All About Books discussion

Jean - I will join in whenever you start another Dickens novel. It'll be great to re-read and savour; and share opinions.

That's great Leslie, and John :) September here we come!

I remember a fair bit of The Old Curiosity Shop. I found it easier going than NN. I will try join in. It has one of my favourite villains (such a well described character)

And a gift for all puzzle setters because of the initial of his name :D

Great to have you alongside, Heather ;)

Before I record starting the next novel, I'll reiterate my amended plan, which edited at the half-year stage in comment 1. I'm keeping to my bi-monthly plan, but inserting a book about Dickens in between each novel by him. So my previous read in July was Charles Dickens and the Great Theatre of the World by Simon Callow, which I enjoyed immensely. I'll amend my list in comment one for these "supplementary reads" as I go, without altering the original challenge.
Here is a link to my review for that one.

Understood.

Oh Jean enjoy this one I should have spoken to you before starting David Copperfield because I also have this one on my shelves. :(

The Old Curiosity Shop:

I started this yesterday and found it intriguing from the start. Instead of giving a lot of (it has to be said) rather dreary family history, as in the previous Nicholas Nickleby, Dickens is straight in there. In fact he has written himself into the book from the start with his unusual first sentence,

"Night is generally my time for walking"

Anyone who know Charles Dickens's life, will recognise the author from this. He used to walk for miles, and for hours on end, all over London - and often at night.

What an atmosphere Dickens has created straightaway, with his two abominable grotesques, his old musty house full of "curiosities", and the tiny "fairylike" child. And what a mystery! We are hooked right from the start by the questions the author/narrator also feels. Where does the old man go every night and why? And is he really rich?

(I've only read 3 chapters so far out of 73, so there are no spoilers here! And don't worry - I'll use tabs if I ever mention any significant plot developments.)

The Old Curiosity Shop was originally intended as a sketch for the magazine "Master Humphrey's Clock," but after he had written - and published - the first three chapters, Dickens decided to turn it into a novel.

When the reader starts the novel, the voice of the narrator, feels particularly personal. We can easily recognise him as the author himself. Then he tells us at the end of the third chapter that he is going to disappear, and from then on (presumably) we will have an omniscient narrator. The upshot of this is that for the reader, who is already feeling an unworldly sense with this novel, is put on edge even more, and feels a little disturbed... disjointed... dislocated.

OK, I'm hooked. Anyone else in with me?

Aw - never mind. Enjoy David Copperfield Tracey - it's a great book - his own particular favourite I gather ;)

I decided to read David Copperfield after watching The Invisible Woman. He said he was finding it hard to let his favourite child go. I do think he loved his writing maybe more than he loved people. :)

Jean - I shall read it quickly as you read it (as you know, I read it very recently) to benefit from your insights (May be even to add/disagree from time to time!

I don't think Dickens changed from narrator to third person in any predetermined way, just fell out of the change in plan - or so I think I read?

That's fantastic John! Yes, it'll maybe be more of a "memory jog" for you since you've read it so recently.

I've been looking into the "switch", where he tells us at the end of chapter 3 that now he's introduced the characters he will,

"detach myself from its further course, and leave those who have prominent and necessary parts in it to speak and act for themselves."

The change of plan, when The Old Curiosity Shop became so popular, was to lengthen it into a novel which would then continue to be published in serial form in Master Humphrey's Clock. Later on, when published as a book, he decided not to alter anything. So we keep the different "feel" (sort of mysterious and spooky - no humour as we have in later chapters) of the first 3 chapter, with the rather unwholesome narrator, who had accompanied Little Nell home,

"It would be a curious speculation" said I after some restless turns across and across the room, "to imagine her in her future life holding her solitary way among a crowd of wild grotesque companions, the only pure, fresh, youthful object among the throng. It would be curious to find - "
I checked myself here, for the theme was carrying me along with it at a great pace, and I already saw before me a region on which I was little disposed to enter. I agreed with myself that this was idle musing, and resolved to go to bed, and court forgetfulness."

which is a very unsettling passage narrated by a sinister sort of character, who for some reason had delayed taking Nell home by the straight route. I personally wonder if Dickens might have been going to make this into a kind of ghost story, as it is so unsettling.

There is a noticeable difference and lightness of touch, starting with chapter 4. Have a look!

Dickens refers to the fact that he did not change anything it in one of his prefaces,

"Master Humphrey (before his devotion to the bread and butter business) was originally supposed to be the narrator of the story. As it was constructed from the beginning, however, with a view to separate publication when completed, his demise has not involved the necessity of any alteration."

Jean wrote: "Aw - never mind. Enjoy David Copperfield Tracey - it's a great book - his own particular favourite I gather ;)"

And one of mine too - is this your first time reading it Tracey? So many memorable characters in that...

Jean, every time I visit this thread of yours I get a sudden urge to grab the nearest book by Dickens.

LOL Charbel! One day you'll give in you know... I still have a mental note that you'll be joining in reading David Copperfield :)

Tracey's reading that one at the moment though, if you want to read it now. It's still a way off for me.

Jean - just read the first three chapters again, while having a coffee and vanilla slice at Hassop Station after walking the dogs. With the three at my feet! Wonderful

How right you are about the unsettling nature of the narration. And the change of style/tone from the beginning of ch4.

How well the mystery/intrigue has been established. Reading again so soon reminds me of 'doing' set books for exams, so many decades ago! Also shows how bad a memory one (I, at least) has.

We have so far seen: Grandfather/Nell/Kit; Fred/Dick; Quilp. The fairy tale begins, and the troll has made his first entry - boo, hiss.

My Penguin Classics edition has illustrations by Phiz and Cattermole. So far we have one of Nell in bed in her room, and one with Grandfather/Fred/Dick, and the narrator (I .... made the best feint I could of being occupied in examining ..... and paying very little attention to the persons before me).

The Green illustrations in the 866 scenes book you looked at has Grandfather/Nell/narrator first, followed by the same four as above, then one of Kit being taught to read by Nell, with Grandfather/narrator behind.

I can't really judge which are better. The Phiz one of Nell looks a bit mature, and a bit like a death-bed scene(!). The Green one makes Nell look like a miniature crone to me. Later on, I think I preferred the more definitely-lined and harder Green ones.

At what rate will you be reading this - for planning purposes?

Lovely, John! I envy you your dogs, Hassop - not to mention the vanilla slice! :D I'm planning on 4 chapters a day - but that's an aim really. I missed out yesterday as the rotten hospital took all my stuff off me and put it in a locker, leaving me to twiddle my thumbs for ages :( And I'd thought that was a prime time for reading too... LOL!

Funny you should be examining the illustrations so closely! I'd been looking into that too, mainly because one of the versions I have seems to have an additional illustration as the frontispiece, and I cannot find mention of it online anywhere. It's signed "HKB", so is clearly "Phiz"'s". And that book is an 1892 copy of the first edition - Green's illustrations must have been a later edition I think. I'm still looking - it almost tells the whole story, and has an eggtimer prominently interwoven in the design. I'll copy it here later if I can't link it.

The first edition was illustrated by George Cattermole and Hablot Browne, with just one single illustration each from Samuel Williams and Daniel Maclise.

Because of the illustrations you pick out - the first one of Little Nell, and these words,

"I had her image, without any effort of imagination, surrounded and beset by everything that was so foreign to its nature...she seemed to exist in a kind of allegory, and having these shapes about her, ...to imagine her in her future life holding her solitary way among a crowd of wild grotesque companions, the only pure, fresh, youthful object among the throng."

I'm fairly sure in my own mind that at this stage Dickens had a sort of ghost story planned, with the narrator being somehow "psychic". You are absolutely right - that particular engraving (view spoiler)[ looks like a deathbed scene, and is similar to another illustration near the end (hide spoiler)]. So I think it is probably meant as a portent.

Jean,

It does get curious. I've just bought on Kindle for <£2, a Complete Illustrated Charles Dickens Novels - 'with their original illustrations from first publication'.

This omits the Nell in bed one, but has one a la Green with narrator and Nell entering the shop, with grandfather with a candle! Puzzling.

Suck eggs teaching, I'm sure, but I found, at 'charlesdickenspage.com/illustrations....', David Perdue's Charles Dickens Page, which has all the original illustrations to view, it says. For The OCS it has the same as my Penguin edition.

If you search for 'phiz old curiosity shop frontispiece' or something similar, you get those google book references such as'books.google.co.uk/books?.isbn=146554298, which allow one to scroll within relevant books.

Also, within Amazon, you can look within books for sale, such as The OCS (Clarendon Dickens) (costing £177.50!), which has all kinds of appendices visible about the issues, engravers, etc.

But, I'm tired. Got to do three hours gardening, listening to Dombey and Son, now.

I had looked at David Perdue's page for the frontispiece - no joy there. None of the other sites either, which are very mixed and random with many glitches. It is a mystery!

Thanks for the input :) And watch your back with the gardening...

Jean wrote: "LOL Charbel! One day you'll give in you know... I still have a mental note that you'll be joining in reading David Copperfield :)

Tracey's reading that one at the moment though, if yo..."

I can wait. I have a lot of books on my plate at the moment.

I shall look forward to reading it Charbel.

At the moment, back to The Old Curiosity Shop, I am wondering if Daniel Quilp is the nastiest piece of work Dickens ever invented! I can't think of a worse one...

I've not read all of his novels yet but he is certainly impressively evil

Quilp's not even just supremely malicious, he's sort of sub-human, threatening to "bite"people all the time! Here's a description of him in his sleep,

"hanging so far out of his bed that he almost seemed to be standing on his head, and whom, either from the uneasiness of this posture or in one of his agreeable habits, was gasping and growling with his mouth wide open, and the whites (or rather the dirty yellows) of his eyes distinctly visible."

I shall be interested to see if he has just one redeemable feature!

His description conjures up a sub-human image. Perhaps more goblin or devil-like than human. I remember being very struck by his descriptions when reading the book

Yes, he uses the words "goblin" and "evil" a lot!

I've been very taken with the metaphors Dickens is using. Quilp seems to pursue the wanderers even as they try to get away from him, both in glimpses by Nell and also in the guise of Punch, as a metaphor. However far they go, they seem to be trapped by various situations and scoundrels. The death of a poor little scholar seems to either be a metaphor for freedom, or else (view spoiler)[a foreshadowing of Little Nell's own death (hide spoiler)].

We're getting some marvellously eccentric characters as well. I had thought that it was only in Nicholas Nickleby where he indulged his love for theatricals so much. But here, we've had a circus troupe... and now waxworks. And what a show! Mannequins who can double as different characters at the... drop of a hat? LOL! I particularly liked a Jasper Packlemerton who had 14 wives and destroyed them all by tickling the souls of their feet. An amazing feat of imagination by The Inimitable? Well...no, actually!

"A news item first published in the Illustrated Police News on December 11, 1869: "A Wife Driven Insane by Husband Tickling Her Feet." The account states that Michael Puckridge had previously threatened the life of his wife... Puckridge tricked his wife into allowing herself to be tied to a plank. Afterward, "Puckridge deliberately and persistently tickled the soles of her feet with a feather. For a long time he continued to operate upon his unhappy victim who was rendered frantic by the process. Eventually, she swooned, whereupon her husband released her. It soon became too manifest that the light of reason had fled. Mrs. Puckridge was taken to the workhouse where she was placed with the other insane inmates."

Extraordinary!

I am just getting started, so am on Chapter 6 or 7. Quilp certainly seems very malicious and the way he has cowed his wife makes me think he must have acted in some horrible manner to her. This is my first time reading this, and I don't think that I have seen any of the dramatizations either.

So Dickens had no imagination, just copied from the equivalent of The Reader's Digest's 'Life's Like That' column? I thought so!

Was the waxworks show taken from real life - I imagine so?

Very probably, John!

Glad you're in now Leslie :) Don't worry, I'll use spoilers - and I have a feeling you'll "overtake" me soon anyway :D

"Little Nell" seems to have different personas/features to fit the plot at the time! The most usual way Dickens refers to her is as "the child" just as he refers to Quilp as "the dwarf", but on one occasion we learn that she is fully 14, and in a recent episode, she seems to have stunned a crowd of onlookers by her beauty. That hadn't come into anything up to now... She seems to be an accomplished reader too.

I have a feeling Quilp is just going to be evil personnified the whole time. At least earlier villains such as Bill Sikes and Ralph Nickleby showed signs of remorse at the end!

Jean wrote: "Very probably, John!

Glad you're in now Leslie :) Don't worry, I'll use spoilers - and I have a feeling you'll "overtake" me soon anyway :D

"Little Nell" seems to have different personas/feature..."

I always felt that in most of his novels, there's a character like Little Nell. But that's probably just me.

No you're right I think, Charbel. He had a penchant for what he saw a perfect young Victorian woman with all the Victorian virtues. They are frequently 17 years old though - which was the age at which Mary Hogarth, his sister-in-law whom he adored and never really got over, died. Writing these drippy girls into his novels seems to have provided a sort of catharsis. We just have to put up with them and wait for the next bit! :D

(Oh, I gather some people do think their goodness, kindness, neatness, good-with-a-thimble-ness is to be emulated. But it's not nearly as entertaining as his other characters' antics!)

Well said.

;)

Good characters are rarely as interesting as evil ones!

Very true...

Oh, Jean - what would Dickens be without his young ladies. Drippy, indeed! As you know, I'm onto Dombey & son. Talk about a drippy boy and his interminable 'old-fashioned-ness'. Give me Nell any day.

I didn't say there aren't plenty of strong females to counteract them, John! Or evil ones either! I just don't tend to go for the "all sweetness and light" bit myself. And yes, there are plenty of boy drips too, but they usually improve as the novel goes on.

But it's the drippy ones I like!

Re boys: But not in the case of Dombey & Son!

LOL!

Oh my I have just read chapter 33 with the description of the "dragon" Miss Sally Brass. Funniest thing I've read for a long time. Well since the feather-tickling episode anyway...

John wrote: "Oh, Jean - what would Dickens be without his young ladies. Drippy, indeed! As you know, I'm onto Dombey & son. Talk about a drippy boy and his interminable 'old-fashioned-ness'. Give me Nell any day."

Oh Dombey and Son is so good! Just wait.

I am still pretty early in The Old Curiosity Shop so I eagerly await the tickling episode :)

Leslie - as always with Dickens, I'm enjoying the writing of D&S if not the drawn-out doings of Paul at the school. But I take heart at your words - I've never not enjoyed one yet since starting from the first, although I'm not expecting to enjoy Hard Times so much when I get there, as I've read that before and been disappointed. I now seem to get so much pleasure from the writing, without really caring about any plot creakiness!

I know! Whatever the basic premise of the book, Dickens is Dickens and will find that kernel of humour!

When I was beside myself consumed by giggles earlier this evening, Chris cheekily asked me, "Oh, have you got to the (view spoiler)[ death of Little Nell (hide spoiler)]?"

I didn't really like Hard Times so much either. I have difficulties separat the writing from the plot -- I am mostly a plot-driven reader (must be all those mysteries I read! although you are a mystery reader as well...).

Well I certainly don't like novels with no plot! I think that's why I have such trouble with stream-of-consciousness stuff! But Dickens always tells stories - even in The Pickwick Papers there are stories after stories - and a linking one too.

Hard Times is a grim one though isn't it, as I remember, and shorter too, so perhaps not as many... "divertissements"?

Another little bit of trivia:

chapter 33 - my favourite so far, as I said - includes in the first paragraph,

"the historian takes the friendly reader by the hand, and springing with him into the air, and cleaving the same at a greater rate than ever Don Cleophas Leandro Perez Zambullo and his familiar travelled through that pleasant region in company, alights with him upon the pavement of Bevis Marks."

In other words, we've finished with the Mrs Jarley and her waxworks for the moment, and we're going to follow some other characters (in fact, the lawyers.)

But quite apart from the admittedly engaging and joyous thought of leaping through the air holding hands with Dickens (!), who on earth are "Don Cleophas Leandro Perez Zambullo and his familiar"?

Answer:

They are characters in the novel, "The Devil on Two Sticks" by Alain-René Lesage.

The story goes that Don Cleophas Leandro Perez Zambullo, a Madrid gallant, accidentally frees a demon from captivity. In gratitude, the demon, (who is on crutches, because of falling from the sky after fighting with another devil) takes him up to a high place and makes all the roofs of Madrid transparent so he can see what is going on everywhere.

Maybe this was a popular novel of the time - presumably Dickens's readers knew what he was going on about. And it certainly sounds exciting!

It seems as if Smollett was a favourite of Dickens, who liked a lot of earlier generation works, partly because of their availability. And Smollett translated The Devil On Crutches.

and here it is! The devil upon crutches in England, or night scenes in London. A satirical work. Written upon the plan of the celebrated Diable boiteux of Monsieur Le Sage. In two parts. By a gentleman of Oxford. The second edition. Volume 1 of 2

Thank you, John :)

Can't find a Kindle or Gutenberg edition!