In Joseph Andrews, Henry Fielding provides an incredibly rich commentary on a variety of topics such as: society, politics, religion, and morality of the 18th century. With the satirical approach, using Pamela by Samuel Richardson as the inspiration, Fielding blends all of these topics into a rich novel. However, for my final paper, I intend to narrow my focus on a political analysis of Joseph Andrews and even Henry Fielding himself.

With how contentious this most recent election became towards the end, I’m of the strong opinion that dissecting a political commentary of the 18th century could be fascinating, especially if I can use this commentary as a means to further understand the political landscape that we have today. In order to begin the first stage of research for my paper, I’m going to look more in-depth into the concept of Parishes and the settlement within them, which was used as a theme towards the end of Joseph Andrews. From there, I will also begin to connect my conclusions from this to the political ideas and divides within our society today. I also intend to use secondary sources, a few of which I’ve already found that might prove useful, in this endeavor.

As a centrist for most of the political topics of today, I really want to use this paper as an opportunity to learn about the merits and criticisms that Fielding had of the 18th century political landscape, and whether they would be classified as either liberal or conservative by today’s standards. This could be a strong point of the paper, and would allow a potential reader to be able to more closely follow my analysis, given that they may already have an opinion on certain aspects of 18th century politics, if provided with appropriate comparisons to issues we face today. From the brief analysis we’ve already had on the system of parishes as they existed in the 18th century, it’s apparent that this system has (by today’s standards) both conservative and liberal beliefs operating within it. So, what would be the criticisms and merits of the parish, and to what extent have the political parties of today learned from this commentary, if at all.

But another question that could come from this topic, aside from one of charity and welfare within a society (or community), could be a critique on the leaders of these parishes, and how they compare to the leaders we have today. Does the critique of politics and the ruling class that shaped it, from the 18th century, provide any further insight into the leaders and their motivations that we find ourselves with today. Have the critiques paved the way for more efficient governing by those in charge, or has the ruling class, whether it was the royalty of the 18th century or the democratically elected officials we have today, changed in name only.

I’m confident with the appropriate secondary sources, and a second reading of the text with a focus on the political aspects of the each scene, I will be able to answer these questions and more in the final paper.