raising Charity." A master's hand is clearly behind this delicious and ironic twist. (See, also, 1, 36, for another good example.)

II

Henry Fielding had announced in his preface to the second edition of David Simple that he had corrected "some Grammatical and other Errors in Style." By "grammatical errors," he may have had in mind such matters as lack of agreement between subject and verb, ambiguity in the use of pronouns, or incorrect verb forms; many such errors, at any rate, he corrected. By errors in "style" he seemed to refer to crudities of diction—phrases like "to please his maggots" (1, 26) or "we have been come home" (1, 224) distressed Fielding—and looseness of sentence construction. The elimination of these faults strikingly demonstrates Fielding's own concern for Correctness.

But Fielding also said in the preface that he had limited his revisions to the "Correction of some small Errors." Actually, he corrected hundreds of errors, large and small. Further, with respect to Volume II, he did not confine his editorial work to "some little direction." He did make many fewer revisions in Volume II than he did in Volume I; but the fact that he made changes in every single chapter but one (Chapter IV of Book III) suggests that he gave to this second volume considerable detailed direction.

Obviously the primary interest of this note cannot lie in the revelation of Henry Fielding's quite harmless concealing of the extent of his revisions of his sister's novel. Nor is it in any vital new truths here uncovered. None are, though this brief study does certainly add to our knowledge of Fielding's concern for a clear, correct, and "elegant" style. It reaffirms, too, our judgment that—with some happy exceptions—the literary ladies of these times did not write very well. But this is incidental. The primary interest to this writer lies in the fact that to collate the two editions of David Simple is in a sense to peer over Henry Fielding's large shoulder as affectionately, patiently, whimsically, ironically, this very busy man read through the brave and bungling literary efforts of a loving, trusting sister. It is a most human, a curiously intimate experience for him who peers.

Notes

¹ For details of Fielding's life in 1744, see Wilbur L. Cross, The History of Henry Fielding (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1918), Vol. II, Ch. I.

² Professor Cross makes a cautious generalization: "It appears … [Henry Fielding] did render … [Sarah Fielding] considerable aid in the matter of details and the general conduct of the story" (The History of Henry Fielding, Vol. II, Ch. 8). The present study is the first to attempt to document this generalization.

³ See, also, I: 1, 5, 6, 13, 15, 18, 27, 40, 79, 92, 155, 180, 185, 198, 201-202, 206, 219, 220, 377; II: 66, 92, 104, 132, 233, 341, 316. The pagination is that of the first edition and very close, throughout, to that of the second. Italics, throughout this article, indicate Fielding's insertions or revisions.