This document provides a summary and analysis of the 18th century novels Moll Flanders by Daniel Defoe and Pamela by Samuel Richardson. It compares the two protagonists, Moll and Pamela, who are both lower-class women attempting to survive in a world dominated by men. While Moll uses her intelligence and skills to manipulate men for her own survival and independence, Pamela embodies virtue and purity. The document analyzes how each novel reflects the societal views of women during the Enlightenment period, with Moll representing a more realistic portrayal compared to Pamela's idealized character.

1. Lafond 1
Erin Lafond – Academic Essay Sample
Enlightenment Women: Moll Flanders and Pamela
During the period of the Enlightenment, women’s place in literature was entirely decided
by men and the result was female characters that often fell short of being complete people.
Women were written as extremes and seemed to be either wicked and capable or virtuous and
weak. The main novelists writing with female protagonists in this time were Daniel Defoe and
Samuel Richardson and they wrote very different stories. First, in 1722, there was Moll Flanders
by Defoe and then, in 1740, there was Pamela by Richardson, both of which featured lower class
women attempting to survive in the world. Moll Flanders tells the story of a lower class woman
who desires to be a gentlewoman and who ends up going down a sinful path while Pamela
concerns a woman of the same social rank who is far more concerned about her virtue than her
status. These two very different women combine to show how women were viewed and treated
during the Enlightenment. They represent different extremes rather than portray a realistic
woman. Moll Flanders and Pamela demonstrate the inherent sexism towards women and display
the two types of women that were acceptable in literature during the Enlightenment: the wicked
and independent or the virtuous and dependent.
In order to compare these two women, their individual stories must be fully analyzed.
Though at first glance these stories seem very different, they are actually quite similar. Both
stories revolve around the development of these women and their social improvement. Their
lives are entirely dictated by men, though Moll Flanders is subject to many men and Pamela is
subject to only one. Furthermore, their stories seem to be entirely motivated by sex and whether
they should or should not have it. Moll is basically required to use her sexual wiles to survive
while Pamela knows that her status will lower considerably if she has sex. Their independence
and future success all depends entirely upon how they navigate a world dominated by men and,
somehow, they both go from lower statuses to living rich, well-endowed lives. However, how
these women get there and how they feel about their actions are extremely different.
The core of Moll Flander’s story begins and ends at Newgate Prison. Her mother, a thief,
gives birth to her in prison before she is transported to Virginia while Moll is left without help.
Moll’s beginning is important and remains important throughout the story. The only real item of
consequence from Moll’s childhood is that she is determined to be self-sufficient. At a young
age, she separates herself from a band of gypsies and is then put in with a local woman. She
prefers to stay with her foster mother and work for a living, calling herself a “gentlewoman,”
because she believes that a gentlewoman is simply someone who supports herself. This is a great
joke among actual gentlewoman who come to meet her and give her money. This joke eventually
gets her a job as a maid in a prominent household. This is important, because it shows from the
very beginning that Moll would rather work to make her own way and that she is capable of
doing so. It also shows the part of her, once she fully understands what it means, that desires to
be a gentlewoman. For this reason, she is adopted by the prominent family she joins and even
learns alongside their daughters which improves her person greatly.

2. Lafond 2
Moll is highly intelligent and capable, often matching or surpassing the daughters. These
qualities assists her significantly, but also quickly gets her into trouble. She easily and
unwittingly attracts both sons, one with honest intentions and one with insincere intentions.
Unsurprisingly, she falls in love with Roland, the one who simply wants to use her for sex. He
manipulates her and lies to her, even convinces her that they are technically married so she will
give him her virtue. When it comes out that Roland’s brother is also in love with Moll and wants
to legitimately marry Moll, Roland pushes Moll to marry him for both their sakes. This is
arguably Moll’s turning point. Roland represents her only true heartbreak. Moll is shoved into a
loveless marriage with Roland’s brother and this seems to ruin all of Moll’s innocence for after
her first husband dies she says, “I had been trick’d by that cheat call’d LOVE, but the game was
over; I was resolv’d now to be Married or Nothing, and to be well Married or not at all” (Defoe
48).
This is when Moll really becomes master of her own life. She decides where she is going,
where she is living, and, most importantly, who she marries. Unfortunately, this is also the
beginning of Moll’s downward spiral into wickedness. She starts out by attracting a husband
with money who eventually runs them into bankruptcy and must flee. After that, she manipulates
the men around her into thinking she has a fortune in order to lure another husband. She baits a
fat fish indeed and the lovers move to Virginia, but this man turns out to be her own brother.
Moll is horrified and eventually, through careful maneuvering, reveals their relationship and
practically runs for England. This ruins her financially and she ends up the mistress of a rich
man. After an affair lasting for years, the man falls desperately ill and repents after he recovers,
casting Moll off forever. This prompts her to once again scheme for a new, rich husband.
Unfortunately, the man she ends up scamming is also scamming her. She refers to this
man throughout the story as her “Lancashire husband.” Their poor situation forces them to split
up which is legitimately devastating to them both. It is soon after this that Moll snares a well-to-
do banker who supports her for several years. However, he makes a bad business decision that
ruins them and the shock kills him. This is Moll’s lowest point ever and the closest she ever
comes to actually starving. Her fear of starvation is what first forces her to steal and it is her
proficiency at it that encourages her to keep going. She evades capture for a long time but is
eventually sent to Newgate. She honestly repents and this repentance saves her from the gallows
with the help of a priest. Her final sentence is transportation and, by a twist of fate, her
Lancashire husband goes with her. They start a true, honest life together that ends in happiness.
Her Lancashire husband is arguably the only man she ever truly loves and it is heartening to
know that she is able to spend her life with him. Her story is one of multiple twists and turns,
but, throughout the story, Moll fights to keep domain over her own life and never truly gives up
her will unless she decides to do so.
Virginia Woolf accurately pegs Moll when she says Moll is “a person of robust
understanding” who works the world around her to succeed and who “delights in the exercise of
her own powers” (14). That being said, Defoe makes it clear throughout his novel that Moll is
doing what is necessary to survive, that life is forcing her hand. Being a woman, Moll has very

3. Lafond 3
few options for survival, and, as time goes on, she makes use of all of them. However, up until
near the end of the novel, it is clear that Moll has morality. She will not relent to Roland until he
convinces her that they are married. She is horrified by the incest she had committed. She never
actually lies to those she manipulates; rather she leaves people to make their own assumptions
and lie for her. It is not until she hits true poverty that she actually becomes hardened. When she
starts stealing, she has to tell herself that she is teaching her victims a lesson to be smarter and
protect their possessions. It is after she has been stealing for a long time and having great success
that she decides to keep going despite having enough money to retire.
On the other side of the coin, Pamela could easily be labeled one of the most sexist
stories ever written and, unfortunately, it was one of the first ever novels and the first bestseller.
Pamela is the complete opposite of Moll in many ways though she comes from the same social
background. She is not an orphan, but her parents live in severe poverty and rely upon her wages.
Like Moll, she works in a well-to-do household as a serving girl and her mistress, an older
woman, gives her extra education. The novel asserts that, like Moll, she is tremendously pretty
and accomplished. She has the favor of everyone around her, and they are blown away by her
innocence and virtue. She is given the opportunity to become the mistress of her Master and be
taken care of, but she rejects it scornfully.
When the woman Pamela serves dies, she is left to the protection of her mistress’ son,
referred to throughout the novel as either Master or Mr. B. He treats her well at first, making her
gifts of clothes and money, but soon his behavior becomes aggressive. He traps her in rooms,
asserting he does not mean to hurt her. When she reveals his behavior to her companion, Mrs.
Jervis, and to her parents, he accuses her of being too free with his name and slandering him.
Despite this, she continues to reveal his troubling behavior, including his strange tendency to
hide in closets and spy on her. He asserts that he hates her, calls her “hussy,” “whore,” and
“slut,” though he seems to be determined to have her. Eventually, he is even aided by Mrs. Jervis
who claims to defend Pamela over her Master but helps him hide in closets. When Pamela finally
makes good on her promise to leave, she is kidnapped by Mr. B. who traps her in a nearby house
where she is prisoner until she agrees to become his mistress.
Despite his constant avowals that he have no desire or plans to harm her, Mr. B. has no
issues taking away her freedom. He has Mrs. Jewkes watching her every move, including any
writing Pamela does. Mr. B. even goes so far as to try to lie and manipulate Pamela’s parents
into thinking that he has sent Pamela away to save her from a potentially damaging relationship
with a man. Pamela, with no apparent means of escape, starts to communicate with a Mr.
Williams, who out of kindness starts to work to save her. However, none of the neighboring
families have any interest in assisting Pamela and she is basically left to her own devices. Her
method of solving matters is telling Mr. B. that she will not lie with him until she has an honest
marriage. This drives Mr. B. mad, but he eventually agrees. The people who scorned and
neglected Pamela come to celebrate her marriage and it is seen as happy occasion as opposed to
Pamela suffering from Stockholm Syndrome and being basically forced to marry her would-be
rapist.

4. Lafond 4
The women get the full blame in this novel which becomes obvious when Pamela says of
her Master “he cannot help it” and “Men may devise to gain their vile Ends; and so I will think
as well as I can of these poor creatures and pity them” (Richardson 65, 73). The men cannot be
blamed for they cannot help it. They are viewed as powerless in the situation. Furthermore, Mrs.
Jervis tells Pamela that it is the fault of Pamela’s dress that the Master attempted to attack her
saying, “you owe some of your danger to the lovely Appearance you made” (66). However, the
most indicative line comes when Pamela admits she pities men in her letter home. She says, “for
it has grown more a Wonder that the Men are resisted, than that the Women comply”
(Richardson 73). Men are supposed to be resisted and it falls squarely on the shoulders of their
female victims to do so.
For this reason, Moll Flanders remains leagues ahead of Pamela. When Roland betrays
Moll and refuses to sacrifice his reputation for her, the novel does not frame Moll as the problem
though it does not label her a victim either. The blame lies squarely with both parties as Roland
does not keep his word and cajoles Moll’s virtue from her and Moll naively gives it though she
knows she should not. It is viewed as unfortunate rather than hugely sinful. It is not until Moll
repents that this changes and even then it is still viewed more as naivety than anything else.
Furthermore, sex is viewed as necessary in Moll Flanders, as a proper stepping stone in
the male-female relationship. Ian Watt, while examining Pamela in an article by the same title
points out that in Defoe’s novels “sexual encounters, marital or otherwise, are treated as minor
episodes within the larger context of the pursuit of economic security” (Watt 43). This is mostly
true with the exception of Roland and Jemmy, her Lancashire husband; however, this does not
condemn sex within Moll Flanders. In a modern day novel, it would, but during this time period,
Moll has limited options for economic security and securing a husband or supporter is one of
them. Either way, Moll is not judged by the narrative for her sexual practices and this is
important, because it means that women in Defoe’s world are not expected to be morally perfect.
Pamela is morally perfect. B.L. Reid describes Pamela as “one-dimensional to paper-
thinness” and as “madly Puritanical, really a maniac of virtue” (34). Her story is simply meant
to be a morality tale, to show women how wrongful their actions are when they agree to be
mistresses. She is a plot device in her own story meant to demonstrate the rewards one gets when
they stick by their virtue. She does not even seem to be capable of true meanness or spite. She
calls her Master “naughty” and “wicked,” but still wishes for his well-being saying, “for I wish
him to live and repent of all his Wickedness to poor me” (Richardson 107). When she discovers
John’s treachery, she still expresses pity for him and when she insult Mrs. Jewkes she qualifies it
with statements such as “if anything God made can be ugly” (Richardson 107). Pamela appears
to be the perfect literary Christian. In his article examining Pamela, Richard Brissenden praises
Pamela for not fitting into the normal mold of a world dominated by the likes of Defoe. In an
incredibly strong statement, Brissenden states “Indeed it is because [Pamela] refuses to fit into
the usual pattern, refuses to behave like Moll Flanders or Roxanna, that she becomes the first real
heroine in English fiction” (54-55). Moll is automatically discounted from heroine status, despite
her ability to survive on her own, because she gives up her virtue.

5. Lafond 5
Moll, for the most part, refuses to be a victim though she could easily be labelled as such.
When things get rough, she devises a plan and forges ahead. She moves around and changes her
identity so she may begin new life. When she discovers her incest, she does not bury as others
say she should. Instead, she refuses to lay with her husband and demands to go back to England.
When this is denied, she continues to fight for it. She, perhaps, does not handle it as gently as she
should, but she refuses to let life control her. As such, she eventually gets her way. Furthermore,
when something bad happens to Moll, she fights it or pushes on, even from the very beginning. It
takes Roland an incredibly long time to convince Moll to marry his brother and it is only by
appealing to her common sense that he achieves his goal. She gets ill from the stress, but this is
the only time throughout the novel and this can easily be attributed to her young age. She has a
streak of independence in her that is never broken and her determination to be herself and run her
own life is remarkable.
This is not to say that Moll is the perfect character or that she does not deserve her stint in
Newgate. She certainly does bad things, such as stealing valuables from countless people. The
purpose of this essay is not to excuse her actions, but understand her character and put them in a
wider context. She certainly does quite a bit of damage to others. She thieves for years, even
stealing from children and distressed families. At one point she even steals a bundle from a
family as their house is burning down and she repents her decision at first but finishes with “The
Reflection worse off, and I began quickly to forget the Circumstances that attended the taking
them” (Defoe 161). When she is rich enough to leave off thieving, she decides she would rather
continue accumulating riches rather than stop. She describes her condition as “hard” and she
certainly is. Her fear and repentance comes from being caught, not from true guilt, as she well
knows and admits, saying when she enters Newgate, “I seem’d not to Mourn that I had
committed such Crimes . . . but I mourn’d that I was to be punish’d for it” (Defoe 214). This
makes it likely that Moll’s life of crime would have continued if she had not been caught. As
Mark Schorer so correctly points out in his article, “Moll turns virtuous only after a life of vice
has enabled her to do so with security” (122).
Equally indicative is Moll’s treatment of her children. She claims to love them and care
for them, which she very well might, but she has no problem leaving them with little
afterthought. She leaves her children all over the place, wherever she can safely put them, from
former in-laws to her brother/husband. The reader sees only a couple of moments where Moll
shows true caring for her children, such as when she has trouble placing one of her children. She
agonizes over her decision to leave her child, but she has been proposed to by the banker and she
does not wish for him to know that she has a child. Eventually, her caretaker helps her find a
woman who will properly take care of her child for a monthly fee. Moll worries about this for
about half a page before she permanently gives up her child and never sees it again, despite
setting up a system to be able to do so. The only other moment is when Moll meets one of her
sons at the end and is seemingly overwhelmed with emotion. That being said, she still seems to
feel little remorse for leaving her children behind and there is little defense for a person who
clearly chooses themselves over their children.

6. Lafond 6
Yet, Moll remains a worthy character for all her faults. In his article examining Moll
Flanders, Ian Watt spends some time examining her attraction to readers. He points out that
“Defoe makes us admire the speed and resolution of Moll’s reaction to profit or danger” (112).
When things go wrong, rather than bewailing her fate, she goes into action and works to
determine her next step. She is certainly worthy of being called a heroine, because she controls
her own fate. Her sexuality is not simply about repelling men, but enjoying herself. Not only
does she not resist the men around her unless she chooses to, but she enjoys the sex she has with
them. By Pamela standards, this is an awful practice and proves that Moll is not a role model,
but by modern day standards, Moll represents something that all women should strive for which
is control over their sexuality. Furthermore, in the same article, Watt observes that Moll is “a
heroine who so fully realised one of the ideals of feminism: freedom from any involuntary
involvement in the feminine role” (117).
This is almost the exact opposite of Pamela. When things get rough, Pamela swoons and
falls into emotional fits. Granted, it does save her, but it also leaves others in control of the
situation. Even Brissenden agrees with this assessment saying, “Whenever her exasperated
master descends to more direct methods she is always saved by her ‘happy knack of falling into
fits’” (52). Pamela constantly labels herself as a victim referring to herself as a “poor Creature”
or saying “poor me!” (Richardson 114, 70). Furthermore, Mr. B’s attempts to subdue her occur
for weeks before Pamela actually tries to leave. She stays under the pretext of finishing her
Master’s vest and then waiting for Mrs. Jervis to leave with her. By the time she actually
determines to truly leave, Mr. B has had ample time to enact his plan upon her. She is being
dismissed under shame anyway; there was no need for her to stay and wait for things to play out,
but she seems hesitant to leave on her own or to leave at all.
To give Pamela her due, she does attempt to find a way out of her position. By hiding the
paper Mr. Longman gave her so she may continue to write her thoughts and secrets, she is
certainly rebelling against a difficult situation. She also works to gain exit from her prison by
attempting to become friendly with maids and others who may be able to help her.
Unfortunately, all of her attempts are crushed by their loyalty to their Master or by Mrs. Jewkes.
Pamela’s solution is to put her entire fate in Mr. William’s hands. She even points out that he has
a garden key and seems to hope that he will physically break her out. However, she still remains
incredibly passive throughout the whole experience.
It is difficult to examine the sexism within Pamela or Moll Flanders without looking also
at the men in the stories. Pamela is easily the worst offender with a violent, controlling main
man. Richardson creates a main character who goes so far as to kidnap and attempt to rape the
woman he “loves.” Daiches labels Richardson’s men as “not sensualist but competitive
collectors of virginities by violence” (25). Mr. B’s main concern is not Pamela, but possessing
Pamela. When she rejects him, he reacts by controlling her every move under the pretext of
“loving her.” Even Pamela sees fault with this logic saying, “If he loves me, as ‘tis falsely called,
must he therefore ruined me” (Richardson 112). If he could have gotten her without marrying
her, he certainly would have done so. This concept of female possession is prevalent in

7. Lafond 7
Richardson’s writing as the men “wish to maintain dominance over their women, wish to be their
sole supports, wish to have the women’s exclusive regard, both in future and retroactively”
(Golden 68).
Furthermore, sex is labelled as a purely male act. Pamela suffers no true temptation as her
only concern is her virtue. She is certainly in danger of it being taken from her, but she seems to
have a nonexistent sex drive. Her “love” for Mr. B has no ties to sexual desire whereas Mr. B’s
love for her stems entirely from sexual desires. He claims to love her, because of her pure and
wonderful spirit that he learns about through her letters, but he would pay little attention to her if
he did not want her sexually. As Daiches says, “The notion of mutual sexual satisfaction never
seems to have occurred to [Richardson]” (25).
The men in Moll Flanders are far more varied and realistic. There is a wide range of
personalities from Roland who is willing to lie and manipulate to gain Moll’s virtue to Jemmy
who respects Moll’s wishes and well-being to the point where he sacrifices his own happiness by
leaving her. Moll marries five times and becomes the mistress of quite a few men, though she
only discusses two, and as such their treatment of Moll varies. Roland is certainly the worst with
his attempt to buy Moll with gifts and his convincing her that they are married before pawning
her off when their relationship becomes inconvenient. There are also men who use her for her
body, but Moll consents to this in exchange for their financial support. Likewise are men who
desire her body, but also want her for a wife, such as the banker she marries. Jemmy outweighs
them all though he initially woos her for her alleged fortune. He respects her opinion to the point
where he even moves to Virginia despite his misgivings, because Moll believes it is the best
thing. Overall, the men in Moll Flanders are far more realistic and their problematic elements
come from them being seventeenth century men rather than being naturally violent and
troublesome.
Moll and Pamela represent two very different types of women and two very different
types of ideologies. In Moll’s world, women are allowed to do whatever is necessary to survive,
including becoming a mistress and thieving. Moll is independent, intelligent, and capable. She
can manage her own affairs and save herself. However, her story was only acceptable to her
readers, because she repents and regrets her actions. In Pamela’s world, it is better to die than
sacrifice or lose your virtue. Pamela is effectively useless and consents everyone around her to
control her life. She is unable to manage her own affairs and requires advice for everything, not
just the big things. She is not very accomplished at decision making. Ultimately, both of their
stories have extremely problematic elements.
Moll and Pamela are the two types of accepted women during the Enlightenment. A
women was either wicked and capable (not to mention, later regretful) or virtuous and
victimized. There seems to be no middle ground. This is further proven by Richardson’s and
Defoe’s later works, Clarrisa and Roxana respectively, which represent very similar women.
Women were extremes as opposed to full people, such as in The Life and Opinions of Tristram
Shandy, Gentleman, or had such little impact on the narrative that they could have been left out
entirely as is the case with novels like Gulliver’s Travels. These women were acceptable,

8. Lafond 8
because they eventually gave in or fitted the system. Even Moll eventually repents and settles
down into a normal, Christian life with a good, Christian husband who has also repented.
Pamela, of course, is the epitome of virtue and gives the men around her total control. Defoe is
leagues ahead of Richardson, but he still writes a woman who fits the mold. She cannot hold
traditional male characteristics such as independence and not do wicked things such as steal and
indulge in promiscuity and riches. This Enlightenment trend of wicked or virtuous continues up
until later in the century when women writers finally begin to be recognized.
Works Cited
Brissenden, R. F. "Pamela." Twentieth Century Interpretations of Pamela. Ed. Rosemary Cowler.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1969. 50-56. Print.
Daiches, David. "Samuel Richardson." Twentieth Century Interpretations of Pamela. Ed. Rosemary
Cowler. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1969. 14-25. Print.
Defoe, Daniel. Moll Flanders. Ed. Edward Kelly. New York: Norton, 1973. Print.
Golden, Morris. "Richardson and the Bold Young Men." Twentieth Century Interpretations of Pamela.
Ed. Rosemary Cowler. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1969. 64-70. Print.
Reid, B.L. “Justice to Pamela.” Twentieth Century Interpretations of Pamela. Ed. Rosemary Cowler.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1969. 33-41. Print.
Richardson, Samuel. Pamela. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1971. Print.
Schorer, Mark. "Moll Flanders." Daniel Defoe. Ed. Max Byrd. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice
Hall, 1976. 120-26. Print.
Watt, Ian. "Love and the Novel: Pamela." Twentieth Century Interpretations of Pamela. Ed. Rosemary
Cowler. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1969. 42-49. Print.
Watt, Ian. "Moll Flanders." Daniel Defoe. Ed. Max Byrd. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall,
1976. 104-19. Print.
Woolf, Virginia. “Defoe.” Twentieth Century Interpretations of Moll Flanders. Ed. Robert C. Elliott.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1970. 11-16. Print.