Take a photo of a barcode or cover
Gee, I dunno. I just don't this was Dickens' best outing. A lot of the plot just feels kind of random, and like he just improvised as he went along. It starts out as a road book, but then about halfway through we switch course and never really regain that. Then at the end a few things are tied up with a bittersweet bow that seemed really forced, like a bad episode of Seinfeld.
I still can't get over how great Mil Nicholson's Dickens readings are, though. She's working her way through all his novels, and her audio versions are free at librivox.org. She seems to be working her way roughly from his weakest stuff to his best. Our Mutual Friend got posted last year, and it should only get better from there.
I still can't get over how great Mil Nicholson's Dickens readings are, though. She's working her way through all his novels, and her audio versions are free at librivox.org. She seems to be working her way roughly from his weakest stuff to his best. Our Mutual Friend got posted last year, and it should only get better from there.
dark
adventurous
emotional
funny
lighthearted
mysterious
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
Mild Spoilers
My favourite story about this book is that when it was being published as a newspaper serial the public became so invested in the fate of Little Nell that in America crowds flocked to the docks where the updates were being shipped in crying "does she yet live?"
Apart from that I didn't much enjoy this book, it was pretty dull and not as complex as Dickens other well known works. The characters were two-dimensional and drifted through the plot with no personal drive.
Of course it is still Dickens so you're bound to get something out of it, and it is a reasonable morality tale of the tragic Victorian poor but save yourself the slog, skim the Sparknotes summary and go and read Bleak House or Great Expectations instead.
My favourite story about this book is that when it was being published as a newspaper serial the public became so invested in the fate of Little Nell that in America crowds flocked to the docks where the updates were being shipped in crying "does she yet live?"
Apart from that I didn't much enjoy this book, it was pretty dull and not as complex as Dickens other well known works. The characters were two-dimensional and drifted through the plot with no personal drive.
Of course it is still Dickens so you're bound to get something out of it, and it is a reasonable morality tale of the tragic Victorian poor but save yourself the slog, skim the Sparknotes summary and go and read Bleak House or Great Expectations instead.
The weakness of Dickens' fourth novel is its lack of understanding who the main character is. Nell is the Oliver Twist equivalent whose purity perseveres through many trials (even if her life doesn't), but Kit is the agent, the person who moves the story along. That said, I can tell how much Dickens enjoyed writing this book and how much the character of Nell meant to him, and certain scenes with her are incredibly powerful.
I keep trying to get people to tell me which is Dickens' best, so I won't have to read all the others. But no one helps much. Some group on the Internet said it was Bleak House, but I think that is the least favorite of the five I've read in the past year.
Based on the five books I've read so far, it appears that Dickens' stories are all pretty much the same. There's always orphans, much benighted, but stout hearted, moral and persistent. There's usually some kind of deformed villain, a ne'er-do-well sponger, a kindly old gentleman or two, an eccentric spinster, and likely a few other character types. Oh yeah, many, but not all, lawyers are conniving and grasping.
Anyway, The Old Curiosity Shop has all this in spades. It's the story of Little Nell and her grandfather, more-or-less. Also the story of Kit. There's lots of pathos, but, what's rather fun, lots of Dickens' wry humorous portrayal of the frailties of humanity. Dickens blathers incessantly, but it's such entertaining blather that one can never tire of it. I wonder why it took me so many decades to discover Dickens?
Based on the five books I've read so far, it appears that Dickens' stories are all pretty much the same. There's always orphans, much benighted, but stout hearted, moral and persistent. There's usually some kind of deformed villain, a ne'er-do-well sponger, a kindly old gentleman or two, an eccentric spinster, and likely a few other character types. Oh yeah, many, but not all, lawyers are conniving and grasping.
Anyway, The Old Curiosity Shop has all this in spades. It's the story of Little Nell and her grandfather, more-or-less. Also the story of Kit. There's lots of pathos, but, what's rather fun, lots of Dickens' wry humorous portrayal of the frailties of humanity. Dickens blathers incessantly, but it's such entertaining blather that one can never tire of it. I wonder why it took me so many decades to discover Dickens?
Un libro molto molto triste e malinconico.
Ma, come spesso accade con Dickens, anche molto dolce.
Qui viene indagato principalmente il grottesco, in tutte le sue forme possibili.
E anche la morte aleggia su tutto il testo, mai come distruzione e dolore, ma come parte della vita, anzi, quasi come via di fuga da una vita fatta di sofferenze.
Inoltre, ciascuno dei personaggi è allegorico e racchiude una parte di umanità.
Iconici Nella e Quilp, il bene e il male.
Personalmente, ho anche trovato dei punti in comune con L'uomo che ride di Hugo, sia per quanto concerne appunto la rappresentazione del grottesco, che anche quella di Londra, come anche quella della bontà, ma anche della bassezza umana.
Magistrale l'introduzione di Giorgio Manganelli, che consiglio di leggere alla fine.
Ma, come spesso accade con Dickens, anche molto dolce.
Qui viene indagato principalmente il grottesco, in tutte le sue forme possibili.
E anche la morte aleggia su tutto il testo, mai come distruzione e dolore, ma come parte della vita, anzi, quasi come via di fuga da una vita fatta di sofferenze.
Inoltre, ciascuno dei personaggi è allegorico e racchiude una parte di umanità.
Iconici Nella e Quilp, il bene e il male.
Personalmente, ho anche trovato dei punti in comune con L'uomo che ride di Hugo, sia per quanto concerne appunto la rappresentazione del grottesco, che anche quella di Londra, come anche quella della bontà, ma anche della bassezza umana.
Magistrale l'introduzione di Giorgio Manganelli, che consiglio di leggere alla fine.
adventurous
dark
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Review for the Purnell abridged version:
This book was simulantaneously one I didn't particularly enjoy, while also being one I think is well written. The characters and observations about human nature make it worthwhile reading, but not gripping.
It was my first Dickens, and I liked his prose but not the plot. It generally landed on the depressing side of life, with limited moments of lightheartedness or even the characters having an acceptable time. I left it alone many months before forcing myself to finish it. I didn't not enjoy the experience of reading it while I was reading, but I was never so engrossed as to want to rush back to it. I only found out that I read the abridged version (~215 pages) when looking for the edition, so I don't know what aspects I might be missing, but I did not enjoy it enough to go hunting for the ~600 page version. The bulk of the book being a pair meandering with no destination and falling into various depressing situations was not to my taste.
Also, possibly because I left so many months between coming back to it, I found it hard to keep track of who everyone was. I did however, like that every loose end was tied up at the end. However, I didn't have any emotional connection to anyone.
There was one singular event that truly struck me while reading, which was Nell hearing someone coming in at night to steal something, only to turn and find out the thief is her own grandfather. That scene hit perfectly- the initial horror of something scary in the night and which then morphs into the horror of human weakness, being taken advantage of by someone who should love you and is simulataneously something to be feared and pitied. The scene hit truly in a way the rest of the book didn't.
This book was simulantaneously one I didn't particularly enjoy, while also being one I think is well written. The characters and observations about human nature make it worthwhile reading, but not gripping.
It was my first Dickens, and I liked his prose but not the plot. It generally landed on the depressing side of life, with limited moments of lightheartedness or even the characters having an acceptable time. I left it alone many months before forcing myself to finish it. I didn't not enjoy the experience of reading it while I was reading, but I was never so engrossed as to want to rush back to it. I only found out that I read the abridged version (~215 pages) when looking for the edition, so I don't know what aspects I might be missing, but I did not enjoy it enough to go hunting for the ~600 page version. The bulk of the book being a pair meandering with no destination and falling into various depressing situations was not to my taste.
Also, possibly because I left so many months between coming back to it, I found it hard to keep track of who everyone was. I did however, like that every loose end was tied up at the end. However,
Spoiler
one character dies at the end, and I was mildly disappointed but not truly sad becauseThere was one singular event that truly struck me while reading, which was Nell hearing someone coming in at night to steal something, only to turn and find out the thief is her own grandfather. That scene hit perfectly- the initial horror of something scary in the night and which then morphs into the horror of human weakness, being taken advantage of by someone who should love you and is simulataneously something to be feared and pitied. The scene hit truly in a way the rest of the book didn't.