Episode I-II, Chapters 1-5, in which we become acquainted with the Pickwick Club

[Jonathan]

"...that illustrious man slowly mounted into the Windsor chair, on which he had been previously seated, and addressed the club himself had founded."

Members, please discuss the first 5 chapters of the Pickwick Papers here...

[Jonathan]

While Sketches by Boz disclosed Dickens' own observations of human scenes and behavior, he has now employed his characters to accomplish this for him. Thus, we have the great novelist's move from fact to fiction.

My initial impression is that the Pickwick Papers is a fictional account of what could otherwise have been a sequel to Sketches by Boz. Lacking a plot, its central theme is observations of the peculiarities, which can and do occur in everyday life. Most likely, we are blessed with those which have piqued the author's interest, and he is relating them through his characters. This is a movement away from Sketches, in which Dickens himself wrote his own observations down and drew a pretty detailed portrait, with some humorous strokes, of certain aspects of Victorian England. Sketches was Dickens writing directly to his readers, while Pickwick Papers is a story with fictional characters and perhaps more ridiculous occurrences, while maintaining its stay in the realm of realism.

[Jonathan]

The 4 main characters so far are distinguished by their interests in life:

Mr. Pickwick (In his own words) - "I am ruminating on the strange mutability of human affairs." Also called himself "An observer of human nature."

Mr. Snodgrass - Poetry

Mr. Winkle - The Sportsman

Portly Mr. Tupman (In his own words) - "Many fine women in this town, do you know, Sir?" While Mr. Pickwick's interests lie in human beings, Tupman's only lie in half of them.

[Christine PNW]

My first experience with The Pickwick Papers was through Louisa May Alcott's Little Women. The March girls had their own Pickwick club. IIRC, Jo was Pickwick, Beth was Tupman, Amy was Winkle, and I guess Meg was Snodgrass.

For me, it took a bit to get into the Pickwick Papers - I find books without a cohesive narrative to be difficult.

[Jonathan]

That's cool about the Pickwick Club finding its way into Little Women. Haven't read that one yet, although it's on my list. That gives me something to watch for in the book. Too funny.

[Jonathan]

I assure you, I will not be SEEN reading it, but I will read it.

[Jennifer]

Jonathan wrote: "I assure you, I will not be SEEN reading it, but I will read it."

Lol, that's the great thing about e-readers. People no longer have to hide or change the covers on books to avoid being seen reading something embarrassing.

[Jonathan]

The sad thing is I brought Wuthering Heights to work, and instead of having a copy such as Signet Classics, I had a copy which was adorned with a cover not at all unlike a Romantic novel. I was hoping anyone who witnessed me reading the book, understood that I was reading it because it was a "classic" despite the muscular man and damsel in distress on the front cover.

[Dieter]

Hi everybody and greetings to you all from Vienna from where I would like to share my thoughts on the Inimitable's first novel!

I really don't feel that the book is lacking a coherent narrative, more that its main character is a man whose life consists of observations. And the single purpose of the Pickwick Club in a way is collecting observations. So the whole construction of the novel enables Dickens to string together single episodes with the Club as a kind of framework.

Wasn't the book also published in installments in one of Dickens' magazines if I remember correctly?

Though the pace of the book is slow I think it's funny and clever, so I'm looking forward to what's coming!

[Jonathan]

Dieter wrote: "Hi everybody and greetings to you all from Vienna from where I would like to share my thoughts on the Inimitable's first novel!

I really don't feel that the book is lacking a coherent narrative, ..."

I think Christine was referring to the fact that this novel does not have "a problem" it is trying to solve or "a question" it is going to answer. A lot of his books do not have a plot or a major conflict. For example, David Copperfield is simply a fictional autobiography, in which David's life is the plot. This book is a fictional expose on the Posthumous Papers, in which the Pickwick Club is the plot.

Because of the way Dickens goes about things, because he is able to get across to his audiences in such a roundabout way, and suck you into the world that he has created with his words, he doesn't need a conventional plot.

I am reading The Law and the Lady by Wilkie Collins, and so far I am unimpressed. Everything he writes is on the surface, and he habitually insults the reader's intelligence by repeating things and harping on certain ideas that will prove to be important. Dickens is a master, he doesn't have to do this to absorb his readers' attention. I remember in David Copperfield, when Dickens dropped a small hint, one line about Lil' Emily's future. I got the point. He did not need to keep on saying, "This is important. Something will happen here. Reader beware!!" He just said something like, "I choose to remember her as she was then, not knowing the fate that would befall her." Or, something along those lines. This was a hint. You read it and you know there is some impending catastrophe looming over her life, yet you know not what. Compare that to Collins' overkill of, "The man who knew the secret looked at the book-case. I knew for sure the book-case was important." To summarize...Collins...overkill...Dickens...subtlety.

Mr. Inimitable, as someone has called him, has such a satirical, sarcastic voice that when he is poking fun at someone, the reader knows it. For example, in Episode II, when the Pickwicks were observing the soldiers' battle reenactment, the reader is given to understand that the author is having fun with his heroes. He doesn't feel the need to blatantly label this. He simply writes:

Mr. Pickwick gazed through his spectacles for an instant on the advancing mass, and then fairly turned his back and - we will not say fled; firstly, because it is an ignoble term, and secondly, because Mr. Pickwick's figure was by no means adapted for that mode of retreat...

He is poking harmless fun at the main character's false bravado as well as his physical capabilities. And, even though the situation they are involved in, observing a pretend battle, is not something one would pick up a book to read about, I am more drawn in by his observations and the eccentricities of his characters than I am by a murder mystery written by a lesser pen, even though there is a supposedly gripping plot. Suffice it to say, I don't need a great plot. I need a born genius, who says things with his pen, that no school can teach you to say, and who creates characters who will never fail to amuse you. That's why I like Dickens. Stephen King, John Grisham, Wilkie Collins, and everyone else can keep their well devised plots. I'll keep my Dickens!

[Jonathan]

Sub plots are important and it is these little tidbits, the lesser events in the main character's adventure, and the major events, like births, marriages, and deaths, in the less important characters' lives, make a story interesting and add the little spices to the author's recipe which make the story taste authentic. A lot of other authors stick too much to the major conflict, omitting the flavorful details, thus creating a story about a problem, instead of a story that sucks you into a world.

[Christine PNW]

Jonathan wrote: "Dieter wrote: "Hi everybody and greetings to you all from Vienna from where I would like to share my thoughts on the Inimitable's first novel!

I really don't feel that the book is lacking a coher..."

This is more or less what I meant. I enjoyed The Pickwick Papers, but I didn't love it. I much preferred David Copperfield.

[Jennifer]

Impressions so far: the Pickwickians are a rather naive group. They're kind and mean well and seem easy prey for scoundrels like "the stranger." Loved the episode with the horses - a nice bit of comedy. I don't have much else to say this early on.

[Jonathan]

The scene in which the post-chaise imploded was certainly a comical one. If any of you are familiar with the sitcom Seinfeld, a show about nothing, then I think we have found it's ancient influence. This is a book about nothing which habitually finds the absurd and ridiculous in everyday life to laugh at and make fun of.

At the battle reenactment, Snodgrass turns to Mr. Pickwick and asks, "We had better throw ourselves on our faces, hadn't we?" The fact that they do not act, but they first stop to reason these things out, that to an orinary human being would just be an instantaneous reaction, reminds me very much of the socially philosophical questions repeatedly asked by the characters in the aforementioned sitcom.

I can just see George asking Jerry, "What is the protocol on breakups? How many dates does it take to require a personal breakup as opposed to me being able to do it over the phone?" This is the same type of reasoning here between the Pickwick members. They don't just act, they question, and they ponder, until they find the right, socially acceptable, face-saving behavior in this and future situations.

[Jonathan]

Dickens' comedy is exhibited in the Stranger's quirky speech:

"Lots of money -- old girl -- pompous doctor -- not a bad idea -- good fun," were the intelligble sentences which issued from his lips.

Then, in a true pen-stroke of genius, the narrator echoes the stranger's style of speech in describing his movements:

...the stranger picked it up, and presented it - a smile - a bow - a curtsey - a few words of conversation.

Amusing, to say the least.

[Jonathan]

Dickensian foreshadowing is woven into the narrative of the duel in which Winkle and Snodgrass are en route for:

He started as they passed the angle of the trench -- it looked like a colossal grave.

Obviously, leaving the reader to think that a borrowed coat, an obnoxious stranger, and scorned doctor will be the death of this innocent and lovable character.

This is another case of Dickens finding something ridiculous in society, which would have been deemed commonplace by men and women of the Victorian Era, and as a matter of fact, in the face of a face saving refusal to apologize, Mr. Winkle saw the duel as a foregone conclusion of this perceived slight. When we read this, we might think it profoundly stupid that two men would, as it were, be compelled to fight to the death to preserve their respective honors. Taking into consideration the humorous way that Dickens sketches this, we are given to understand that the author found it just as ridiculous. Yet, to the rest of the world this was a fair, common, and reasonable practice. In perhaps the most famous duel of all time, U.S. Vice President Aaron Burr killed Alexander Hamilton over stark political differences and was never brought to trial for murder leaving us to suppose that duels were a reasonable means to resolve such differences on the field of honor. Dickens, a far more rational and civilized thinker, pokes fun at the silliness, which is eventually resolved harmlessly, without bullets fired, or blood shed, as the aggressor finally realizes, he has been involved in a case of mistaken identity.

[Jonathan]

Adam wrote: "Jonathan wrote: "The 4 main characters so far are distinguished by their interests in life:

Mr. Pickwick (In his own words) - "I am ruminating on the strange mutability of human affairs." Also cal..."
Adam, I think that the whole book will be disjointed. The Pickwick Club are just moving from place to place "observing", taking it all in. I wouldn't look for the events to build up to a climax, or for them to relate to one another. I am not "let down" by this. I appreciate this for being Dickens' first novel, and fictional version of Sketches by Boz, his first major release.

I really like it so far. How does everyone else feel?

[Cleo]

I've received my copy and am going to try to catch up with everyone.

I have to say ...... I JUST LOVE THIS BOOK!

To date I hadn't been a Dickens fan; this perhaps was the result of my first Dickens read being The Mystery of Edwin Drood, but recently he is rapidly rising in my estimation.

The Pickwick characters are so lively. First they reminded me of Bertie Wooster and his pals but soon I found that Jerome K. Jerome and Three Men in a Boat came more to mind.

[Jonathan]

Cleo, I think his later works were darker. A Tale of Two Cities certainly was. This is light-hearted fun, which I like.

[Cleo]

Jonathan wrote: "Cleo, I think his later works were darker. A Tale of Two Cities certainly was. This is light-hearted fun, which I like."

Yes, how true. I'm also reading Martin Chuzzlewit at the same time. I believe it was one of his earlier works and again, so far it is very amusing.

[Cleo]

So far I am noticing some minor differences between this novel and other later Dickens novels that I have read. While his descriptions are wonderful, I don’t find them as florid or grand. In addition I feel that the reader is being lead with a heavier hand, relying more on explanation than allowing the story to speak for itself.

“It will give me great pleasure, I am sure,” said Doctor Slammer, little suspecting who Tupman was.

Well, the reader already knows that Slammer, at this point, is ignorant of Tupman’s identity. Here Dickens states the obvious, which I found was unlike him.

It's not that obvious and it doesn't bother me at all but it is one aspect that I've noticed in comparison to his later works. Has anyone else noticed this?

[Jonathan]

The first story of his that I read was A Tale of Two Cities, in which almost everything was allusion and he released the reader's hand and left him to make these types of connections on his own. There is a small but evident language barrier between his writings and a 21st century American reader, as myself. Therefore, I appreciate the hand holding, spelling it out for me, kind of writing prevalent here and in his other earlier works. Notwithstanding, I loathe this type of overkill found in other works by writers who are easier to follow, such as his friend and contemporary Wilkie Collins, who in The Law and the Lady held the reader's hand so tight that mine still aches a fortnight after finishing it.

[Cleo]

Jonathan wrote: ".... such as his friend and contemporary Wilkie Collins, who in The Law and the Lady held the reader's hand so tight that mine still aches a fortnight after finishing it. ..."

*** grin ****

Yes, I read some of your comments. I considered reading The Law and the Lady and ended up reading The Woman in White. I'm glad I did. Collins is nowhere near Dickens in ability; I approached TWiW as a type of gothic mystery novel and was not disappointed. He had me page-turning for about 75% of the novel, yet at the end I found myself wanting him to just stop the madness. After all, how many tragedies, follies and dark menacing figures can accost the main characters in the short period the novel covers? Really! So it is definitely worth the read but as "classic fluff" and not as serious literature, at least IMO (apologies to any Collins fans!)

[Jonathan]

Cleo wrote: "Jonathan wrote: ".... such as his friend and contemporary Wilkie Collins, who in The Law and the Lady held the reader's hand so tight that mine still aches a fortnight after finishing it. ..."

**..."

So far, everything I have read of Dickens, no matter what I have heard of the book beforehand, I have always been left thinking, "I can't believe it was that good." However, reading my first Collins book, the Law and the Lady, I was left wondering, "I can't believe it wasn't better." I have thought this about Hemingway's books too. I don't know. I just like Dickens style and especially his sense of humor in his earlier works like this one.

[Pamela]

Jonathan wrote: "The sad thing is I brought Wuthering Heights to work, and instead of having a copy such as Signet Classics, I had a copy which was adorned with a cover not at all unlike a Romantic novel. I was hop..."
You need an ereader. Then, no one knows what you're reading.

[Pamela]

Dieter wrote: "Hi everybody and greetings to you all from Vienna from where I would like to share my thoughts on the Inimitable's first novel!

I really don't feel that the book is lacking a coherent narrative, ..."

I agree with you. I felt exactly the same.

[Jonathan]

Yeah, I love The Pickwick Papers. Dickens is often slammed for not having/developing a plot in his early works. I also like to say this in his defense. Dickens was not simply trying to tell a story, he was creating a world. What some view as useless details, or observations as they are called here, are actually tiny brushstrokes which the master has used to bring his canvas to life.

[Jonathan]

I wouldn't say that. Oliver Twist is almost a fictional biography on Oliver. There is no central problem that the characters are trying to solve, nor a big question they are trying to answer. David Copperfield and Great Expectations fall into this category as well. There is no plot in a conventional since. The main character is the plot. Martin Chuzzlewit, Little Dorrit, and A Tale of Two Cities are a little bit different because they focus more on the problem than one specific character. Like Oliver Twist's plot is Oliver, The Pickwick Papers' plot is the Pickwick Club. Now, this is unconventional, they say. But, since a lot of the first novelists wrote this way, such as Henry Fielding, I beg to differ. The new way, where a central problem dominates a story, that is unconventional, because that style came after, Jane Austen excepted.

[Everyman]

Jonathan wrote: "I assure you, I will not be SEEN reading it, but I will read it."

You'll be sorry. At least in my opinion. I tried to read it for another book group, got two pages in and couldn't stomach it. It read, to me, like a cup of very weak coffee sweetened with four tablespoons of sugar and five packets of saccharin.

But I do know lots of people who love the book. Which is good -- without differences, Goodreads would be a mighty dull place.

[Everyman]

Adam wrote: "Oh but there is conflict in David Copperfield! It simply has a series of conflicts that become convoluted and intertwined. It's one of Dickens' trademark devices that he provides sub-plots and coin..."

Absolutely. As I hope we will see when we get to it. And isn't a bildungsroman a legitimate plot element in its own right?

[Everyman]

Jonathan wrote: "The scene in which the post-chaise imploded was certainly a comical one. If any of you are familiar with the sitcom Seinfeld, a show about nothing, then I think we have found it's ancient influence..."

I'm coming late to this discussion, trying to get caught up in interesting thread. But as to your comparison to Seinfeld, I think that's a nice way to look at it. Though I don't see it as nearly as sophisticated as Seinfeld. I have never been able to get very deeply into PP because I find the humor too forced, too almost slapstick, the opposite of the subtle humor I love in authors like Austen or, more recently, Flanders and Swann.

But though I've never gotten past about Chapter five in previous attempts, I'm determined this time to stick with it at least for awhile, partly because I owe it to myself to find out why it is such a favorite of so many readers I respect, and partly (a larger part) so that I can better appreciate the discussion taking place here.

Having read most of Dicken's mature works, I do sense the immaturity (or what I view a immaturity) in PP as Dickens just begins his career as a novelist. The characters seem, so far, not very finely drawn, more broad brush caricatures than recognizable people.

[Everyman]

Just discovered, when querying myself as to whether dueling was still prevalent (and legal) in England in 1848, that Dickens wrote a piece in All the World Round on Irish dueling, titled "Dead (and gone) Shots." I couldn't, in a very brief search, find a copy online.

[Everyman]

Jonathan wrote: "That's cool about the Pickwick Club finding its way into Little Women. Haven't read that one yet, although it's on my list. That gives me something to watch for in the book. Too funny."

It also made it into Cranford, where it was the favorite work of one of the male characters, whose name I forget, who was reading the installments as they came out and quoting passages to a very uninterested older woman whose name I also forget. (At my age, names tend to be the first thing to go.)

[Jonathan]

Everyman, the novel begins as it states as a series of scenes well suited for sophisticated observation. About a third of the way through, there is a problem, which comes to the forefront. From that point, the book becomes normal, and even suspenseful. Coincidentally, or maybe not so much, this is the point at which sales began to skyrocket.

I can see the progression from essayist to novelist that Dickens the Great went through during this work. Are you familiar with Sketches by Boz? Although that first work of his was nonfiction, the first part of this book was exactly like that. Somewhere along the way it turns into a story with all the necessary ingredients. If for no other reason than Dickens' own transformation, this book is a great historical read. It is also rich in details about Victorian life, which I always find interesting. I loved this book from beginning to end, but I must play the part of Jonathan the Confessor and cop to putting it down after the first couple pages a couple of years ago on my first attempt. It is one of the few books I rated 5 stars, but there is no question it is now my favorite Dickens novel. None.

[Everyman]

Jonathan wrote: "I can see the progression from essayist to novelist that Dickens the Great went through during this work. Are you familiar with Sketches by Boz? "

Oh, most certainly! But not for many years, I have to ruefully admit. (Many in this case being something more than thirty.) So I don't remember that much about them.

It is also rich in details about Victorian life, which I always find interesting.

I do also greatly enjoy details about Victorian life, but so far (and I'm still in the early chapters) there isn't that much other than what I suspect is a not very accurate portrayal of a military show.

I didn't think, so far, that his descriptions come close to matching the descriptions of London in other of his novels. And there are also those of many other authors (I think of Eliot's very well researched and detailed descriptions of provincial life, and Hardy's quite accurate writing about southwest England and its rural culture, one great example being the somewhat lesser known "Under The Greenwood Tree," as just two examples.)

But I am, I admit, judging very early in the book. I'm comforted by our comment that "I must play the part of Jonathan the Confessor and cop to putting it down after the first couple pages a couple of years ago on my first attempt." That's my experience exactly; let's hope I can duplicate your later experience and come to appreciate the work as I get further into it.

Meanwhile, I do thank you for starting this group and giving us the opportunity to explore this magnificent author with you and other likeminded readers.

[Jonathan]

Everyman wrote: "Jonathan wrote: "I can see the progression from essayist to novelist that Dickens the Great went through during this work. Are you familiar with Sketches by Boz? "

Oh, most certainly! But not for..."

And, I would like to thank you as well for joining it and bringing some much needed depth of insight to the discussions. I always look forward to hearing your observations, on anything.

[Tristram]

I would also like to admit that Sketches by Boz never really stunned me into reading it completely, but that is probably because I generally am not too fond of observations of everyday life being made for entertainment without a story to lead me along. I had the same feeling like you, Jonathan and Everyman, when I started Pickwick Papers, but I give a book at least 100 pages before I am disgruntled enough to put it away. Another example of where my patience was rewarded is LeFanu's The Old House by the Churchyard, which sets up a delightful microcosm of people and a sinistre murder story.

[Petra]

Hi, Joy! I recently read this book, too, and look forward to discussing it with you. (I love Pickwick, the Dodo!)