s works are coarse, and that
they contain scenes and characters of a dissolute nature, is neither to
be denied nor to be regretted. If they were more pure, they would be
less valuable from a historical point of view; less true to nature, and
therefore less artistic. That the author's intention was far from the
production of works with an evil tendency, is evident. He was careful
to say in the preface to "Joseph Andrews": "It may be objected to me
that I have against my own rules introduced vices, and of a very black
kind, in this work. To which I shall answer first, that it is very
difficult to pursue a series of human actions, and keep clear from them.
Secondly, that the vices to be found here are rather the accidental
consequences of some human frailty or foible, than causes habitually
existing in the mind. Thirdly, that they are never set forth as the
objects of ridicule, but detestation. Fourthly, that they are never
the principal figure at that time on the scene; and lastly, they never
produce the intended evil." And again, still more strongly, Fielding
claims the merit of purity and moral effect for "Tom Jones," "I hope
my reader will be convinced, at his very entrance on this work, that
he will find, in the whole course of it, nothing prejudicial to the
cause of religion and virtue; nothing inconsistent with the strictest
rules of decency, nor which can offend the chastest eye in the perusal.
On the contrary, I declare, that to recommend goodness and innocence
hath been my sincere endeavor in this history. * * * Besides displaying
that beauty of virtue which may attract the admiration of mankind, I have
attempted to engage a stronger motive to human action in her favor, by
convincing men that their true interest directs them to a pursuit of her.
For this purpose I have shown, that no acquisitions of guilt can
compensate the loss of that solid inward comfort of mind, which is the
sure companion of innocence and virtue; nor can in the least balance the
evil of that horror and anxiety which, in their room, guilt introduced
into our bosoms."

Thus, it is evident, that Fielding had no desire to write what might be
harmful. The contrast between his promise and his fulfilment is simply
an illustration of the standard of his time. His novels are coarse to a
degree which may nullify their merits in the eyes of some readers of
the present day, and may unfit them for the perusal of very young
people. But this is simply beca