You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.9 AVERAGE
3.9 AVERAGE
Enjoyed the language - love Dickens style. Found the plot boring!
Nowhere near as good as his other books.
Disappointed.
Nowhere near as good as his other books.
Disappointed.
It had been several years since I had last read "David Copperfield" and I had forgotten the pleasure.
It's been a weird experience re-reading it now, as an adult, and re-discovering the well-loved, half-familiar characters, the rich language, the intricate plot...
This classic definitely stands the test of time, both its own 170 years since publication and my own personal time-the 20 or so years since I first read it.
It's been a weird experience re-reading it now, as an adult, and re-discovering the well-loved, half-familiar characters, the rich language, the intricate plot...
This classic definitely stands the test of time, both its own 170 years since publication and my own personal time-the 20 or so years since I first read it.
Glad to have finally reread this. It took 20 hours before I was actually invested in the characters (And had a good grasp of which characters were which and their motivations.) Once I finally knew who everyone was, the story came alive more than I ever originally though it would.
Considering the last time I attempted to read this book I was about 12 and gave up about 100 pages from the end, I'd call this go-around a vast improvement. I liked some of the subtle commentary on class/British politics from the mid 1800s, the villain was much more contemptuous as an adult because of his gaslighting and false modesty, and the main romantic relationship was more thoughtful and respectful than I expected it to be.
That being said, I don't think this will ever be one of my favorite classics. David Copperfield (the character) feels bland throughout the entire story and is manipulated by others so much, that the only reason I could figure for making him the main character was so that the reader could listen in to the conversations and figure out what is actually going on in the scene (Even after he's grown up he's pretty naive). I much prefer Les Mis for themes and Tale of Two Cities for Dickens, so I don't know when I will revisit this again. If I do, I will definitely use the audiobook though, because it made the characters much more enjoyable.
Considering the last time I attempted to read this book I was about 12 and gave up about 100 pages from the end, I'd call this go-around a vast improvement. I liked some of the subtle commentary on class/British politics from the mid 1800s, the villain was much more contemptuous as an adult because of his gaslighting and false modesty, and the main romantic relationship
Spoiler
David and AgnesThat being said, I don't think this will ever be one of my favorite classics. David Copperfield (the character) feels bland throughout the entire story and is manipulated by others so much, that the only reason I could figure for making him the main character was so that the reader could listen in to the conversations and figure out what is actually going on in the scene (Even after he's grown up he's pretty naive). I much prefer Les Mis for themes and Tale of Two Cities for Dickens, so I don't know when I will revisit this again. If I do, I will definitely use the audiobook though, because it made the characters much more enjoyable.
I first read this book when I was 16 years old. I thought it would be a good summer read but neglected it for most of the summer. I went to visit my grandmother in Delaware for a week and on my second day I had a terrible allergic reaction to the sun and had to stay indoors for the rest of my stay to avoid re-exposure. What got me through and distracted me from the pain of the hives was this book. I'll never forget it -- “Whether I shall turn out to be the hero of my own life, or whether that station will be held by anybody else, these pages must show.” I'm still trying to be the hero of my own life. This book encouraged me to read other Dickens novels: Little Dorrit, Nicholas Nickleby, Bleak House, A Tale of Two Cities, Martin Chuzzlewit, and Great Expectations. David Copperfield has remained my favorite.
This review is for the recent audiobook version released by Audible in February. I will not comment on the book itself but rather on the performance by the reader. I've wanted to re-read the book for some time but never have. When this audiobook became available it was too good to miss. The reader, Richard Armitage, is excellent in his performance. I've listened to many audiobooks performed by him and haven't been let down yet. So many characters each with his/her own voice, I don't know how he managed it. The performance is so heartfelt and true. I didn't agree with all the voice characterizations (Betsey Trotwood with an Edinburgh accent took some time to get used to), but the performance allowed me to really enjoy the leisurely pace of the descriptive passages as well as drama of the action scenes.
It's 36.5 hours long but I enjoyed every minute of it and was sad to reach the end. Kudos to Audible for getting Mr. Armitage to give such a grand and glorious performance.
This review is for the recent audiobook version released by Audible in February. I will not comment on the book itself but rather on the performance by the reader. I've wanted to re-read the book for some time but never have. When this audiobook became available it was too good to miss. The reader, Richard Armitage, is excellent in his performance. I've listened to many audiobooks performed by him and haven't been let down yet. So many characters each with his/her own voice, I don't know how he managed it. The performance is so heartfelt and true. I didn't agree with all the voice characterizations (Betsey Trotwood with an Edinburgh accent took some time to get used to), but the performance allowed me to really enjoy the leisurely pace of the descriptive passages as well as drama of the action scenes.
It's 36.5 hours long but I enjoyed every minute of it and was sad to reach the end. Kudos to Audible for getting Mr. Armitage to give such a grand and glorious performance.
This started as an exercise to get the general idea of the Demon Copperhead plot, and as a late night audio book sleep aid, but then I got caught up in the masterful storytelling and wanted to hear the whole thing. A combination of great narrator on Librivox and Dickens' humor and insights kept me going through some of the tiring Victorian era style and social norms.
Yesterday evening I suddenly was struck by the urge to write a short essay about the first sentence of "David Copperfield". When I first told my co-workers about my Dickens challenge, one of them said he'd expect one, but that certainly isn't why I wrote it. It's just that while I was reading it, and having fun, my subconscious (I suppose) was thinking about it and finally errupted. Or something.
I won't bore you with the essay, but I have some thoughts about classics I want to put in writing. Another co-worker confessed to me she had never read anything by Dickens, and I replied that was fine. Because I honestly don't think you have to read Dickens. There's no need to read any specific book - but I would argue it doesn't hurt to pick up a classic every now and then.
Classics to me are books (or poems) that answer or pose questions that are still relevant to us today, and thus form a connection to the past. Case in point, David Copperfield's description of his courtship of Dora in all its ridiculousness, which amused me to no end because literally nothing has changed there.
What makes a classic a classic? And what makes a classic worth reading? Obviously the so-called canon is perpetually changing, which is a good thing. Literary canons have been dominated by white male writers for way too long, and it's necessary to re-evaluate what we call classics in order to better reflect who we are as a society now. I'll pick queer writers as an example because I am queer and feel more comfortable speaking about my own experience in this case, but the same is true for writers of colour. It matters to be able to point at history and to say, "We have always been there and we have always mattered". And that is why it's silly to say you have to read Dickens, or Austen, or Brontë, or Melville specifically. (I do think there are exceptions - reading Goethe as a German student or Shakespeare as an English student is important because of their influence on the language itself.) But for me there is something powerful in picking up a book that is hundred or more years old and finding things that resonate.
I'm going to stop rambling now. "David Copperfield" is the only Dickens book I've read thrice, and re-reading it reminded me why. It's just really fun to read.
I won't bore you with the essay, but I have some thoughts about classics I want to put in writing. Another co-worker confessed to me she had never read anything by Dickens, and I replied that was fine. Because I honestly don't think you have to read Dickens. There's no need to read any specific book - but I would argue it doesn't hurt to pick up a classic every now and then.
Classics to me are books (or poems) that answer or pose questions that are still relevant to us today, and thus form a connection to the past. Case in point, David Copperfield's description of his courtship of Dora in all its ridiculousness, which amused me to no end because literally nothing has changed there.
What makes a classic a classic? And what makes a classic worth reading? Obviously the so-called canon is perpetually changing, which is a good thing. Literary canons have been dominated by white male writers for way too long, and it's necessary to re-evaluate what we call classics in order to better reflect who we are as a society now. I'll pick queer writers as an example because I am queer and feel more comfortable speaking about my own experience in this case, but the same is true for writers of colour. It matters to be able to point at history and to say, "We have always been there and we have always mattered". And that is why it's silly to say you have to read Dickens, or Austen, or Brontë, or Melville specifically. (I do think there are exceptions - reading Goethe as a German student or Shakespeare as an English student is important because of their influence on the language itself.) But for me there is something powerful in picking up a book that is hundred or more years old and finding things that resonate.
I'm going to stop rambling now. "David Copperfield" is the only Dickens book I've read thrice, and re-reading it reminded me why. It's just really fun to read.
Ein Klassiker, den ich schon lange lesen wollte. Sicherlich sind ein paar Längen drin - hauptsächlich im mittleren Teil - aber mir hat er gut gefallen. Die autobiographischen Züge fand ich sehr interessant. Ich hatte die englische Ausgabe von Penguin, die Anmerkungen enthält. Diese waren zum Teil sehr hilfreich, um damalige Verhältnisse besser zu verstehen. Dieses wird sicherlich nicht mein letzter Dickens sein.
This was a fairly long one, but really good. Mr. Micawber and his letters crack me up.