which Tom and Master Blifil are perceived is key in establishing Fielding’s understanding of virtue’s delicately complicated nature. It is also worth mentioning, that Fielding’s use of a distinct narrator to deliver this message, and one who goes on to apologize for interrupting and so boldly stating his theme, is supportive of his message. If Fielding’s morality is one which recognizes subjectivity, than the addition of a clearly authored statement like this one, makes its message stand out. Appearance and perspective is so wrapped up in the estimation of a character, that this message Fielding “could not prevail on any of (his) actors to speak” (123). In short, Tom Jones, originally criticized for lacking a sense of morals, contains what seems like an entirely realistic treatment of human nature. Fielding recognizes the complexity of goodness, and its relationship to the perception of others. The characters in his novel find themselves in any number of situations which support this idea. And, as we have seen in chapter VII of Book III, Fielding goes as far as to outright state his impression of morality. It is almost ironic, really, that a work which points to the complications involved with goodness and perception of goodness should be so thoroughly criticized for vulgarity and immorality. Tom Jones is quite like Tom Jones in that sense, for its outward appearance belies its more soundly moral interior...
