Printable View
It is shameful for me to say, but it must be said. I've never read any Charles Dickens. I'll pass the buck and blame the educational system, which never made me read any of it. Then again, this is probably a good thing, since I pretty much know I wouldn't have appreciated Dickens in school, whether it be high or elementary.
But, I digress.
I'm wondering if anyone has any suggestions on good starters to introduce someone to Dickens. This forum board has yet to steer me wrong.
Thanks!
I'd start with the shortest: A Tale of Two Cities; that way you can see if his style and writing are to your tastes. Not his best book in my view, but short enough not to be torture if you dislike it, and a good example of what the longer works are like.
Or you could try some of the short stories :) My favourite is The Signal-man.
I agree if you are not to sure about Dickens start with a Tale Of Two Cities, it is relatively short and one of his best novel.
However if you are more dedicated, his best novel by far is David Copperfield.
Oliver Twist is actually the shortest, but ya I'd start with the medium length novels. Twist is one of his earlier works and it has a lot of what Dickens is famous for, Victorian Idealism and strong memorable characters, but is not his best work.
I'd go with Hard Times, Tale of Two Cities, or Great Expectations.
David Copperfield and Great Expectations are my favourite Dickens novels.
Christmas stories and short stories, one might say I am a Dickens' fan. Because, like many Victorian authors, his novels were serialized, they tend to be overly long. However, his mastery of the English language more than compensates for the longevity of his novels. I would start with David Copperfield, a semi-autobiogrphical novel. Follow this by Great Expectations and A Tale of Two Cties. After finishing these, you'll have a good idea whether you want to be a Dickens' afficianado or not. Of his longer novels, Bleak House is probably the best.
The Short stories and Christmas stories can be read at any time afterwards.
There are many great movies made from Dickens' novels. Of the older movies (in black and white), those made by David Lean are superior. These are Oliver Twist and Great Expectations. Two other older but good ones are David Copperfield staring W. C. Fields as Micawber and A Tale of Two Cities with Ronald Coleman as Sidney Carton.
The modern Dickens' movies made by Masterpiece Theatre are excellent. Bleak House is one of the best. Our Mutual Friend, the last complete novel, is also excellent, along with Martin Chizzlewitz. If you're not up to reading the really long novels, at least watch the British-made movies. I think all of his novels have been made into movies with the possible exeption of Barnaby Rudge. And maybe The Old curiosity Shop.
The people who don't like Dickens are usually those who can't assimilate his longer, complex sentences. Those who can, are usually great Dickens' fans.
How about the 'Pickwick Papers' (or whatever it's called)? I haven't read any Dickens, but I've heard it's funny. I associate dense, wordy prose (-> boring!) with Dickens, so why not start with something funny?
I second this. [However the second part I don't agree with at all. Dicken's isn't hard to read. He wrote for the public as a serial novelist printed in newspapers.]Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodo25
Else you might want to go back being a child and read Oliver Twist. Although I've yet to read Barnaby Rudge and Bleak House everything else I've read is crap. Serial novelists tend to be full of 'coincidences' and lame plot twists, and schmaltzy 'ideas'. The Pickwick Papers were at least funny at times. Tale of Two Cities is simply famous because the first and last paragraphs, otherwise you'll be thinking how he got everyone to swallow this tripe and then claim it to be prime rib.
Thanks for the input, arrytus, but I still want to experience Dickens. And, I must admit, I'm hesitant to believe any criticism when so vitriolic.
I think I'll give A Tale of Two Cities a try, especially since it is one of his most famous.
Also, I forgot that I did read A Christmas Carol last year. I'd still like to try one of his other novels, though.
Exactly right. Another possibility is Hard Times - very short and his best work, in my view.Quote:
Originally Posted by Night_Lamp
No. Both Hard Times and A Tale of Two Cities are shorter.Quote:
Originally Posted by OrphanPip
Hard Times is a good one to start with.
I have read Dickens and started with David Copperfield then a tale of two cities and Hardtimes. I like his characterization so much. And of course the way he could depict the tragic side of humanity in a way few of his contemoraries and still fewer of today's writers could do. I enjoyed his reading but if we make an analogy I find Russian novels and particularly Dostoevsky more appealing to me. There is a lack of philosphical quotients in his writings and it cannot delve into deeper and deeper realms of human minds. He is not a psychological novelist and Ifind him hovering on the surface.
I enjoyed Bleak House. It's long but it's got the things you would associate with a Dickens novel. There was a BBC adaptation a few years ago that was enjoyable so you might want to watch that and see if it piques your interest.
A Tale of Two Cities is considered to be one of his best and it does have the most famous opening and closing lines of Dickens' novels. Very tragic.
You seem to be right, for some reason I remembered Twist being shorter than it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Syd A
As to the recommendations, Mut seems to have settled on Tale, which was the first Dickens I read when I was in high school and it is a good one to start with.
Hard Times is really good, but I have to disagree with Night that it is typical Dickens: it is Dickens most political novel and probably his least sentimental, though it has its quirky satirical moments. Of course, it's still worth reading.
Hard Times. This was my first Dickens novel, assigned in a class to illuminate a discussion on Marxism. Great novel. A Tale of Two Cities and Bleak House were to follow (outside of the classroom) and both were, in my opinion, superb literary treats!
I had a bad experience when I read the supremely awful Great ExpectationsQuote:
Originally Posted by laymonite
But two copies of Hard Times are always lying around in a room a study in and because it's relatively short I am tempted to give Dickens another go.
I believe I shall now.
I started off with Oliver Twist. I got it free as an award for reading so much in Middle School. It was the first Classical literature I ever read of my own volition. Then I got hooked on Dickens and that was the end of that. :D
I started a Dickens reading project about five years ago. The goal was to read every Dickens novel. I completed the project a few months ago. Now I'm going to begin another project wherein I go back and reread all his novels. It's well worth it.
I consider Hard Times one of my favorite novels. It's quite biting and sarcastic in a political sense but also features great characters which is what he's mostly known for. I loved Great Expectations as well although it's some what lengthy it's quite an easy and quick read. I've also read A Tale Of Two Cities and David Copperfield but that was many years ago so I have little memory of them. I recall enjoying them a great deal at the time. I recently purchased the Complete Dickens for my Kindle which chronicles all of his novels.
I've read most of Dickens and a Tale of Two cities was one of my least favourite of his novels. Ok it's set in the most colourful period in history, has Byronic hero, and well-paced action, and it's written by Dickens:) So it isn't a bad experience. BUT it lacks all that Dickens does best - no cozy Englishness, no quirky characters, little comedy.
The populous landscape is absent, you only get the rather "straight" main characters and "the mob". Ok the characters are as good as, say, those in Trollope, but Dickens is usually better than Trollope! Also the actual landscape is flat - no unforgettable sketches of London here... or even of Paris. So read it certainly, but if you are disappointed by the lack of the particular "Dickensian magic", then don't worry - there's more of that in whatever other novel of his you might read!
Well, I might like A Tale of Two Cities then. I'll give it a go.
Hope I will not get exasperated by his 'Paris', like I did with his 'Venice' in Little Dorrit, which I abandoned shortly after that... :yuk:
Thanks for the hint on Trollope, may add him to my list. ;)
As an update, I just finished A Tale of Two Cities and really enjoyed it.
I once starred in an Oliver Twist play..
Try reading Oliver Twist, if you are up for a FUN story! :D
Trollope is wonderful. I am reading The Way We Live Now, and watching The Barchester Chronicles again, after just having watched TWWLN again. He's very good on the establishment of the day, the Church and Parliament, with a lovely satirical bent. I love him.Quote:
Originally Posted by kiki1982