Marketing Novels as "History" in Henry Fielding's Tom Jones

History and truth are interesting aspects in Henry Fielding’s Tom Jones. There are a few places that I would like to look at as I investigate what Fielding means by history, how this affects “truth,” and finally, how this adds to our understanding of eighteenth-century print culture.

The early days of the novel can be seen as experimental. Eighteenth-century novelists were exploring novel writing, as is evident by the array of “layers” we find in novels of that time. What did authors want to write about? How did they go about writing it? What I am drawn to is how so eighteenth-century novelists desired to write the “truth” even though their readers are aware that what they are reading is a fiction. Before I discuss Tom Jones, I would like to draw our attention back to Aphra Behn’s Oroonoko. Behn’s title page reads, Oroonoko: or the Royal Slave. A True History. As I have discussed in a previous blog, “truth,” which precedes “history,” implies that historical documents are not necessarily always the truth. This would give Behn reason to emphasize that the history she is telling is in fact true. Is this Behn’s criticism of historical documents, which tend to mask the presence of a narrator or subject telling the story in order to appear less biased? Perhaps Behn is implying that literature is more truthful than history itself. In all cases, Behn is interested in stressing truth as basis of her novel. 

Like Behn, Fielding also calls his work of fiction a “history.” The full title to Tom Jones reads, The History of Tom Jones, a Foundling. Since we are interested in print culture this semester, I think it’s important to pay some attention to how the title page is set up. Having looked up several title pages from the various editions of Tom Jones (Google image search!), I found that the word that begs the most attention is HISTORY. “History” is printed at the top of the page in big, bold letters. Thus, the publisher sees value in this word. As we are learning this semester, publishers make conscious decisions on what to print and how to print it. Readers will see the title page and will be instantly drawn to the word “history.” In choosing this particular layout, what can we infer about the publisher’s assumption about eighteenth-century readers? Are readers more likely to be drawn to a story that claims to be a history, thus a “true account” of Tom Jones? Will readers then take the book more seriously, even with its satirical approach? Will this book sell better if it is marketed as a history?

Not only does the publisher emphasize the word “history,” but so does Fielding in his contribution to George Lyttelton. He says, “To you, sir, it is owing that this history was ever begun,” and “Again, sir, without your assistance this history had never been completed” (3). Fielding is not only stressing his gratitude to Lyttelton, but is “again” emphasizing that Tom Jones is a “history.” Further down the page, Fielding says “Lastly, it is owing to you that the history appears what is now is” and even ends the preface referring to himself as “master” of “the following history” (3). I think that as he expresses his gratitude towards those who have aided him, Fielding is also marketing his work as a history.

Returning back to my early discussion on experimentation within the novel, I think it is interesting to consider how authors and publishers wanted to market novels. By marketing novels as histories, publishers and authors tell us something about eighteenth-century culture. I think we can assume that eighteenth-century readers value "truth." How this truth manifests itself differs across eighteenth-century novels, as is evident in Behn's approach to history as opposed to Fielding's approach. Behn questions history as a source of truth, thus elevating fiction, while Fielding claims to be writing history and entirely avoids the mention of "fiction." Nonetheless, there is still this shared desire for truth in fiction, regardless of how the work is marketed, which I find totally fascinating. Fielding even professes his own limitations and illustrates his honesty as an author when he tells readers not to “expect to find perfection” in his work (6). After all, claiming perfection would only devalue Fielding’s attempt at marketing his work as history or truth.