Paper 102: Literature of the Neo-classical Period

“Through a Man’s Eyes: The Construction of Female Virtue in Richardson’s Pamela”

Table of Content

Abstract…………………………………………………………..3

Keywords…………………………………………………………3

Research Questions………………………………………………4

Hypothesis……………………………………………………….4

1. Introduction……………………………………………………4

2. Authorship and the Illusion of Female Autonomy…………….5

    (i) Epistolary Voice as Apparent Empowerment………………6

    (ii) Virtue as Commodity and Narrative Capital………………7

    (iii) Authorial Control and Moral Surveillance………………..7

3. The Male Gaze and the Performance of Virtue………………..8

    (i) Virtue as Visible Spectacle………………………………….8

    (ii) Feminine Fabrication and Social Craft……………………..8

    (iii) Learned Innocence and Performed Chastity……………….9

4. Desire, Power, and the Paradox of Moral Reward……………..10

    (i) From Moral Resistance to Erotic Possession……………….10

    (ii) The Marriage Contract as Patriarchal Absorption………….11

    (iii) Authorial Desire and the Fantasy of Control………………11

5. Modern Resonance — From Pamela to #MeToo………………12

    (i) The Language of Virtue and Credibility…………………….13

    (ii) Rewriting and Mediation of Women’s Voices………………13

    (iii) Continuities of Surveillance and Spectacle……………14

6. Conclusion………………………………………………….14

7. References …………………………………………………15-16

• Academic Details:

                  - Name:  Mansi S. Makwana

           - Roll No: 21

           - Enrollment No: 5108250021

           - Sem: 1

           - Batch: 2025-2027

           - E-mail: mansimakwana307@gmail.com

• Assignment Details:

         - Paper Name:  Literature of the Neo-classical Period

         - Paper No: 102

         - Paper Code:  22393 

         - Unit: 4

       - Topic:  “Through a Man’s Eyes: The Construction of   Female Virtue in Richardson’s Pamela”

  -Submitted To: Smt. S. B. Gardi,Department of English,MKBU  

        - Submitted Date: November 10,2025

• The following information—numbers are counted using QuillBot

   - Characters:     17915

    - Words:             2458

   - Sentence:       220

   - Paragraph:    121

Abstract

Samuel Richardson’s Pamela; or, Virtue Rewarded (1740) is both a moral fable and a coded narrative of surveillance, desire, and patriarchal authorship. The novel’s claim to celebrate female virtue paradoxically rests on male control—of voice, narrative structure, and moral validation. This paper examines how Pamela’s supposed moral autonomy is shaped through male observation and narrative containment. Drawing on the works of Kerry C. Larson, Terry Castle, James Cruise, Sheila Conboy, and Diana Rosenberger, the essay argues that Pamela transforms virtue into performance, intimacy into exposure, and moral reward into patriarchal possession. Furthermore, it considers how the novel anticipates modern patterns of gendered storytelling, especially in movements like #MeToo, where women’s credibility is still mediated by moral respectability.

Keywords:

Pamela; Samuel Richardson; virtue; patriarchy; male gaze; authorship; narrative control; chastity; morality; performance; #MeToo

Research Questions

How does Richardson’s authorship regulate Pamela’s voice and identity through moral surveillance?

Hypothesis

This paper hypothesizes that Pamela does not represent female virtue as self-determined moral strength but as a construct authored, tested, and rewarded by men. The text’s gender politics reveal that Richardson’s “virtue” is an instrument of male authority—a spectacle that disciplines female desire and self-expression within patriarchal codes of propriety and submission.

1. Introduction

When Samuel Richardson published Pamela in 1740, he described it as “a series of familiar letters from a beautiful servant-maid to her parents,” designed to teach morality through realism. Yet beneath its moral surface lies a deeper narrative tension: the story of a woman whose virtue is defined, tested, and ultimately possessed by men. Pamela’s letters are framed by the moral voice of her male author, the voyeuristic gaze of her master, and the sympathetic judgment of her readers.

Kerry C. Larson’s study “‘Naming the Writer’” underscores this paradox: Richardson “exposes the female subject in the very act of claiming to protect her” (Larson 128). Terry Castle similarly argues that Pamela eroticizes its moral spectacle, turning virtue into “sexual fiction” (Castle 470). While Pamela’s voice seems central, her power is contingent—she can only speak through moral compliance.

This essay therefore examines Pamela as a narrative that constructs virtue “through a man’s eyes.” It explores how Richardson’s authorship turns female morality into both spectacle and discipline, anticipating the modern tension between women’s voice and patriarchal control.

2:Authorship and the Illusion of Female Autonomy

Pamela’s letters appear to give her narrative authority, yet this power remains an illusion carefully controlled by Richardson’s authorial intent. Her voice, though central, is both framed and constrained by patriarchal design.

(i) Epistolary Voice as Apparent Empowerment

At first glance, Pamela’s letter-writing seems to grant her freedom to tell her own story. The epistolary form suggests intimacy, immediacy, and subjectivity. However, as Kerry C. Larson observes, this is “the illusion of authorship, not its realization” (Criticism 129). Richardson’s narrative scaffolding determines both the moral direction and the emotional tone of Pamela’s writing.

Pamela’s “self-expression” therefore functions within an imposed moral pattern—each confession or reflection reinforces the author’s didactic purpose rather than personal autonomy. Even her diary entries, supposedly private, are written as if to please her moral audience—her parents, her master, and Richardson himself.

“Pamela’s letters simulate freedom only within the boundaries of male instruction.” — Larson (130)

(ii) Virtue as Commodity and Narrative Capital

James Cruise, in “‘Pamela’ and the Commerce of Authority,” highlights how the heroine’s virtue operates like moral capital within patriarchal exchange: “Pamela’s self-representation becomes a moral economy of submission” (Cruise 343). Each letter is both self-defense and self-advertisement, converting chastity into symbolic wealth.

When Pamela insists, “My virtue is all I have,” she commodifies her moral integrity in a system where value depends on male recognition. The textual economy mirrors social reality: her letters circulate as proof of purity, establishing her worth in the moral marketplace controlled by Richardson and Mr. B.

(iii) Authorial Control and Moral Surveillance

Although Pamela writes, Richardson ultimately speaks through her. Larson argues that Richardson’s authorial presence “exposes the female subject in the very act of claiming to protect her”. The narrative transforms authorship into a form of surveillance—Pamela’s words are constantly evaluated against an invisible moral code.

Her letters, intended to preserve innocence, become records of obedience; her authorship thus collapses into confession. Richardson positions himself as both moral guardian and voyeur, authorizing what Pamela can or cannot say.

In this sense, Pamela’s authorship mirrors her social condition: her voice exists, but only under the gaze of patriarchal authority.

3: The Male Gaze and the Performance of Virtue

Pamela’s chastity, rather than being an internal truth, is continually defined by external observation. Her “virtue” survives only because it is seen, tested, and narratively displayed. In Richardson’s moral world, womanly goodness depends not on inner conviction but on the spectacle of self-control under surveillance.

(i) Virtue as Visible Spectacle

Terry Castle insightfully remarks that “Pamela’s virtue exists because it is watched” (Studies in English Literature 471). Every emotional scene—her tears, fainting fits, and confessions—is a moment of theatrical exposure. Richardson’s narration transforms private moral struggle into public performance.

These spectacles of chastity invite the gaze of both Mr. B and the reader, turning Pamela’s moral resistance into an eroticized form of display. Castle concludes, “Virtue, in Richardson’s moral theatre, is inseparable from spectacle” . In other words, virtue is not experienced but performed before an audience that defines its legitimacy.

(ii) Feminine Fabrication and Social Craft

Sheila Conboy expands this idea through the imagery of needlework and writing, calling Pamela’s self-presentation an act of “feminine fabrication”. Her sewing and letter-writing become twin symbols of moral stitching—crafting her identity thread by thread to meet patriarchal ideals of modesty and decorum.

Pamela’s “fabrications” are not lies but necessary constructions. By mastering the language of humility and propriety, she weaves a social armor against male domination. Her virtue, then, is an artful product of self-discipline and cultural performance rather than an innate purity.

(iii) Learned Innocence and Performed Chastity

John A. Dussinger adds that “Pamela’s innocence is not innate but learned through performance” . Each encounter with Mr. B functions as a moral rehearsal in which Pamela practices the script of virtuous femininity. Her letters demonstrate her awareness of being read—by her parents, her suitor, and the novel’s audience—and she tailors her voice accordingly.

This self-conscious morality reveals that Pamela’s virtue is a socially conditioned performance, not a natural moral instinct. She embodies the paradox of being empowered through submission—her power lies in performing weakness convincingly enough to convert male desire into moral approval.

4: Desire, Power, and the Paradox of Moral Reward

Pamela’s “reward” for virtue — marriage to her former aggressor — exposes the deep contradiction within Richardson’s moral universe. The novel claims to celebrate chastity and integrity, yet it resolves by legitimizing desire through patriarchal possession. Virtue becomes not liberation, but submission disguised as triumph.

(i) From Moral Resistance to Erotic Possession

Donald E. Morton argues that Richardson’s narrative “resolves moral tension by translating aggression into possession” (Studies in the Novel 245). The same Mr. B who threatens Pamela’s virtue becomes its ultimate owner, thereby turning her survival into an act of surrender. What begins as a struggle for moral autonomy concludes as a transfer of ownership — Pamela is rewarded only by being claimed.

This resolution reflects what Morton calls “the containment of moral energy within the domestic ideal” . Pamela’s virtue, rather than challenging patriarchy, reinforces it by converting her endurance into proof of marital worthiness. The novel’s conclusion thus domesticates rebellion into obedience.

“Virtue rewarded becomes virtue reclaimed by patriarchy.” — Morton (246)

(ii) The Marriage Contract as Patriarchal Absorption

James Cruise underscores this contradiction when he writes that “Pamela’s virtue gains social legitimacy only when it is absorbed into patriarchal property through marriage” (Journal of English and Germanic Philology 346). Her moral identity, initially self-defined, achieves public validation only once it aligns with Mr. B’s authority.

This transformation mirrors 18th-century social order, where marriage functions as both moral certification and economic transaction. Pamela’s chastity becomes a form of currency that Mr. B redeems through matrimony, converting virtue into property. As Cruise suggests, the heroine’s self-worth is measured by her ability to uphold the social hierarchy that once endangered her .

(iii) Authorial Desire and the Fantasy of Control

Kerry Larson interprets this ending as “the authorial fantasy of control,” where Richardson transforms resistance into reconciliation (Criticism 133). Pamela’s submission is not merely narrative closure but an act of authorial mastery — Richardson, the moral arbiter, reclaims authority over his rebellious heroine by scripting her reward.

This ideological resolution allows desire to masquerade as virtue: the seducer becomes the redeemer, and the victim’s chastity becomes his moral alibi. As Diana Rosenberger later observes, “Pamela’s story exposes the blurred line between coercion and consent, a tension that still haunts modern narratives of female virtue” (South Central Review 21).

In this way, Pamela anticipates the cultural logic that continues to shape women’s representation — where resistance is narratively punished or absorbed into romance, and patriarchal structures reassert dominance through emotional resolution.

5 : Modern Resonance — From Pamela to #MeToo

Diana Rosenberger’s essay “Virtual Rewarded: What #MeToo Can Learn from Pamela” powerfully situates Richardson’s novel within modern feminist discourse. She argues that “Pamela’s testimony—like the stories of women in the #MeToo movement—is granted legitimacy only when it conforms to the language of virtue and victimhood” (South Central Review 22). Across centuries, the cultural validation of women’s voices remains conditional: credibility depends not on truth, but on moral performance.

(i) The Language of Virtue and Credibility

Pamela’s letters mirror the rhetorical pattern of #MeToo testimonies: both depend on a moral lexicon that makes female suffering socially legible. Rosenberger observes that women’s confessions “are still received through a filter of chastity and self-restraint” .

In both Pamela and modern media narratives, women’s voices gain authority only when they align with established ideals of “goodness” and “decency.” The consequence is double-edged: virtue provides credibility but erases complexity. Like Pamela, contemporary women must craft their stories to appear morally pure before they can be heard.

“Pamela’s legacy is not her virtue, but the system that makes virtue the price of being believed.” — Rosenberger (23)

(ii) Rewriting and Mediation of Women’s Voices

Sheila Conboy’s assertion that “to speak as a woman is to risk being rewritten” resonates profoundly in this context. Richardson’s moral mediation of Pamela’s letters parallels how media institutions, editors, and audiences reinterpret modern testimonies of harassment.

The #MeToo movement reveals how women’s stories are continually reframed—edited for tone, morality, and empathy. Just as Pamela’s first-person letters are filtered through Richardson’s moral design, survivors’ accounts today are mediated by journalistic, legal, and social expectations of propriety. Authentic female experience becomes public discourse only after being “mended” to fit the moral imagination of society.

(iii) Continuities of Surveillance and Spectacle

Pamela’s virtue was constantly observed, tested, and authenticated by male eyes; the modern woman’s body and voice face a similar gaze through digital and social media. Rosenberger suggests that “online platforms reproduce the same structures of scrutiny that Richardson dramatized”.

The performative dimension of #MeToo—hashtags, public statements, televised confessions—echoes Pamela’s epistolary exposure. Both depend on visibility to assert moral truth, but visibility itself becomes a form of vulnerability. The woman’s testimony remains trapped within the patriarchal cycle of exposure, judgment, and reward.

6.Conclusion

Samuel Richardson’s Pamela appears to celebrate female virtue and autonomy, yet the narrative reveals how both are shaped and controlled by male authority. Pamela’s voice, though seemingly independent, functions within the moral boundaries set by her male author and male observers. Her letters become a performance of innocence designed for approval rather than self-expression.

The novel’s ending—where virtue is “rewarded” through marriage—transforms resistance into submission, reinforcing patriarchal power. As critics like Larson, Cruise, and Castle suggest, virtue in Pamela operates as spectacle and currency within a system ruled by men.

Even today, as Rosenberger’s #MeToo reading shows, women’s voices are still filtered through ideals of purity and victimhood. Thus, Pamela remains a powerful reflection of how female virtue and authorship continue to be constructed through the gaze and authority of men.

7. References 

Castle, Terry J. “P/B: Pamela as Sexual Fiction.” Studies in English Literature, 1500–1900, vol. 22, no. 3, 1982, pp. 469–89. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/450242. Accessed 2 Nov. 2025.

Conboy, Sheila C. “Fabric and Fabrication in Richardson’s Pamela.” ELH, vol. 54, no. 1, 1987, pp. 81–96. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2873051. Accessed 2 Nov. 2025.

Cruise, James. “‘Pamela and the Commerce of Authority.’” The Journal of English and Germanic Philology, vol. 87, no. 3, 1988, pp. 342–58. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/27710028. Accessed 2 Nov. 2025.

Dussinger, John A. “What Pamela Knew: An Interpretation.” The Journal of English and Germanic Philology, vol. 69, no. 3, 1970, pp. 377–93. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/27705884. Accessed 2 Nov. 2025.

Larson, Kerry C. “‘Naming the Writer’: Exposure, Authority, and Desire in Pamela.” Criticism, vol. 23, no. 2, 1981, pp. 126–40. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/23105108. Accessed 2 Nov. 2025.

Morton, Donald E. “Theme and Structure in Pamela.” Studies in the Novel, vol. 3, no. 3, 1971, pp. 242–57. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/29531465. Accessed 2 Nov. 2025.

Richardson, Samuel. Pamela: Or Virtue Rewarded. Edited by Thomas Keymer and Alice Wakely, OUP Oxford, 2001. Accessed 2 November 2025.

Rosenberger, Diana. “Virtual Rewarded: What #MeToo Can Learn from Samuel Richardson’s Pamela.” South Central Review, vol. 36, no. 2, 2019, pp. 17–32. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26758135. Accessed 2 Nov. 2025.

Suleiman, Susan Rubin. “Of Readers and Narratees: The Experience of Pamela.” L’Esprit Créateur, vol. 21, no. 2, 1981, pp. 89–97. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/26283838. Accessed 2 Nov. 2025.