Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.02 AVERAGE
4.02 AVERAGE
I may or may not have read every other chapter for the last two hundred pages. I do not know what to do with Dickens. On one hand, I think he is pretty funny and entertaining. On the other hand, I get the impression that he is kind of an asshole. And at a certain point a book is just too long.
Dickens last complete novel. A total powerhouse. Lots of fantastic characters, lots of thematic dealings in duality, the nature of reality & self. Definitely a dark turn for Boz.
slow-paced
I love Dickens. I really do. Also uncommonly good is the 1998 miniseries based on this book.
Every bit as funny as I found it at fourteen - the skewering of Society is Dickens's comic genius at its height. Other elements sit less easily with me now than they did then (Dickens's treatment of disability, for instance, leave much to be desired) but Our Mutual Friend remains richly worth rereading.
I first read this as part of a Victorian Lit class is college, and it became one of my favorite books. It's Dickens at his very Dickens-est--tightly knit plot, vast web of interconnected characters, sweeping or sarcastic or poignent comments on the human condition. Centered around the will of old Harmon, a miserly old grouch, and the people it touches in one way or the other, everything gets thrown out of whack and then set back right in a neat, satisfying ending.
What makes a Dickens book for me is the characters, and here we have some of his best. I could fill a review just describing them. From sweet, brave, selfless Lizzie to petulant but good-hearted Bella; from the conniving Wegg and the evil Riderhood to the dear Boffins and the shiny bran-new Veneerings, all are expertly drawn and filled out. To anyone daunted at the length, soldier on. It's worth it.
What makes a Dickens book for me is the characters, and here we have some of his best. I could fill a review just describing them. From sweet, brave, selfless Lizzie to petulant but good-hearted Bella; from the conniving Wegg and the evil Riderhood to the dear Boffins and the shiny bran-new Veneerings, all are expertly drawn and filled out. To anyone daunted at the length, soldier on. It's worth it.
SUMMARY - Money can't buy me love, in 800 pages rather than 2 mins 11 secs. The course of human motives proves as windingly unstraightforward as the Thames, as both take sharp turns that disorient and surprise.
‐------------
Deep Father Thames takes the limelight in Our Mutual Friend, even as other places are left in the shadows. The steady presence of the river is the one constant. Like the comfortingly-familiar rotating opening credits of Eastenders, the river is the dependably fixed point. Normally Dickens introduces the city quarters, towns and villages for the action with enough detail to feel like you could walk the streets. Certainly, there were times where Our Mutual Friend gives a sense of place, but these tend to be confined to scenes such as the Millwall discovery and Greenwich restaurant celebration overlooking the river traffic.
In contrast, the cast of characters prove more unpredictable and quixotic than perhaps in any Dickens novel. This is a novel about being led into temptation, and the proving of one's mettle/metal (base iron or gold). Bella vascilates but also matures, and even beyond those like Eugene whose Damascene moment gives a stock basis for transformation, other relationships deepen and bloom of their own accord. I enjoy the cartoonish elements behind the stock characters in Dickens c.pre-1850 novels, but it's a more unsettling and engaging set of moral fables here because as readers we are not permitted to pigeon-hole those such as Boffin, Headstone or Eugene merely into 'good' and 'bad'.
Role reversals happen throughout, and perhaps for this reason the society set (Veneerings et al) are needed for stodgy contrast as being emblems of solid stability. I don't know, other than that I much preferred the parts where age and class were being upended. The infantilisation of Pa Wilfer and Mr Doll (/Wren) were by turns playful and anarchic, while the inverted snobbery of the Dustmen nouveau riche or the various forfeitures of wealth and status for cosy contentment worked for me.
The names get close to an apogee of silliness in Our Mutual Friend (Jenny Wren, Sloppy, Twemloe), and having now read all 13 of Dickens's completed novels, I probably prefer his more autobiographical novels that felt less stagey but more close to home. Davis Copperfield, Little Dorrit and Great Expectations (also A Tale of Two Cities) have been those I've found most engaging, perhaps because they seem to come from a real place of shame, anger and qualified triumph. Our Mutual Friend doesn't quite rank so highly for me on an emotional level, even though I recognise its artistry and sophisiticated plotting.
Like Bleak House, this novel offers plenty of surprises (arguably more in this case), and in each case the complicated plot coheres. As with BH we get multiple deaths spliced with lighter moments. Jenny Wren was as daft as any Dickens creation, playing the court jester to good effect; and I always perked up when we got to scenes with peg-legged Wegg, the paternal Cherub, and the Boffins. In contrast the society portraits may just have dated, but they also felt more like set-dressing. The Veneerings make a late but slight reappearance, and the Lamalles make a sharp exit stage right. Neither were hugely missed by me.
The relatively sympathetic portrait of a Jewish figure was a pleasant surprise. I need to read up on the context, but my first thought was whether Benjamin Disraeli's rise to prominence in the 1860s may have helped foster more positive popular representations, embodied in 'godmother' Riah. Beyond its more tolerant tone on creed, the gender-flip made it feel even more current.
More familiar were the references. Someone had presumably counted how many Dickens novels mention Macbeth, Hamlet and Robinson Crusoe. Like three witches at All Hallows Eve, these books seem to troop back into view at least once in every novel. Our Mutual Friend is Dickens as Shakespeare tragedy. I might generally prefer him in Defoean comedic adventure mode, but Our Mutual Friend will still rank among my favourites. They are all here: the stormy flight, the pathos-drenched death, the cosy hearthside scenes, the shifty schemers, the marital bliss, the scars of poverty, the arrogance of unmerited wealth, and the author's own delight in words.
‐------------
Deep Father Thames takes the limelight in Our Mutual Friend, even as other places are left in the shadows. The steady presence of the river is the one constant. Like the comfortingly-familiar rotating opening credits of Eastenders, the river is the dependably fixed point. Normally Dickens introduces the city quarters, towns and villages for the action with enough detail to feel like you could walk the streets. Certainly, there were times where Our Mutual Friend gives a sense of place, but these tend to be confined to scenes such as the Millwall discovery and Greenwich restaurant celebration overlooking the river traffic.
In contrast, the cast of characters prove more unpredictable and quixotic than perhaps in any Dickens novel. This is a novel about being led into temptation, and the proving of one's mettle/metal (base iron or gold). Bella vascilates but also matures, and even beyond those like Eugene whose Damascene moment gives a stock basis for transformation, other relationships deepen and bloom of their own accord. I enjoy the cartoonish elements behind the stock characters in Dickens c.pre-1850 novels, but it's a more unsettling and engaging set of moral fables here because as readers we are not permitted to pigeon-hole those such as Boffin, Headstone or Eugene merely into 'good' and 'bad'.
Role reversals happen throughout, and perhaps for this reason the society set (Veneerings et al) are needed for stodgy contrast as being emblems of solid stability. I don't know, other than that I much preferred the parts where age and class were being upended. The infantilisation of Pa Wilfer and Mr Doll (/Wren) were by turns playful and anarchic, while the inverted snobbery of the Dustmen nouveau riche or the various forfeitures of wealth and status for cosy contentment worked for me.
The names get close to an apogee of silliness in Our Mutual Friend (Jenny Wren, Sloppy, Twemloe), and having now read all 13 of Dickens's completed novels, I probably prefer his more autobiographical novels that felt less stagey but more close to home. Davis Copperfield, Little Dorrit and Great Expectations (also A Tale of Two Cities) have been those I've found most engaging, perhaps because they seem to come from a real place of shame, anger and qualified triumph. Our Mutual Friend doesn't quite rank so highly for me on an emotional level, even though I recognise its artistry and sophisiticated plotting.
Like Bleak House, this novel offers plenty of surprises (arguably more in this case), and in each case the complicated plot coheres. As with BH we get multiple deaths spliced with lighter moments. Jenny Wren was as daft as any Dickens creation, playing the court jester to good effect; and I always perked up when we got to scenes with peg-legged Wegg, the paternal Cherub, and the Boffins. In contrast the society portraits may just have dated, but they also felt more like set-dressing. The Veneerings make a late but slight reappearance, and the Lamalles make a sharp exit stage right. Neither were hugely missed by me.
The relatively sympathetic portrait of a Jewish figure was a pleasant surprise. I need to read up on the context, but my first thought was whether Benjamin Disraeli's rise to prominence in the 1860s may have helped foster more positive popular representations, embodied in 'godmother' Riah. Beyond its more tolerant tone on creed, the gender-flip made it feel even more current.
More familiar were the references. Someone had presumably counted how many Dickens novels mention Macbeth, Hamlet and Robinson Crusoe. Like three witches at All Hallows Eve, these books seem to troop back into view at least once in every novel. Our Mutual Friend is Dickens as Shakespeare tragedy. I might generally prefer him in Defoean comedic adventure mode, but Our Mutual Friend will still rank among my favourites. They are all here: the stormy flight, the pathos-drenched death, the cosy hearthside scenes, the shifty schemers, the marital bliss, the scars of poverty, the arrogance of unmerited wealth, and the author's own delight in words.
One of Dickens' darkest novels, with explorations of repressed sexuality, a loss of identity, and Dickens' favorite "money don't buy happiness" moral. Weak points include the Boffins' overly complicated, good-hearted schemes and an ~attempt at a sympathetic Jewish character, who is unfortunately laden with some of the usual stereotypes. It's still a nice change from Dickens' earlier portrayal of Fagin.
But the other characters Dickens draws here are the most fascinating of his career: the wry, tortured duo of Mortimer and Eugene; the wise-cracking Jenny Wren; BRADLEY HEADSTONE, the baby Claude Frollo you've always wanted; and Mr. Venus, the morose taxidermist. And that hasn't even covered the main protagonists, who are darling. Dickens leaves so much to think about here, and it's definitely one of my favorites of his.
But the other characters Dickens draws here are the most fascinating of his career: the wry, tortured duo of Mortimer and Eugene; the wise-cracking Jenny Wren; BRADLEY HEADSTONE, the baby Claude Frollo you've always wanted; and Mr. Venus, the morose taxidermist. And that hasn't even covered the main protagonists, who are darling. Dickens leaves so much to think about here, and it's definitely one of my favorites of his.
It was a foggy day in London, and the fog was heavy and dark. Animate London, with smarting eyes and irritated lungs, was blinking, wheezing, and choking; inanimate London was a sooty spectre, divided in purpose between being visible and invisible, and so being wholly neither. Gaslights flared in the shops with a haggard and unblest air, as knowing themselves to be night-creatures that had no business abroad under the sun; while the sun itself, when it was for a few moments dimly indicated through circling eddies of fog, showed as if it had gone out, and were collapsing flat and cold.
Reading a Dickens novel is like stepping into a bath that is already piping hot - even if you've read many of his other books before, it still takes a moment to adjust, to settle into the pace, and begin the process of memorising its large cast of characters as well as starting to work out the connections between each of the various plots. I completely understand why this puts people off and why some readers give up within the first hundred pages, but, regardless of how overwhelming all of that can be, I love his books so much.
Our Mutual Friend was Dickens' final completed novel and, knowing that, it really does feel like a crescendo that highlights all of his strengths, demonstrates his development and growth over the years, and it just feels like a perfect farewell to one of the greatest writers of all time. It features some of his finest characters such as Eugene Wrayburn, Lizzie Hexam, Bradley Headstone, and the Boffins, it is a balanced blend of dark grittiness and twinkling humour, and the story itself unfolds so beautifully and, even though there's so much going on, it didn't lose me for one minute - I was completely engaged from page one.
The social commentary in this book is especially sharp, even for a Dickens, and, while he can be scathing about the follies and vapidity of society, his work also exudes so much love for the human condition. I think that Dickens despaired with society many times and in many ways, but he never completely succumbed to absolute pessimism and cynicism - he saw the charm and the tragedy, the flaws and the beauty, and there is so much hope in his books.
While I don't think this one quite surpasses the brilliance of Bleak House or Little Dorrit for me, Our Mutual Friend is a masterpiece and a perfect final novel.
Reading a Dickens novel is like stepping into a bath that is already piping hot - even if you've read many of his other books before, it still takes a moment to adjust, to settle into the pace, and begin the process of memorising its large cast of characters as well as starting to work out the connections between each of the various plots. I completely understand why this puts people off and why some readers give up within the first hundred pages, but, regardless of how overwhelming all of that can be, I love his books so much.
Our Mutual Friend was Dickens' final completed novel and, knowing that, it really does feel like a crescendo that highlights all of his strengths, demonstrates his development and growth over the years, and it just feels like a perfect farewell to one of the greatest writers of all time. It features some of his finest characters such as Eugene Wrayburn, Lizzie Hexam, Bradley Headstone, and the Boffins, it is a balanced blend of dark grittiness and twinkling humour, and the story itself unfolds so beautifully and, even though there's so much going on, it didn't lose me for one minute - I was completely engaged from page one.
The social commentary in this book is especially sharp, even for a Dickens, and, while he can be scathing about the follies and vapidity of society, his work also exudes so much love for the human condition. I think that Dickens despaired with society many times and in many ways, but he never completely succumbed to absolute pessimism and cynicism - he saw the charm and the tragedy, the flaws and the beauty, and there is so much hope in his books.
While I don't think this one quite surpasses the brilliance of Bleak House or Little Dorrit for me, Our Mutual Friend is a masterpiece and a perfect final novel.
I got to page 720 with 100 pages to go and had to quit. Some of the female characters were becoming so twee I couldn't take it any more. I can take the patronizing anti-anti-semitism with a grain of salt, but the infantilized women were just too much. blech.