All About Books discussion

The History of Tom Jones, a Foundling
29 views
The 100 Best Novels > Week 5 - Tom Jones by Henry Fielding

Comments Showing 1-20 of 20 (20 new)    post a comment »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Jenny (last edited Oct 20, 2013 11:38PM) (new)

Jenny (jeoblivion) | 4893 comments Ta-ta-ta-taaaa: and here's week 5 with Tom Jones or The History of Tom Jones, a Foundling by Henry Fielding.

The book was first published in 1749 and described as both a 'Bildungsroman' and a Picaresque novel. (the latter being a Spanish term, describing a popular sub-genre of prose fiction which might sometimes be satirical and depicts, in realistic and often humorous detail, the adventures of a roguish hero of low social class who lives by his wits in a corrupt society. This style of novel originated in sixteenth-century Spain and flourished throughout Europe in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Thank you Wikipedia!)

Find the article here

and in case you'd like to know more about Henry Fielding go here.


LauraT (laurata) | 14362 comments Mod
This one I've read - and didn't like that much. It has the "defects" of a XVII century novel: too many things happening, too many coincidents - far more far fetched than Dickens's!!! - too few insight of characters.
But I understand they were ... "making themselves the bones" as we say in italian - "Farsi le ossa" meaning learnig how to do it!!!!


message 3: by [deleted user] (new)

Again, not a book I've even heard of!


Gill | 5719 comments Ok, Tom Jones. There was a film of it (in the late 60s?). Just checked, it was 1963 with Albert Finney. Anyway, on the basis of the film, several of us at school decided to read the book. I don't remember much about it, but at least I can claim to have read it!


Gill | 5719 comments That's funny. I've just looked at the article and there I see a photo from the film!


Valetta | 33 comments Ah, I loved Tom Jones! I agree that there were too many coincidences and it was a little far-fetched but I remember it as absolutely funny!


message 7: by Dhanaraj (new)

Dhanaraj Rajan | 2962 comments If I am not mistaken Leslie had already predicted it. Leslie can really see into the future.......Lol..

And not so surprisingly I have not read the book....


message 8: by Jenny (new)

Jenny (jeoblivion) | 4893 comments True!! Leslie? I am not sure whether to be impressed or scared!! LOL


message 9: by Leslie (last edited Oct 21, 2013 02:16PM) (new) - rated it 4 stars

Leslie | 16369 comments Dhanaraj wrote: "If I am not mistaken Leslie had already predicted it. Leslie can really see into the future..."

Ha! I did indeed predict this one! :P

And I did read this but years ago and I don't really remember it very well. My impression is favorable though Laura is correct that it makes liberal use of coincidence!


message 10: by Pink (new)

Pink I've heard of all of these so far, but read none of them. The list is remarkably similar to The Observer's 100 Greatest Novels of all time, except that it skipped Don Quixote. So if it follows suit next week should be Tristram Shandy.


Leslie | 16369 comments Pink wrote: "I've heard of all of these so far, but read none of them. The list is remarkably similar to The Observer's 100 Greatest Novels of all time, except that it skipped Don Quixote. So if it follows suit..."

I was noticing that as well. I just went back to the original article - this list is only Anglo-American novels, which narrows the field (especially in the 17th century)! But I thought that it was supposed to be alphabetical, which it certainly isn't so far!


message 12: by Jenny (new)

Jenny (jeoblivion) | 4893 comments I guess time beats alphabet?


message 13: by Pink (new)

Pink Certainly looks to be going in date order, which is how the Observer's list is ordered, that's why I noticed the similarity. Leslie, I guess it being Anglo-American explains why Don Quixote is missing.


message 14: by Gill (new) - rated it 4 stars

Gill | 5719 comments Though, since some books from the Observer list will be left out of this new list, that must mean there are some additions.


message 15: by Pink (new)

Pink Very true Gill, I didn't think of that! Of course the list might deviate more from the Observer once the books become more modern. Like Leslie mentioned, there aren't many English works to choose from in the 17th century.


LauraT (laurata) | 14362 comments Mod
Has anyone read Tristram Shandy?
I did, and find it a bit difficoult ...


message 17: by Gill (new) - rated it 4 stars

Gill | 5719 comments LauraT wrote: "Has anyone read Tristram Shandy?
I did, and find it a bit difficoult ..."

Yes I have, very recently. If Pink's theory is correct I'll tell you about it next week!


LauraT (laurata) | 14362 comments Mod
OK!


message 19: by Harold (new)

Harold Walters (ghwalters) | 5 comments Read Tristram Shandy a hundred years ago in university. At the time I thought it was humorous. One of the books I'd like to read again for curiosity's sake.


Leslie | 16369 comments Harold wrote: "Read Tristram Shandy a hundred years ago in university. At the time I thought it was humorous. One of the books I'd like to read again for curiosity's sake."

Oh good as it is on my TBR list!


back to top