Perfect Pamela

I get the impression that there is more meaning to people being viewed as property than the obvious superficial meaning that is easily taken for granted. Pamela begins as a servant in Mr. B’s mansion and then is kidnapped by him when she wants her freedom. Once she leaves and goes to live with her parents he will no longer have any control over her and she will not have to be submissive to his will. This brings me to the letters. After Professor Maruca asked about the significance of the letters, I found myself obsessing over it just as much as Mr. B obsesses about reading them. He provides his own excuses for wanting to read them, such as, “If I had not loved you, do you think I would have troubled myself about your letters” (239) then a couple pages later he says, “you have so beautiful a manner, that it is partly that, and partly my love for you that has made me desirous of reading all you write” (242) and again after he tells Pamela that he does not need to see the letters any longer but would still like to because “for the sake of the sweet manner in which you relate what has passed” (284). There are many more excuses that he provides throughout the text but these examples stood out to me. It seems that he may be able to control and own Pamela physically but it is a very different matter when it comes to her thoughts. This is the aspect of her that he cannot have full possession of. But then it is interesting to consider that he has transformed from a ‘wicked’ master into her ‘generous master.’ It seems that by reading the letters she writes he can change himself into the person she will approve of and in this way he is technically controlling/manipulating her thoughts and the contents of her letters.
I have to address the aspect of the situation that Pamela can control her master by her letters. Her opinion adjusts his behavior. This, I think, is the source of his anger issues. I think that Mr. B does not think he can be as good as Pamela expects or wants. This produces frustration in him and then all hell breaks loose.
I was taken back by the rules that Pamela must follow. She has escaped being a prisoner against her will but now she is a prisoner because it is her will. It was ridiculous when Lady Davers came and Pamela had to jump out the window. Once she gets to one of the houses (I cant remember which one) where Mr. B expected her to be she does not want to share the account of what happened because she remembers the china plate incident that he told her of. My one question is who cares? He should have a full account right then and there about what his insane and hot tempered sister did. At least they did end up discussing it, at the urging of everyone there. Of course everyone there wanted to hear the juicy details of this situation. Another aspect that bothers me is that Mr. B asked if Pamela had any adjustments that she would like to seem him make and she replied that she did not. I would have suggested some anger management and patience. Maybe, a restraining order against his sister.
One scene that really, really stood out to me was when Mr. B sent Pamela away and then became sick. He is lovesick because Pamela has left him. This transforms love from an emotional to a physical level. He would have never recovered if his Pamela did not return to him because her “presence has chased away [his] illness” (280).
When reading a novel, we take notice of the characters and the positive and negative aspects that they embody. I found it interesting that at the end of Pamela, Richardson felt compelled to tell the readers what they should get from his novel. I can see how Richardson got the idea for this novel from letters he was writing regarding conduct. It just seems a little odd in some circumstances, such as, Pamela jumping out the window into the garden to escape, or when she jumps out of the window to escape from Lady Davers. So is this what you are suppose to do when you are taken prisoner? Is this proper conduct? Maybe there is an underlying message about jumping out of windows.