Now and Then

I wrote this as a discussion question for my British Literature class. We had just read Joseph Andrews. Sorry if this comes across sounding like a rant.


The way in which Joseph Andrews was written is very different than the way authors are told to and write today. I am also taking a creative writing class this semester so I will try to compare and contrast (mostly contrast) what we (as writers) are told how to write verses how Joseph Andrews was written.

Punctuation is an important part of any book because it can help emphasizes thoughts and draw the reader to conclusions as well as set the tone. In Joseph Andrews, I was beginning to wonder if periods cost the author money because he used them so sparingly, sometimes just one sentences to a good sized paragraph. By the time I got to the end of his long winded sentences, I often forgot what it started with or what the point was. Writing for a modern day crowd, writers are told not to have so many thoughts to a sentence because it can confuse and distract the reader.

Another difference between the writing in this book and modern writing is the excessive use of capitalization and italicization. Just about every other word is capitalized in Joseph Andrews for no particular reason that I could find. The author also italicized names––most of the time. All these marks often left me confused at first but soon I started ignoring punctuation all together. I think that is why today we are told to use these features sparingly, so that our readers will pay attention to them and know they mean something when they are used.

The next point is something I learned just this semester about writing. In Joseph Andrews, we get the feeling that the author is having more fun writing this book than we might be reading it because of all the tangents and digressions the “narrator” goes off on. This is a big no for today’s writing. The reader should always feel like they are having more fun discovering the authors little jokes and plot twits than the author did writing them. If they don’t, they might take that the author wrote this piece more for him or herself than for others.

In Joseph Andrews, we are told just who and what each character is/ looks like/ feels. But we aren’t shown. Today, authors are told, “Show me. Don’t tell me.” This means show how someone looks when they are angry: creased brow, tight fists, narrow eyes. Are their hearts pounding? Is their vision blurred? Don’t just write, “He was angry.” Readers can pick up on that from the “visual cues” a writers gives just like a person can in real life. Writers are told this makes the whole reading experience feel more real.

Which brings me to my last difference that I will talk about: the plot. It started out slow, and then stayed that way. The truly exciting parts didn’t happen until book three and then I found them anticlimactic and melodramatic. Basically, I felt they built up to the action could have been so cool, and then the problem was resolved and the reader was forced to move on without feeling like much had happened at all. The most exciting thing to occur was when Fanny was kidnapped. But even that conflict was resolved quickly without anybody getting hurt and no actual addition to the plot but to take up space. Writers today are told that every scene, every action, must have a purpose in the plot.