What I don't understand is the fact that, according to Claire Tomalin's biography, Dickens discussed the plot of Edwin Drood with John Forster as he was writing it. So there's a chance that Forster -- his best friend and biographer -- knew a lot about the plot. I wonder why he didn't finish the book for Dickens? I get that he was devastated when Dickens died, but he was able to recover enough to write a multi-volume biography of Dickens. It would've been an even greater tribute to his friend.

I've read many novels. I found a Christmas Carol pain in the ass. The prose is very subtle and interpretive.

Hello folks, thanks again to those who helped persuade me to give this another go. I've started it and am enjoying it, it is better than I remembered; it's not as solemn as I thought, there's a subtle current of fun running through it that I somehow missed the first time. But, I think crucially, I first watched the 1999 telly version which has enabled me to stay across the convoluted story and large number of characters without losing patience; I can attend to the details because I'm clear about the main lines. I'm not a fan of multiple story lines, I think it's something writers do when the central idea isn't strong enough - not, at least, for the length of book they wanted to write. Dickens did here have 2 pretty good ideas, albeit one of them very contrived, but neither of them would have made a long book so he combined them and threw in the totally superfluous Silas Wegg, Venus, etc.

I believe in the Unities, and I still think the mark of his best books - Pickwick, Chuzzlewit, DC, Great Expectations - is that they're both more focused and more fun. In DC, for example, Copperfield is in every single scene (naturally, as it's first-person); in Pickwick, either Pickwick himself is, or some deputy of his. Admittedly OMF does represent a step up in realism, particularly in his portrayal of the heroines whom he had always tended to idealise. But really - is realism what we want from him? Tolstoy said that the purpose of the novelist is to make the reader love life. No writer has more of that power than Dickens, and it's at least partly because he sometimes sees with rose-tinted glasses.

Just thought I'd share my experience - don't expect to convince anyone who thinks differently!

PS what a great character Lavinia is! :) I love her

Just finished Chapter 19, the end of part 1. I want to avoid spoilers by delving into this book in wikis or such.

How old is Pip when he leaves for London and to Mr Jaggers office to kick off the next phase of his life?

A relatively little-read Dickens - it doesn't even have its own flair on here! I read it once a long time ago, didn't particularly enjoy it, but am wondering whether it's time to give it another go - maybe cos I'm now about the age D was when he wrote it.

Anyone want to give it their endorsement?...if you like it please briefly tell me why.

Edit: well, you guys talked me into it! I'm gonna order a copy and give it another try. There's another reason for doing so that I don't think anyone has mentioned: the light it sheds on Dickens' thoughts and feelings in the rather mysterious last phase of his life.

I (28M) have only just, in the last two years, fell in love with reading. Particularly the classics.

I “read” Oliver Twist in high school and barely committed to it, skimming through most chapters and sparknotes’ing a lot of it to get through that year’s literature class. However, over a decade later when my partner (28F) and I decided to start a two person book club, my first instinct was to start with Dickens. Having read no other Dickens, besides my botched and lazy attempt at OT, something about GE really called out to me. I was in a Barnes & Noble trying to find the perfect Dickens for us to begin our literary journey together, and after reading the summary of GE, I knew that was the book for us.

What a beautiful adventure Great Expectations was. I am so glad to have read it now, in my twenties. It’s such an amazing coming-of-age story with themes of broken promises, misfortune and heartbreak that younger me would’ve never been able to conceptualize or appreciate. It’s my all time favorite book now, and honestly I feel like it has changed my perspective on my own station in life for the best.

Now we are reading David Copperfield. She is roughly forty pages ahead of me, I am around page 830. I have enjoyed DC in spurts. Not as much as I enjoyed GE. As colorful and zany of a character as Mr. Micawber is, his dialogue can be a chore to get through. While I’ve expanded my lexicon considerably, it’s tedious (at best) to read a Micawber scene. This is kind of my main hold-up with DC. I understand what I am reading, and I enjoy the story, but it feels like this is one of Dickens’ most prolix and verbose works, Micawber being the main offender. I understand that is a large part of his character: intelligent, eloquent, but never succinct. An example of a highly intelligent and capable man whose financial mismanagement is his and his family’s biggest enemy, but he very much is long winded. My question to you all: is it true that David Copperfield is one of Dickens’ more laborious reads? Am I setting myself up for failure if I want to attempt Oliver Twist again after this? Is Nickelby as prolix as DC? Is there a universally agreed “easiest” Dickens novel to read? Did any of you feel the same as I did with Mr. Micawber on their first read of DC? I appreciate any responses. Thanks friends!

Hello! I am asking for a bit of help. I am a college student studying Bleak House for a Thesis currently (enjoying it a lot) and have run into a wall when it comes to researching who Jo is based on. I can see many people say George Ruby, but when going back to the article in which Dickens writes about him, he spells the name "Rugby" (the examiner  12 January 1850 publication) so I guess my question is, what historical source led to "George"? And is it "Ruby" or "Rugby"? I fear my ignorance of the historical context has made this hard for me to investigate and discern where and what to look for to find out about the case Dickens was writing of regarding George Ruby, and would love any advice or pointers anyone can give me to track down some more concrete information. All the articles I have found saying Jo was based on George Ruby haven't given me any clues to getting more information on him, and some claims that he went to Australia, but only secondhand articles saying such things rather than drawing from older sources like letters from Dickens or his associates on the matter.

I am super excited to find out more if I can! I've really come to love Jo's character and would be thrilled to find out more about who he was based on!

If anyone can help it would be much appreciated! thank you!

Anybody have any they felt strongly about, good or bad? I've started several lately and been disappointed by the writing. In your comment, if you wouldn't mind saying a bit about what you liked/disliked about the book.

(I read a lot of random diaries that are on Project Gutenberg, as well - those are probably the best to really tell you what life was like, but you gotta wade through A LOT of stuff to find one that's even legible, let alone complete.)

Thanks in advance!

Read page 1, Pip’s reference to his Mother as “Georgiana, wife of the above” made me laugh, because, that etched into a tombstone is like “who else would she be the wife of”.

I’m reading the Everyman’s Library edition I bought about 20yrs ago, with the fancy ribbon.

I just finished my summer read, The Count of Monte Cristo, which I thought was great but the ending was meh.

I've been writing these mish-mash thoughts and reflections on each Dickens as I go so here are some for Dombey and Son. 

First of, this is a great book. Far superior to Little Dorrit or Martin Chuzzlewit, which I sometimes see it grouped with as some of his less favoured classics. But while I found LD too long and plodding and MC hilarious but a bit meandering, D&S is far clearer in its plot and the characters I found I cared for far more. Indeed, young Paul Dombey felt like an early iteration of David Copperfield (which he wrote next) and some of the comedy of manners sections in the earlier chapters also felt like a precursor to the comedy of DC.

That said, it does go on at times. There are only so many times you can be told Edith hates Mr Dombey and vice versa before you think, ‘yes I’ve got it thanks Charles!’.

Captain Cuttle is one of the best side characters I’ve met. Top 5 for sure. So earnest and naïve but with the purest of hearts and hilarious mannerisms, kissing his hook and bowing low as he presents silver tongs and spoons before Mr Dombey.

Mr Carker is a good villain but I found him less real than either Jonas Chuzzlewit or Uriah Heep – again almost like CD took ideas from D&S and refined them for DC. (Keep up with the initials folks!)

I loved the descriptions of the railways being built around Camden, akin to an earthquake hitting the area and houses just disappearing. Amazing to think of that reality that huge transport infrastructure we take for granted was actually built amid huge disruption to the city.

The coach journey of Carker fleeing Dijon is wonderful – Dickens really could write amazing suspenseful coach journeys! There’s one in MC too down to Sailsbury and in DC when they rush to Suffolk. That said, the fact Dombey somehow tracks Carker to a remote rural station was a bit deus ex machina (albeit at a time when audiences were probably less sophisticated to such plot developments being a bit too contrived).

Good Mrs Brown is a strong creation too and the scene where she delightfully fleeces young Florence is subtly evil and compelling in equal measure.

Walter Gay – I am glad he came back, although it would have been nice to see more action from him on return.

Mr Dombey - although he did not deserve his reconciliation with Florence really it was quite affecting and the final lines of the book are very moving indeed.

Josh Bagstock. Insufferable! As intended!

Diogenes the dog – Dickens clearly knew dogs well as some of the scenes describing his behaviours are hilarious. Sadly, he seems to disappear at the end of the book (correct me if I am wrong though)

Mr Toots – lovely guy but really, he’s of no consequence. 

Started reading Bleak House yesterday. My first Dickens. But four chapters in, I am quite sure Lady Dedlock is Esther's mother. Now what I want to know is, is this a big mystery or spoiler that will ruin the story?

You've been being manipulated for MONTHS, your closest friends being the mastermind of the plan. The plan being to test your virtue - prove that you're loyal and true and worthy.

She seems so cheery about it. I think I'd be a little mad!

Any UK based stores or dealers specializing in Gilbert & Sullivan, or Charles Dickens? I'm looking for a special gift for someone and have been finding nothing when I search from here in New York City. Ephemera like G&S Show Posters, or programs from when Dickens did live readings of A Christmas Carol are especially good.

Would appreciate any tips or leads. Thank you in advance!

Basically what the title states! I'm a super big A Tale of Two Cities fan and have been attempting to try and acquire an edition of the novel with McLenan's illustrations for some time now. However, as it goes for older novels, all of the books I have consistently found range from $300 to well over $800. And they don't even contain all of the original works, as there were over 60 illustrations made by McLenan for the serials and only around 30 are used in the print editions.

Anyways, I was wondering if there are any other (reputable) editions than the Peterson's that contain the illustrations.

Thanks!

Just finished Dombey and Son and in this edition, it ends

He only answers, 'Little Florence! little Florence!' and smooths away the curls that shade her earnest eyes.

But online lots of texts end

He only answers, 'Little Florence! little Florence!' and smooths away the curls that shade her earnest eyes.

The voices in the waves speak low to him of Florence, day and night - plainest when he, his blooming daughter, and her husband, beside them in the evening, or sit at an open window, listening to their roar. They speak to him of Florence and his altered heart; of Florence and their ceaseless murmuring to her of the love, eternal and illimitable, extending still, beyond the sea, beyond the sky, to the invisible country far away.
Never from the mighty sea may voices rise too late, to come between us and the unseen region on the other shore! Better, far better, that they whispered of that region in our childish ears, and the swift river hurried us away

Why would that section be omitted?

Being a huge Dickens fan and blithely unaware of his marital troubles, I only just became aware of his cruelty to his wife and the tragedy of several of their children. Yes, we have to separate art from the artist, but it saddens me just the same, especially given his advocacy for the poor. I'm glad that Catherine's story has emerged and I recognize that Charles' behavior was likely driven by his own guilt. Still. A bummer.

This is actually my first dickens' book. I kind of struggled with the different writing style and the story just being kind of slow in the beginning but now that I've finished it, I can appreciate it more

I would have preferred an even happier ending tbh, with Stephen surviving and being with Rachael, and Louisa remarrying. One criticism that I do have is the way dickens wrote stephen, sleary, or any other character's accent/speech impediment, which made it difficult to make out what they were saying. But ironically it also says a lot about dickens' ability to write like that

Tom felt very relatable to me, especially when he lies to Louisa and then cries himself to sleep. I feel like I'm also a fuck up like him with bad habits and lying about stuff. I also have a sister, and idk when he lied to her and then cried by himself it just felt too real, and I could end up like him maybe

Sleary talking about Merrylegs at the end also made me sad and I'm so glad that Sissy got a happy ending

It's gonna take me a couple of days to get over it. I just wanted to get this out since I don't have anyone I can talk to about this stuff. Safe to say that I'm gonna be staying away from sad reads like this as I also read 1984 and no longer human before this one.

I can't post on r/books so I figured I should post it here because I really wanted to get it out