Being an 'example' means influencing the actions of another. If the effects are, as Johnson claims, “powerful,” a responsibility of care accompanies the role of example. This responsibility may seem superfluous, since the example takes over the “memory” and exists only as a mental influence. However, this influence only exists temporarily in the mind. The 'effects' are realized in actions capable of influencing individuals in the surrounding environment. A responsibility is therefore present in the conscious effort to exhibit one's behavior as a positive moral example, so that these 'effects' that occur in others are also positive. Johnson specifies that these effects are produced "without the intervention of the will." Perhaps this suggests that the responsibility of example is present in every action, not simply the conscious activity of modeling oneself to exert positive influence. If the “intervention of the will” is removed, neither the example nor the individual influenced by the example can choose which of their actions serves as the example. Both Eliza Haywood's Fantomina and Samuel Richardson's Pamela engage with this concept of every action as an "example." Even seemingly arbitrary actions have powerful effects, suggesting that every action is inescapable of moral responsibility. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Throughout the eighteenth-century novel, characters are often classified by social class. Eliza Haywood's Fantomina challenges the notion that the powerful effect of "example" is limited to social class and the customs associated with it. Example effects are so powerful that they ignore social hierarchy and are capable of influencing individuals across class boundaries. The original example of Fantomina, the prostitute in the opening scene, is unnamed but central as an influence that "aroused her curiosity to know how these creatures were dealt with." [1] Physically limited by social class, Fantomina resides in a box. , while the prostitute remains in the 'Pit'. Therefore no interaction takes place with his example, suggesting that the power of the example can only be active through the gaze. However, his “curiosity” is “excited”, not created. This suggests a generalized dissatisfaction with her experience of class restrictions that has remained dormant, but is still deeply rooted in a history of female repression. Fantomina can now act on this frustration only through the introduction of an example that she can imitate; the prostitute offers an approach that bypasses the restrictions of feminine tradition. The power of the example is probably diminished by this argument, since the "curiosity" already exists within Fantomina. Furthermore, the gaze provokes his "curiosity" towards a "sort of violence", so much so that the prostitute's influence almost completely overcomes the process of "possession of memory". As soon as Fantomina witnesses the “way” prostitutes act, she begins to implement her “resolutions” (Haywood, p.227). For this 'Prank' to be possible, Fantomina must stoop below the human form, to a 'Creature', to consciously neglect the burden of responsibility attached to the status of Lady. [2] Haywood therefore refuses to align Fantomina with a class-specific restrictive example. If the power of the example were so influential that it affected Fantomina through sight alone, even interacting with a higher-class example would likely be ineffective. Instead of the freedom to cross social boundaries, Richardson's Pamela shows an expectation that example shouldbe limited by social rules. class. Margaret Anne Doody suggests that none of Richardson's female characters are "absolute" and need constant positive example to make them so. [1]. Richardson then presents Lady Davers as the character who should exist as an example to be represented in the 'absolute' upper class Pamela. However, his vocabulary rejects this expectation: "the girl could not speak thus, if she had not been her master's bedfellow" (Richardson, p.384). Lower-class terminology, including "maiden", creates a parallel between the two women - Pamela regularly calls Mrs Jewkes a "fat, fat thing" - which suggests that they both need a polite example to become "absolute", independently from their ancestors (Richardson, p.114). Lady Davers is then identified as a bad example and her influential "power" is diminished. Unlike Fantomina, Pamela can choose to refuse both the sight of and interaction with her expected "example". Furthermore, this interaction of characters occurs in private, suggesting a difference between this and public discourse. Lady Davers freely deals with the theme of desire, an emotion that women should neither feel nor discuss. This presents the role of an upper class example as perhaps exclusive to a public construction of behavior, existing only to meet social expectations. Privately, Richardson inverts these public expectations of example. Pamela is able to reject Lady Davers' negative influence by recognizing her own morality as a better example. Ironically, the girl accused of acting as "her master's bedfellow" serves as a positive example that will make the Lady "absolute." The "power" of the example can therefore vary depending on the recipient. Pamela fixes this scene in her memory, as she will later tell it to Mr. B., but does not allow this influence to "take possession" of her. In Pamela, the power of example is limited to those who are socially superior, a concept condemned by Richardson through Pamela's rejection of Lady Davers' influence. Richardson and Haywood also present their protagonists as examples and explore how "powerful" their effects are on others. . Tassie Gwilliam comments "it is easy to see how the line separating the woman who performs for an audience without knowing it from the woman who knowingly performs for that male audience can blur." [1] This concept separates Pamela and Fantomina as characters. Example effects are likely more powerful when they arise naturally within an individual, as opposed to a performance. Pamela possesses, and exudes, naturally, the attributes of good example: For Beauty, Virtue, Prudence and Generosity [...] she has more than any Lady [...] she has all these naturally; they are born with her (Richardson, p.423). Authenticity seems to influence how powerful an example is. Pamela is called a truer example of "any Lady", since morally positive attributes "are born with her". This suggests that the occurrence of these qualities naturally is more influential than a conscious performance, than a mere imitation of a natural example. Being "born" with "beauty, virtue" and "prudence", Richardson implies that it is almost hereditary, rejecting the association of refined sensibilities with the upper class. Pamela's parents are ranked socially inferior due to their poverty, but morally they are such a powerful example that it seems to be hardwired into their DNA. Perhaps Pamela maintained this existence as a natural example only through her original position in the social hierarchy. By comparison, Lady Davers' privileged upbringing taught her proper public conduct, suggesting that everyvirtue he exhibits is a performance. While these praises are spoken by Mr. B., Pamela reports them to the reader through the epistolary form. This secondary narrative layer distances the reader from the reality experienced by Pamela, defining her narrative as, although close to realism, a performance. As Gwilliam suggests, the “line” between an unconscious performance and a conscious performance is blurred. However, this performative epistolary form is irrelevant when considering Pamela as an example. She is identified as a positive natural example, and this aligns Gwilliam's more positive definition of the "unconscious" performer. The woman who consciously performs is therefore condemned as almost incapable of existing as a positive moral example. After playing Fantomina, Haywood's protagonist constructs a series of different identities – the widow, the servant, Incognita – each of which consciously enacts public and virtuous behavior. Pamela maintains this virtue in private, while Fantomina submits to both her own desire and that of Beauplaisir: 'with these Arts of conveying him as new Mistress […] I have always delirious, wild, impatient' (Haywood, p.243) . Haywood almost encourages a conviction of Fantomina as a bad example. Actively performing as the unconsciously acting woman, each character feigns virginal status and ignores Beauplaisir's true nature. However, for Beauplaisir, this performance is reality; she is an "unconscious" artist for him, who "passes" every time for a new Mistress. To sustain this fiction even in private, Fantomina must constantly change her identity to meet the demands of Beauplaisir's desire. Thus, she states “I have him,” implying feminine and dominant possession, but she is also “wild” and “impatient” like him. Fantomina's virtue is a public display and cannot exist as a positive moral example due to lack of coherence. Her identity and virtue change in private, suggesting that Fantomina does not possess the natural attributes of a virtuous exemplar like Richardson's Pamela. Rejecting this moral example is perhaps conscious. He consistently labels his business as an “Art,” suggesting such a deep immersion in his performance-based reality that he cannot return to a reality to meet the social expectations of this morally positive exemplar. According to Gwilliam, Fantomina is classified as the woman who "consciously performs", and therefore cannot naturally exude the power of example. Haywood recognizes Fantomina's actions as a bad example of virtue and instead presents her as a positive example of female independence. The effects of Fantomina's example are therefore powerful, however not in the intended context, or in the same context as Pamela's. Until now, the power of example has been considered to have an undeniable influence. However, both novels also question how "great" the external influence of the example is compared to one's own conscious, internalized desires. In Haywood's Fantomina, Beauplaisir refuses to act as a morally positive example and instead chooses to fulfill his own desire. This is underlined by Fantomina's expectations of how women should be "addressed" to men, even when she identifies as a prostitute: she told him she was a virgin, […] [she was] far from forcing him to desist – indeed, in current ardent Enthusiasm of Desire (Haywood, p.30). Gentlemanly conduct is an "[obligation"] for Fantomina, and she expects it especially after revealing her virginal status. Yet Beauplaisir's conduct is perhaps immune to the force of a gentleman's example, especially at this time. For example, its influence is committed to memory, and then a period of time passes before it affects thesubject. This “burning anxiety of desire” is instead identified as existing in the “present,” where spontaneous emotion prevails over any influence that may exist in memory. An insistence is also reflected in the syntax. The hyphen not only adds a breath, as if to mimic physical pleasure, but creates a momentum in the sentence that mirrors the increasing progression of the action that Fantomina struggles to slow down. As an experience of the moment, desire takes hold of the person without “the intervention of the will,” similar to the example effects established by Johnson. If the desire produces the same effects, but instead originates from an internal influence, this suggests that the power of the external example is not as "great" as Johnson suggests. Arguably, the power of the example could be seen as greater the longer the desire exists as an emotion. However, as soon as this emotion is felt in the "burning" "present", it requires to be physically satiated as well. Desire therefore induces as much action as it influences the power of the example. Thus, the "power" of the example is temporarily overpowered as "great", as the desire drives immediate action, while the example can be rejected while it still exists as a mental influence. This allows Beauplaisir to ignore the morally positive example shown by the gentleman and instead choose to satiate his desire. In Fantomina, Beauplaisir is immune to the power of positive example. In Pamela, Mr. B. only temporarily adheres to the stereotype of the eighteenth-century libertine. His initial refusal to accept responsibility for example moves from Beauplaisir's insistent moment of longing to consistent, genuine love. His original choice, which favors desire rather than following or displaying a respectable example, is recounted by Pamela in Letter XI. It is addressed only to his mother, although almost all other letters are addressed to both parents. This suggests that male desire, and its consequences for women, was a topic that could only be addressed by women: "I found myself in his arms, quite without strength, and he kissed me two or three times, as if he had eaten." me' (Richardson, p.23). In her nervous state, Pamela lacks "strength" physically. However, he also actively rejects any emotional action, subsequently denying any desires felt. She “found herself” draped over him, and “he kissed her,” emphasizing his dominance over her through the order of pronouns. Only by presenting this experience as unwanted can Pamela completely preserve her virginity, as she rejects even lustful thought. Her lack of agency is further suggested by Mr. B.'s almost animalistic strength, which becomes primal in his desire to "[eat] her." This emphasizes the physical “violence” that desire can inadvertently cause in the urge to be satiated, provoking Mr. B. to actions almost “without the intervention of [his] will.” As the novel progresses, the powerful effects of Pamela's morally exemplary reform, Mr. B. Richardson, suggest that this is only possible through marriage. The sacrament forces Mr. B.'s relationship with Pamela into the public sphere. She is, by law, now a Lady, and is considered his equal and capable of setting an example for her husband. Thus, the effects of Pamela's virtuous example are consistently more powerful than the "libertine" stereotype. However, it is only when Pamela rises in the social hierarchy that she is given the opportunity to inflict it. Each novel explores the "power" of example. When exploring the success of an example, you need to consider whether the example presented is identical to what the author intended. Richardson and Haywood show, 2001)