Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.72 AVERAGE
3.72 AVERAGE
dark
emotional
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Some things are timeless. This story is one of them. There has always been and will always be ... a contrast ... a tension ... a push and pull in life. This book highlights the divide between the two sides. This was a great reminder to me that we can so easily become the thing we hate. There is only one truly sustainable revolutionary act ... to love. To love someone or something to the point of self denial ... even to the point of death. This story is as relevant today as when it was written.
adventurous
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
To me this book was an exploration into the anatomy of a revolution. What triggers it, who participates it in, and how it plays out when the political and personal are allowed to intertwine unchecked. The story shows how noble intentions can be perverted into something ugly and destructive.
Certain parts of the story reminded me of many themes dissected in George Orwell's 1984, in where even though the populace was espousing justice and equality, their actions showed a desire for vengeance and retribution. And they seem to hold these two contradictions within themselves with little to no conflict - reminding me of the concept of doublethink. And this is made easier by the mob mentality of the people. There is also an unabashed faith in the moral purity of the state, and a hyper surveillance of the citizens by their fellow citizens. Everyone seemingly is a valued member of this great state, but at the same time also a suspected enemy.
It reminds of something I heard from ContraPoints on YouTube in her video essay on Envy - "When the people are hungry they eat the rich, and when the rich are gone, they eat each other"
Certain parts of the story reminded me of many themes dissected in George Orwell's 1984, in where even though the populace was espousing justice and equality, their actions showed a desire for vengeance and retribution. And they seem to hold these two contradictions within themselves with little to no conflict - reminding me of the concept of doublethink. And this is made easier by the mob mentality of the people. There is also an unabashed faith in the moral purity of the state, and a hyper surveillance of the citizens by their fellow citizens. Everyone seemingly is a valued member of this great state, but at the same time also a suspected enemy.
It reminds of something I heard from ContraPoints on YouTube in her video essay on Envy - "When the people are hungry they eat the rich, and when the rich are gone, they eat each other"
I started this book not because I wanted to read it, but because I thought that I should read it. It was the same thinking which led me to read mostly classics some years ago, and which ended up with me exhausted and decidedly against reading books that are ‘important’ and ‘essential to be a reader’. But yet, I started this, because Dickens is too big a name for me to only have read Great Expectation in my school days, and that too a copy that I’m fairly convinced was abridged. Anyway, I digress. I started this book with a tainted motivation, that’s my point. I ended it, a couple of hours ago, pacing through my house and smiling like an idiot. I am so, so impressed.
It’s the story of Paris and London, let’s get that out of the way. Before I read this I knew that it was supposed to be a story of a happy city and a sad city. Just as I was beginning, I found out that those cities were London and Paris. And all that I know about their history is that the American revolution happened and that the French revolution happened. That’s the base that we are starting at, so don’t be surprised when I was lost in the story.
What I expected from the book was a simple story. The basic reflections on war and poverty, class difference, and a tragedy to go along with it. A simple story that would make all those 19th century people introspect deeply and make me think ‘nice but nothing original’ (while acknowledging that this is the original). What I got, instead, was an expertly crafted story, written, somehow, amazingly well.
Like, I need to talk to someone about it, that’s why I am writing this so soon after finishing the book. There’s so much to talk about. I am so blown away by Dicken’s capabilities as a writer. No exaggeration, it feels like a generational talent. When the story began, I was quite lost, yet quite engaged. The first thing I noticed was the characters, their unapologetic uniqueness, how the book did not seem to shy away from showing funny and strange characters in very serious roles. I loved Mr. Lorry’s ‘recalled to life’, and then ‘it’s business, business’, and I really liked that the book did not take that basic classic novel route.
Yet, as the story moved on, I often stayed lost. This was on two accounts, both the reasons why this doesn’t have five stars, and also both not really flaws, but a difference in times. First, the sentence structures were really annoying at times. It was probably what was normal back then, I will glaze Dickens’ writing enough soon, but god, it became hard to understand. I would have to read and re-read paragraphs that were actually just one sentence stretched to no end. It became exhausting, and I was pretty happy to be able to read 12-15 pages a day. A lot of times I did not know what was happening, I simply trudged along. That is also partly because of the other reason, my being thoroughly unaware of old European culture and history. I just did not know what the words meant or what the characters were talking about when they were implying things and not speaking literally, which happened very often. Another thing that happened very often were long and deep descriptions. I really liked the book when the story was happening and the characters were talking, at those points it glided along. But for so many pages there were just descriptions and descriptions in those long sentences that I talked about and of those unknown things that I also talked about. I found those to be so dense, it was a struggle to get past them. And once I did get past them, I knew that I didn’t understand most of it. So it was definitely a hard read, and I would warn everyone who is going into this. I still don’t know a lot of what happened in the story, but I got the general idea.
Now, the first of the good things, the writing. I am so surprised, and so impressed. The writing was so innovative and ambitious. It feels so ahead of its time. It was poetic, it was metaphorical, it was really well done. The descriptions that I hated so were also so well written, I find it hard to describe. How Dickens is able to describe powerful things the guillotine, the rage of people, and even simpler things like buildings and gaits, it was so masterful. The feelings that the descriptions rouse, when I was not bored out of my mind, were perfect. It’s impressive to me that someone can execute it so well. I’m jealous even, thinking that this guy can do this incredibly difficult thing so perfectly and make it seem so effortless. It feels like this person was born to be a writer. I love how he leans completely into what he’s doing, no pulled punches, never going for the basic and safe writing style. I love that he does so much that makes the book so unique, not at all the basic classic novel that I was expecting. It’s hard to describe, but it’s like Dickens chooses a way to describe things that is perfect for the thing, then expands on it and shows why it is perfect. It’s really thoughtful, it’s really consistent, and as he keeps using the same analogies over the entire book, you see how it ends up fitting perfectly ten chapters after it was first told.
And speaking of things that pay off later, this story is so damn perfectly made. Everything happens for a reason, every character has a complete arc. This book was somehow serialized? Why can’t modern authors do this with the complete book in their hands? The story was perfect, like how lord of the rings was. Everything comes together just as they were meant to. No ass-pulls, no loose threads. Everything at the beginning that just happened for no real reason will come back in the end. And everything was presented so well. It was so unique how things were revealed to us, characters knew things before we did, and we found out only by their dialogues. It treats the readers as smart people, leaving things implied to be understood. And the timing of reveals was so on the mark. Just, so well done and so original. I am, again, so impressed.
All in all, I did not understand everything in this book, that was tough. But I am extremely in awe of Dicken’s writing style and story craft, he’s such a master. Read it if you want, I’m just fanboying because I liked enthusiastic and ambitious writing. Loved this.
It’s the story of Paris and London, let’s get that out of the way. Before I read this I knew that it was supposed to be a story of a happy city and a sad city. Just as I was beginning, I found out that those cities were London and Paris. And all that I know about their history is that the American revolution happened and that the French revolution happened. That’s the base that we are starting at, so don’t be surprised when I was lost in the story.
What I expected from the book was a simple story. The basic reflections on war and poverty, class difference, and a tragedy to go along with it. A simple story that would make all those 19th century people introspect deeply and make me think ‘nice but nothing original’ (while acknowledging that this is the original). What I got, instead, was an expertly crafted story, written, somehow, amazingly well.
Like, I need to talk to someone about it, that’s why I am writing this so soon after finishing the book. There’s so much to talk about. I am so blown away by Dicken’s capabilities as a writer. No exaggeration, it feels like a generational talent. When the story began, I was quite lost, yet quite engaged. The first thing I noticed was the characters, their unapologetic uniqueness, how the book did not seem to shy away from showing funny and strange characters in very serious roles. I loved Mr. Lorry’s ‘recalled to life’, and then ‘it’s business, business’, and I really liked that the book did not take that basic classic novel route.
Yet, as the story moved on, I often stayed lost. This was on two accounts, both the reasons why this doesn’t have five stars, and also both not really flaws, but a difference in times. First, the sentence structures were really annoying at times. It was probably what was normal back then, I will glaze Dickens’ writing enough soon, but god, it became hard to understand. I would have to read and re-read paragraphs that were actually just one sentence stretched to no end. It became exhausting, and I was pretty happy to be able to read 12-15 pages a day. A lot of times I did not know what was happening, I simply trudged along. That is also partly because of the other reason, my being thoroughly unaware of old European culture and history. I just did not know what the words meant or what the characters were talking about when they were implying things and not speaking literally, which happened very often. Another thing that happened very often were long and deep descriptions. I really liked the book when the story was happening and the characters were talking, at those points it glided along. But for so many pages there were just descriptions and descriptions in those long sentences that I talked about and of those unknown things that I also talked about. I found those to be so dense, it was a struggle to get past them. And once I did get past them, I knew that I didn’t understand most of it. So it was definitely a hard read, and I would warn everyone who is going into this. I still don’t know a lot of what happened in the story, but I got the general idea.
Now, the first of the good things, the writing. I am so surprised, and so impressed. The writing was so innovative and ambitious. It feels so ahead of its time. It was poetic, it was metaphorical, it was really well done. The descriptions that I hated so were also so well written, I find it hard to describe. How Dickens is able to describe powerful things the guillotine, the rage of people, and even simpler things like buildings and gaits, it was so masterful. The feelings that the descriptions rouse, when I was not bored out of my mind, were perfect. It’s impressive to me that someone can execute it so well. I’m jealous even, thinking that this guy can do this incredibly difficult thing so perfectly and make it seem so effortless. It feels like this person was born to be a writer. I love how he leans completely into what he’s doing, no pulled punches, never going for the basic and safe writing style. I love that he does so much that makes the book so unique, not at all the basic classic novel that I was expecting. It’s hard to describe, but it’s like Dickens chooses a way to describe things that is perfect for the thing, then expands on it and shows why it is perfect. It’s really thoughtful, it’s really consistent, and as he keeps using the same analogies over the entire book, you see how it ends up fitting perfectly ten chapters after it was first told.
And speaking of things that pay off later, this story is so damn perfectly made. Everything happens for a reason, every character has a complete arc. This book was somehow serialized? Why can’t modern authors do this with the complete book in their hands? The story was perfect, like how lord of the rings was. Everything comes together just as they were meant to. No ass-pulls, no loose threads. Everything at the beginning that just happened for no real reason will come back in the end. And everything was presented so well. It was so unique how things were revealed to us, characters knew things before we did, and we found out only by their dialogues. It treats the readers as smart people, leaving things implied to be understood. And the timing of reveals was so on the mark. Just, so well done and so original. I am, again, so impressed.
All in all, I did not understand everything in this book, that was tough. But I am extremely in awe of Dicken’s writing style and story craft, he’s such a master. Read it if you want, I’m just fanboying because I liked enthusiastic and ambitious writing. Loved this.
Wow. So many feels right now. I get that the French aristocracy had it coming, but it’s hard to believe that people could become so bloodthirsty and hardened. Dickens paints it in such a harsh way and I’m still feeling jarred. But also there’s such a wonderful story of peace and redemption amidst the chaos. “The vigorous tenacity of love [is] always so much stronger than hate”
challenging
emotional
informative
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
What
A Tale of two cities follows main character Alexandre Manette through the trials and tribulations of the French Revolution. It explores themes of class, repression, poverty, aristocracy, hatred, love, dedication, sacrifice and redemption.
How
Dickens interweaves an array of characters stories which does make it difficult to follow at times. However it compliments the complexity and size of impact of a national movement, and the impact on each individual circumstance, when it all combines, ultimately leads to a brilliant finale.
For example. A whole chapter spent on a tertiary side characters past life (although it supplied perspective to the level of poverty at the time) just so that it could produce a reveal that led to another characters ability to blackmail him for assistance.
True
It highlights the resilience, determination and sacrifice that love can provide in any living conditions. Sydney Carton, Dr Manette, Charles Darney..
The novel does raise questions around whether love or hatred is a stronger form of passion.
In the face off scene, it seems that Miss Pross brings unwavering dedication for others where Madame Defarge’s has a desire for redemption from past injustice lived as hatred and pain directed towards aristocrats and foreigners.
This form of passion, ultimately distracts from a revolutions purest goal(improving society conditions for the oppressed) which leads to Defarges underestimating Pross.
Arguably because the revolutionists goal is not constantly kept in the mind, it corrupts and dilutes their cause. This leads to masses of revolutionists misplaced satisfaction and romanticising excessive use of the guillotine.
Also it’s exploration of approaches that favour repression and the results it can bring
What of it
Important topics for contemplation.
Dickens seems to paint the French at the time as rude aristocrats or jealous blood thirsty revolutionists. Domineering either way.
Best bits
If you knew what a conflict goes on in the business mind, when the business mind is divided between good natured impulses and business appearances, you would be amused mr Darney.
Last lines of “the Jackle” Chapter
Funny- *Aristocrat runs over and kills small boy*
“Control yourselves, who knows what damage you have caused my horses*
Detestation of the high, is the honorary homage of the low.
Repression is the only lasting philosophy, the dark deference of fear and slavery will Lee the dogs obedient to the whip as long as this roof shuts out the sky.
I will die perpetuating the system under which I have lived
Anyone carried home by the people today, may be condemned tomorrow
Tell the wind and the fire where to stop not me
A Tale of two cities follows main character Alexandre Manette through the trials and tribulations of the French Revolution. It explores themes of class, repression, poverty, aristocracy, hatred, love, dedication, sacrifice and redemption.
How
Dickens interweaves an array of characters stories which does make it difficult to follow at times. However it compliments the complexity and size of impact of a national movement, and the impact on each individual circumstance, when it all combines, ultimately leads to a brilliant finale.
For example. A whole chapter spent on a tertiary side characters past life (although it supplied perspective to the level of poverty at the time) just so that it could produce a reveal that led to another characters ability to blackmail him for assistance.
True
It highlights the resilience, determination and sacrifice that love can provide in any living conditions. Sydney Carton, Dr Manette, Charles Darney..
The novel does raise questions around whether love or hatred is a stronger form of passion.
In the face off scene, it seems that Miss Pross brings unwavering dedication for others where Madame Defarge’s has a desire for redemption from past injustice lived as hatred and pain directed towards aristocrats and foreigners.
This form of passion, ultimately distracts from a revolutions purest goal(improving society conditions for the oppressed) which leads to Defarges underestimating Pross.
Arguably because the revolutionists goal is not constantly kept in the mind, it corrupts and dilutes their cause. This leads to masses of revolutionists misplaced satisfaction and romanticising excessive use of the guillotine.
Also it’s exploration of approaches that favour repression and the results it can bring
What of it
Important topics for contemplation.
Dickens seems to paint the French at the time as rude aristocrats or jealous blood thirsty revolutionists. Domineering either way.
Best bits
If you knew what a conflict goes on in the business mind, when the business mind is divided between good natured impulses and business appearances, you would be amused mr Darney.
Last lines of “the Jackle” Chapter
Funny- *Aristocrat runs over and kills small boy*
“Control yourselves, who knows what damage you have caused my horses*
Detestation of the high, is the honorary homage of the low.
Repression is the only lasting philosophy, the dark deference of fear and slavery will Lee the dogs obedient to the whip as long as this roof shuts out the sky.
I will die perpetuating the system under which I have lived
Anyone carried home by the people today, may be condemned tomorrow
Tell the wind and the fire where to stop not me
emotional
informative
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
emotional
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
An incredibly boring book. There is essentially no interesting character development despite this being a character-driven novel. Completely inane descriptions of things that have no relevancy towards progressing the book along as expected from a dreadful writer such as Dickens. Ends on a complete whimper
adventurous
hopeful
informative
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
N/A
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus:
N/A
For the first maybe third of this book, I did not like it, and procrastinated reading it, because it was written quite confusingly and there were too many characters all over the place. Then, it all fell into place, and suddenly it hit home very hard. Madame Defarge especially is a character I want to read more about. Charles, Sydney Carton, Lucie, Dr. Manette, really everyone became very interesting. This is a story about what happens to individuals in the midst of a violent revolution, and it feels very apt in this political landscape, to be honest. ESPECIALLY the bit at the end, I do not remember the quote but it was... let me look it up...
The tragedy of this story was sown from the very beginning, in the greed of the Marquis. Everything rolls along from there.
Crush humanity out of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself into the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit according to its kind.
Six tumbrils roll along the streets. Change these back again to what they were, thou powerful enchanter, Time, and they shall be seen to be the carriages of absolute monarchs, the equipages of feudal nobles, the toilettes of flaring Jezebels, the churches that are not my father’s house but dens of thieves, the huts of millions of starving peasants! No; the great magician who majestically works out the appointed order of the Creator, never reverses his transformations... Changeless and hopeless, the tumbrils roll along.
The tragedy of this story was sown from the very beginning, in the greed of the Marquis. Everything rolls along from there.