Oliver Twist: Chapters 9 - 17

[Bridget]

Bionic Jean wrote: "Yes Michael, the Angel is a famous part of Pentonville, which was mentioned before as where Mr Brownlow lives. .."

There is an interesting note in my edition saying that George Cruikshank lived at 23 Myddleton Terrace, Pentonville. Perhaps not a coicidence that Dickens chose that neighborhood for Mr. Brownlow?

I like Cruikshank's drawing of Mr. Brownlow for this chapter. He does a great job capturing Brownlow's shock at the picture/Oliver similarities by leaning him forward and pushing his coat back. Its very effective without being cartoonish.

[Shirley (stampartiste)]

Kathleen wrote: "Claudia wrote: "Later in his novels, Charles Dickens uses a similar technique, a portrait of a lady in James Carker's living room."

And in Bleak House!..."

Yes! I thought of this as well, Kathleen!

Now I'm wondering if:
1) Mr. Brownlow knew Oliver looked like someone he'd seen before but couldn't remember where he'd seen the face, or
2) Mr. Brownlow knows who the lady is in the portrait and is now going to try to figure out her relationship to Oliver.
This is getting so exciting! Another mystery!!!

[Bridget]

Kathleen wrote: "Claudia wrote: "Later in his novels, Charles Dickens uses a similar technique, a portrait of a lady in James Carker's living room."

And in Bleak House!."

There is a portrait used as a plot point in Dombey and Son too.

It's very fun, as a reader, to try and guess what these portraits mean. Could this portrait at Mr. Brownlow's be Oliver's mother? That's my current guess :-)

*edit: sorry Shirley, I think we cross posted. I like your thoughts too!

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

LOL Shirley, yes perhaps that US governor did pinch Charles Dickens's words - or that of an earlier nursery rhyme!

I love Charles Dickens's mysteries too, and Oliver Twist shows us that he wanted to intrigue and baffle us right from the start of his novels.

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

Bridget - "George Cruikshank lived [in] Pentonville. Perhaps not a coicidence that Dickens chose that neighborhood for Mr. Brownlow?"

Great idea! They were getting along like a house on fire at this point, so it would be nice to be immortalised as someone whose "heart [was] large enough for any six ordinary old gentlemen of humane disposition" - or at least associated with him 😊

And you're right, George Cruikshank has perfectly captured his demeanour as he "raised his spectacles on his forehead, and thrust his hands behind the skirts of his dressing-gown"'

[Beth]

Others have commented on what was most striking to me in this chapter already, most notably the biting humor about the strength of the broth, and the depiction of the doctor who sees Oliver ("sees" is about all he does).

The quote below is a relatively small part of the chapter, but it's distinctive in being the first instance in the book thus far where I couldn't figure out the meaning after several readings. The first sentence is clear to me, and is included to give context for the second, which isn't. I think it's mainly that I don't see what "who" is referring to.

"Gradually, he fell into that deep tranquil sleep which ease from recent suffering alone imparts; that calm and peaceful rest which it is pain to wake from. Who, if this were death, would be roused again from all the struggles and turmoils of life; to all its cares for the present; its anxieties for the future; more than all, its weary recollections of the past!"

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

I think it is referring to Heaven and the Afterlife, Beth. Editions vary, but we also have:

"he awoke at last from what seemed to have been a long and troubled dream."

My understanding is that Oliver is hovering between life and death, and even seems to "see" his dead mother, (although this could be a delirious image sparked by the painting of a beautiful lady). But this further shows his state of mind:

"they brought into the boy’s mind the thought that death had been hovering there, for many days and nights, and might yet fill it with the gloom and dread of his awful presence, he turned his face upon the pillow, and fervently prayed to Heaven."

Who?

It is pain, the author says, to wake from near death. The punctuation is confusing. Try missing out the full-stop before "who", and see what follows as the next clause in one long sentence. Then "who" refers to the subject of the sentence, "he", i.e. Oliver.

Alternatively, if you keep the full-stop then it is two sentences, and the second needs a question mark at the end. "Who" then becomes interrogative: i.e. "Who would want to be roused back to the cares of this world?" (implying that nobody would). On balance, I think I prefer this second interpretation.

It's an editing problem.

"the doctor who sees Oliver ("sees" is about all he does)." Yes! 😂

[Claudia]

Yes Bridget I meant a portrait in Dombey and Son in Mr James Carker's living room.
Kathleen: I could not know about a portrait in Bleak House, as I have not (yet) read it.

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

Both times it is crucial ... and I'm now in the process of mentally going through each novel by Charles Dickens, to perhaps identify a portrait ...

[Shirley (stampartiste)]

Claudia wrote: "Yes Bridget I meant a portrait in Dombey and Son in Mr James Carker's living room.
Kathleen: I could not know about a portrait in Bleak House, as I have not (yet) read it."

You’re right, Claudia, the portrait I was thinking of was in Carker’s room in Dombey and Sons, not in Bleak House. But I think the portrait of Lady Dedlock in Bleak House had the same connotations.

[Greg]

I liked the short reference to photography, it was both entertaining and intriguing on some several levels.

It's amusing in a quaint way, because of course we know that contrary to Mrs. Bedwin's assertion that it would "never succeed", photography eventually became a widespread and central part of our culture and changed it in many fundamental ways.

But also, there's her suggestion that photographs are "a deal too honest" and reflect reality too closely to be acceptable or desirable. It's an interesting idea, especially considering that Oliver Twist itself uncovers many dark and uncomfortable social truths that some of his time might not have wanted to examine too closely or to have seen portrayed in so raw a manner. Dickens' portrays dark aspects of his country's reality that might have been uncomfortable for some of his contemporary readers to see, though he makes it more palatable with humor and irony.

In general, the idea that people sometimes don't want to see what is true - that seems very interesting and potentially important.

I appreciated the texture behind Mrs. Bedwin's quaint, mildly sexist comment; it has lot of potential connotations underneath.

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

Greg wrote: "It's an interesting idea, especially considering that Oliver Twist itself uncovers many dark and uncomfortable social truths that some of his time might not have wanted to examine too closely or to have seen portrayed in so raw a manner ..."

I really like this idea Greg: that the entire reason and force of the novel is encapsulated in this one seemingly naive observation by a minor character 😊 Thank you!

[Werner]

Bionic Jean wrote: ""Who" then becomes interrogative: i.e. "Who would want to be roused back to the cares of this world?" (implying that nobody would). On balance, I think I prefer this second interpretation."

I took it that way too!

[Anna]

I learned some new vocabulary: "perspicuity" meaning clarity. I'd heard of perspicacity, which means about the same, but had to look up the former. Also "saveloy" which is a type of sausage. A "belcher" handkerchief, which is a blue color with a pattern in it, and "cant" meaning a private language of the underworld. Great to expand my vocabulary - I'm sure there will be more!

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

Anna wrote: "I learned some new vocabulary ..."

Oh yes, Anna, in fact there are more examples of the "private language of the underworld" today 😊

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

Chapter 13:

Jack Dawkins tells Fagin that the police have taken Oliver. Fagin is furious, and threatens to “throttle” Dodger, while Charley Bates cowers and weeps:



"What's become of the boy?" - James Mahoney 1871



"Return of the boys without Oliver" - Frederic W. Pailthorpe 1886

Bill Sikes arrives:

“a stoutly-built fellow of about five-and-thirty … with a beard of three days’ growth, and two scowling eyes; one of which displayed various parti-coloured symptoms of having been recently damaged by a blow”

followed by his “white shaggy dog, with his face scratched and torn in twenty different places” who skulks into the room and gets a kick from Sikes, sending him right across the room. The dog behaves as if he is used to this. Sikes tells Fagin that if he had been his apprentice, he would have killed Fagin. In reply, Fagin observes that Bill Sikes seems to be “out of humour”.

Bill Sikes then mimes “tying an imaginary knot under his left ear, and jerking his head over on the right shoulder”, which Fagin seems to understand perfectly.

Dodger tells Sikes a version of the truth, that Oliver has been taken, whereupon Sikes and Fagin argue, worrying aloud that the boy will say something that will lead the police to them. Bill Sikes says that they must get Oliver back, before he “peaches” (tells on them) and then he must be “taken care on”. Neither the men nor the two boys are willing to do this.

Bet arives, and Fagin tries to coax her to go to “the office” (the police station). Bet makes it clear that she will not, whereupon he turns his attention upon Nancy, and Sikes insists that Nancy go. After “alternate threats, promises, and bribes” Nancy agrees, not fearing as the others do that she may be recognised, as she has only just moved to the area.

At the police station, dressed respectably, Nancy acts the part of a worried sister, “with the most piteous wailings and lamentations”.

When she returns, Nancy reports to Fagin that the gentleman had taken Oliver to his house in Pentonville. Bill Sikes disappears with his dog, and Fagin locks up, secretly retrieving all his treasures and hiding them about his person, moving his criminal operations to another “ken” (a room to stay in), and sending Nancy and the Artful Dodger to find Oliver, and bring him back:

“He has not peached so far, … If he means to blab us among his new friends, we may stop his mouth yet.”

This ends installment 6.

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

Oh no! Oliver’s paradise at Mr. Brownlow’s seems to be under a sinister threat, and something tells me that “taking care on him” from Fagin, means something very different from what Mr. Brownlow would mean. After all, we’ve now seen Fagin’s true colours, menacing the boys and throwing the pot of beer at them. Also when Sikes was joking about Fagin poisoning him, Fagin gave a secret “evil leer”, as if he really would stop at nothing.

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

Nancy

We assume that Nancy wears similar clothes to Bet, who is “gorgeously attired, in a red gown, green boots, and yellow curl-papers”. No decent woman of the time would wear red, or these garish clothes of a prostitute, so Fagin helps her to look the part of a woman looking for her little brother, masking her unsuitably garish (and perhaps soiled or untidy) dress with “a clean white apron”, and her hair and “curl-papers” with a straw bonnet. She also carries a basket and a door key. These are the outward signs of respectability—cleanliness, tidiness, possessions, and a home with a lock on the door.

When Charles Dickens says Nancy is from the “genteel suburb of Ratcliffe” we can be sure that it is not very “genteel” at all, and that he is being sarcastic. The name sounds like a place Charles Dickens has invented, but in this case it is not! In fact at the time Ratcliffe was a slum area, on the North Bank of the river Thames, between Limehouse and Shadwell. (Now it is in Tower Hamlets.)

This is the area of London which has had the most ongoing continually changing immigration. It started with the early Flemish settlers in the 1500s, through the French Huguenots in the 17th and 18th centuries, fleeing initially from Catholic persecution; then came Chinese people employed by the “British East India Company” in the 1780s, on merchant vessels (you may have heard of ”Chinatown“). Ever since Bangladesh’s War of Independence in 1971, Bengali immigrants have established a community in Tower Hamlets, and this was the dominant ethnic group when I worked there for several years. Locals still call this area "Banglatown".

But at the time of Oliver Twist, in 1837, the East End was expanding. Irish workers fled the Great Famine, seeking employment constructing railways and canals. Jewish refugees joined them, as they fled from the pogroms of Russia and Eastern Europe. Ratcliffe, as well as “Field Lane” in the 19th century was a hubbub of all sorts of immigrant peoples, seeking homes and work.

We don’t yet know her very well, but from the way she has thrown herself into the role, it is clear that Nancy is resilient and quick-thinking.

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

Charles Dickens just can’t resist having more digs at his old enemy Mr. Laing, can he? When Nancy visits the police station and the prisoner’s cells, we see Charles Dickens stressing that these men had been locked up for the most trivial of reasons. This is partly yet another criticism of the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834. If you are poor, he tells us through the text, you can’t do anything right; the law will get you one way or another.

Simply begging was enough to get thrown in gaol, but as he points out, the man who was trying to earn his living by selling saucepans, also fell foul of the law because he had no license. (Since he very probably had no home either, one wonders how he could have obtained a license without an address!) But one example was so ridiculous that it shouted "Allan Laing" at me ...

It was the poor man who was thrown in prison for the heinous crime of playing his flute (and even having it confiscated!). Didn’t this remind you of the real life occasion I mentioned, when November 1835, Charles Dickens reported in the “Morning Chronicle” about Mr. Laing throwing a muffin-boy in jail “for ringing a muffin-bell in Hatton Garden while Laing’s court was sitting”?

The words power-crazy despot come to mind 🙄 ... Charles Dickens had really got his literary teeth into Mr. Fang Mr. Laing!

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

Speech and Class

I added brief “translations” of the Victorian crime slang Anna mentioned, in the summary. One was when Jack Dawkins asks whether Oliver was “to be kidnapped to the other ken” a “ken” is a house. Then a few lines later, Fagin says, “He has not peached so far”; i.e. he has not informed on someone. There is an extensive vocabulary of crime in Victorian London, and we can see that these words would be completely out of place in the mouths of Mr. Brownlow or Mrs. Bedwin. Mr. Brownlow speaks in a quiet way, considering all his words carefully, but Fagin’s gang use more ”colourful” language, full of slang expressions and spoken with some force. This shows how observant Charles Dickens was of the different speech patterns and dialects in London, right from the start.

I’m very conscious of these two worlds: the grim world of pickpockets and vice, and the comfortable friendly world of Mr. Brownlow. There’s great tension here, both between the two villains Fagin and Sikes, but also in the story itself, and we now feel anxious for Oliver. It all seems too good to be true for him, and we fear what might happen.

In fact have you noticed how Charles Dickens, at the end of this installment, has pulled away from Oliver for the first time in the book? Oliver is not present at all in this chapter, but safe in Pentonville. Dickens is plunging into the crime world of London without his hero, which seems a bit of a gamble. Will he keep our interest? I for one want to know more about Sikes and Nancy … but then there’s that mystery at Mr. Brownlow’s house.

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

Names (delicate readers might need the smelling salts for this one!)

Further to the idea about slang, it only occurred to me a few days ago that the name “Jack Dawkins” must be one of Dickens’s little jokes. What’s the main identifiable thing we know about jackdaws? That these birds are notorious for stealing shiny, precious things and hiding them away in their nests. So the Artful Dodger, king of the pickpockets, is “kin” (family) to a jackdaw! I don’t know if any critic has ever spotted this—I expect they must have though.

Now the next name is “X” (adult)-rated, and it wasn’t me who first noticed it (so please don’t blame me for your blushes!) but the eminent literary critic John Sutherland. It’s about Charley Bates.

Among his many works, John Sutherland has written 3 books of literary puzzles, and in Who Betrays Elizabeth Bennet?: Further Puzzles in Classic Fiction he has an essay called “Name Games”. (Proof to me that even he didn’t want to come out with this theory in a title!) But if you are listening to Oliver Twist on audio, and the narrator uses a short “a”, then it’s fairly obvious what I’m going to say …

Jack Dawkins and Charley Bates are probably around the same age, but Jack is called “Mr. Dawkins” (or “Dodger”). Charley though, is always called “Master Bates” (or Charley Bates). Elide these two words, and you have it … Plus his behaviour is described rather oddly—as a little hysterical.

This is not what you expect from Mister Dickens? Well remember that he had a penchant for 18th century novels, which as we saw with The Adventures of Tom Jones by Henry Fielding are witty but bawdy novels, full of ribaldry. Also Charles Dickens was just 25—only a decade or so off puberty. His ambitions to become a distinguished literary figure were way off in the future. He had an impish sense of humour. But it would have been risking the continuing readership of his respectable middle class audience for Dickens to come out with something so shockingly vulgar, so he “hid” his idea in full view, in a name.

Still not convinced? Well I counted the number of times Charley Bates was referred to as “Master Bates”, and it is 58! I can’t believe that is coincidence. To be scrupulously fair, Jack Dawkins is referred to as Mr. Dawkins 14 times. And if you need any more proof, then I refer you to John Sutherland’s essay.

(Please don’t shoot the messenger!)

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

And a little more …

Publication Troubles

The arguments between Charles Dickens and Richard Bentley through July and August had reached fever pitch by now. Poor John Forster was trying to soothe the nerves of both, but Charles Dickens was talking about Richard Bentley to him just as Sikes talks about Fagin in today's chapter 13, and in a thoroughly bad tempered letter to his friend, called Richard Bentley an: “infernal rich plundering thundering old Jew”. (OUCH!) History does not record what Richard Bentley might have said about Charles Dickens.

It is down to John Forster’s diplomatic skills that we can read the rest of Oliver Twist at all! On 30th August 1837 Charles Dickens had decided to resign his editorship of Bentley’s Miscellany, and write no more installments of Oliver Twist after the next one! (i.e. nothing for October and for ever afterwards).

I’ll tell you what happened during September, after we have read the next installment 7, for September 1837, chapters 14 and 15.

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

This ends installment 6. We will now have a day free before we begin installment 7, with chapter 14 on Sunday. Your thoughts on this momentous installment?

[Janelle]

Lmao Jean, I was going to ask about the number of times Dickens called him ‘Master Bates’ thinking it had to be deliberate but didn’t really want to be the first to mention it!

I like the theory that it was harking back to his love of those bawdier 18th century novels.

[Michael]

If one thought Fagin was a dangerous man, we get this quote from Fagin to Sikes if they finally face justice, “that it would come out rather worse for you than it would for me, my dear”. Considering what we know about Fagin, the only thing “worse” would be a murderer.

There is perhaps a historical subtext to Fagin's use of "worse". The number of offenses carrying the death penalty in the English criminal code, once given the epithet of ”bloody code”, was being reduced over the past decade. During the time of Oliver Twist’s publication the Whig Home Secretary, future Prime Minister, Lord John Russell was rewriting the criminal code so that by 1841 the only capital offenses in practice were attempted and actual murder and treason.

There were various motives for this major change. One was the increase in humanitarian concerns carrying over from the 18th century: Enlightment and Sentiment. Related was the concern the jury sitting public was unwilling to find defendants guilty because the penalties were considered so out of line with the charges. This lack of convictions would destroy the deterrent effect of the criminal code. Using Utilitarian principles the solution was to subject criminals to non-capital punishments: transportation, whippings, solitary confinement, and the treadmill. The sure application of these punishments was considered sufficient to deter criminal activity and if the person still committed a crime perhaps they would be reformed.

The Utilitarians believed that under the correct environment a criminal could be reformed: Bentham’s design for the (in)famous panopticon and Pennsylvania’s Eastern State Penitentiary.

In England, “the number of felons sentenced to death fell in one decade from almost 4,000 in 1828-30 to 249 in 1838-40, while the number hanged dropped from 178 to twenty-six”. Notice how even under the “bloody code”, there was a complete lack of follow through from sentencing to actual hanging as convicted felons were given alternative punishments, the one to gain literary notoriety being transportation to Australia.

Based on how Fagin and Sikes interacts one gets the feeling Fagin is terrorized of the ruffian. Dickens uses “abject humility” to describe an interaction between Fagin and Sikes.

Earlier Sikes comments if was “’prentice”’ to Fagin he would have murdered him long ago and “I couldn’t have sold you afterwards, though, for you’re fit for nothing”. Dickens might be referring to the lucrative black market trade in cadavers. In an age prior to refrigeration, medical schools needed a steady supply of cadavers and were willing to pay for that supply. Society was scandalized by “resurrection men” conducting raids on graveyards, the more recent the burial the better, to obtain bodies to sell to the medical schools. An attempted fix of the supply problem was the Anatomy Act of 1832 which handed over unclaimed bodies of persons passed away while residing at the workhouse to the medical schools. In a Christian society, the idea one could be denied a Christian burial and the opportunity of rising from the dead at the Last Days added another layer of dread to ending up at the workhouse.

[Werner]

I never picked up on the double entendre inherent in Charley's name when I read the book --but then, I read it at the age of eight, long before puberty, and in a much less sex-saturated culture than the one that eight-year-olds are bombarded with today. At that time, I'd never heard of the word, nor of the concept.

[Michael]

Bionic Jean wrote: " ”genteel suburb of Ratcliffe“"

My first thought was how did Nancy if she came from a "genteel suburb" ends up with Fagin. Then when I did a Wikipedia search, I realized Dickens was telling an inside joke to his London readers. I wonder how many readers not familiar with London were scratching my head like I was.

[Werner]

Michael wrote: "In a Christian society, the idea one could be denied a Christian burial and the opportunity of rising from the dead at the Last Days added another layer of dread to ending up at the workhouse."

Michael, I don't doubt that your source stated this; nor do I doubt that there might have been a folk superstition to the effect that dismembered bodies couldn't be resurrected. We have to remember that most of the poor people of that day (the ones who actually would have been in danger of going to the workhouse), although they were Christian-influenced, were also illiterate and largely lacking in any kind of serious religious instruction. In that situation, odd folk beliefs could pass as facts in their minds.

The classical Christian tradition, though, has always held that ALL humans, regardless of the condition of their bodies, will be raised on the last day. (Most dead bodies, by that time, could be expected to have rotted away to nothing; resurrection, in this view, is a miracle caused by Divine power, which is no more balked by cremation or dismemberment than it is by decay.) All educated Christians of every denomination would have held that view in Dickens' time (as would the Orthodox Jews, whose view of the resurrection underlies the view in the New Testament).

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

"I wonder how many readers not familiar with London were scratching my head like I was."

It was well known that East London was not a salubrious area, Michael. My grandmother (born 1880 and not educated past school age) had never been to London, and lived up North in Yorkshire. But she knew that East End street children had tatty clothes and no shoes, and about The Blind Beggar of Bethnal Green. by R. Dodsley..

Hopefully my post gave you a feel for the area 😊

[Sam]

Bionic Jean wrote: "Names (delicate readers might need the smelling salts for this one!)

Further to the idea about slang, it only occurred to me a few days ago that the name “Jack Dawkins” must be one of Dickens’s li..."

Here is a link to Victorian text on fagging in the British school which continues this subject of names to Fagin.

https://books.google.com/books/about/...

Note this is 19th century British terminology, not 20th century American though it is possible that connotations are similar.

[Sam]

Bionic Jean wrote: "Speech and Class

In fact have you noticed how Charles Dickens, at the end of this installment, has pulled away from Oliver for the first time in the book? Oliver is not present at all in this chapter, but safe in Pentonville. Dickens is plunging into the crime world of London without his hero, which seems a bit of a gamble. Will he keep our interest? I for one want to know more about Sikes and Nancy … but then there’s that mystery at Mr. Brownlow’s house.

Writing style

You may notice that this is the first time we have a split scene, rather than simply following Oliver himself. Did the switch seem a little “clunky” to you? Charles Dickens said it:

“affords the narrative an opportunity of relieving the reader from suspense, in behalf of the two young pupils of the Merry Old Gentleman; and of recording—

That when the Dodger …“

Charles Dickens is not an experienced novelist yet! And what's more, before we get to what we really want to know—and that Charles Dickens had promised us—all the action back at Fagin’s den, we have to read a long hectoring sardonic speech about the ills of so-called “philosophers”, (those responsible for the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834, as we’ve discussed before). But we do get there eventually!


I am trying to pivot off these two quotes to comment on Dickens skill as an author at this time and more specifically things he is doing in this novel that IMO, warrant its greatness and classic standing. First note how far we are from the heavily sarcastic narrator of the early chapters; notice how we are getting much more show than tell; note the increase in dramatic immediacy (as if we are now watching a play instead of reading a novel); notice the various literary ploys Dickens is using to both experiment, (like split POV) and stay grounded to maintain audience, (employing certain sentimental and melodratic plot elements to match reader expectations); and finally notice how tight this writing is. There are few wasted words and little fluff, Everything written seems to push the novel forward. Every character is described leads us to wanting more. I find the Dickens writing this far more devloped than the one who wrote Pickwick Papers. IMO, the book is already an instant classic and I am wondering if Dickens felt that at this point in his writing of the novel? My feeling is he must have had an idea and I imagine an anxiety in worrying if he could maintain it.

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

Sam re. fagging.

Yes, it is an English tradition, mainly (but not only) now in public schools like Winchester. 1st year boys at many British secondary schools (year 7, ages 11-12) are called "fags" (at that age at my girls' grammar school I was called a "fusty" - the female equivalent) but only public schools have the rigid traditions associated with it, where fags are regularly beaten and act as virtual slaves: servant to the prefects.

However, I'm not sure of the connection with Fagin in Oliver Twist though, Sam, especially since we know from his friend John Forster that Charles Dickens used the name of a boy he had known. Fagin is as I remember from Eastern Europe (like many Jews in the area at that time, as I explained) so it is impossible that he would be an alumnus of an English public school. Also somewhere in the text (view spoiler)[ there is a hint that he comes from a circus/acting tradition (hide spoiler)] in his country of origin.

I can see that the word "Fagin" is similar, but not the function or meaning. Could you explain, please?

[Sam]

Bionic Jean wrote: "Sam re. fagging.

Yes, it is an English tradition, mainly (but not only) now in public schools like Winchester. 1st year boys at many British secondary schools (year 7, ages 11-12) are called "fags..."

The term term was used in connection with the younger students (fags) performing tasks (fagging) for the upper classmen. In some cases this behavior became exploitative and in extereme cases was thought to be extortive and intimidative for money or favors including sexual. I see Fagin in the role as as explotative authority here. The close similarity in name should have prompted a connection to the practice I think.

[Sam]

Bionic Jean wrote: "Sam re. fagging.

Yes, it is an English tradition, mainly (but not only) now in public schools like Winchester. 1st year boys at many British secondary schools (year 7, ages 11-12) are called "fags..."

Here is a book The Old Boys: The Decline and Rise of the Public School that describes the issue and Guardian link that reviews the book and mentions the practice a dew paragraphs down.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/201...

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

It's certainly an interesting theory you're developing there, Sam! Fagin is certainly exploitative ...

As I say, the practice of fagging is very familiar to any English person (I was a fusty and my husband and brother were fags) and the bullying is endemic, and in some public (i.e. boarding) schools sexual favours too, as you say, (but I don't see any hint of this latter with Fagin.) Others who are not English may find the articles interesting though, thanks.

By the way, the pronunciation is different (which I'm afraid makes any connection tenuous). For the word "Fagin", because it only has one "g", in English you pronounce the vowel as the name of the letter "a", (Phoneme "eI" - small e and capitaI I) as in "angel" or "paper" whereas "fagging", because of the double "g" sounds like the "a" in cat, or "alpha". (phoneme "ae" - small a joined to small e - though I cannot type these properly as I can't find a chart online with the 44 phonemes! 🙄) This is not altered by accent or region.

Another word closely related to fagging is the English word "fag", commonly used for cigarettes, and dating from before the 19th century https://idiomorigins.org/origin/fag (I know it means something different in the USA - just to confuse matter further - but Charles Dickens was English.)

So this is where the public school "fag" comes from. We saw an example of a kindly prefect and his fag in David Copperfield (view spoiler)[ Steerforth and young David or "Daisy" (hide spoiler)], but many were far worse. Roasting before the fire was a common punishment for fags.

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

Sam wrote: "Everything written seems to push the novel forward. Every character is described leads us to wanting more. I find the Dickens writing this far more devloped than the one who wrote Pickwick Papers ..."

Yes - good observation Sam. He just needed to curb his hectoring a little, and learn to "show not tell" as you say, which as we know he did! We can see indications here that he is developing these skills; thank you for pointing it out 😊

"the book is already an instant classic and I am wondering if Dickens felt that at this point in his writing of the novel?"

No - it's a nice idea, but I'm afraid not, for the simple reason that Charles Dickens still did not know he was writing a novel. Quite the reverse in fact, as he had decided to write no more, as I said. He was just going to finish his contract (see my post earlier today, currenly post 123).

He was supremely confident though!

[Kathleen]

Sam wrote: "I am trying to pivot off these two quotes to comment on Dickens skill as an author at this time and more specifically things he is doing in this novel that IMO, warrant its greatness and classic standing. ... I am wondering if Dickens felt that at this point in his writing of the novel? My feeling is he must have had an idea and I imagine an anxiety in worrying if he could maintain it...."

I like your thoughts here, Sam, and agree with your specific examples of his improving abilities. I would think (regardless of his thoughts about the future of this or any writing, whatever form it would take) that he was aware of his increasing skill. His confidence is clear, as Jean says, but I bet secretly he must have wondered if he could maintain this level of the craft. Fortunately for us, he did!

[Kathleen]

Jean, your details and the ones shared by others here about the names, history, and most particularly the language are priceless to me. Dickens clearly knew his audience: Londoners from his period, certainly not me! These are the kind of things that, unless I'm reading a heavily annotated edition, would go right over my head. And they bring so much more enjoyment and understanding of the story!

[Bridget]

In my edition (Penguin Classic), Bill Sikes is forty-five years old. (I believe my edition uses the text from the original 1837 installments.) It's interesting to me that later on Dickens made Bill Sikes ten years younger. IMO, that's a good change. When I read, today, that Sikes was 45, that seemed much too old to me.

Hilarious stories about the names today. Thanks for a good laugh, Jean!

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

Bridget wrote: "In my edition (Penguin Classic), Bill Sikes is forty-five years old. (I believe my edition uses the text from the original 1837 installments.) It's interesting to me that later on Dickens made Bill..."

Wow, what a huge change! Thanks for picking that one up, Bridget! It seems odd it would be that way round, as when we are young, 35 seems ancient, but when you get there yourself somehow it does not seem that old. So if anything I would have expected the older Charles Dickens to push his age up, not down. But perhaps there will be something in the text later which fits better with the younger man for Sikes.

And to be honest, even mid-thirties was getting on for a criminal in Victorian London. People aged so much more quickly. I once worked out that Miss Havisham in Great Expectations can't have been more than in her late 30s.

I'm so pleased you're all enjoying the "extras" 😀

[Jenny]

I always love learning from your extras Jean! Jack Dawkins being a "Jackdaw" was my favorite from today, though Charley Bates got a chuckle from me!
Sike's poor dog :(

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

Michael and Werner

I'm not sure it's always "a folk superstition to the effect that dismembered bodies couldn't be resurrected."

Do we have any Catholics here? I know that the Vatican forbade cremation for centuries, for that reason, and only in 1963 (in England, at least) did the Church amend its Code of Canon Law, lifting its ban on cremation. Even now it is discouraged.

So for some, it is a sincerely held belief, and since Catholics have large families, there would be a substantial number in the workhouse.

Michael - your info on the criminal code is pertinent, thank you, although we (England) stopped sending convicts to America in 1783, so I'm not sure how Pennsylvania’s Eastern State Penitentiary comes into it. As you correctly said, convicts were sent to Australia, and in one of the threads our expert from down under, Janelle gave us an excellent summary of what happened to them when they got there 😊

Fagin's gang though, fear being hanged more than anything, viz Sikes's dumb show in this chapter, and the poster of the scaffold on the wall, in an earlier illustration by George Cruikshank.

Jenny - Yes indeed, poor dog!

[Michael]

Bionic Jean wrote: "Pennsylvania’s Eastern State Penitentiary cr..."

The reference was meant as a real historical prison that was designed along Utilitarian lines. The prison's design and rules attempted to reform the criminal. I did not know of an example of such a prison in England.

[Daniela]

About cremation.
In October 2016 the document "Ad resurgendum cum Christo" (to resurrect with Christ) was published, which reaffirms what was established in 1963 and that is that burial is better than cremation because it expresses greater respect for the deceased; however cremation is not prohibited, unless it is intended as a denial of Christian dogmas or out of hatred against the Catholic religion and the Church.
Burial remains the most suitable form for expressing faith and hope in bodily resurrection but it is assumed that habits are changing and that the choice to be cremated is also growing among believers. However, the ashes of the deceased must usually be kept in a sacred place, that is, in the cemetery or in the church. Furthermore, to avoid any kind of pantheistic, naturalist or nihilist misunderstanding, the dispersion of the ashes in the air, on the ground or in water or in any other way is not permitted nor their transformation into objects.

[Bionic Jean, "Dickens Duchess"]

Thank you very much Daniela, and Michael too (about the penitentiary this time).

We can learn so much, still sparked by Charles Dickens!

[Werner]

Bionic Jean wrote: "Thank you very much Daniela, and Michael too.

We can learn so much, still sparked by Charles Dickens!"

I echo that --not being Catholic myself, I wasn't aware of their changing rules on cremation, and found that quite interesting! As Daniela said, the reason for the preference/requirement for burial rather than cremation is that it is/was felt to show greater respect for the dead. The 2016 statement says, "“cremation of the deceased’s body does not affect his or her soul, nor does it prevent God, in his omnipotence, from raising up the deceased’s body to new life.”

[Lori]

This chapter has a definite theatrical appeal. And these are the scenes I remember most from my high school production (but I was playing Bet so they are more vivid than the rest of the scenes). I know I have my old script somewhere, and now I’d love to see what was the focus in that play and what was left out.

Sikes seems to be the only person to frighten Fagin, even a bit. Fagin was trembling when Sikes growled at them. I am wondering if Sikes is higher up in the thieves hierarchy than Fagin. Is he the boss, maybe?

Every time I think about reading Dickens on my own, I know I won’t get the full benefit of having Jean’s wonderful extra info. It really does make all the difference to me because there is so much I would miss on my own! And the added benefit of discussion among our group members makes it even more worthwhile.

[Janelle]

Bionic Jean wrote: …our expert from down under, Janelle…"

Not really an expert, but thank you Jean :)

The prison that Michael is talking about In Pennsylvania, Dickens visited and hated. (He writes about it in American Notes For General Circulation They are also known as ‘model prisons’, and there was a similar one at Port Arthur in Van Diemens Land. Point Puer the boys prison that Jean mentioned earlier is just across a narrow bay from Port Arthur.

This is the Wikipedia page for Port Arthur. It’s a great place to visit if you’re in Tasmania. Beautiful and haunting. (Unfortunately there are very little remains of the boys prison.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Ar...

[Sue]

Lori, as a first time reader of Oliver Twist, I know I wouldn’t be getting nearly as much out of my reading if I wasn’t in this group. So even when I’m not commenting, I’m hear listening.

[Franky]

Thanks for all the information and context Jean. You are helping me with some aspects I missed on my first read of this. I love how Dickens uses such details into describing and illustrating the characters through print, so the illustrations add an extra richness.