Feelings in The Man of Feeling

The Man of Feeling was one of the most unique books we have read so far. Harley was a man who let feelings control his judgment, which caused him to not gain the money he set out for and to die because of loving a woman whose affections he could not gain. The book was broken up into little "scenes" or "episodes," and there were a lot of sections missing from Harley's writings. These omissions were disorienting at first (when did Harley lose his dad; why is there a section called "The Pupil" which seemingly came from nowhere?), but I got used to it after a while. Each section was compact enough to learn the lessons in each without getting confused. My main problem with the novel was that I was forced to feel a certain way for each person Harley came across. I mean, it was hard not to feel sorry for certain individuals like the woman in the mad house or for Edwards, but it was too much by the end of the book. It was like everyone had misfortunes and no one had any joy in their life. And if I wanted to pass judgment on a certain character (like the prostitute; maybe she was to blame for her hardships because she went after that guy and didn't even tell her father), I couldn't. Harley's words and his compassion, as well as the feelings of the girl's father, were like swords stabbing my brain, telling me I had to feel sorry for this poor girl. I did find it interesting how Harley managed to touch everyone he came across; making me think that he was turning others into "men of feeling." Yet in the end, he died back at home and without the woman he loved. If anything, Harley taught me that a man should not let his feelings rule everything in his life; there needs to be a balance between reason and feelings. If Harley had followed this advice, he'd be alive, had gotten money, and would have expressed his love for Miss Walton sooner rather than later, and possibly have gotten married to her. Instead, we are left with an ending that seems to say "Harley managed to save everyone but himself."

Depiction of imagination

We discussed in class why these novels have lost appeal to our generation. After thinking about this I think it’s the fact many of us have lost the ability to imagine. As I said in class the scenery description in Man of Feeling on page 64 as well as the third paragraph on page 90, are all to trigger ones imagination. Describing setting and scene in detail raises the chance of a reader recognizing something that pertains to them and so they build a picture around that. The description of the painting must have been one many readers would have known so for them they already can picture the scene more effectivly. unlike us since these days with our world moving in such speed that even sleep is becoming a chore, we don’t have time to imagine, we use other people and television to imagine for us. the serenity of sitting in the shade with the breeze hitting your face and the scent of spring in your soul is lost to our genertaion. I doubt it is easy for most of us to set up the Scene of page 90, which goes into detail of the sick man laying in a dirty bed and a woman supporting him. Mackenzie goes into great detail describing the women as an angel and how she smelled as well as that there was a tear on her cheek. From this we could build in our head a picture of a woman who we too thought to look like an angel, this is the beauty of these novels, the fact that such skill was required to entice a reader to read so many pages is amazing and lost to us. Like we said in a previous class one has to place themselves in the time of the novel to truly appreciate their words. just look at our generation and the exploration many authors are doing with literature. all this to create a new way to grasp the reader to pick up a book, just look as Crying of Lot 49, Hood and other modern day novels.
I leave you with a question, do you still imagine the words when you read?

Man of Feeling

Man of Feeling poses some interesting challenges to the reader. Harley appears at first to be a breath of fresh air. He is a feeling and sensitive hero, almost out of place in the world. The conceit of the found pages is intriguing, and I found myself wondering where this twist of ‘feeling hero’ would take us. The journey to London begins well enough with interesting encounters and characters, but then becomes increasingly fractured as a story. As each new happening becomes an occasion for Harley to be misused, I began to wonder if Mackenzie is asking us to decide if a moral life is possible in modern life? Is being sentimental and generous to the degree Harley has chosen a realistic goal for the working class, or an indulgence of the upper class? Ultimately, I was left feeling empty. While I am usually a sap, there was a sense of being compelled to feel that actually sucked the emotions right out of me. But in terms of the final result, if Mackenzie is asking the reader to question the definition or efficacy of a life of feeling, he is successful.

Man of Feeling

If Mackenzie's purpose was to convey the emotional and sentimental character of mankind through this work, I think he effectively accomplished that task. By having his sentimental hero, Harley, experience such personal scenes and events, the reader cannot help but sympathize with the whirlwind of emotions present in each case. Our entrance into each emotional scene seems purposefully directed by Mackenzie, as though getting to the heart of the situation (i.e. where the geyser of emotions lies) is what matters most. In some ways, these abrupt entrances to different scenes mirrors the postmodern style, wherein fragments of situations are laid out in no particular order and the reader has to work hard to connect the fragments in order to understand the big picture. We are thus presented a character who is put through the emotional burdens of others and whom we see get engulfed by his passions at the end of the book.
Just a note: I was surprised that while reading this book I was also touched by the emotional events that provoked the protagonists's feelings. From the title of the book I thought the novel would be a discourse on emotions, etc. However, it turned out to be an intriguing piece of literature. Being a modern reader, I was apprehensive about how I would read the book. Yet, seeing how the "Man of Feeling" was able to strike my own nerves, I have to wonder at the responses that 18th century readers felt.

Love That Boy

Tom Jones is a satisfying read. The book is a journey into the world of 18th Century life as chaotic and filled with dichotomies as any modern day tale. Tom is a flawed hero, to say the least, and it is Fielding’s willingness to place the entire burden of this story on the shoulders of such an imperfect character that makes his journey the more enjoyable. Tom goes through his life with a flawed reputation and one that, for the most part, he has earned. Yet, for all of his misconduct, the reader is hard pressed not to root for Tom. I, myself, love a bad boy. A good guy in bad boy clothing; this is what I declared my husband to be after a month of dating. Ten years later this combination still charms me. This is also the way I would describe Tom Jones. He is not out to hurt anyone and in fact operates from a strong moral point of view, but he does have an element of ‘bad boy’ that is often the result of impulse control. What saves him is that, even in the midst of these undesirable actions, he is brave and generous and willing to risk his own well being in order to be sure that what is right prevails. I believe that ultimately Tom and Sophia find happiness together. Together they have a perfect balance of impulse and propriety. Tom Jones is a crisp spring breeze that wakes you up from a lazy afternoon and reminds the reader of all the unexpected adventures that make up life.

Moderating "feeling"

In Mackenzie’s “man of feeling,” Harley, at first seemed like a nice idea (even to a non-sentimentalist reader, like myself)—he is refreshingly sensitive, bashful, and kind-hearted---something atypical for a male hero. But all this was undermined when he became excessively “feeling.” I mean, sometimes, giving all your money to charity may not be the best idea when you have bills to pay... And I started to sneer at Harley’s sentimentality. Within the framework of the novels we have discussed, exists two major elements of identity: logical reasoning, and overt sentimentality. Mackenzie flaunts sensibility but simultaneously rejects the purity of this sentimentality. He says in chapter XL, “The desire of communicating knowledge …is an argument with those that hold that man is naturally a social animal…but it may be doubted whether the pleasure…arising from it be not more often selfish than social” (79). Basically, sensibility is tainted. This gives rise to some questions: Just how are reason and sensibility perceived by Mackenzie? Can the two be jibed into one realistic character? Can this "man of feeling" actually exist? It was difficult for me to read Harley as a straight up sentimental character. With that sort of reading, he seemed more sentimentally unattainable, in the same way that Pamela is morally superior. This encouraged a more ‘read between the lines’ approach that encouraged the analysis of human nature and the characteristics that create a balanced individual: both sentimental, and logical.

Tom Jones - Misunderstood

Here I find myself defending the morally "incorrect" again, I do believe we have to give some allowance to Tom Jones behavior. I believe that we give Tom Jones too much credit for his indiscretions. Although it is true that he indulged in an affair or two I believe that these would have never been if not initiated by the female counterpart. I see Tom Jones as a sweet caring gentleman that was simply obliged to do his duty and return the affections of a lady (after all how would Lady Bellaston and Molly feel if they were rejected). Although this does not by any means justify his behavior, I do want us to look at the whole situation objectively, it does take two. Ultimately I was well pleased to see Sophia and Tom together (despite all the objections by her father) but do hope that Tom will now be a model husband to the end of his days. You can’t help but like the guy and want all the best for him.

A Comparison Between Two Foundlings

As I was reading the history of Tom Jones, I was reminded of a certain other foundling I had read about: Heathcliff from Wuthering Heights. Heathcliff was found by Catherine's father in the streets, alone and abandoned, just as Tom was found by Mr. Allworthy; though he was actually put in Allworthy's own bed! Both Tom and Heathcliff were wild children and they both seem very driven by nature. Tom has an undying love for Sophia even though he sleeps with many other women, while Heathcliff does everything for Catherine; even courting Isabella to make her jealous. Yet, these two foundlings are very different from each other. For one thing, Heathcliff is not a likable person; he seems to hate everyone besides Catherine, and indeed treats everyone he knows rather badly. Tom, despite his sexual faults, is quite likable, and even though he constantly gets into trouble, he is plagued by any misfortunes he encounters. Tom loses sleep over any of his mishaps and repents for any wrong he does others. Heathcliff did everything he could to win over Catherine even though she was married to another man, yet he lost her to death in the end. Tom overcomes many obstacles to win Sophia's love and marries her at the end of his novel. Tom and Sophia have kids after their marriage, but since Tom Jones is only a history of the main character, we never delve into their lives, whereas Wuthering Heights goes on for many pages after the death of Catherine to deal with the lives of her daughter and Heathcliff's sons. Heathcliff's "son" Hareton, who is really Hindley's son but Heathcliff raised him, manages to find love with the second Catherine and marries her; something his "father" was never able to do with the original Catherine. Fortunately, Fielding's Tom Jones is much more lighthearted than Wuthering Heights, so we don't have to deal with serious losses and can congratulate Tom for finally getting his girl in the novel's finale.

"The Novel of Feeling" not "The Man of Feeling"

Reading "The Man of Feeling" was at times a bizarre experience. Due to the novel's fragmentation I often felt like I was reading the journal of a frequent user of acid (ironically, even more so then when I read "On the Road"). The novel was occasionally incoherent and more often a little confusing. I tried my best while reading to be open to feeling for Harley, but the format of the novel definitely didn't help me.
However, after reading the novel I realized why Mackenzie used such an unusual format. I don't believe Mackenzie's intent was to purely make a sentimental novel. It was more to create a discussion on morality (at least that's what I hope). If he had used a more attached format (such as a consistent first or third person) I probably would have felt more sympathetic towards Harley, but I wouldn’t have questioned the various morals displayed in the novel as much. I don't think this book was meant to be a tearjerker. By using a detached view to show a plethora of unusual (and not black and white) occurrences, Mackenzie forced me to question the situations in the book and my own beliefs. Is living a life of "feeling" worth it? What role does greed play in our society? What should you value the most: money, love, friendship or honesty? I may not have felt for Harley while reading, but I definitely felt something. More importantly, I questioned. In the end, my guess is that "The Man of Feeling" will be my least favorite novel to read, but the one I enjoy discussing the most.
It's funny, because I watched the film "The Searchers” tonight with my dad, which has some similarities to the novel. From the outside (especially now) the film can appear racist, sexist and just plain old fashioned. However, when you look closer many of the perceived offensive characters and events are meant to ask questions, not just perpetrate stereotypes. "The Man of Feeling" is very much the same. To only explicitly read the novel is to not do it justice.

Sophia's Mistake in Marrying Tom!!!!!

I think when it comes to Love a person has no idea what they are doing. It is a feeling that is unexplainable and unavoidable. You don’t realize what is going on and you find yourself doing things tat otherwise wouldn’t dream of doing. I guess this novel showed me just that. Tom Jones was in Love with Sophia right from the start but he chose to ruin what he has by sleeping with others and by doing things that would cause him to lose Sophia. I guess that is one thing that many of us do. I find myself thinking that Tom did that just to because he is so immature about it or doesn’t really realize how much he really loves her. It also comes down to the fact that Tom is a ladies man and it amazes me to see that he actually really loves Sophia and is devoting himself to her. I guess there is that one person who changes your mind about what you feel in a certain area. I personally think about marriage that way. I never want to get married but I said to myself if I ever find a man who will change my mind about marriage than he is the right one for me until then well no marriage. I think that is what happened with Tom. Tom slept around with women and until Sophia he didn’t really know what it means to love someone. I think that Sophia should’ve never been with Tom Jones. Although I am a sucker for happy endings I really hate the fact that she marries him in the end. He clearly is a typical guy who claims he loves her but is sleeping with others. If you really love someone you want to be with them not with others. I guess I would have to say this, “A man wrote this novel.” I expect nothing less.

Sentimental Fiction

I’ve always considered myself to be somewhat sentimental, but I’ve come to the realization that I really don’t like sentimental novels or movies. Don’t get me wrong, I cry very easily when watching or reading something sentimental, but it’s usually through laughter (for falling victim to it) or through disgust (that the writer went so low to endeavor to make me cry). Henry Mackenzie’s novel, however, did not affect me too much. I think that has a lot to do with the structure of the novel, which at times made me quite confused. I’m not really sure why Mackenzie chose to style the book in that way, I know it was for a purpose, but all it did was distance me from Harley, and so I never really felt too much for him. His death scene was not very sad to me, I know the intention of the death scene was to make me cry, but it didn’t work. I didn’t read the book with an ironic eye, and I was all prepared to feel for him, but I didn’t. I think if the novel took on a less fragmented shape, and I got to know Harley better I would have been more able to sympathize with him. So it brings me back to my original question, why did Mackenzie create such a fragmented book; wouldn’t the book have had a more sentimental effect if it was more cohesive? Perhaps not, I really not sure what the purpose of sentimental fiction is, so I don’t understand Mackenzie’s motivations. I read a little bit of the introduction and it attempts to explain the fragmentation a bit. There’s a specific part (if I understand correctly what it’s saying), that makes the distancing of Harley from the reader more interesting. It implies (to me) that in a sentimental novel there is a “marked sense of distance between the sentimental hero and the society in which he finds himself” (viii). If that is the case, perhaps Mackenzie was not only trying to create a distance between the hero and his society, but a distance between the hero and the reader. In this way, the novel does not only follow the sentimental form, but is in essence sentimental?

Tom Jones

After reading this book, I was very happy that Tom and Sofia finally ended up together. After all the obstacles that they had to face, Sofia's father disapproving of Tom because of him being born a bastard child and Tom sleeping around with Molly, they are finally together and deeply in love. This truely proves the saying that love is a battle field because Tom makes a lot of mistakes and has to overcome several struggles before he ends up with his true love, Sofia. He really came to his senses and did the right thing by completing devoting himself to her.

Style of MacKenzie

Each of the novels that we have read so far presents a history of a fictional character, and each author has a unique style. However, although the authors differ in the way they write, they all present various difficulties for a 21st century reader. Richardson's epistolary style was problematic because we found out that Pamela is virtuous because she constantly told us that she is. Fielding's style was a different challenge because his narrative digressions deliberately distract us from the story by reminding us that we are reading a work of fiction. MacKenzie's fragmented style is another issue simply because I am used to reading a narrative that is continuous and complete. My theory for why he chose this style is that true history is fragmented and incomplete, and also because it allows MacKenzie to consisely divulge what is necessary in order to understand the moral. I was moved by the character Harley, and I feel that MacKenzie's moral is sound. Harley has compassion for individuals that most of society either overlooks or despises, from prostitutes to the victims of imperialism. Harley recognizes everyone in society, he even has tears for the mentally ill. I do not think this book is overly dramatic, instead I believe that it addresses serious issues in a touching way.