Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.69 AVERAGE
3.69 AVERAGE
funny
lighthearted
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
This book is one of the funniest book I've ever read.
Oh, my gosh. I am such a Dickens fangirl. This started out a little slowly for me and I thought, "Well, this certainly won't hold a candle to Bleak House" (which I read prior to this). And in a way, I was right. It really doesn't. But that doesn't keep it from being so, so, so good. That someone had this much creativity bottled up inside a 24 year old body is just mind-boggling.
This is not so much a connected story as a series of stories, wild tales, ghost stories, poems, and all manner of writings, all jammed into one book. It is as if Dickens is trying out lots of different styles an genres - "Do I want to write a mystery? Do I want to take a stand against the legal system? Do I want infuriating characters? Do I want funny vignettes?" And the answer to all of these questions was "Yes. Yes I do. Why choose?" So he didn't.
You see the beginnings of several other stories - including A Christmas Carol and the legal shenanigans of Bleak House's Jarndyce and Jarndyce. You see his absolute delight in creating characters that may sound like cardboard figures when you describe them, but somehow end up morphing into *people*. What started out as a kind of "duty read" ended up being an altogether enjoyable experience.
And I closed the book after 804 pages sorry that there was no more. Dickens and Trollope both are like that for me. However much there is, it isn't enough.
BTW: The Audible version of this book, narrated by David Timson, is stellar and comes with my highest recommendation. If I could buy you a copy, I would.
This is not so much a connected story as a series of stories, wild tales, ghost stories, poems, and all manner of writings, all jammed into one book. It is as if Dickens is trying out lots of different styles an genres - "Do I want to write a mystery? Do I want to take a stand against the legal system? Do I want infuriating characters? Do I want funny vignettes?" And the answer to all of these questions was "Yes. Yes I do. Why choose?" So he didn't.
You see the beginnings of several other stories - including A Christmas Carol and the legal shenanigans of Bleak House's Jarndyce and Jarndyce. You see his absolute delight in creating characters that may sound like cardboard figures when you describe them, but somehow end up morphing into *people*. What started out as a kind of "duty read" ended up being an altogether enjoyable experience.
And I closed the book after 804 pages sorry that there was no more. Dickens and Trollope both are like that for me. However much there is, it isn't enough.
BTW: The Audible version of this book, narrated by David Timson, is stellar and comes with my highest recommendation. If I could buy you a copy, I would.
3.5!
I read this for the Dickens vs Tolosty debate hosted by CarolynMarieReads and * e m m i e * on YouTube. I overall really enjoyed this book but It didn't blow me away by any means. Though I think it might now hold the title of the funniest classic I've read. This definitely feels like Dicken's first story and I am interested on where he goes from here.
I read this for the Dickens vs Tolosty debate hosted by CarolynMarieReads and * e m m i e * on YouTube. I overall really enjoyed this book but It didn't blow me away by any means. Though I think it might now hold the title of the funniest classic I've read. This definitely feels like Dicken's first story and I am interested on where he goes from here.
http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/2151880.html[return][return]I got to page 118 of this and was beginning to despair, to the point that I actually put out a plaintive Tweet/Facebook post wondering if there would be a funny bit soon. But in fact Sam Weller arrives to rescue the book at the end of page 119, thank heavens; although there is a lot of snobbish condescension in Dickens' portrayal of him, he is also given some penetrating insights and just some generally good lines.[return][return]There's a defence of The Pickwick Papers which would be similar to what apologists for some parts of Old Who might say: reading this as a novel is contrary to the author's original intent - it was written as a series of humorous installments, when Dickens was 24, and today's reader's experience of it is analogous to the puzzled New Who fan who puts on the newly bought DVD of An Unearthly Child for their first experience of Old Who.[return][return]Yet at the same time, that's not really good enough. The book is presented as a novel, and has been since 1837, only a few months after the original publication (unlike An Unearthly Child, broadcast in 1963 and released on video only in 1990), so I think it's fair to criticise its failings as a novel. Pickwick himself is much less clever than he realises, which is nto actually all that funny at first and gets less funny as the book wears on. The plot, such as it is, revolves around some terribly conventional farce tropes which were old-fashioned when Plautus did them in about 200 BC, linking together various set-piece sketches of life in the old days (ie about a decade before the book was actually written).[return][return]But what makes the book is a) Weller's sardonic commentary, and b) some of the set-pieces. The Eatanswill by-election is still a favourite among us political types, but reading it in context I was struck that the author's emphasis - and the element from the episode that returns later in the book - is actually on the two local newspapers, who feud with each other in a gloriously fannish style which is very recognisable today. The ghost stories which punctuate various chapters are also neatly done for their type (in general better than the average Poe story) with The Bagman's Tale, in one of the later chapters, surely one of the first examples of a time travel romance in literature?[return][return]The Pickwick Papers is a long old slog, however, and I think the casual reader could be excused for seeking out the edited highlights only.
This book is about a bunch of people who mostly spend their time doing justice to dinners and ejaculating. It really moves along until Mr Pickwick and company wind up going to Bath. I don't know what else Bath is known for, but hopefully it is for something other than being the place where Dickens' first novel loses steam.
I read this book twice a year--once in June and once in December. Damned if I know how it is, but the funny bits only get funnier and the stuff I didn't like gets better each time.
Also, Samuel Weller is one of the best characters ever put to paper
Also, Samuel Weller is one of the best characters ever put to paper
Oh this was so much fun! I can definitely see why people compare this to [b:Don Quixote|3836|Don Quixote|Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1546112331l/3836._SX50_.jpg|121842], but for me what this book most closely resembles is the work of Monty Python. I could absolutely see the Python boys adapting this book as a series of skits, and it wouldn't at all surprise me if they were originally much inspired by Mr Pickwick and his posse.
Also, this book features what is easily my favourite fictional courtroom trial of all time!
Also, this book features what is easily my favourite fictional courtroom trial of all time!
The Pickwick Papers was Dickens' first novel and it shows. It definitely reminded me why I find Dickens difficult writer because I couldn't keep up with the story at many points. I also missed Dickens' criticism of society and I must say that I enjoy Dickens more tragic stories more.