A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens (Group Classic Read Aug/Sep 2017)

[Bionic Jean]

Karin wrote: "I forgot that you said all of that--sorry! I just happened to read a book this month that brought it up :)..."

No worries at all Karin :) I just assumed you hadn't scrolled back. And on an app it can be particularly tricky, I've been told.

[Shirley]

Ok, just back reading this again now, looking forward to getting back into this again. Currently about 20% read.

[Diane S ☔]

I am about where you are, Shirley. As I read I am remembering more and more from the first time I read.

[Karin]

Jean wrote: "Karin wrote: "I forgot that you said all of that--sorry! I just happened to read a book this month that brought it up :)..."

No worries at all Karin :) I just assumed you hadn't scrolled back. And..."

I don't have an app, but you are correct, I didn't go back :).

[Bionic Jean]

Shirley and Diane - I think over time, we may forget some of the minor but important characters such as "Mr Jarvis Lorry".

I love the metaphors, such as "on his way to dig someone out of a grave".

There are so many sort of taglines "Recalled to Life", "One Hundred and Five, North Tower" - I think Dickens made a lot of these, to fix the ideas in his readers' minds.

In Ch 4 the pensive passenger has an important secret to divulge to Miss Manette, and I like how we get a nice feeling of being "in the know" because we guess the "secret" well before Miss Manette appears to. It's such clever writing. We also get a lot of info via flashback here, and it's done very well, with an element of gentle humour through the rather staid Mr Lorry.

The next chapter, ch 5, introduces the Defarges, the bull-necked strapping wine-shop keeper and his stolidly knitting, impassive wife. We're suspicious of both of them from the start - or are we? There are many sidelong glances and why is everyone called "Jacques"? Definitely a shifty pair.

Chapter 6, set in the prison with a prisoner who appears to have forgotten everything except his trade, is gripping and tugs at our heart-strings. The reunion between (view spoiler)[father and daughter (hide spoiler)] was very moving, if a tad melodramatic - I can always envisage these moments on a stage - as I'm sure Dickens himself did. Ah well I can forgive Dickens his "staginess" on such momentous occasions ;) And now we know what one of the meanings of the "golden thread" is - though I think mentioned this earlier in the thread.

I love this chapter, as the atmosphere is cranking up. (view spoiler)[Is it really believable that after the story Charles Darnay recounts, (where workmen in a gaol find the letters DIG, and upon doing so find the ashes of paper some "unknown prisoner" had written and hidden to keep it secret from the gaoler) Dr Manette would really have given such a violent reaction because he hears large drops of rain falling? I think not! There is more to this than meets the eye! (hide spoiler)]

But I love the way the weather echoes the drama in the story. We started with a storm, and we now have a storm threatened, then developing, and lightning. And the echoes in the room - of feet - but also of the past? Fabulous atmosphere and allusions! And those portentous end sentences.

So we've had at least two occasions where (view spoiler)[Dr Manette seems to have been overwhelmed by past memories, which may or may not prove significant. Back in the courtroom he had a peculiarly violent reaction when he first saw Darnay:

"His face had become frozen, as it were, in a very curious look at Darnay: an intent look, deepening into a frown of dislike and distrust, not even unmixed with fear. With this strange expression on him his thoughts had wandered away."

We do not yet understand this, since Darnay's story was about the Tower of London, and Dr Manette was imprisoned in the Bastille, but I think we're being led to think it significant. (hide spoiler)].

I think that by about 20% through we've met all the major characters and because we know the history, we know what lies in store for the country. What we don't know is how they will all relate to each other, and the explanation of the central mystery.

The next few chapters are rather more dense, and might prove a little indigestible. Dickens has a tendency to obfuscate ... The historic references are a bit obscure. He is his sardonic self, though, and the episodes involving (view spoiler)[the Marquis and the people near the fountain, and then with CD (whose initials are deliberately the same as the author's!) (hide spoiler)] are enjoyable I think. If you know Bleak House, you might see echoes of (view spoiler)[Rigaud / Blandois / Lagnier in the Marquis, maybe. (hide spoiler)]

[Leslie]

Jean wrote: "Shirley and Diane - I think over time, we may forget some of the minor but important characters such as "Mr Jarvis Lorry".

I love the metaphors, such as "on his way to dig someone out of a grave"...."

And a nice little hint about (view spoiler)[Jerry Cruncher's sideline (hide spoiler)]! I noticed there were a lot of those preshadowing phrases early in the book - more than I remembered.

Earlier in post 92, you mentioned how Dickens hides the names of some of the characters. This reminded me that during this reread I had some confusion about Monseigneur. In the past, I had always assumed that he was Darnay's uncle but listening to the audiobook, it suddenly occurred to me that this form of address would be used for the king. A lot of the description and commentary could apply to the king! I think that in this case, Dickens is using the ambiguity of the name to make comment about all of a certain type of French noblemen. What do you think Jean?

[Shirley]

Jean wrote: "Shirley wrote: "I find with Dickens that I can't have too big a gap between reading or I have to read the last few pages again to remember what was happening, and remember who the characters are!!...."

Hi Jean!

I'm just about to start chapter ten, and really getting into the story now, and it's getting increasingly intriguing. This is a cracking story! I have a few days off work so should get some time to read more over the next few days...

[Bionic Jean]

Leslie wrote: "I think that in this case, Dickens is using the ambiguity of the name to make comment about all of a certain type of French noblemen. What do you think Jean? ..."

I do, yes, and think this is a nice observation Leslie! Dickens is using it to condemn not just this one individual, but a whole type/class of people in that culture at that time - part of his ongoing social commentary. Thanks for pointing this one out :)

The part where this is most evident I think is (view spoiler)[when the cruel Marquis Evrémonde kills a child by running his cart over the boy, and is more concerned with whether any damage has been done to his carriage. This is an incredibly poignant scene, and we sense the brooding resentment and hatred; the heartless indifference and callous cruelty of the privileged aristocracy. The Marquis is an archetype of an evil and corrupt social order, almost the aristocracy’s “everybody”, but portrayed very convincingly as an individual. (hide spoiler)] (that para is actually from my own review LOL)

"Evrémonde" is interesting too, as it combines "every" with the French expression "tout le monde" (everybody). So in a way it is “Everyman.” But is this "Everyman" Darnay - or his uncle - or are they both indicators of the opposite societies they wish to evolve?

Although I love his stories in any format, it is only when I read the book that I marvel at all Dickens's skill in foreshadowing, and hiding of names to increase the mystery etc. As you say, "more than I remembered"!

[Shirley]

Just finished this and I have to say it's my favourite, although I have only read a few (Oliver Twist, Great Expectations and The Mystery of Edwin Drood). By the way, as someone who didn't know the story at all, thanks for remembering to put spoiler tags on, it was much appreciated!! I agree with what Pink said about Lucie, that she could have had a more developed character, also that the story raced ahead at certain points, however I thought the plot was enough for me to enjoy despite this. I have decided on five stars as four just isn't enough to do it justice! Some very poignant moments, some rather funny moments and all around a great story. I look forward to reading another Dickens, not sure which one, though...

[Bionic Jean]

Shirley wrote: "Just finished this and I have to say it's my favourite ..."

I'm so happy you enjoyed this and gave it 5 stars! You know Shirley, before Goodreads I thought A Tale of Two Cities was one of my least favourites of his, but after my reread I revised my estimation!

Parts of it are so theatrical and passionate. Even before any mention of (view spoiler)[La Guillotine (hide spoiler)] we have this, from Book 2 chapter 22:

(view spoiler)[ "See!" cried madame, pointing with her knife. "See the old villain bound with ropes. That was well done to tie a bunch of grass upon his back. Ha, ha! That was well done. Let him eat it now!" Madame put her knife under her arm, and clapped her hands as at a play. . . Madame Defarge had but followed and turned her hand in one of the ropes with which he was tied — The Vengeance and Jacques Three were not yet up with them, and the men at the windows had not yet swooped into the Hall, like birds of prey from their high perches — when the cry seemed to go up, all over the city, "Bring him out! Bring him to the lamp!"

Down, and up, and head foremost on the steps of the building; now, on his knees; now, on his feet; now, on his back; dragged, and struck at, and stifled by the bunches of grass and straw that were thrust into his face by hundreds of hands; torn, bruised, panting, bleeding, yet always entreating and beseeching for mercy; now full of vehement agony of action, with a small clear space about him as the people drew one another back that they might see; now, a log of dead wood drawn through a forest of legs; he was hauled to the nearest street corner where one of the fatal lamps swung, and there Madame Defarge let him go — as a cat might have done to a mouse — and silently and composedly looked at him while they made ready, and while he besought her: the women passionately screeching at him all the time, and the men sternly calling out to have him killed with grass in his mouth. Once, he went aloft, and the rope broke, and they caught him shrieking; twice, he went aloft, and the rope broke, and they caught him shrieking; then, the rope was merciful, and held him, and his head was soon upon a pike, with grass enough in the mouth for all Saint Antoine to dance at the sight of." (hide spoiler)]

And the few paragraphs before made the hair on my head stand on end. Wow!

This illustration of the (view spoiler)[killing of Foulon (hide spoiler)] is by Fred Barnard:



And this one is by Harry Furniss, of the same scene:



I like them both :)

Then there's what I mentioned, a machine always referred to as a female - I love this! Who said Dickens was about wishy washy women?! And the description of the Carmagnole leaves me speechless and astounded. It's just horrific - a kind of war dance - but it describes ordinary people under the influence not really of any stimulants (except drink) but of their own extreme passions and years of poverty and oppression.

This novel is similar to his other historical novel, Barnaby Rudge, which also contains incredibly powerful and chilling descriptions of riots and behaviour of people en masse.
I still think A Tale of Two Cities is a bit short, and underdeveloped to be an absolute favourite, but he still manages to crank up the tension within it, and the plot and the writing is superb, in my opinion.

Magic :)

[[deleted user]]

After Shirley's great review I've ordered a copy from the library. I wasn't enjoying the audiobook at all but I think that was the format not the story. I will give it a chance in paperback!

[Shirley]

One of the funniest scenes, for me, was when Stryver went into the bank, it made me laugh out loud, but also just goes to show how well Dickens had set the scene for Tellson's, that the character of Stryver should make such an impact.

"It was Stryver's grand peculiarity that he always seemed too big for any place, or space. He was so much too big for Tellson's, that old clerks in distant corners looked up with looks of remonstrance, as though he squeezed them against the wall. The House itself, magnificently reading the paper quite in the far-off perspective, lowered displeased, as if the Stryver head had been butted into its responsible waistcoat."

[Bionic Jean]

Heather wrote: "After Shirley's great review I've ordered a copy from the library. I wasn't enjoying the audiobook at all but I think that was the format not the story. I will give it a chance in paperback!"

Aw ... I went straight off to read Shirley's review but it wasn't there :/ Confused now.

[Bionic Jean]

Shirley wrote: "One of the funniest scenes, for me, was when Stryver went into the bank, it made me laugh out loud, but also just goes to show how well Dickens had set the scene for Tellson's, that the character o..."

That's a wonderful quotation Shirley. What I particularly like about it is how the bank has its own personality. Dickens's quirky personified buildings often make me laugh out loud too :)

[Shirley]

Jean wrote: "Heather wrote: "After Shirley's great review I've ordered a copy from the library. I wasn't enjoying the audiobook at all but I think that was the format not the story. I will give it a chance in p..."

I think Heather is referring to my five 🌟 rating, I haven't actually written a review as such.

[Shirley]

Jean wrote: "Shirley wrote: "One of the funniest scenes, for me, was when Stryver went into the bank, it made me laugh out loud, but also just goes to show how well Dickens had set the scene for Tellson's, that..."

Yes, his descriptive writing is brilliant, as you say, not just the characters themselves but buildings, even! I'm going to have to think about which one to read next. I have seen a few BBC adaptations, notably Little Dorrit, Bleak House, David Copperfield, and the reason I really wanted to read A Tale of Two cities was because of the first paragraph, and because I didn't know the story at all. I shall probably pick another story I am unfamiliar with, unless it is very very long, which might put me off!!

[Bionic Jean]

Shirley wrote: "I think Heather is referring to my five 🌟 rating, I haven't actually written a review as such ..."

Ah, thanks, that makes sense now :) I have actually written a review (which I know you've read, thanks Shirley :) ) and also rated it 5 stars.

HERE's Jean's review, for anyone who's interested.

[Bionic Jean]

By the way, here's a question for anyone who has now finished the novel ... (view spoiler)[Where did Sydney Carton get his drugs from? (hide spoiler)] There is an answer of sorts, which John Sutherland ferreted out.

[aPriL does feral sometimes]

I read the novel years ago, and I am listening to an audiobook this time. I must say this is a terrific comment thread!

[LauraT]

Sorry to be so late commenting, but even if I've finished it for some time now, I was too much absorbed by my seaside to be here!!!
I've liked it a lot, even if it has made me smile.
In Italy - but I suppose it is the same in many countries, we tend to see the French Revolution as the beginning of the "modern" age; the starting point of the best histric period, the end of monarchy at its worst.
It's not the first time I've noticed that foe England, especially Victorian England, it was seen as something to be dreaded...

[aPriL does feral sometimes]

I picture Madame Defarge as Michelle Pfeiffer's portrayal of Catwoman, btw, but harder core.

[[deleted user]]

I've picked up a copy of this from my library in paperback. I hope I get on better with it than my kindle version!

[Bionic Jean]

LauraT wrote: "It's not the first time I've noticed that foe England, especially Victorian England, it was seen as something to be dreaded..."

Hi Laura!

I'm not an historian, nor a royalist, but I do think Dickens's descriptions of the violence are to be believed. We know the originals for (view spoiler)[the death of Foulon, which I already mentioned (hide spoiler)] are documented. So wouldn't anybody dread "la Terreur", or the "reign of terror", irrespective of what class, European country or political persuasion? As a means to an end it must compare with one of the most inhumane. And the descriptions of mob mentality are truly frightening.

[Bionic Jean]

Heather wrote: "I've picked up a copy of this from my library in paperback. I hope I get on better with it than my kindle version!"

Good luck Heather! I think this is a good idea :)

[Bionic Jean]

(view spoiler)[Where did Sydney Carton get his drugs from? (hide spoiler)] doesn't seem to have piqued anyone's interest. So I'll just direct anyone coming to this thread later to John Sutherland's excellent books on literary conundrums, where he explains it. It's to do with references in the novel, the specific small area of narrow streets in London Sydney Carton frequented, the availability of (view spoiler)[ specific drugs (hide spoiler)]at the time, and the underclass of thieves one would have to deal with to obtain it in this way.

[Jen from Quebec :0)]

Hey, all! I HAVE NOT STARTED the book yet (I know, I know!) but I *am* being a creepy lurker and checking in now and then + trying to decipher these conversations yet NOT read the spoilers, lol!

It SEEMS like you *might* be talking about the violence of the times/setting as another 'character' in the book? If so, and anyone is doubting the legitimacy of the cruelty of the times, do not be mistaken- it was cruel as hell! I have a history degree and have read enough historical fiction to know that ridiculously barbaric things were occurring in the scarily not-so-distant past, my friends....

One more recent example of this that comes to mind is the book: Slammerkin by Emma Donoghue ! Has anyone read it? (Great book, btw) but in it, prostitutes were raped, beaten, thrown into rivers, children abducted, public lynchings in the streets, commonplace physical abuse in institutions and at homes...and the violence wasn't even 'an issue' - it was merely the place and the times, you know? (of course, her book was set in London...)

ALSO....this might not even be remotely close to what any of you are discussing and I might be wayyyy off and I might just need to stop talking before I embarrass myself any further!

*lurks back out, shamefaced* --Jen from Quebec

[Bionic Jean]

Hi Jen, great to read your post! Yes, I'm beginning to wonder if I misunderstood Laura ... and yes, it always strikes me too how "not so distant" this past is. It feels very close; only a few generations ago. And so easy to relate to in the way Dickens brings out the worst aspects of human nature.

I'm currently reading The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexandre Dumas, which is set a little later, and am missing the vividness of Dickens's descriptions. It feels far less "real".

It's probably me who's putting in all the spoilers actually, trying to be careful, but I did comment on the first few chapters at the beginning of this thread, so they can be unclicked quite soon!

[LauraT]

Jean wrote: "LauraT wrote: "It's not the first time I've noticed that foe England, especially Victorian England, it was seen as something to be dreaded..."

Hi Laura!

I'm not an historian, nor a royalist, but I do think Dickens's descriptions of the violence are to be believed.

Of course they were real. Not so "narrative", but more real than ficticious. That I know
What I intended was that the "attitute" towards the Revolution from an English point of view is, generally speacking, one of condamnation, while, in Italy at least, we really tend to see it as the beginning of the "modern" democracy, we don't stress the Terror period - that we know existed - but the first part. The assertion of the rights for everybody, the freedom from the yoke of the power of the nobles, and so on...

[Bionic Jean]

Thanks for the clarification Laura.

[Karin]

Jennifer Lynn wrote: "Hey, all! I HAVE NOT STARTED the book yet (I know, I know!) but I *am* being a creepy lurker and checking in now and then + trying to decipher these conversations yet NOT read the spoilers, lol!

..."

Oh, my gosh, yes, lots of violence went on!

[Karin]

Jean wrote: "Hi Jen, great to read your post! Yes, I'm beginning to wonder if I misunderstood Laura ... and yes, it always strikes me too how "not so distant" this past is. It feels very close; only a few gener..."

I really like The Count of Monte Cristo, but it's an entirely different kettle of fish from anything by Dickens. It's more of the ulitmate story of revenge and also Dumas used to wish for a lot of wealth, so you see this unbelievable fortune...

[aPriL does feral sometimes]

I think originally in America we saw the French Revolution as a positive, then later as a still a really good thing which got out of hand - slightly. The French people gave us the Lady Liberty statue as a recognition of our 'shared' values of throwing off the oppression of supposed upper-class superiority to the supposed more primitive unwashed uneducated grosser uglier folk - in America, it was the colonists; in France, it was the lower classes. However, French commoners had suffered longer and much more deeply than Americans ever had.

America had fought a bloody revolutionary war (actually off and on depending on crop growing seasons), but the English and supporters of English rule could retreat across the Atlantic Ocean, which stopped the bloodletting. French aristocrats lived side by side with French peasants and could only barricade their homes. Plus, hello, Canada and Mexico territories. People could run and escape and begin completely new lives, living off of the land here, lose themselves in all of the wild unowned forests, plains and deserts. French land was all owned by an aristocrat somewhere.

[Bionic Jean]

Karin wrote: "I really like The Count of Monte Cristo, but it's an entirely different kettle of fish from anything by Dickens..."

Goodness, yes! When I read the first couple of chapters I thought exactly the same thing and actually put on my status update "Well this isn't Dickens, that's for sure!" The descriptions were just so corny, for a start. But then I had a rethink and realised I'd set the bar too high, and it's a very different sort of ... entertainment. Alexandre Dumas did write by the line, for money, as you'll know.

I'd just thought it was about time I tried him, in a very good translation, and only brought it up really because of the strange coincidence, with The Count of Monte Cristo being set very shortly afterwards.

[LauraT]

aPriL does feral sometimes wrote: "I think originally in America we saw the French Revolution as a positive, then later as a still a really good thing which got out of hand - slightly. The French people gave us the Lady Liberty stat..."

That's "our" attitude!

[Karin]

Jean wrote: "Karin wrote: "I really like The Count of Monte Cristo, but it's an entirely different kettle of fish from anything by Dickens..."

Goodness, yes! When I read the first couple of chapters I thought ..."

Okay. I enjoyed it all, unabridged (well, a few parts weren't quite as interesting). I read it in high school but think it might have been an abridged version; I liked it then as well, but it's better to read it all, IMO.

[Illona]

I remembered Dickens when I saw Victorian Slum House on PBS, it covered many similar topics.

I thought it was interesting, sad, to see scapegoats have not changed in 100s of years, the poor, single mothers, orphan children, people with disabilities, elderly.

I like how Dickens writes such rich descriptions of people and places.

I also enjoy these four other fiction & non-fiction writers that wrote on social justice, poverty, they are,
Jeffrey D. Sachs
John Steinbeck
Bryan Stevenson
H.G. Wells

[Leslie]

Illona wrote: "I remembered Dickens when I saw Victorian Slum House on PBS, it covered many similar topics.
...
I also enjoy these four other fiction & non-fiction writers that wrote on social justice, poverty, ..."

If you like that type of literature, I strongly recommend John Dos Passos's trilogy USA: The 42nd Parallel / 1919 / The Big Money.

[[deleted user]]

I feel like I've given this a good go but I just don't want to pick it up. I'm starting to think that I might just not like Charles Dickens that much. I've rated Great Expectations and Oliver Twist highly but I still remember struggling through them. So, it's a DNF for me. Maybe I'll give up on Dickens for now but I will never give up for ever!

[Bionic Jean]

Never mind Heather. We all like different types of writing, don't we. I now think if I have to struggle that hard to read something, then it isn't likely to ever really appeal to me. The two novels you name are so very different ... To me, one represents his immature pontificating attempts, and the other is a highly skilled and multi-layered novel. So it sounds to me as though Dickens really is not for you - or not at the moment.

(And if you're at all counter-suggestible, you'll come back to him later and love what you read LOL!)

[[deleted user]]

I feel a bit disappointed in myself! But there is no point in reading if I'm not enjoying it and I have loads of other things I want to read. I still enjoy reading reviews and discussions with Dickens and I'm sure I will come back to him

[Leslie]

Heather wrote: "I feel a bit disappointed in myself! But there is no point in reading if I'm not enjoying it and I have loads of other things I want to read. I still enjoy reading reviews and discussions with Dick..."

Don't feel disappointed (at least not in yourself!). I'm glad you are planning on coming back to him someday but you have given his writing a more-than-fair try. Who knows, when you reach my age (50s), you might find that you like him after all. Or that you are glad you didn't waste your time with him!

As Jean said, it is hard to like a book that is a struggle to read (as I am finding with my struggle with Proust!).

[Bionic Jean]

Absolutely! You've read so many books which I'd hesitate to even try, Heather! I think in a way Dickens is an acquired taste. And as Leslie says, you like different authors at different ages. Sometimes I'm a bit scared to revisit an author I rated highly years ago. And sometimes I can be pleasantly surprised that I now like someone (or a particular book) I didn't used to. I didn't enjoy The Pickwick Papers at all when I read it years ago - found it dull - but recently I found it a delight!

[[deleted user]]

Thank you both! I will look forward to picking Dickens up again in a few years and seeing how my feelings have changed.

[Bionic Jean]

Yay :)

[Pink]

Heather, I echo everyone else's thoughts, don't worry about not liking Dickens. Maybe you'll try another of his books in years to come and I suspect Jean will be here waiting to give you the encouragement!

[Karin]

Heather wrote: "Thank you both! I will look forward to picking Dickens up again in a few years and seeing how my feelings have changed."

His books vary, as well. I was delighted by Nicholas Nickleby , for example, but wasn't as keen on The Pickwick Papers which I read not long after. So tastes vary as well.