I have seen a BBC adaptation of Clarissa a long time ago. I don't remember most of it, but I do remember Lovelace. Reading your review I cannot but wonder how agonizing it must be to follow Clarissa on her plight for freedom. But there's something in Richardson's book that still resonates today: 1) why must women go through such horrors (especially sexual violence) to learn about the world? Is there (and in some cases there has been proven to be) a fetish related to violence targeted at women? 2) Its a story that cautions women to protect themselves and never bothers to teach anything to its male readers. Its the same today. We are still telling women to be careful, but never mind telling men how to respect women and improve certain behaviours.
It was a really difficult and challenging read. I’m glad to have read it, but I’m unlikely ever to want to read it again. It feels so relevant today — I can only imagine it’s the sheer length of it that means it hasn’t become a fashionable novel again. While Lovelace doesn’t reform there is a rake who does. I think Richardson intended him to be a lesson to male readers. But I believe his readership was largely female. I’m starting to dig into how the novel was received at the time which is interesting.
I have. The first half of the book goes very quickly, action upon action. But the second half is like a completely different book, extremely moralising and preachy. Even though it's a lot shorter, I actually found Pamela a much harder read.
I didn't really enjoy reading either of them in the moment. But I did find them very useful for understanding the history of the novel and the historical context. On reflection, I'm glad I read them and enjoy them a lot more now I've finished!
I have seen a BBC adaptation of Clarissa a long time ago. I don't remember most of it, but I do remember Lovelace. Reading your review I cannot but wonder how agonizing it must be to follow Clarissa on her plight for freedom. But there's something in Richardson's book that still resonates today: 1) why must women go through such horrors (especially sexual violence) to learn about the world? Is there (and in some cases there has been proven to be) a fetish related to violence targeted at women? 2) Its a story that cautions women to protect themselves and never bothers to teach anything to its male readers. Its the same today. We are still telling women to be careful, but never mind telling men how to respect women and improve certain behaviours.
It was a really difficult and challenging read. I’m glad to have read it, but I’m unlikely ever to want to read it again. It feels so relevant today — I can only imagine it’s the sheer length of it that means it hasn’t become a fashionable novel again. While Lovelace doesn’t reform there is a rake who does. I think Richardson intended him to be a lesson to male readers. But I believe his readership was largely female. I’m starting to dig into how the novel was received at the time which is interesting.
I also believe his readership was largely female. Have you read Pamela? I've heard it's just as moralizing.
I have. The first half of the book goes very quickly, action upon action. But the second half is like a completely different book, extremely moralising and preachy. Even though it's a lot shorter, I actually found Pamela a much harder read.
Really? From what I've heard and read about Richardson's books so far, I'm not sure I want to read them anymore :D
I didn't really enjoy reading either of them in the moment. But I did find them very useful for understanding the history of the novel and the historical context. On reflection, I'm glad I read them and enjoy them a lot more now I've finished!