Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.8 AVERAGE
3.8 AVERAGE
Oh my dear Nicholas. Your impetuousness is only surmounted by your altruism, yet the necessary presence of (somewhat blinding) hubris make the implausibility of your journey, plausible. You are at times pugnacious, and at times utterly phlegmatic. You are colourful and full of life, as only Dickens could imbue into a character. Thank you for the wild ride. I love you ardently. (And to my darling Smike, I say, you were too good for this world.)
If you want to get into Dickens, don't start with this, but with a later novel. One of the best things about this was the introduction by Chesterton, included as a postscript in my edition. This brilliantly phrased evaluation is available online here. Such flair and rhetoric skill – so well done I can even forgive him the jibes at evolutionists' expense, which have nothing to do with the subject at hand, but which apparently he can't do without.
As for Nicholas Nickleby, it's still very much the work of an author learning the craft. As Chesterton says, it's not a novel yet, it's the work of an author deciding he wants to be a novelist. The novels are yet to come – and for the really great novels people had to wait a few more years.
Enjoyable enough as it is, though.
As for Nicholas Nickleby, it's still very much the work of an author learning the craft. As Chesterton says, it's not a novel yet, it's the work of an author deciding he wants to be a novelist. The novels are yet to come – and for the really great novels people had to wait a few more years.
Enjoyable enough as it is, though.
I found this work of Dickens rather a letdown. I read it over two and a half months roughly, so maybe I did not fully appreciate the plot having drug it out so long. However, I still think there are legitimate problems that made this book less than the stellar works that one equates with Charles Dickens.
Nicholas Nickleby is a very unfortunate character left to fend for himself in this world, not unlike many of Dicken's other characters. His father is dead and he is left with sister and mother whose only option as a family is to seek the help of his cold-hearted uncle, Ralph Nickleby. That much I like. I love the contrast of Nicholas, a kind-hearted young man who has next to nothing in this world, to his uncle who had all the money he could want yet remains stiff and above helping his family. The first half to two-thirds of the story tells the journey of Nicholas navigating through the horrendous teaching job at DoTheBoys Hall that Ralph Nickleby helps him find, followed by adventures with Vincent Crummle and his likable gang of performers. There's many subplots along the way, including the fate of Nicholas' sister, Kate, but I wanted to take the time to explain mostly why I didn't find this book all that excellent.
In true Dickens' fashion, there are many side characters, many of which I found utterly boring. I'm not talking about Mr. Crummles, John Browdie, the Cheeryble brothers, Newman Noggs, or Mr. Squeers. These were excellently developed supporting characters that were crafted with much to offer to the plot. I'm mostly talking about characters such as Mr. and Mrs. Kenwigs, Mr. Lillyvick, or Mr. and Mrs. Mantalini. There were whole chapters and sections dedicated to the dialogue of these characters that do absolutely nothing to advance the plot at all. I found myself speed-reading most of these as they were the main contributor to me not wanting to pick this book up for the last half. In contrast to the other supporting characters that I enjoyed above, these fell short of what Dickens demonstrated he can do--create a plethora of engaging, entertaining characters that vie for attention from the main characters.
Speaking of characters, I am confused as to why Nicholas himself didn't engage me. I suppose it was because although he was kind and had hard circumstances, he wasn't entertaining by himself. Not enough of the book is seen through his direct perspective, so I believe that's part of it. Another aspect is that even though his father died and he was left with a difficult uncle, he wasn't left with nothing. I didn't feel utter sympathy for him like I do for some of Dickens' other characters. His circumstances were easily turned around and weren't as drab and dreary to begin with. His character wasn't particularly interesting either. Like I said, he was certainly a kind, gentle person, but you couldn't say much other than that. What would he want if he didn't have to just get a job to survive? What did he want to do? What did he want for his family? I would have liked to see more moments showing him grieving over his father, and then maybe I would have felt sympathy. His compassion was admirable, but there was nothing else that made me root for him.
I often found myself questioning exactly why I was reading this book. I feel if a book does not offer either deep morals/themes or entertainment, it's not worth my time reading. Personal opinion, but I'm not sure why anyone would read a book unless it either enlightened you on human nature or just offered a well-crafted story that keeps your attention even if there is no deeper meaning. Books that do both make it to five stars for me. However, "Nicholas Nickleby" had only some entertaining elements such as DoTheBoys Hall and the adventures with Vincent Crummles theatrical company, but not enough to redeem the length of the book. On the flip side, there were hardly any deeper themes than basic ones of love and family. Excellent themes to be sure, but again, not enough to compensate for the chapters upon chapters spent building the plot. The only touching aspect of the book was the death and backstory of Smike, a sad cripple with no family who Nicholas befriends at DoTheBoys Hall and is later revealed to be Ralph Nickleby's son, or Nicholas' cousin. His contribution to the book reminded you that this indeed, was a Dickens novel with a dark, sad edge. His death at the end would have been touching if it wasn't so rushed.
In conclusion, this is one of Dickens' earlier novels, written after "Oliver Twist," and it's evident. It's certainly not a terrible read for those who want to read all of Dickens, but I wouldn't recommend it to someone genuinely looking for a good, British classic. His writing made major improvement over time to create such things as "David Copperfield" and "Bleak House." It has much more of a light, comical tone that doesn't seem to fit with expectations. A lot could have been cut from this book, as well. I don't have the exact page numbers, but sitting on my shelf next to seven other Charles Dickens books, it appears to be the longest. It was well-done in some respects, but in others fell short of its potential. "Nicholas Nickleby" was too much of a dedication for the time spent reading it with little pleasure in return.
Nicholas Nickleby is a very unfortunate character left to fend for himself in this world, not unlike many of Dicken's other characters. His father is dead and he is left with sister and mother whose only option as a family is to seek the help of his cold-hearted uncle, Ralph Nickleby. That much I like. I love the contrast of Nicholas, a kind-hearted young man who has next to nothing in this world, to his uncle who had all the money he could want yet remains stiff and above helping his family. The first half to two-thirds of the story tells the journey of Nicholas navigating through the horrendous teaching job at DoTheBoys Hall that Ralph Nickleby helps him find, followed by adventures with Vincent Crummle and his likable gang of performers. There's many subplots along the way, including the fate of Nicholas' sister, Kate, but I wanted to take the time to explain mostly why I didn't find this book all that excellent.
In true Dickens' fashion, there are many side characters, many of which I found utterly boring. I'm not talking about Mr. Crummles, John Browdie, the Cheeryble brothers, Newman Noggs, or Mr. Squeers. These were excellently developed supporting characters that were crafted with much to offer to the plot. I'm mostly talking about characters such as Mr. and Mrs. Kenwigs, Mr. Lillyvick, or Mr. and Mrs. Mantalini. There were whole chapters and sections dedicated to the dialogue of these characters that do absolutely nothing to advance the plot at all. I found myself speed-reading most of these as they were the main contributor to me not wanting to pick this book up for the last half. In contrast to the other supporting characters that I enjoyed above, these fell short of what Dickens demonstrated he can do--create a plethora of engaging, entertaining characters that vie for attention from the main characters.
Speaking of characters, I am confused as to why Nicholas himself didn't engage me. I suppose it was because although he was kind and had hard circumstances, he wasn't entertaining by himself. Not enough of the book is seen through his direct perspective, so I believe that's part of it. Another aspect is that even though his father died and he was left with a difficult uncle, he wasn't left with nothing. I didn't feel utter sympathy for him like I do for some of Dickens' other characters. His circumstances were easily turned around and weren't as drab and dreary to begin with. His character wasn't particularly interesting either. Like I said, he was certainly a kind, gentle person, but you couldn't say much other than that. What would he want if he didn't have to just get a job to survive? What did he want to do? What did he want for his family? I would have liked to see more moments showing him grieving over his father, and then maybe I would have felt sympathy. His compassion was admirable, but there was nothing else that made me root for him.
I often found myself questioning exactly why I was reading this book. I feel if a book does not offer either deep morals/themes or entertainment, it's not worth my time reading. Personal opinion, but I'm not sure why anyone would read a book unless it either enlightened you on human nature or just offered a well-crafted story that keeps your attention even if there is no deeper meaning. Books that do both make it to five stars for me. However, "Nicholas Nickleby" had only some entertaining elements such as DoTheBoys Hall and the adventures with Vincent Crummles theatrical company, but not enough to redeem the length of the book. On the flip side, there were hardly any deeper themes than basic ones of love and family. Excellent themes to be sure, but again, not enough to compensate for the chapters upon chapters spent building the plot. The only touching aspect of the book was the death and backstory of Smike, a sad cripple with no family who Nicholas befriends at DoTheBoys Hall and is later revealed to be Ralph Nickleby's son, or Nicholas' cousin. His contribution to the book reminded you that this indeed, was a Dickens novel with a dark, sad edge. His death at the end would have been touching if it wasn't so rushed.
In conclusion, this is one of Dickens' earlier novels, written after "Oliver Twist," and it's evident. It's certainly not a terrible read for those who want to read all of Dickens, but I wouldn't recommend it to someone genuinely looking for a good, British classic. His writing made major improvement over time to create such things as "David Copperfield" and "Bleak House." It has much more of a light, comical tone that doesn't seem to fit with expectations. A lot could have been cut from this book, as well. I don't have the exact page numbers, but sitting on my shelf next to seven other Charles Dickens books, it appears to be the longest. It was well-done in some respects, but in others fell short of its potential. "Nicholas Nickleby" was too much of a dedication for the time spent reading it with little pleasure in return.
I really do love Dickens, but this one was harder to get through than some of his others. A Tale of Two Cities is one of my favorite books ever. This book felt like a bit of a slog to get through at times, though the characters were great and I certainly didn't dislike this book. I kind of wish I'd gotten to read it in serial format...maybe that would have been less daunting.
Nicholas Nickleby constitutes this year’s entry in my Annual Winter Dickens project. It’s only the second novel he ever wrote (third if you count The Pickwick Papers, which is arguably more a series of sketches than a fictional narrative per se), and there’s a lot of youthful energy fizzing from the pages. Young Nicholas is very much the action hero: he’s frequently physically violent when he feels honour is at stake, usually either his or his sister’s. Wackford Squeers and Ralph Nickleby, the two villains of the piece, are extremely melodramatic: they clench their fists, turn white, and snarl, with astonishing regularity. This level of implicit theatricality makes a good deal of sense in a novel so given to explicit theatricality; the Crummles family, with whom Nicholas falls in, are traveling actors, and many of the best scenes in the book involve them.
Characterization suffers somewhat as a result of this trait. Better and more informed minds than mine have written theses on Dickens’s relationship with the theatre, and on his use (and subversion) of comic and tragic stereotypes in his fiction. The Brothers Cheeryble, who give Nicholas a chance when all hope seems lost, and who delight in doing good works without being thanked, might be better named the Brothers Implausyble. Kate, Nicholas’s beautiful, vulnerable sister, is a classically boring Dickens heroine, as is Madeline Bray, the object of Nicholas’s affections. There are, though, moments of rupture when characters – usually minor ones – confound expectations: the madman in love with Mrs. Nickleby, for instance, in his small-clothes and grey worsted stockings, falling down the chimney.
All this said, it is a tremendously enjoyable reading experience. For all that it’s extremely episodic (and long – 777 pages in my edition), its fictional world also feels smaller than that of Dickens’s later novels; I’m thinking especially of David Copperfield, which was the last Dickens I read and which contains several characters whose relevance, even at the time, thoroughly escaped me, whereas pretty much all of the characters in Nickleby recur frequently enough, and have enough to do, that a reader can keep track. The least successful of these, for my money, is John Browdie, who seems to exist mostly so that Dickens can write bad Yorkshire dialect in the depiction of an honest countryman. It’s not subtle, and it’s nowhere near the heights of elegant connectivity that he reaches in Bleak House and Our Mutual Friend: in Nickleby, Dickens’s love of coincidence is still just an excuse for clumsy plotting, instead of a commentary on the fundamental intersectionality of all levels of society. But it’s very fun, and you can sense that with this novel he found his feet.
Characterization suffers somewhat as a result of this trait. Better and more informed minds than mine have written theses on Dickens’s relationship with the theatre, and on his use (and subversion) of comic and tragic stereotypes in his fiction. The Brothers Cheeryble, who give Nicholas a chance when all hope seems lost, and who delight in doing good works without being thanked, might be better named the Brothers Implausyble. Kate, Nicholas’s beautiful, vulnerable sister, is a classically boring Dickens heroine, as is Madeline Bray, the object of Nicholas’s affections. There are, though, moments of rupture when characters – usually minor ones – confound expectations: the madman in love with Mrs. Nickleby, for instance, in his small-clothes and grey worsted stockings, falling down the chimney.
All this said, it is a tremendously enjoyable reading experience. For all that it’s extremely episodic (and long – 777 pages in my edition), its fictional world also feels smaller than that of Dickens’s later novels; I’m thinking especially of David Copperfield, which was the last Dickens I read and which contains several characters whose relevance, even at the time, thoroughly escaped me, whereas pretty much all of the characters in Nickleby recur frequently enough, and have enough to do, that a reader can keep track. The least successful of these, for my money, is John Browdie, who seems to exist mostly so that Dickens can write bad Yorkshire dialect in the depiction of an honest countryman. It’s not subtle, and it’s nowhere near the heights of elegant connectivity that he reaches in Bleak House and Our Mutual Friend: in Nickleby, Dickens’s love of coincidence is still just an excuse for clumsy plotting, instead of a commentary on the fundamental intersectionality of all levels of society. But it’s very fun, and you can sense that with this novel he found his feet.
Not the best of Dickens that I've read so far, but enjoyable nonetheless
adventurous
emotional
funny
hopeful
informative
inspiring
fast-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:
Yes
"Nicholas Nickleby" is a fascinating book when you consider that Dickens wrote it simultaneously with "Oliver Twist." They are quite clearly appositional works. While Oliver is a character of little agency, worked on by criminals of the lowest order, Nicholas is a very active individual who must struggle against the machinations of a single person - his own uncle. Where "Oliver Twist" is quite dark, menacing, and serious, "Nicholas Nickleby" harks back more to Dickens' earlier works with a great deal of social satire and depiction of the absurdities of 19th century London.
I found this book very enjoyable, particularly after having just read the much more malevolent "Oliver Twist." Even more than his previous works, there is a great deal of plot in this story. It is amazing how well Dickens is able to weave together so many separate strands into a wonderfully gratifying narrative of heroes, rogues, innocents, and devils. It does feel cumbrous at times, but the denouement of each storyline is incredibly satisfying. Like his other works, this was published serially and Dickens is a master of the cliffhanger, impelling the reader to continue onward time and time again. His ability to build suspense, both from chapter to chapter and from beginning to end, is unparalleled.
Nicholas is an endearing character, if only because he has all the best qualities that we would each like to imagine within ourselves. He is the epitome of taking the high road, in complete contrast to his uncle, who, as we find in the end, would even dispose of his own child in order to gain his ends. There are so many delightful characters here -- Noggs, Lillyvick, Miss La Creepy, Tim Linkinwater. I can only say, you will never be lonely if you read this book because the company is extraordinary.
I recommend this book highly. It may be a bit long for some readers, but it is well worth the time and effort.
I found this book very enjoyable, particularly after having just read the much more malevolent "Oliver Twist." Even more than his previous works, there is a great deal of plot in this story. It is amazing how well Dickens is able to weave together so many separate strands into a wonderfully gratifying narrative of heroes, rogues, innocents, and devils. It does feel cumbrous at times, but the denouement of each storyline is incredibly satisfying. Like his other works, this was published serially and Dickens is a master of the cliffhanger, impelling the reader to continue onward time and time again. His ability to build suspense, both from chapter to chapter and from beginning to end, is unparalleled.
Nicholas is an endearing character, if only because he has all the best qualities that we would each like to imagine within ourselves. He is the epitome of taking the high road, in complete contrast to his uncle, who, as we find in the end, would even dispose of his own child in order to gain his ends. There are so many delightful characters here -- Noggs, Lillyvick, Miss La Creepy, Tim Linkinwater. I can only say, you will never be lonely if you read this book because the company is extraordinary.
I recommend this book highly. It may be a bit long for some readers, but it is well worth the time and effort.
Classic Dickens: a tale of abused children, kindly businessmen, love, death, villainy, and justice, with a large helping of social commentary. Not his most tightly plotted (I think that would be Bleak House, on which I wrote a paper in AP English forty years ago), not even my current favorite (which is Our Mutual Friend), but a highly moving and memorable book. I've read it once myself and once aloud to my wife. If you simply cannot wade through it, at least watch the BBC version.
slow-paced