Korean Job Discussion Forums

Tiberious aka Sparkles · Joined: 23 Jan 2003 Location: I'm one cool cat!

Although I pride myself as being a keen reader of classic literature, I must admit that I have never read any of D!ckens's novels. I was tempted to buy David Copperfield today, but my favorite novel not titled The Brothers Karamazov is Maugham's Of Human Bondage, and because I've heard that it's somewhat similar to Copperfield, I was apprehensive.

For D!ckens fans, what made him such a great writer? What's the best aspect of his writing? His prose? Stories? Characters?

Also, which of D!ckens's novels would you recommend the most highly? D.C.? Oliver Twist? Bleak House?

Sparkles*_*

JAWINSEOUL · Joined: 19 Nov 2005

I am currently enjoying reading The Brothers Karamazov. As someone who may share similar literary tastes as you. I will warn you that I believe D!ckens novels to be drivel. I have given his work several chances to impress me, but since I am not a masochist I put it down.

On the other hand, everyone deserves a chance. Let me know if you can stomach him.

JongnoGuru · Joined: 25 May 2004 Location: peeing on your doorstep

tzechuk · Joined: 20 Dec 2004

I've read Oliver Twist, A Christmas Carol, A Tale of Two Cities, Great Expectations, The Pickwick Papers (some of the chapters, anyway) and David Copperfield.

I think you should start with Oliver Twist to ease yourself into it - that's by far the easiest to read (we had to read it at 14 at school, so it couldn't be that difficult).

HapKi · Joined: 10 Dec 2004 Location: TALL BUILDING-SEOUL

I am a little ways into Oliver Twist at the moment. Was surpised to find out that the famous "Please Sir, I want some more," quote happens very early on.

My favorite passage so far:

the_beaver · Joined: 15 Jan 2003

One of the greatest writers in terms of making solid characters -- a lot of writers have a general uniformity across the supporting characters and names get twisted around in the "who's that again?" reading game. With Dickens, in general, all characters are alive.

By and large Dickens was formulaic and I'll admit that it takes a good 100 pages to even get into a Dickens novel, but with the exception of Pickwick, I've enjoyed them all.

Privateer · Joined: 31 Aug 2005 Location: Easy Street.

They always say his bad characters are wonderful but his good characters are far too saintly to be interesting.

shortskirt_longjacket · Posted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 11:41 am Post subject:

To start on D!ckens I would recommend "A Tale of Two Cities."

The main character is a French Nobleman living beneath himself in England and tutoring pupils in his native tongue. I think that's a protagonist we can all get behind.

P.S.; anyone on this thread saying they can't get into D!ckens is a Philistine. D!ckens is eminently accessible and readable especially when one considers the time lapse. His characters are dynamic and complex and his plots are intricate and exciting without falling into contrivance. "A Tale of Two Cities" and "Great Expectations" in particular cement him as the greatest British novelist ever, and I will only accept arguments of Joyce to the contrary if you can explain "Finnegan's Wake" to me.

eamo · Joined: 08 Mar 2003 Location: Shepherd's Bush, 1964.

shortskirt_longjacket · Posted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 11:04 pm Post subject:

Swiss James · Joined: 26 Nov 2003 Location: Shanghai

*braces self for influx of celtic rage*

shortskirt_longjacket · Posted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 11:28 pm Post subject:

Satori · Joined: 09 Dec 2005 Location: Above it all

Why read Dickens indeed?

Well, first off, he is one of the most biting satirists to have ever laid pen to paper. Don`t be fooled by the fact that he is also enormously funny. His humour has a purpose, and it is to lampoon the pretentious upper classes, and rail again social injustice. He was in fact, a very angry man. Lucky he was so clever and funny about it.

He is not by any means a "realist", but that`s not the point. He even stated that his characters were amalgamations of a certain "type" of person. Thus, he afford himself the luxury of exageration to get his point across. His characters are usually very indelible, very unique, and memorable. He`ll take the time to describe physical characteristics, and they are always expressive of some character trait. Each character has a strong personality, with drives, weaknesses, foibles, special speech characteristics, all done deftly with a few choice sentences.

He`s extremely visual, his works are shot through with visual metaphor. All the imagery ties in with the overriding theme. In this sense he is a very careful writer and pretty much defined this as a classic novelistic technique which was used for the next 100 years. He is GREAT at writing about London as a city, he makes it come alive, it`s almost as if London is one of the characters in his novels.

His humour runs to burlesque, satire, farce, slapstick, it`s really colorful and riotous, just like his plots. He can be wry, sly, dry, witty, or fruity, cheesy, and bawdy. For a writer of his time he really had the whole arsenal of weapons at his disposal.

Finally, I recommend "Great Expectations". It`s a social commentary but also a slow burning thriller with a ripping climax. Social commentary, love and betrayal, cruelty, greed, pride, justice, revenge, what more could you ask for!

Xerxes · Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 2:50 am Post subject:

The OP mentions both D!ckens and Dostoyevsky, which is a very interesting comparison actually. I have to admit that I've not read much of D!ckens, and what I've read seemed really preachy about London's ails of his time, kind of like Victor Hugo. He's so stuck on righting the wrongs of his society that he makes the story seem secondary. That's my biggest gripe with him, but I did like the strong character of the convict, Magwitch. I liked the story generally but the preaching got in the way.

Dostoyevsky though, I can't get enough of. I've read every one of his novels except his letters and literary criticisms, and I had even begun to get into those too. The only gripe I have with Fred is that his characters are similarly crazy after a while and I get the Russian names confused because they are all very similar in development (Kind of like how Shakespeare's character names are all so similar). His major characters are remarkable but he has many of the same "type" characters in his stories.

Just my two cents!

(Don't know why I actually posted--it's been years and years since I did literary criticism and actually enjoyed talking about it)

Qinella · Joined: 25 Feb 2005 Location: the crib

The only D!ckens book I read was Great Expectations. I loved it. As others have said, the characters are so alive. His descriptions of them are so tangible, so vivid. In Expectations, there is a particularly shady character that has the verb "slouch" tagged to his every movement. He slouches here, he was slouching home, etc. And this continues throughout the book for the character.

As Satori said, Expectations has everything you could ask for in a book. I'd probably read more Dickens if I read anything, but I don't read much these days due to other areas of import.

Also, I'd like to note that I have tried to read two Dostoevsky books and couldn't make it through three or four pages in either one. Horrendously boring.

Q.