The History of Pendennis

by William Makepeace Thackeray

This is a reproduction of the original artefact. Generally these books are created from careful scans of the original. This allows us to preserve the book accurately and present it in the way the author intended. Since the original versions are generally quite old, there may occasionally be certain imperfections within these reproductions. We're happy to make these classics available again for future generations to enjoy!

Genres: Classics, Fiction, Historical Fiction, 19th Century, British Literature, Novels, Victorian

Paperback

First published December 1, 1850

About the author

William Makepeace Thackeray was an English novelist, satirist, and journalist, best known for his keen social commentary and his novel Vanity Fair (1847–1848). His works often explored themes of ambition, hypocrisy, and the moral failings of British society, making him one of the most significant literary figures of the Victorian era.
Born in Calcutta, British India, he was sent to England for his education after his father’s death. He attended Charterhouse School, where he developed a distaste for the rigid school system, and later enrolled at Trinity College, Cambridge. However, he left without earning a degree, instead traveling in Europe and pursuing artistic ambitions.
After losing much of his inheritance due to bad investments, Thackeray turned to writing for a living. He contributed satirical sketches, essays, and stories to periodicals such as Fraser’s Magazine and Punch, gradually building a reputation for his sharp wit and keen observational skills. His breakthrough came with Vanity Fair, a panoramic satire of English society that introduced the enduring character of Becky Sharp, a resourceful and amoral social climber.
Thackeray’s later novels, including Pendennis (1848–1850), The History of Henry Esmond (1852), and The Newcomes (1853–1855), continued to explore the lives of the English upper and middle classes, often focusing on the contrast between personal virtue and social ambition. His historical novel Henry Esmond was particularly praised for its detailed 18th-century setting and complex characterization.
In addition to his fiction, Thackeray was a noted public speaker and essayist, delivering lectures on the English humorists of the 18th century and on The Four Georges, a critical look at the British monarchy.
Despite his literary success, he lived with personal struggles, including the mental illness of his wife, Isabella, which deeply affected him. He remained devoted to his two daughters and was known for his kindness and generosity among his friends and colleagues.
His works remain widely read, appreciated for their incisive humor, rich characterizations, and unflinching critique of social pretensions.

Reviews

[Gary Inbinder · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pendennis, an early Victorian semi-autobiographical Bildungsroman that might be compared to its more famous contemporary, Dickens’ David Copperfield, is a prime example of the novels Henry James deprecated as “loose, baggy monsters.” Long to the point of exhaustion, the novel’s filled with numerous characters who appear, disappear, and then reappear under the most incredible circumstances; plots, subplots and counterplots; ludicrous coincidences and chance encounters; dealing, double and triple dealing; long-winded explanations of characters’ motives; purple prose, and cloying sentimentality; and a jumble of dangling loose ends to be gathered together in a denouement that affronts sanity with the sublime indifference of the Marx Brothers.

At times I speculated, while rubbing my weary eyes, whether Thackeray had been paid by the word. And yet, scattered here and there, were scenes of ingeniously crafted brilliance detailed in stunning prose: a ball, a night at Vauxhall Gardens, the vivid descriptions of life in the English countryside, of University Life in the 1830s, of the Inns of Court, the London Underworld and Debtor’s Prison, of the end of Coaching Days and the coming of the railroad, and throughout this great crazy quilt the portraits of numerous unforgettable minor characters who come out of the wings to play, at one time or another, a major role before exiting the stage never to be seen again.

Is Pendennis then a loose, baggy monster? Perhaps, but in my opinion it’s a most fascinating and endearing beast for those brave enough to enter its lair and spend some time in its company.

[John Purcell · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am so sad. This book was my friend and now it is finished. If you love Vanity Fair and want to meet Thackeray, here is your chance.

[K. · Rating 4 out of 5]

If I write anything in the review, it will contain spoilers. So, if you care, don't read it ;)

A fascinating little tidbit from the back cover of my edition, which created a lot to ponder for me as I read the book: "Pendennis is one of the earliest and greatest of the Victorian Bildungsromanen--introspective novels chronicling the author's growth to maturity under a thin veil of fiction. On coming across Pendennis in later life, Thackeray was heard to mutter: 'It is very like. Yes, it is very like.'"

This is a really long, but quite delightful story of a spoiled young man growing up into a pretty decent man. Fortunately for Pen, the protagonist, his life turned out better than Thackeray's own had done, at least in terms of familial relationships. Perhaps this was an alternate ending for him, a little "what might have been."

It seemed to me that for the most part Thackeray was honest about Pen, and always was very willing to point out his character flaws and point us unmistakably to just who was Pen's own greatest enemy. At times I thought he waxed a little too poetical about Pen's virtues, but it really was quite an even picture of a real human trying to make his way in the world. If I found Pen's mother and Laura a little too good at times, it was probably due to my wishing someone could possibly think I'm as angelic ;) But Thackeray must have been painting pictures of women he had loved and respected completely.

The book had a lot of themes good for thought. Loyalty (Warrington); Self-sacrifice (Warrington, Mrs. Pendennis, Laura, even Bows); What a good mentor can do for a self-absorbed person (Warrington); When in Rome (Major Pendennis, Blanche); What vice leads to (Sir Francis Clavering, Costigan); Friendship (Warrington, Foker, even Strong); Patience & forbearance (Warrington, Laura); Honesty to & honor for self & others (Warrington, Laura, Pen); Selfishness, worldliness, skepticism, cynicism (Pen, Blanche, the Major).

The story of growing up & learning what would really make him (Pen) happy (instead of what he had thought would make him happy) was well done and the moral was clear without being overbearing or too in-your-face (mostly). It was a fun, easy, although long, read. Glad I did & glad I had read "The Newcomes" first (even though that was sort of backwards) so that I knew Pen would turn out okay.

Usually, the longer the book, the better (for me). But this one really could probably have been much shorter, really, probably half. Sometimes the "Pen getting snared by the Artful Blanche" just felt way too drawn out. You think he's safe, and then he's not, etc a few times over. It just seemed that it could have been wrapped up in a much shorter & more concise way.

All in all, this book was much more to the point than "The Newcomes" and much more enjoyable, it really was a delightful story. I love Thackeray's humor & his obvious willingness to poke fun at himself & teach a moral by helping us not to do what he did. Despite his sometime stupidity, Pen was a loveable character. I only wish Thackeray had written a book about Warrington, because I liked him best of all.

--
Some fun:

"What a pang it is (to be lovesick)! I never knew a man die of love, certainly, but I have known a twelve-stone man go down to nine stone five under a disappointed passion, so that pretty nearly a quarter of him may be said to have perished: and that is no small portion." (165)

"Half a fellows pangs at losing a woman result from vanity more than affection. To be left by a woman is the deuce and all, to be sure; but look how easily we leave 'em." (166)

"What a deal of grief, care & other harmful excitement, does a healthy dullness and cheerful insensibility avoid! Nor do I mean to say that Virtue is not Virtue because it is never tempted to go astray; only that dullness is a much finer gift than we give it credit for being, and that some people are very lucky whom Nature has endowed with a good store of that great anodyne." (182)

"A man will lay down his head, or peril his life for his honour, but let us be shy how we ask him to give up his ease or his heart's desire. Very few of us can bear that trial." (211)

"We are not about to go through Pen's young academical career very minutely. Alas, the life of such boys does not bear telling altogether. I wish it did. I ask you, does yours?" (211)

"Many a young man fails by that species of vanity called shyness, who might, for the asking, have his will." (298)

"I doubt whether the wisest of us know what our own motives are, and whether some of the actions we are the very proudest will not surprise us when we trace them, as we shall one day, to their source." (392)

"Don't be too eager, or too confident, or too worldly, my boy." (572)

"Pen was sarcastic and dandified with he had been in the company of great folks; he could not help imitating some of their airs and tones, and having a most lively imagination, mistook himself for a person of importance very easily." (580)

"His worldly tactics and diplomacy, his satire and knowledge of the world, could not bear the test of her purity, he felt somehow." (855)

"All this kindness Laura had acquired, not by arts, not by any flattery, but by the simple force of good-nature, and by the blessed gift of pleasing and being pleased." (857)

"...what a mockery life was, and how men refuse happiness when they may have it; or, having it, kick it down; or barter it, with their eyes open, for a little worthless money or beggarly honour..." (863)

[Geoff]

From Gary Inbinder's review:

"Pendennis, an early Victorian semi-autobiographical Bildungsroman that might be compared to its more famous contemporary, Dickens’ David Copperfield, is a prime example of the novels Henry James deprecated as “loose, baggy monsters.” Long to the point of exhaustion, the novel’s filled with numerous characters who appear, disappear, and then reappear under the most incredible circumstances; plots, subplots and counterplots; ludicrous coincidences and chance encounters; dealing, double and triple dealing; long-winded explanations of characters’ motives; purple prose, and cloying sentimentality; and a jumble of dangling loose ends to be gathered together in a denouement that affronts sanity with the sublime indifference of the Marx Brothers."

SOLD.

[Charlotte K · Rating 5 out of 5]

Pendennis is a guilty pleasure for readers who love 19th century British literature about wealthy aristocrats who make bad choices, but also know that they probably should be reading French literature, where everyone is poor and miserable and the injustices of the world are called more clearly into light.
I enjoyed every one of the 800 pages of Pendennis. I'll probably go back to reading miserable French novels now, or maybe contemporary fiction about real, pressing issues, but I'll always look back on this vacation fondly.

[Rachel · Rating 2 out of 5]

Well. It's a bit like Vanity Fair, except not nearly so good, and with a really annoying hero. I mean, you don't want a perfect hero, but on the other hand you don't want a spineless snobbish idiot with no redeeming features at all, like Arthur Pendennis. Didn't warm to him. Didn't think he should be rewarded with the best girl at the end. Some of the minor characters are quite amusing, but not enough to make up for the rottenness at the core.

Oh and the introduction was annoying too. The editor seemed to think Thackeray was better than George Eliot (nonsense), and almost as good as Joyce. Which is unfair. He's much better than Joyce.

[Dan · Rating 5 out of 5]

2025: Screencapped a great episode of Victorians talking about kissing in a jokily euphemistic way on this most recent readthrough: “You stupid old woman,” said the Doctor, “when I am gone, you shall marry whomsoever you like. I will leave orders in my will, my dear, to that effect: and I’ll bequeath a ring to my successor, and my Ghost shall come and dance at your wedding.”

“It is cruel for a clergyman to talk so,” the lady answered, with a ready whimper: but these little breezes used to pass very rapidly over the surface of the Doctor’s domestic bliss; and were followed by a great calm and sunshine. The Doctor adopted a plan for soothing Mrs. Portman’s ruffled countenance, which has a great effect when it is tried between a worthy couple who are sincerely fond of one another; and which, I think, becomes ‘John Anderson’ at three-score, just as much as it used to do when he was a black-haired young Jo of five-and-twenty.

2023: Very funny to see the 2016 version of me, brain not yet fully warped by Victorian fiction, failing to enjoy this book that I have now read and loved for a third time. Going into this brain unwarped I think it's easy to miss the ways in which Pen is—as Thackeray repeatedly insists—unheroic, because in the end he'll do something that is close enough to heroism to leave the book without any real teeth. But Thackeray really does want us to compare him to Laura and Warrington and find him wanting, just as Pen does himself, and accept him as a brother all the same.

Speaking of Laura, I have an axe to grind on the skulls of people who find her boring, one-dimensional, etc. She's very funny! She repeatedly gets the upper hand on Pen by coming to understand him before he understands himself. And while other people in the book sometimes see her as a simplistic, natural angel of the hearth, Thackeray makes it clear in the book that it is a real struggle or act of will to be that way—one that he sees as noble but doesn't shield from his usual gentle irony. I'm thinking specifically of her push for Pen's sacrificial marriage to Blanche to happen as quickly as possible. Thackeray makes a note of that without pressing very hard on it, and I think he's contrasting her struggle to remove a very real temptation to Pen's more languid way of living with temptation and assuming it will never get too bad. The way she reacts to realizing that she loves Warrington is similar; it may seem like a missish cause for alarm, but it's real alarm, and she acts on it rather than floating above it.

She also gets off the line of the novel, about (and it's weird that Thackeray knew about this) how people talk on Twitter: "And if you do not win fame, what then? You own it is vanity, and you can live very happily without it. I must not pretend to advise; but I take you at your own word about the world; and as you own it is wicked, and that it tires you, ask you why you don’t leave it?"

Warrington has a good one too, same subject: “Stuff!” growled [Warrington], “you fancied you were getting bald the other day, and bragged about it as you do about everything. But you began to use the bear’s-grease pot directly the hairdresser told you; and are scented like a barber ever since.”

“You are Diogenes,” [Pendennis] answered, “and you want every man to live in a tub like yourself. Violets smell better than stale tobacco, you grizzly old cynic.” But Mr. Pen was blushing whilst he made this reply to his unromantical friend, and indeed cared a great deal more about himself still than such a philosopher perhaps should have done. Indeed, considering that he was careless about the world, Mr. Pen ornamented his person with no small pains in order to make himself agreeable to it, and for a weary pilgrim as he was, wore very tight boots and bright varnish.

2016 review [three stars, like an idiot]: This is the genuine article of all the bad things people say about Victorian fiction, with a sainted mother and lots of authorial intrusion and not very much plot at all, but after the first quarter (which is, I accept, the size of many much better books) I was entertained, and Thackeray's humor and moral imagination shows through after Pendennis comes of age and becomes a lucky prig. Not really a three star book as I look back at it, but if I weren't compelled by it... well I like to think I'm not dumb enough to read 800 pages of what I am experiencing in my heart as a two star book.

[Preetam Chatterjee · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an extended, slackly organised novel, in which the author, between events, stops to chat and moralize with the reader. There is present a robust stress on ethics, on goodness and truth, as opposed to a selfish, a scheming, attitude which stresses material wealth and social advancement. The most unfailing leitmotif, brought out with piercing irony, is the self-conscious, unbending snobbery among classes in England, and the constant efforts of the middle class to become noblemen and aristocrats. This subject is epitomised in the character of Major Pendennis, but it is also demonstrated in the experiences of young Arthur Pendennis, who is torn between his uncle's efforts to assist him to augment socially and his mother's struggles to keep him natural and pristine. Read it in 2004.

[Kuszma · Rating 4 out of 5]

Türelem – nos, az kell ehhez a monstrumhoz. Főhősünk, Arthur Pendennis, a nem túl gazdag és nem túl sziporkázó főhős 18 éves, mikor először találkozunk vele e könyv lapjain, és a 175. oldalig kell várni, amíg az író egyáltalán eljuttatja őt az egyetemre. (Megjegyz.: nem az a megfejtés, hogy évvesztes a srác.) Erre mondta egy ismerősöm, hogy azért bámulatos: ilyen keveset ilyen sok szóval elmondani! Nevezett Pendennis uraság amúgy fairoaksi birtokán éldegél édesanyjával és Laura nevezetű csodabájos rokonával – aki mindazonáltal elég távoli rokon ahhoz, hogy az olvasó nagy összegben le merje fogadni: előbb-utóbb egymáséi lesznek. Aztán Pendennis pár száz oldal után elhagyja szülőföldjét, és a cselekmény Londonban folytatódik. Aminek következtében üdvösen fel is pörög, úgyhogy nekem senki egy rossz szót ne szóljon az ipari forradalomról meg az urbanizációról, ha ezek nincsenek, ott döglene meg az olvasó az unalomtól a kies angol vidék eseménytelenségében. (Megjegyz.: bennem felvetődött a kérdés, hogy rendben van, Arthur különböző kalandokat él át a nagyvárosban – de mit csinál addig a Fairoaksban ragadt Laura? Gondolom, nagyjából semmit, mert nem az a dolga, hogy csináljon valamit. Legfeljebb horgol pár terítőt. Agyagozik. Playstationnal csapatja agyon az időt. Hibernálva van, mint Ripley az Alien-ben. Mindegy az*.)

Mindazonáltal el kell fogadni, hogy ez a könyv nem elsősorban történetet mesél el. Alig vannak benne dickensi drámai jelenetek és színes dickensi karakterek – az olvasónak az az érzése, hogy ha a szereplők bele is keverednek valami hallatlan konfliktusba, valahogy mindig sikerül lágyan kitáncolniuk belőle. Sokkal inkább ráérős tabló ez a vidéki és nagyvárosi Anglia mindennapjairól, újarisztokratákról és tősgyökeres lordokról, katonákról, cselédekről, lelkészekről és patikusokról – azokról, akiket Thackeray oly jól ismer. Mert meg merem kockáztatni: e regény relatív eseménytelensége annak is betudható, hogy végtelenül személyes. Nem annyira szórakoztatni akarja az olvasót, mint inkább vallomást tenni. Túl sok olyan elem van ebben a könyvben, ami egyértelmű párhuzamot mutat Thackeray életeseményeivel: a fiatalon elvert családi örökség, az anyagi problémák, vagy az újságírók és irodalmárok világa. Az volt az érzésem, hogy Thackeray ugyanúgy saját ifjúkori tévelygéseinek állít emléket e könyvben, mint ahogy az íróvá váló Pendennis is önmagát írja meg regénybeli regényében, a Walter Lorraine-ben. És ez a fajta (képzelt vagy valós) személyesség sokat hozzátesz ehhez a könyvhöz.

Szóval ahogy az a klasszikus gigászoknál lenni szokott: amint elfelejtettem a rohanó időt meg a többi posztmodern fantáziát, finom kis élvezetet volt e ráérős prózán átkorzózni. Nem tagadom, voltak pillanatok, amikor egyszerűen leragadt tőle a szemem, de ha az ember befejezi, és egy nap múltán visszatekint rá, már nem az unalom jut eszébe, hanem valami kellemes, bágyadt jóérzés: mintha lankás zöld mezőkön barangolt volna a minap. Nem nagy hegycsúcsok és szédítő szakadékok kápráztatták el, csak valami nyugodt időtlenség. Valami elegáns puhaság. Jó ám az is.

* Amúgy elkelt volna ebben a könyvben egy rendes, igazán kimunkált, élő nőalak. Néha Laurában, néha Amoryban is mintha fellángolt volna valami, de összességében végig Arthur függelékeiként funkcionáltak.

[Karen Eterovich · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent, Dickens for adults! Very funny, very satisfying, another world and yet not.

[Jeremy · Rating 2 out of 5]

I have to admit that I couldn't get through this book. Well, I couldn't get through the second volume. Perhaps the change of seasons did me in; it's hard for me to curl up with a dusty victorian tome when the air outside is so fresh and inviting. Plus, I don't think this novel is nearly as good as Vanity Fair. The characters just are not as interesting or accessible, there are too many of them, the plot flags and seems to repeat similar story lines. The only highlight, other than Thackery's prose (man, it's good) is the aging Major Pendennis, who spends several hours a day putting on make up, powdering his wig and having his boots shined just so...all in a vain attempt to recall his glorious past of hobnobbing with the in-crowd. He doesn't realize, sadly, that he's becoming a caricature. All very poignant, but not enough to get me through. On to the summer reading list...

[Pauline Wharton · Rating 3 out of 5]

If I said I'd read all of this book, I'd be telling a lie. It took me ages to read - which I didn't mind - and that was skipping at least half of it. I'm not blaming Thackeray - that's the way novels were at the time - but, maybe because of advanced age, I really haven't the patience to follow all the inessential meanderings of the writer. A pity, because I think I would have enjoyed it - if it had been shorter. The main character isn't specially sympathetic; his mother and 'sister' are saintly Victorian female stereotypes; and though there are some interesting characters, there are so many of them, it's hard to remember who's who.But there are parts of it which are excellent, and kept me glued to the page. So don't start it unless you have plenty of time, and can cope with characteristics of Victorian fiction. Then you may find something rewarding.

[Kat · Rating 2 out of 5]

As for the story - after muddling through this book to the end, I wasn't rewarded. I just didn't care about Pen. Laura had no personality it is true, but you actually felt for George and wanted him to be happy. I didn't feel for Pen, how his mom and Laura thought him to be so wonderful was silly. In fact I was hoping he would end up marrying Blanche and then having to deal with that and somehow George and Laura could end up together.

As for the writing itself - there were some great quotes along the way, and some great comments/observations that Thackeray made of people in general, so I guess that made it worth those lost hours.

[Robert burke · Rating 5 out of 5]

Don't know how many people will like this novel or even Thackeray. Some say he is way too 'wordy', but what gems of wisdom we find among those words. If you like fast reading Victorian novels, you won't like it. If you like a novel that you would read every word and that flows seamlessly, this is for you. We read of Arthur first love at eighteen and Thackeray makes us think back to our first love. We grow with Arthur though his life and think about ourselves. Thackeray is the one author that can relax the reader and make them forget about the modern world.

[Patrick · Rating 4 out of 5]

The History of Pendennis has got to be the loosest baggiest monster in all of Victorian fiction, but is pretty damned entertaining for all that. It foreshadows contemporary television series: Every “season” (300 pages or so) you get new characters, new storylines, it’s almost like a different book! For those with any interest in mid-Victorian life, the novel abounds in details of entertainments and festivities of the era, coffee-house and restaurant culture, and much more besides: It’s bottomless.

[Shelby Rollenhagen · Rating 2 out of 5]

Although The History of Pendennis is well written and a good read, it is long and a bit of a challenge to get through at times. I would recommend reading it, but there is nothing fast paced throughout the novel.
It is a good example of a literary Bildungsroman.

[Monica · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was my second foray into Thackery after sampling his wit and his characterisation skills of his sprawling epic Vanity Fair. At the time of reading Vanity Fair I had the luxury of what seemed like sprawling time as it was during lockdown, whereas this time, I had to do my reading alongside work, social activities & life. It was a much more cumbersome endeavour for this reason, but also because Pendennis lacks the more sustained piquancy of Vanity Fair.

Most importantly it lacks the scandalous female characters which add the extra juiciness which is much needed in a Victorian novel. Secondly, the male young main character, Pendennis which is a fictionalised version of a young Thackery is not very loved by the author. I imagine it is because it is a sort of semi-biographical endeavour and a sharp witted clever author like Thackery would be most critical of his own self. But bottom line is that Thackery really doesn't think much of Arthur Pendennis. As such, is is tedious to follow him in the various stages of his young life.

Thirdly, there is much padding and characters which are unilateral, stock characters on the male side, either comic, or drunk, or on the women side, virtuous with a capital V, as such Boring with a capital B. There is one exception and that is Arthur Pendennis' uncle, the aging bachelor, Major Pendennis and all the scenes which pertain to his club, his mores and the Victorian London life are sprinkled with Thackery power of observation, parody and charm. For anyone coming to Thackery, I would say definitely do no start here.

I rather hope that there are other novels that are more in the vain of Vanity Fair that I can venture into as I know Thackery was one of Trollope's most beloved friends and icons. A 2.75 stars.

[Susan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Vanity Fair is still his masterpiece. This goes on far too long and by the end some of the plot turns seem added on just to make the book longer. As a result they're unbelievable. It doesn't help that the main character, Arthur Pendennis, is unlikeable and self-centered and the main female characters his mother and Laura, the girl who was raised alongside him, are painted as saints who adore him. Also, there's the accepted notion in the book that a girl of a lower class is naturally inferior not just economically but intellectually and therefore not worthy of Arthur. This is partially a reflection of the period the book was written but other writers of the period didn't necessarily share this opinion. In any case it really rubbed me the wrong way. I'm not sorry I read the book; the insight into the literary world and the character of Arthur's unçle held my interest but I won't be re-reading it.

[Jenny · Rating 2 out of 5]

I became thoroughly sick of this book’s protagonist and gave up hoping his character would ever develop. The arrogant little *@$ just became an older version of himself. Reportedly a very autobiographical story, Thackeray’s self indulgent tone became completely nauseating.

I remember enjoying VanityFair but in the debate between whether the two contemporary authors, Thackeray or Dickens, is the better author- I’ll take Dickens. Even making allowance for the time period in which it was written this book is thoroughly misogynistic and filled with class prejudice. Debatably made worse by the author’s and protagonist’s complete conviction of his own “open-minded” superiority. Ugh

[Lucy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I don't think Thackeray liked people very much. The 'good' characters are so unrealistic, Arthur's mother especially - he's much better at the ones he can despise like Costigan. Oh, but wouldn't Anthony Trollope have made a wonderful thing of Pen and Warrington?
This book goes on far too long and he makes it quite clear to the reader that he's rushing the end, which is frankly ludicrous. Ah well, Trollope had barely got going at this point in time, so comparisons are odorous.....

[Perry Whitford · Rating 4 out of 5]

It took the author two years of labour to produce this semi-autobiographical tower block of a Bildungsroman. It may take you as long to read it but there are worse ways to spend the time, i.e. reading Trollope.

Thackeray's young Pendennis is the kind of generous, guileless, son of an upwardly mobile tradesman with pretentions of gentility and a doting mother, who falls in love with the first pretty woman he sees in a vast number of Victorian novels.

True enough he does exactly that, with an indifferent Irish actress named Emily Costigan, daughter of Captain Costigan, a seedy old raconteur for whom 'fact and fiction reeled together in his muzzy, whiskified brain.'

This injudicious amour is just the first mistake in a series of youthful gaffs from a refreshingly less than sympathetic protagonist. He's not a rogue, far from it, but he has plenty of faults:

'this lad was very weak as well as very impetuous, very vain as well as very frank, and if of a generous disposition, not a little selfish in the midst of his profuseness, and also rather fickle, as all eager pursuers of self-gratification are.'

Pendennis becomes a dandy and scapegrace at college, failing his exams ('He had slept, and the tortoise had won the race') and running up huge debts for his widowed, adoring mother to settle. What he really needed at this stage was a good clip round the ear.

After retaking his exams with success, young Arthur moves to London and studies for the Bar while making a living as a journalist. His further romantic entanglements include Betsy 'Blanche' Amory, a wealthy and capricious flirt, and Fanny Bolton, a pretty girl from the lower-classes (cue the obligatory patronising attention to dropped h's etc.)

Not as ripe as Dickens, nor as tedious as Trollope, Thackeray struck me as splitting the distance between his two contemporaries. He addressed the reader frequently, on a couple of occasions even upbraiding the illustrator for the lack of fidelity in his character studies!

The plotting was mercifully free from lazy coincidences (apart from a minor one near the end.) Certainly he couldn't resist condescending his lower-class characters, as all his Victorians did, but he served up the same treatment to the toffs. In fact I speculated that Arthur's greatest enemy referred to in the title may actually have been his uncle, Major Pendennis, a slavish ass-kisser of the aristocracy.

On a sidenote, never before have I come across an author so enamored by the verb 'sate.'

At just under a thousand pages you may want to think twice about reading it. On balance I enjoyed it enough to commit to giving Vanity Fair a shot one day. Here's an example of Thackeray's humour, topic the perils of imitation:

'has not the grave closed but lately upon poor Tom Bickerstaff, who having no more imagination than Mr. Joseph Hume, looked in the glass and fancied himself like Shakspeare? shaved his forehead so as farther to resemble the immortal bard, wrote tragedies incessantly, and died perfectly crazy—actually perished of his forehead?'

[J · Rating 4 out of 5]

The History of Pendennis, Book 1. This is Thackeray’s semi-autobiographical Bildungsroman. As in Vanity Fair we have Thackeray’s assured and playful voice (occasionally speaking directly to the reader) describing various follies of human nature, but Thackeray’s personality is more directly present in this work. Pendennis brings to mind a better known contemporaneous Bildungsroman, David Copperfield, for comparison. In Dickens’ work we admire its endearing protagonist, the innocent humor, and its fairy tale like quality. In The History of Pendennis the protagonist is more flawed and foolish, there is more cynicism, and the humor is more often sarcastic or tongue in cheek. I find this work funnier, more true to life, and more adult. More than the plot or characters, I treasure Thackeray’s entertaining company and his penchant for skewering pomposity.

The History of Pendennis, book two. Arthur Pendennis Jr. slowly matures and makes his way in the world. Thackeray continues to illustrate his society’s preoccupation with social status and gainful marriage. I was impressed by how many characters are kept in play and how some minor characters introduced in book one return in book two to make their mark. The story becomes quite dramatic towards its conclusion. There’s sentimentality towards the end too, but it is balanced by enough cynicism to maintain a sense of realism. I will miss Thackeray’s companionship and his colorful world.

[Kezia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not a five-star novel but well worth it.

The nice thing about serialized novels (originally published in monthly installments, to keep the public buying) is they are in tidy, digestible chapters of roughly equal length. The less nice thing is there can be some "filler" to stretch things out, so I have to agree with others, this drags in places, and some sections that are deadly dull.

But plenty of memorable characters--some pathetic, some awful, some charming--keep you turning pages. I happened to think Pen is one of those characters: sometimes pathetic, sometimes awful, sometimes charming. I sense an antipathy to Pen here, but probably these same reviewers loved Holden Caulfield and what's-his-name from Coupland's Generation X and multiple other examples of post-adolescent ennui. Sure, Pen's been spoiled by his mama, but that's not really his fault, nor is it his fault he's grown cynical about love and romance after being dumped by Emily and rejected by Laura. But we know he has a heart in there, because he makes himself deathly ill pining for Fanny.

The notes in this edition are not very illuminating unless you're interested in the addresses of London haberdashers in 1860, or obscure plays of Thackeray's time and the actresses he admired.

[Sophie · Rating 3 out of 5]

As I slogged through this 800+ page tome, I remembered a throwaway line from an old movie where a man claims Thackeray is his favorite novelist because he likes "an author who makes you work a little." Setting aside the oddity of that preference, I would say Thackeray is an author who makes you work a lot. In fact, I'm so worn out by the three-month effort of reading this book that I don't really know what I think about it anymore. I didn't really care for the main characters: Pendennis and his uncle Major Pendennis are far from admirable characters (Laura, on the other hand, is so angelic she's one-dimensional and unconvincing), and I was never really sure what all these many pages were in service of. What was I meant to be rooting for? Pen to (finally!) grow up and win the grand prize? (The girl raised as his sister, by the way. Ew.) By the end, Pendennis has grown up and improved a bit, so I guess that was the (bildungsroman) point of it (but whether he has it in him to make the saintly Laura happy is debatable). Anyway, I can now say I've read two Thackeray books, and I will immediately run back to authors who don't make me work quite so much.

[Andrew Noselli · Rating 3 out of 5]

In this entertaining and much-prized novel, William Makepeace Thackerary tells his autobiographical story of how he negotiated the hazards of the work-world, getting to be knowledgeable about the wiles of women without succumbing to them, and finally arrived at his position as a writer, a standpoint from which he was able to survey life as an observer and yet being able to live it over and over again. Three stars.

[Rachel Stevenson]

A Jane Austen marriage plot, but from the point of view of the man, and, because the book is so long, Penn must entangle with three unsuitable ladies rather than one, before he marries the suitable but drippy girl. 1000 pages just for a man to marry his step sister! These late Georgians liked to keep it in the family. Not half as much fun as Vanity Fair, but almost twice as long.

[Burns · Rating 4 out of 5]

Long. Good.

[Sean · Rating 3 out of 5]

Entertaining

[Chet Taranowski · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found this book entertaining. The author succeeded in creating an immersive fictional world.

[Profdave]

reading Thackeray is an intellectual effort well worth it! Brilliant mastery of the English language.