I do like Dickens. I think that his style is a reflection of the time he lived. I think there was a struggle for him in trying to show that people could come out of their roles and yet in that culture at that time it really wasn't possible. I mean if you were born poor you doomed to be poor. I hadn't considered before whether or not he was writing about himself. I think i will re-read with that in mind and see if I notice it.

I think Tale of Two Cities would be my favorite. Of course I had to read Great Expectations in HS, doesn't everyone?

I am also an admirer of Dickens. I wonder if his novels have a particular focus on the poor and downtrodden because he understood the power of the printed word as an influence for reform? Dickens knew personally the misery that came with the era in which he lived: the industrial age.

Several of his novels were printed as monthly serials for the newspapers, and from all that I have read, they were wildly popular.

I like the plot and sub-plot technique of his writing; the challenge of keeping it all straight and the interaction between plots. I think my favorite story is A Tale of Two Cities, but I truly love A Christmas Carol as well.

Yes, that is what mainly interested me about his books, the view of the lower class. I find the subject of the diffrences of social classes in various time periods interesting.

Wait, thats not what I came here to write. I just went on Masterpiece Theater's website and it noted that sometime in 2009 they will be showing a remake of Dickens' Oliver Twist and The Old Curiosity Shop.

I really loved the new Bleak House production they did, with Gillian Anderson and Charles Dance. Absolutely amazing! I have it on DVD.
I also saw some newer make of David Copperfield, Nicholas Nickleby (with Anne Hathaway), and also the old one of and Oliver Twist.
I also saw Great Expectations and didn't like it at all, so I doubt I would enjoy the book much...
CMK

When I was a kid I was in love with Mark Lester from the movie Oliver Twist, does anyone else remember that?

I adore Dickens. I think that he wanted to create a world where injustices were addressed, where (sometimes) the bad guy gets caught, and the little guy wins, and love conquers all. I admire his humor and find his work unfailingly entertaining and captivating. Among many others of his works, I really enjoyed Little Dorrit.

I think to our modern ears, his sentimentality and the tidiness of his plots can make us impatient. But I'm a fool for it. Every winter I pick one of his books and settle in. It makes the world right again.

I also love Dickens. My favorite is Bleak House. Peggoty from David Copperfield is my heroine. I find Tale of Two Cities very good but very different from his other work.

I took a Dickens course in college that was taught by a professor who was a huge fan and co-wrote a book about him, which he claimed was a failure. The final exam was to create an outline of your own Dickens novel and tell why you did what you did. I got an A, and consider it my crowning accomplishment.

I believe that he wrote purposely to bring about social change, and the sentimentality was a part of his times. His books created a tremendous amount of publicity. The story is that when the ship came in to the U.S. shore carrying the part of The Old Curiousity Shop serial that would tell of Little Nell's end, it was met before docking by a crowd shouting, "Did she die?"

I really enjoyed Bleak House, and my heroine was Lady Dedlock, lol. She wasn't virtuous, but she was real. There was something deeper and darker about BH that made me prefer it over Dickens' others; it was more realistic in a way. There was doom and awe in it (I hope that made sence). I remember reading something that said that BH was diffrent from his other books. What do you think it was that made it so diffrent?
A question for those of you who have read BH (i'll try not to give anything away). Do you think Mr. Jaundyce (my 2nd favorite character) really was trying to raise up E. (you know who she is) as his future bride? If so, do you think it odd or just an occurance explained by the times they were in?
CMK

Combining threads here -

My favorite Dickens is Tale of Two Cities. I find this a bit of odd...since I must have started to read it at least 5 times and couldn't get more than 10 pages into it. The time that it clicked for me, I couldn't bear to put it down. That's unusual for me when erudite reading is involved. I tend to make novels like this into year long projects!

I am enjoying Bleak House almost as much. In the other thread, someone said she never reads introductions. And usually I don't, but I started the one in this book, and it was so well written that I got swept up into it. I learned that BH is the first English novel that featured a professional detective. Kind of cool, I thought. And, no spoilers! It was like attending a well done lecture.

I reread A Christmas Carol almost every year and read Dickens' other Christmas story when it was discussed here. I read David Copperfield in ninth grade and remember almost all of it. I enjoyed Hard Times, reading it during afternoon quiet time when my children were little. (Everyone had to be in his or her own room, on his/her own bed - sleeping was not required - reading or quiet play only for about an hour. Sometimes we listened to some radio dramas that the local radio station had in the afternoon - and this was the 70's not the 40's or 50's.)

I think Great Expectations is a masterpiece, and I'm also very fond of Oliver Twist. Reading about his life is very useful in understanding his works.

I have to admit that I have never been a big Dickens fan, although I enjoyed reading some of Pickwick Papers recently.
I think as Ideefixe says it is a good idea to get an idea of Dickens himself and the time he lived in to understand his work
Has anyone read Girl in a Blue Dress by Gaynor Arnold? It was long-listed for this year's Booker prize and is the thinly disguised story of Dickens' wife Catherine and the bad treatment she received at the hands of her husband and many children. I have it on order from the library.

CMK, I agree that the recent BBC production of Bleak House is excellent. Re the Jaundyce and Esther thing. I think you need to remember that Dickens had a very sentimental attitude to girls/young women, which today might be considered rather unhealthy. Many of his heroines are feeble, pretty, small-brained females (though Esther wasn't)
I looked up the movie 'Great Expectations' and found it seemed to be 'All American'. Was it 're-set' in the US?
The one to watch is the 1946 b&w David Lean production starring John Mills, Alec Guiness and Jean Simmonds. I saw it as a child and my hair stood on end during the sequences in the Kent marshes.

Here is a link that might be useful: 1946 'Great Expectations'

Dickens did see himself as a social reformer through print. Although he did not like to talk about his own experiences as the child of a man jailed for debt, it obviously molded his outlook and his writing.
He also agreed with the view of women most accepted in his time-they were the weaker vessel-lipservice was given to "protecting" women, but in reality, they were viewed as possessions or drudges. This went across class lines, although wealthy women at least had their basic needs of food and shelter taken care of-although many were treated very badly by husbands and fathers. For the lower classes, life was difficult for everyone-poverty and brutality went hand in hand.
I think when reading literature written in another time, you can not apply contemporary critiques. Of course real life isn't as tidy as Dickens writes. But when he was writing his serials, he needed to conform somewhat to publishers' expectations or he would not be given the platform he wanted to get his message out. His sentimental prose opened the eyes of many to the dark side of the industrial revolution. Remember, he wrote at the same time as the Crystal Palace Exhibition, which was a celebration of all that was wonderful about industrialization.
He was wildly popular, both in Europe and the US.

My copy of Bleak House is a "Barnes and Noble Classic", The inrtroduction is by Tatiana Holway - more than 15 pages long, it includes a time line of Dickens life along with the narrative that includes biographical information, and then discussion about the book. There is a good description of the court set up of the time.
She also wrote foot notes...at the end of the book. These supply a lot of contemporaty infomation. I read them before each chapter...so it doesn't interrupt the flow of my reading. It's like sitting in a classroom with a great teacher. I have never enjoyed a classic quite so much.

-Veer, Im glad im not the only one who doesn't particularly adore Dickens. But you didnt say what exactly it was you didn't like about him.
Thanks for answering my question, I was thinking that too. Mr. Jaundyce was such a philantrapist that he wanted to help every person in need that he could. I suppose when he met Esther as a child he decided he wanted to help her. Then when she was older he found how kind and like-minded she was and figured marriage was the best way to keep her protected.

I think I read somewhere that Oliver Twist caused quite a sensation because of its content. The child labor shown in Dicken's book angered some people and helped to eventually end it. Is that true? Have you heard of that before?
CMK

Although he shares my birthday, I have never been a fan of Dickens. In high school, we were forced to read "A Tale of Two Cities." Once I got into it, I found it not bad, and have always meant to re-read it now that I am older.

I am grateful to Martin of RP who suggested we read and discuss here "A Christman Carol." I do find this classic timeless. We later read "The Chimes" which was OK, but not really to my taste.

I guess I can take Dickens in small doses (his shorter works). I find his characters just too depressing in the longer works, even though I acknowledge the worthiness of his attempt at social reform and his sympathy for the lot of the poor.

Around the same time Oliver Twist was published in serial form in the newspaper, there were also some of the first "crusading" journalists writing articles about child labor and other social ills. There was a series about children used as chimney sweeps and one about little girls sold into prostitution. Oliver Twist certainly didn't hurt the cause.