Little Dorrit

[Canary42]

I've just finished reading Little Dorrit by Charles Dickens.

My word, what a struggle to get through it in places, and the complexity of the "plot" is quite puzzling, even after the denouement. 

But Dickens' characteristic humour often sparkles, and his satire on the Civil Service, Capitalism, Social Status is biting at times.

Any other Abers like to comment ?

SPOILER ALERT: Go no further if you've not read it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nice to see that Amy (Little Dorrit) ended up happily married, even if her husband was somewhat naive. 

[Canary42]

I'll bump this into Latest Posts as very few of the many Ab topics get visited otherwise.

[naomi24]

I read it a long time ago, canary, and seem to remember it being very convoluted.  I sometimes wish one of the television companies would produce versions of classic stories, not least in an effort to introduce them to young people who don't seem to read them now. 

[Canary42]

Yes naomi, I agree - it certaily worked for Austen.

[Canary42]

*certainly

[naomi24]

The BBC's production of Pride & Prejudice with Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle was the best ever!!

[brainiac]

Dickens could have done with a good editor.  Most of the books are so spun out and convoluted because they were originally published in serial form, so he had to keep his readers coming back for more

[Vagus]

I find that all tv adaptations make more sense of Dickens, I just wish they'd been available when I was at school.
Same with a lot of history, I got sooo bored with it at school and have learned a lot more from tv.

[Canary42]

Yes brainiac, Little Dorrit was one such case - it certainly appears to have a significant influence on the structure.

[Canary42]

Yes vagus, school (in my day certainly) has a lot to answer for.

As far as History goes I am now reading Unruly: A History of England's Kings and Queens by TV Comedian David Mitchell. It appears to be well researched and the humour makes it much more readable. The humour does get a bit formulaic at times though, so by the time I've finished it the gloss will possibly have dimmed.

[Canary42]

I've just been exploring the Related Questions (see below) for this thread. It seems my "complexity of the plot is quite puzzling" opinion was quite widely held when BBC produced an adaption.

[Peter Pedant]

I sometimes wish one of the television companies would produce versions of classic stories,

er they did - Tom Courtenay as John Dickens, Dickens father, the  debtor - Andy Serkis ( Golem) does his own stunts, and falls off a gutter - I  am not sure  if  that makes it to the final cut. 

Not  one of Dickens greatest - as it now makes no  sense to us to lock up a debtor for civil debt

Lu-lu comes from inheritance and not industrial production or er work, so the creditors  waited for a wealthy relative to cough up or die.  This happened in John Dickens case.

The relatives passed in an out, as in the series, and supported the debtor as best they could. More money to the gaoler the  better the accommodation. 

HMRC can imprison for civil debt - er tax debt - no one else  can now. In the walk-around-London=and-lookee books, one of the walls of the marshallsea prison is still there, and you can kinda walk up to it and stare

https://lookup.london/marshalsea-prison-wall/#:~:text=The%20Marshalsea%20Prison%20stood%20off,That's%20right.

there you are: wall it is

This is a sort of third tier of Dickens books you should read. 

[Peter Pedant]

Plot - god you are not  joking

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Dorrit

[Canary42]

Hats off to the Victorians !

With the serialisation of Little Dorrit, Victorian readers' mental acuity must have been pretty sharp, not only to unravel the plot, but to remember bits from weeks ago in order to do so. 

 

[ubasses]

Have you read Pickwick Papers, I laughed my way through it.

[Canary42]

Yes, a long time ago. Very comic indeed.

[TommyC]

As a lifelong Dickens lover, since my earliest reading years I also always felt quite privately puzzled as to exactly why his "cast lists" were quite as huge as they were, and his novels' plotlines quite as complex (and, let it be said, often deeply unlikely !). But over many years of re-reading, thinking and researching, I think I just "settled" emotionally on the following factors as a kind of combined explanation:

1) Dickens was not just "another novelist" on any level, even by very high Victorian standards. His peculiar genius - for character description, fiendishly-complex plot, grammar, colossal vocabulary, emotion-laden storylines, rigid moral compass, etc. - set him apart in every way from even his own peers, at a time when the general level of education in England was unrecognisably higher and more refined than we have ever seen before (or since). Such an incomparably-gifted genius writing at his intellectual level probably never imagined for a moment that anyone could ever find his work "heavy-going" - partly because those with such rarified minds notoriously don't easily understand the lives or mindsets of others at a completely different level.

2) Although I believe he was much more advanced and technically-capable as a novelist, some of Dickens' peers prove that he was not quite alone in approach or style. Though his style and interest in character development is of course utterly different, some of Trollope's novels (and he wrote many more than Dickens) are of similar length (and sometimes complexity). Also, Elizabeth Gaskell, who knew Dickens well and worked with him, is sometimes still affectionately called the "female Dickens". Wilkie Collins was also a favoured acquaintance, and I've always personally thought of the plot of "The Moonstone" as more like Dickens trying out the feeling of writing a "detective-fiction" paperback, however unfair that may sound to Collins !

Although it was a long time ago, I quite enjoyed "Little Dorrit" overall, and don't really remember the plot as being so difficult - but then my favourite by far is the very complex and massively-long "Bleak House" (which, being partly about lawyers, seems to bore most people to tears). And I also think the magnificent "Our Mutual Friend" is still criminally under-rated and ignored after more than 150 years ! By comparison, the endlessly-filmed and popular (but utterly pointless !) "Oliver Twist" leaves me stone-cold, and worst of all, my school's force-feeding of "Great Expectations" at the wrong age caused me to overlook for many years the strange, restrained beauty of the romance, as well as the timeless perfection of the plot !

[Canary42]

Thank you Tommy for your response to this thread from last year.  Bleak House is the only Dickens book I've never been able to finish, not entirely sure why but it fails to grip me enough to continue to the end.

I too have enjoyed Gaskell and Trollope.

Your "force-feeding at school" remark is so so true in my case (1950s) I don't know whether it is any better these days.