When Samuel Richardson began The History of Sir Charles Grandison, he had no plan other than to present a moral tale to counter the bawdy tone and content of Henry Fielding’s wildly popular The History of Tom Jones, A Foundling (1753). His own cautionary tales, Pamela (1740) and Clarissa (1747–48), had been satirized by Fielding and others, but Richardson, whose nicknames as a youth were “Serious” and “Gravity,” remained unashamed by jibes regarding his style and high subject matter. In Grandison, he asked for equal time from the reading community for a novel that would engage their interest while reaching a high ethical purpose.

Released in seven volumes over a year’s time, the novel’s lack of unity continues to receive critical comments by readers, who must be reminded to consider the time in which it was produced and also Richardson’s particular method of writing. As he produced each volume, he printed copies on his own press, distributing them to friends for comments and suggestions before proceeding to the next volume. The letters regarding the novel prove as interesting as the work itself, as various correspondents plead that Grandison choose the beautiful product of nobility, Clementina della Porretta, over the novel’s supposed heroine, the lovely young Harriet Byron.

At one point, Richardson writes of his frustration in having spent so much energy developing Clementina, who threatens to take over the female protagonist role from his intended heroine. When he finally decides to marry Grandison and Harriet, Clementina’s fate offers a conundrum, leading a Mrs. Donnellan to write that she could not tolerate Richardson’s possible marriage of “the angel Clementina to the hair-brained Count de Belvidere.” Such participation by readers/reviewers in the development of a 21st-century novel would be unheard of. It contributed to what critics label an inorganic presentation.

As with Richardson’s other tales, Grandison is presented as an epistolary novel, producing a satisfying irony in light of the important part that Richardson’s own epistolary activity played in the novel’s development. Harriet Byron unsettles London’s social scene, arousing the passion of Sir Hargrave Pollexfen, representative of one of Richardson’s favorite character types, the dishonorable male who uses his aristocratic position to excuse dastardly behavior. When Harriet rebuffs him, he predictably kidnaps her, fails to frighten her into marriage, and sends her as a prisoner to his country estate. This allows the gallant Sir Charles Grandison to interrupt Pollexfen’s design, rescuing the fair heroine who falls in love with her knight, as he does with her.

However, Sir Charles is already promised to the magnificent Clementina della Poretta, whose noble Italian family owes him a favor. The two never married due to religious differences, a fact that allows Richardson to emphasize his moral themes. In Grandison’s absence, the delicate Clementina suffers an emotional breakdown, prompting her parents to beg Grandison’s return to Italy. He answers their summons, his presence allows Clementina a full recovery, and Richardson settles the dilemma of the two loves by having Clementina release Grandison from his promise.

This proved a far more satisfying solution to his reviewers than one possibility he had considered, which was to allow another character, Greville, to assassinate Sir Charles. Richardson still foreshadows this possibility, increasing the anticipation of readers. He was writing his sixth volume with no decision having been made on his conclusion. Other possible endings he considered included a marriage of Grandison to Harriet, who would later die in childbirth, freeing Grandison as a romantic widower to then unite with Clementina. He had even considered polygamy, as he could not bear the thought of leaving Clementina single and alone. However, his reviewers made clear that Grandison must not continue to toy with the affections of both women, as that countered his clearly noble character.

Later critics would challenge the interminable extension of virtue evidenced by all characters, except for the clearly distinguished villains. This, however, was a part of Richardson’s distinct style. His releasing of the novel in slow volumes, later to be condensed to only three, enticed readers to near-frenzy in expectation of the all-important final seventh volume. Richardson carefully controlled that printing by doing it himself. The earlier volumes had been printed by hired publishers, with some pirated by an Irish publisher. Such publishing behavior strikes modern readers as odd, but in the 18th century, when printing remained fairly uncommon and the novel form was still in the developmental stage, approaches to distribution were not well controlled.

Commentary from the period and during subsequent years by notables, including the aesthete Lady Mary Wortley Montagu; critic, essayist, and novelist Samuel Johnson, who found the novel particularly satisfying; critic William Hazlitt; novelist Jane Austen; essayist and critic Thomas Babington Macaulay; and novelist George Eliot, shows just how widely the novel was read and used as a model. While Montagu wrote a note in her copy describing the novel as “Mean sentiments meanly expressed,” that proved the attraction for contemporary middle-class readers who enjoyed its colloquial, or more common, style, a new development in “polite literature,” according to Jocelyn Harris.

Along with Richardson’s additional work, The History of Charles Grandison remains readily available, representing an important step in the history of the development of the novel itself. Because its form was not yet firmly in place, Richardson could incorporate various literary approaches, including corrections of “oversights” in early volumes printed in later volumes. He uses the memoir approach in assigning only initials as last names to certain characters, suggesting they really exist. He also incorporates the letter form, sermonettes, news bits, what appear to be legal memoranda, popular “commonplace book” forms, and historical events from his own day. At one point he remarked that he could not continue the novel because its events had not yet happened. Such an approach remains worthy of study and enjoyment apart from the reading of the novel itself. As Harris explains, the novel proved popular due to its use of traditional character shaping based in “philosophical and religious convictions,” but also due to a new approach incorporating “knowledge of the human heart,” involving the novel in “radical social questions.”

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Harris, Jocelyn. Introduction to The History of Sir Charles Grandison, by Samuel Richardson. New York: Oxford University Press, 1972, vii–xxiv.

Categories: British Literature, Epistolary Novels, Literature, Novel Analysis

Tags: 18th-century fiction., 18th-century literature, Analysis of Samuel Richardson's The History of Sir Charles Grandison, aristocratic behavior, British Literature, character development, Clarissa, Clementina della Porretta, epistolary form, epistolary novel, George Eliot, Harriet Byron, Henry Fielding, historical novels, human heart, Jane Austen, Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, literary approaches, Literary Criticism, moral tale, moral themes, narrative techniques, novel development, novel structure, Pamela, philosophical and religious convictions, philosophical literature, publishing history, radical social questions, Samuel Johnson, Samuel Richardson, Samuel Richardson's Novels, Samuel Richardson's The History of Sir Charles Grandison, Sir Charles Grandison, Sir Hargrave Pollexfen, social commentary, social issues, The History of Sir Charles Grandison, The History of Tom Jones, William Hazlitt