Although it might get used far too often Instead of trying out new plots and ideas, Dickens keeps focusing on his maiNever change a running plot system
Although it might get used far too often Instead of trying out new plots and ideas, Dickens keeps focusing on his main premises, recycling himself a bit and especially losing control over the inner logic, coherency, and credibility, not ever to talk about suspension of disbelief, because this thing feels so constructed.
Kind of a franchise of social critique Not bad, but one of his weaker works, it reminds me a bit of a certain behemoth company always following the same scheme, adoring the running system, never changing much if it brings sweet money money. I do appreciate any kind of social criticism and that´s, along with all the ethics, moral, capitalistic evil, etc. what makes Dickens´work so special, but he just didn´t put that much effort into this one, maybe there were personal reasons or problems, maybe he needed to get it published, maybe he just mehed and thought https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph... https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph... , who knows.
Definitely did see it coming I was pretty disappointed after about half to two thirds of the book, because I could guess that there won´t be space for more dynamic plotlines (as if Dickens would have used such) and the ending was the ultimate Deus ex machinagasm. I can´t get behind the fascination of this novel for some readers, it´s an uninspired, stale infusion of Dickens topics in an unmotivated attempt to make more money by using his position as a moral guardian, a kind of national symbol ("our great writer to be proud of BS patriotism", no matter what she/he writes), and progressive critic of society, and copying his tropes until they began to fall into pieces.
Not close to Oliver Twist and Chrismas Carol Because the story isn´t that amazing, I would like to focus on dissecting Dickens, so let´s take a short look at the strengths and weaknesses of his writing in general, by comparing best and worst, instead of talking about a story close to redundancy. In contrast to Christmas Carol and Oliver Twist, there seems to be less real lifeblood and the true self of the author in it, instead, it becomes a kind of next part of the literary brand Dickens was able to establish himself as.
A bit more complex characters, please Dickens writes stereotypically, overusing the good/bad ugly/beautiful, and simple characterization scheme without the second layer and avoids describing realistic inner conflicts and anything giving characters more depth and complexity. There are no real cliffhangers, second and third plotlines, dynamic changes of perspective, and a general lack of pace and suspense, it´s as if an ultra stoic person tells one a story without any mimic or emotion and one has to struggle not to fall asleep while listening.
Not everyone ages well toward ingenuity What irritates me the most is that his 2 great classics weren´t that average, although many other authors get better and better while they age and become specialists in the game of writing, but he lost parts of his motivation and/or talent while getting older. Without his established name, the last few novels wouldn´t have sold in the way Christmas Carol and Oliver Twist did, he would probably even didn´t have had the option to write more novels without the money and success.
Without the positive intent of showing grievances and dysfunctions in civilizations, this would have been a 3 star. I am the last one to say that activism, progressivism, etc., aren´t good, but as soon as money and economic interests become more important than the work itself and ethics are hypocritically used to boost sales, the writer has lost her/his street credibility. It just reminds me more of the daily, average „each year a new novel“ mainstream mentality, not of a real classic.
One of the most influential and anti grinchy works of all time.
It might be hard to impossible to find someone who hasn´t at least heard about this clOne of the most influential and anti grinchy works of all time.
It might be hard to impossible to find someone who hasn´t at least heard about this classic example of Christmas ethic seminar, something close to impossible to achieve and to thank Dickens for as a paladin of humanism. The story is well known, close to an epigenetic factor because of its prominence, so let´s drivel around the core element.
I don´t know where this kind of moral storytelling originated, probably tens of thousands of years ago when the first shaman or chief thought it would be cool to use vision, prophecy, the power of dreams, imagination and a grain of indoctrination to communicate the right behavior to her/his people. Ethics and moral are important, omnipresent, and timeless topics that shouldn´t be reduced to the few holidays of different religions to give people, working against the interests of humankind to enrich themselves the whole year, a bad conscience (as if this would be possible, as if they would even realize what monsters they are as they don´t directly kill, but just indirectly support the misery by playing key roles of a dysfunctional system), but used in everyday life, politics, and every single decision. Ok, before it gets completely unrealistic, I´ll better end this review.
Just one more if you have time? Great. A bit too much fourth wall breaking here today, sorry for that.
The bigotry and mendacity of society and the middle and upper classes have grown since Dickens times, as they were at least confronted with the poor and their suffering, directly starving on the streets next to the degenerated elite, while noblemen and ladies were worried there shoes or clothes could get stained if a dying person collapses in their direction as blood was so difficult to get out those days without fancy detergent tech.
Today, the hardship and slums are kept far away from the modern, beautiful, important parts of cities, recreational and cultural centers, etc. so that nobody has to burden her/himself with thinking or even worrying about the majority of people living in precarious conditions to serve the upper class to enable their useless, earth shattering consumption and snobbish spare time activities they need wage slaves for to really enjoy, as they can´t even get their lazy buttocks moving to make themselves a coffee or meal or find hobbies not involving dozens of minimum wage paid people needed to support their entertainment.
Not even to mention the Southern hemisphere and the immense, unnecessary, by a fair economic system easily preventable, suffering of billions and dying of tens of millions of people directly caused by this system.
Not as good as Christmas Carol and Oliver Twist, a tiny bit better than A tale of two cities, but to its core just Oliver Twist 2.0 with a first persoNot as good as Christmas Carol and Oliver Twist, a tiny bit better than A tale of two cities, but to its core just Oliver Twist 2.0 with a first person narrator, and a perfect reason for why nobody likes serialized short stories condensed to weak novels.
I mentioned some of the weaknesses of Dickens writing in my review of A tale of two cities https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... and the reason why it´s not as bad as it because he went back to a topic he could describe with more credibility because of the real life experiences he had made, and possibly people wanted more Oliver Twist and he knew he could sell more or just because he was nostalgic while getting old.
It´s quite kind of sad that his great, timeless, and important first works that point the finger at many societal problems are indirectly reduced by readers who choose to pick this work or Tale of two cities first instead of reading his masterpieces. I would completely understand if one wouldn´t want to try a second book after this one.
From all UK/US classics I´ve read, these two novels are by far the weakest. I do often think that some classics, many of them I won´t be able or willing to read, weren´t really good, subtle, or ingenious, but just the first on the market and had no competition, as simple and unromantic that might sound. I mean, reading outside stupid indoctrination BS was long time deemed a dangerous, stupid women activity real men would never do and as the wasted centuries were over and humankind awoke out of the terrible nightmare of the unnecessary Middle Ages, the first average writers had the easy stand of being the only person writing in a genre or even just one of 5 to 10 authors sold at all. That´s what I call a monopoly,
And the authors were idealized and glorified, mixed up with patriotism and national pride, made superstars, it was the first wave of endless Bieber fever for all ages.
Both factors contributed to a romanticized idealization of works that are just your average reading if nothing else is out there, but nothing one would read with flow and enthusiasm, more with a meh attitude instead of watching TV, social interactions, or other wastes of lifetime.
The dawn of the use of social criticism as main plot element while overusing the modern readers' tolerance for suspension of disbelief
by making the wThe dawn of the use of social criticism as main plot element while overusing the modern readers' tolerance for suspension of disbelief
by making the whole story a bit too unrealistic optimistic and too full of coincidences, a kind of trademark of Dickens work as he didn´t MacGuffined and Chekhoved enough or mixed different plotlines to make it look more compelling. It would also help if it would be a bit less wooden, stiff, and more dynamic, but not everybody can be a Jane Austen or Mark Twain and it´s not bad, just not the work of a literary genius, but of a person trying to send a message at any cost.
Full of subjective real life inspirations It´s possibly one of Dickens most autobiographical works, as the had to endure poverty and see the dark sides of society firsthand, but instead of getting bitter, his work became a torchlight of the importance of staying human and positive under the worst conditions while each normal person would have already relinquished or had a mental breakdown.
Subjective reading preferences for English speaking authors I´m just once again realizing how much I enjoy UK/US classics and literature in general while avoiding especially Central Europe and I have a controversial and very unfriendly theory I already keep repeating throughout my reviewer career and it feels like a rant is coming up.
The review now seems to escalate to trolling against European literature, it must have something to do with bias and stream of consciousness, sorry for that.
There are no past or current European equivalents Dickens is an institution and shows that, already in the 19th century, UK/US authors dominated the creation of entertaining, good works of fiction. Sorry, Continental Europe, much eccentric philosophical blah yadda and deeper meaning literature just isn´t as entertaining as all the UK/US works, one of the reasons I hardly ever read European authors. Something with fantastic realism and cultural heritage went terribly wrong and created a reading culture and literature notorious for its boring, reader hostile, and arrogant sociopathic style, absolutely not caring about what the vast majority of readers like. Shame on you. Ok, if I can´t sleep or want to make myself angry and sad it´s the literature of choice, but in all other cases, no thank you. The funny thing is that it´s the same situation now as it was hundreds of years ago, European literature just sucks, and the snobby attitude towards pseudo intellectual garbage or poorly written trivial literature seems to have epigenetically poisoned most countries. And transformed them into toxic literature wastelands fueled by the tears and screams of the poor pupils and students forced to read this trash while the same happy students in English speaking countries can enjoy great entertainment as part of their education.
Look at the completely different approaches: European writer: I want to make high brow, over the top, eccentric, weird, impossible to understand Nobel prize material, glorify myself and my intellect, and integrate much of my personal bias in it to impress critics with similar, restricted mindsets. UK/US writer: I want to use the rules of the writing game to create epic, timeless pieces that are both entertaining and have a message. If someone would create music or paintings the same way, one could immediately hear and see the ugliness and the underlying incompetence, sadly that´s not possible with literature.
Personal nightmare I imagine waking up in purgatory, first thinking it´s heaven because it´s an endless library, then realizing it´s just Eurotrash literature, laughing louder and louder while madness kicks in and crying takes over in waves over my tormented soul while the demons are coming closer to fix me to A Clockwork Orange style force reading machine.
Mario the lone bookwolf
>
Books:
dickens-charles
(4)
Loading...
