Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.64 AVERAGE
3.64 AVERAGE
This got off to a rough start for me. The people at the orphanage were so nasty, I almost gave up. Then, around ten per cent of the way through the book, it captured my fancy, and I had no problems forging ahead. Of the four Dickens' books I've read this year, this is my second favorite after Great Expectations (fwiw, the other two being, David Copperfield and Bleak House).
A major theme in this book is how people are defined by their blood lines. Bad blood makes for a bad person and vice versa. There are, of course, a few who run against this vision. Two in this book being Nancy—who had some good tendencies within a more-or-less depraved character—, the other being Monks, who just seemed to be a quirk of nature, good breeding, but a bad character none the less. Oliver, it turns out, was such a good person because, unbeknownst to everyone, including himself, he did have good blood.
So, apparently, the reason for treating people so badly in orphanages and work houses of Victorian England was because they were depraved anyway. Why bother about them? It's kinda like Romney/Ryan's 47%. They're benighted folks anyway, just looking for handouts, so not worth worrying about.
It's rather an interesting point of view for people claiming to be Christian. My understanding of Christian theology is that all people are redeemable and should, therefore, be treated with respect.
So, it would seem that little has changed in the past 200 years, the Mr. Bumbles of Dickens' workhouse and the Romney/Ryans of today have the same exalted view of their own worth in society and the same stunted concept of the lack of worth of everyone less fortunate than they. One day, one hopes, those of the Romney/Ryan ilk will either be saved, or else like Mr. Bumble, be discredited and discarded. I'm not holding my breath.
A major theme in this book is how people are defined by their blood lines. Bad blood makes for a bad person and vice versa. There are, of course, a few who run against this vision. Two in this book being Nancy—who had some good tendencies within a more-or-less depraved character—, the other being Monks, who just seemed to be a quirk of nature, good breeding, but a bad character none the less. Oliver, it turns out, was such a good person because, unbeknownst to everyone, including himself, he did have good blood.
So, apparently, the reason for treating people so badly in orphanages and work houses of Victorian England was because they were depraved anyway. Why bother about them? It's kinda like Romney/Ryan's 47%. They're benighted folks anyway, just looking for handouts, so not worth worrying about.
It's rather an interesting point of view for people claiming to be Christian. My understanding of Christian theology is that all people are redeemable and should, therefore, be treated with respect.
So, it would seem that little has changed in the past 200 years, the Mr. Bumbles of Dickens' workhouse and the Romney/Ryans of today have the same exalted view of their own worth in society and the same stunted concept of the lack of worth of everyone less fortunate than they. One day, one hopes, those of the Romney/Ryan ilk will either be saved, or else like Mr. Bumble, be discredited and discarded. I'm not holding my breath.
An easy read, great language, but lacking a bit excitement.
A good story from the point of view, the prose, and the voice of a flawed storyteller...as are all.
Immature listeners like me, be prepared for a character named "Master Bates" referred to by name and title many many times...
another gem here Fagin goes by his name or simply "The Jew" seemingly at random…
Immature listeners like me, be prepared for a character named "Master Bates" referred to by name and title many many times...
another gem here Fagin goes by his name or simply "The Jew" seemingly at random…
3.5 stars
While I liked this book I did have trouble staying on track so I listened to the audio book at 2x speed and then read a long which made it much easier. Overall a good book, humorous in spots, had suspense, and yeah.
While I liked this book I did have trouble staying on track so I listened to the audio book at 2x speed and then read a long which made it much easier. Overall a good book, humorous in spots, had suspense, and yeah.
I read this as a child and still love rereading it. It is one of Dickens' earliest works and not as polished as some that follow, but it has a top spot in my heart. I do love the orphan hero trope in literature, and this book may just be the reason for that. Still a little mad though that Dickens didn't tell us more about the Artful Dodger.
Do people change or are they always with their demons?
Finally got around to reading this classic and it didn't disappoint
Pretty good overall. Sometimes the description of the group's power over the individual was a bit on the nose but it was good nonetheless.
Pretty good overall. Sometimes the description of the group's power over the individual was a bit on the nose but it was good nonetheless.