I'm going to make a confession. For the most part, I tend to think that Dickens is highly overrated. Mostly I find his stuff overly sentimental (see: A Christmas Story *gag*). I also saw someone else mention that high school teachers do Dickens a great disservice by forcing us all to read Great Expectations and I agree with that 100%. I had to read that book at least twice before getting my diploma and I still resent it.
Then I had to read Dombey and Son in college and I had to admit that I actually kind of liked it. The professor who assigned it (one of my favorite teachers ever) said he thought that Bleak House was his best work. So I grabbed it a few years ago and it was sitting on my shelf when I decided it had been awhile since I had read a good old-fashioned Victorian novel and it was time for another one.
I'll admit, this one might have changed my mind on Dickens. While some of his other novels make it obvious that he was publishing them chapter-by-chapter without a chance to go back and revise (something I could never do but hey, we all have our own systems) this one seemed like he might have actually had an outline or something. At 880 pages, it was a very well-thought out, well-planned novel. Not sure if he actually used an outline for this one (no judgment here either way, again, we all have our own systems) or if he actually had a chance to go back and revise but it was awesome. It was a very complex plot with a huge cast of characters (I frequently had to go back to refresh my memory) with a very clear beginning, middle and end.
I won't say that it kept me reading from beginning to end. That would be a lie. It starts off really slow, gradually gains momentum, and then I read the last 150 pages in two days because I couldn't put it down. It has two narrators and one of them is much more difficult to get through than the other. However, the dense narrator is also quite witty. There's a lot of commentary on the British legal system of the time (much of which can be directly related to our current legal system here in the U.S., since we used their system as the basis for our own) which is actually quite funny and often painfully accurate.
His physical descriptions are also awesome. I have mixed feelings about them because there were so many times when I felt dragged down by them. On the one hand, they slowed down my reading and didn't help to further the plot, on the other hand, they really helped bring his scenes to life and I know his physical descriptions are something he's known for - with good reason.
I have a love-hate relationship with his characters. For the most part, they are not full-fleshed characters: rather, they are two-dimensional caricatures. Sometimes this makes them insupportably dull (Esther Summons) while, at other times, it helps brings them to life when he gives them little quirks that belong to them and them alone - such as Mr. Smallweed's tendency to constantly sink into his char. I felt like I was watching a cartoon and it was extremely enjoyable. Also the fact that his name was "Mr. Smallweed". How perfect was that? (Answer: Perfect)
I just have to take this opportunity to clear up a myth before someone makes a comment about how Dickens was overly-wordy because he was paid by the word. He was not paid by the word. Most of his books were published in installments and he was paid per installment. He was overly-wordy because that's the style that most writers of his generation were writing in. In those days, when people bought the book, they wanted big, thick books that would provide hours of entertainment so they could feel that the money they were getting a good value for the money they spent on the book. You know, back when people bought physical books that you had to go to the book shop to pick up. Remember those days?
No comments:
Post a Comment