
Today I read parts of two novels I imagine were probably read by young women in the eighteenth century:
Love in Excess by Eliza Haywood and Sarah Fielding's
The Governess.
Love in Excess was wildly popular (Paula Backscheider calls it a "blockbuster novel") and, for me at least, an incredibly fast read. Haywood piles intrigue upon intrigue in episodic plots that are elaborate but that nonetheless resolve fairly quickly and, generally, satisfyingly. The characters are passionate and, in the words of Zoolander, "really, really good-looking"; as a bonus, they have just the right combination of quick intelligence and rashness to be interesting. Despite the relentless manliness of the men*, the plotlines are generally devised and resolved by women, making the story even more compelling. The lesson the book teaches, if any, is that passion--when noble--rightly trumps reason, and that only those who have loved passionately can understand those who love passionately. So there!
If
Love in Excess is the eighteenth-century equivalent of say, a WB soap opera,
The Governess is children's programming that does not translate to grown-up enjoyment. It's doubtful that it would be enjoyable to children--or, more specifically, the target audience of young women--in the first place, actually. It's a story about unruly girls with names like Lucy Sly, Dolly Friendly and Betty Ford (I don't make this up!) who need to be taught How to Accept a Delicious Fruit Snack Without Tearing the Hair of the Girl Who Received a Slightly Larger Apple. I admit I'm only a few chapters in, but the story is already pretty boring. It's supposedly the earliest, or at least one of the earliest, children's novels, but I don't think the genre has really figured itself out yet. I wonder when children's literature (not fairy tales or legends, but actual novels) began to be less transparently didactic? When did the concept of novels written specifically for children's or young people's amusement really take shape in England and/or the U.S.?
In related news, when I flipped through the channels this morning I found this on PBS:

Who knew Natalie Portman was a guest on Sesame Street?
* From the Broadview edition: "Tho' it was impossible for any soul to be capable of a greater, or more constant passion than he felt for Melliora, tho' no man that ever lived, was less addicted to loose desires, - in fine, tho' he really was, as Frankville had told him, the most excellent of his kind, yet, he was still a
man! . . . " (225)