*~Can't Stop Reading~* discussion

Discussion for A Tale of Two Cities.

Dickens can be a tough nut to crack, but his supporters claim it is worth all effort once you chew on his filling.

I wonder how accessible people are finding this book.

I read it a few months ago and gave it up. Nothing much seemed to happen the language (as expected from work of that period) was quite dense. Will give it another crack in the future.

I read A Tale of Two Cities several months ago. It took me a while to get through it and I was close to giving up several times.

The style the book is written in is hard to understand, since no one talks or writes like that anymore--it's a completely different ball game than modern literature. However, Dicken's work is amazing and once you finish the book you will realize that every page was worth the effort.

It isn't an easy book to read, but is totally worth it!

Ooh I love Charles Dickens, I'll be reading this later in the month, have a couple of others I need to read first.

This was not my favorite of his novels, though I am glad I read it. I have to admit, I was half inspired to read it because of all the references to it in Clockwork Princess *sheepish look*

I think Dickens could have been an incredible romance writer if he had chosen, but Sydney's love seemed really out of place in this book. And having read other of Dicken's works, his characters did not seem as vibrant.

The one thing I really focused on in this novel was Sydney's motivations. It was a very good and noble thing he did, taking Darnay's place, but honestly I found it stemmed mostly from selfishness. As he stood about to die, his thoughts were not on the joy Lucy can now have in life, but rather how the Carton name will be cleared. He wanted to be remembered (which is a totally valid human desire). I think he died not for his love of Lucy, but to do in death what he could not do with his life- be noble and worthy of love, admiration, and remembrance.

Charity wrote: "I read A Tale of Two Cities several months ago. It took me a while to get through it and I was close to giving up several times.

The style the book is written in is hard to understand, since no ..."

Well, I'll give it another go, but you do get the impression from some literature commentators that you 'have' to read Dickens because it's Dickens, not because you want to. Does that make sense? Ditto Shakesphere.

I believe a lot of people chose to rate classic novels higher because they are worried about others reactions if they don't. Or worse, they're worried that they will be told they just weren't "intelligent enough" to get it.

Which has been the case. I started reading Shakespeare and Dickens obsessively at about 12 or 13 because I loved the way the literature was so complex it, literally, demanded all my attention. I suppose for someone who reads solely for escapism, light, thoughtless, dreams, then they'd find him more of a chore than a delight.

That being said, not all of Dickens' works impressed me. The ones that have (A Christmas Carol, Great Expectations, and A Tale of Two Cities) have extremely strong character development. Perhaps, that's another reason I love Dickens. He was heavily focused on character development in his novels.

Honestly though, and as shallow as this seems, the main reason I fell in love with A Tale of Two Cities: He takes almost an entire chapter to explain how poor the poor were. How they scooped the wine from the dirt and cobblestone in desperation and thirst. Which is a description that is more hard hitting the further you read into it. Which summarizes why I loved this book, and his writing.

Charles Dickens books are like being under a mountain of blankets, it seems thick and impossibly suffocating to dig through all the words, but it's incredible to dig through all the layers of his works.

Or, do I just sound like a bohemian now?

Cherene wrote: "I believe a lot of people chose to rate classic novels higher because they are worried about others reactions if they don't. Or worse, they're worried that they will be told they just weren't "inte..."

Good post. I've been in people's houses where the shelves are stacked with the 'classics' just for the sake of appearances. I doubt if they had ever read them. Probably killing a sacred cow here, but I've never rated Shakesphere. Too much doth this and alas that. A trip to the theatre to see Othello had me begging for death! Like I said, I'll give 'a tale of two cities a final go.

I'm a huge fan of Dickens, have been for a very long time, but he's certainly not everyone's cup of tea. His books were serialized and he got paid by each serial part (not by the word) so they can be somewhat long and wordy. And, of all his books, A Tale of Two Cities is my least favourite. Personally I prefer Bleak House and Dombey and Sons. But, for anyone interested in what it was like in Victorian England, no one wrote it better than Dickens (or funnier or more descriptively for that matter).

However, I think it's important to understand that classics are classics for a reason. I get why some people don't like them - they were written for a different audience with different expectations. We forget that writers like Dickens and Shakespeare wrote mainly for the masses, not the intellectuals or elites of the time. They were the Stephen Kings of their day so to speak but their works survive because they have something universal, timeless, and important to say. That today's audience would not like all the 'doths' and 'alases' of Shakespeare makes a certain sense - the audience of the time would have fully understood what, to us, is practically a foreign language. But, if you give it a chance, no one is more ribald or humorous than Shakespeare or had a better understanding of the human condition.

Maxine wrote: "I'm a huge fan of Dickens, have been for a very long time, but he's certainly not everyone's cup of tea. His books were serialized and he got paid by each serial part (not by the word) so they can ..."

Good post.

Dickens works only for you when you have the energy to tackle his plots layer by layer for it's contrived and intricate. I second the opinion that says he has strong character developments and that shows greatly in "A Tale of Two Cities". Without spoiling it for those who hasn't come to its end but there are clues hidden and spread all over the chapters that at the end you find all the threads combine again to form the whole tapestry of the story. If you ask me he could've written thrilling detective stories that would leave you spinning around until the bitter end. If you survived the first half of the book, you'll most definitely love what comes next.

I am just finishing up a very easy ya read and am anxious about picking up A Tale of Two Cities. I've only read Dickens' A Christmas Carol and Hard Times, and I know that Dickens will be quite demanding, so I wanted to clear away everything else in order to give it the attention it looks like it will demand. I'll be glad to have others to mull it over with if I manage to wade through. So, thanks for the posts.

I tried this first when I was a teenager - got through the first chapter and put it back on my shelf. I then picked it up again a couple of years ago

Like most dickens it is a hard read with copious amounts of detailed description to wade through. The funny thing is the bits about the family seemed to move slowly but the bits about France seemed to fly by.

I loved this book because it took on this topic from a whole new angle and it was fascinating

This book has been compared to cod liver oil! Good for you, but bitter to swallow.

Jumped in late last night and read the first 3 short chapters. I think what it is, at least for me, is my lack of -- as we say in elmentary school literacy lessons -- "schema" because my background experience with this time and place is limited. Maybe now that I am so much more ancient than when I read my first Dickens, I'll have more experience (and familiarity with the language) and it'll all make wonderful sense! We'll see. Cod liver oil, eh? Mmmmmm.....

Robin wrote: "Jumped in late last night and read the first 3 short chapters. I think what it is, at least for me, is my lack of -- as we say in elmentary school literacy lessons -- "schema" because my background..."

Dickens was born after the French Revolution so your background knowledge of Ancien Regime France is probably on a par with Dickens. The language can be a bit difficult at times, but then again I struggle with words like cat and hat!

I'm not finding this near so tough slogging as I found Hard Times oh so long ago. I just reread the paragraph where Mr. Lorry is speaking hypothetically about how Miss Manette's father came to be locked away. "...If he had an enemy in some compatriot...who could exercise the privelege... of filling out blank forms for the consignment of anyone to the oblivion of a prison..." (p. 23 of my edition). I have reached p.88. Have I missed a further explanation of what happened or is that still to come?

I do have to say that I have been pleasantly surprised by Dickens' sense of humour.

'For gracious sake, say something besides "indeed" or you'll fidget me to death,' said Miss Pross: whose character (dissociated from stature) was shortness.

And this is the best and most intriguing happening so far:

The Gorgon had surveyed the building again in the night, and had added the one stone face wanting...It lay back on the pillow of the Monsieur the Marquis. It was like a fine mask, suddenly startled, made angry, and petrified. Driven home into the heart of the stone figure attached to it, was a knife. Round its hilt was a frill of paper, on which was scrawled: 'Drive him fast to his tomb. This, from JACQUES.'

Bazinga.

Robin wrote: "I'm not finding this near so tough slogging as I found Hard Times oh so long ago. I just reread the paragraph where Mr. Lorry is speaking hypothetically about how Miss Manette's father came to be l..."

Hard times is well named as that's what I got when I read it!

Hmmmm, they have stormed the Bastille and things are really picking up, just like others had advised. (I believe the advice was to hang in and the plot thickens around the 200-page mark.)

I also did a little snooping around this group's members list and didn't find anyone who listed A Tale of Two Cities as their current read. Is anyone else working on it currently or should I just be quiet now?

Robin wrote: "I also did a little snooping around this group's members list and didn't find anyone who listed A Tale of Two Cities as their current read. Is anyone else working on it currently or should I just be quiet now? "

Definitely don't be quiet now! Haha, A lot of people may have already finished it by now, and a lot of people may have read it already and are simply deciding on when/if to enter the discussions. I actually found a few different people currently reading it, so you're not alone. :)

I personally have a problematic relationship with Dickens' work, and fluctuate in my opinions of him. I liked the storming of the Bastille part, but I think I liked it more because of the history of it, rather than Dickens' writing. I pretty much enjoyed all the parts that portrayed all the major historical events, but didn't care for, well... most of everything else.

I think like Les Misèrables, hanging in there with this book is definitely the way to go if you hope to make it to the end. :)

Thanks, Kyle.

Oh, I definitely am finishing it now,even if it is a little echoey (?) in this discussion.

I have learned to tune out the superfluous (or what I think are superfluous) words and that makes following the storylines somewhat easier. I can do that now, like I couldn't when I was reading it for a university course. So far, so good, but I may end up having to go back to reread some paragraphs I thought were so much extra baggage at the time. They may turn out to be critical plot points. Jerry Cruncher remains a bit of a mystery, but I figure he will rise again, so to speak. Moving on to read "The Wood-Sayer" after baking some peanut butter cookies. (Although I often can't stop reading, I really have to.... for a little while.)

Robin, I finished the book a while ago and moved on to other books! My comments are here: http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/..., but may be a little spoiler-ish.

It's a great book and, though the storylines are sometimes a little vague or convoluted, they work out in the end and, for me, were compelling.

The great things about classics is that you can come back to them again and again and learn something new - it's all those layers Marwa mentioned above!

LOL - thanks, Susan. I'll beware.

Classics, I think, are better seasoned with age and experience. (My age and experience.) That's my story and I am sticking to it.

I'm quite enjoying the pace right now. I was just hoping that there might be someone reading through it at the same time to share insights or thoughts in progress. (If there wasn't I was going to be quiet... Since I would be writing to myself, essentially. LOL)

Done! In a Tale of Two Cities the historical descriptions are brutal - and very good. The same can be said about the Dickensian socal commentary on how the oppressed become even worse oppressors. I enjoyed how he wove the stories together in the end, and after giving myself permission to glide over some of the more wordy passages (a luxury I could not afford when studying Dickens) I found that I was able to pick up on descriptions and plot points of importance without sacrificing the enjoyment of the story. The weird thing is that I fully intend to do a little googling of study notes on the Tale, just to make sure I didn't miss some important symbols or imagery of whatever. (So much for not 'studying' the novel.) I am glad I can now say that I have read A Tale of Two Cities..... and even enjoyed it! And I can think of no better way to reach my meagre Goodreads Challenge goal. (Now I ask myself, do I bump my goal up again since my reading addiction is back in full swing or just go with it?)

Congrats, Robin! I do love the social commentary found in Dickens and he describes poverty in such vivid terms that it is heartbreaking.

Glad you enjoyed the book and reached your goal.

Robin wrote: "Done! In a Tale of Two Cities the historical descriptions are brutal - and very good. The same can be said about the Dickensian socal commentary on how the oppressed become even worse oppressors. I..."

Good job finishing it. Feels like you accomplished something important, doesn't it? :) I'm glad the book was less brutal for you than it could have been. And you're wanting to do research on it now! That's great! I wish every book I read made me want to go do some research after finishing it.

I always find Dickens hard going because of the language but the overall stories are so good. This one is a classic in every sense but still hard work.

Robin wrote: "Done! In a Tale of Two Cities the historical descriptions are brutal - and very good. The same can be said about the Dickensian socal commentary on how the oppressed become even worse oppressors. I..."

To be fair to this book, the description of the wine barrel smashing, and the people lapping it up, was first class writing.

A Tale of Two Cities was the first Dickens I ever read, probably about 15 years ago. I must admit that I found it hard-going to start with. I think that's because the book spends some time introducing you to its characters, and it isn't until later that you see how they slot into the plot. I was maybe a third of the way through before I started to get into it, but when I did I found that it was worth the effort.

I've read a few Dickens since, and found them mostly enjoyable. The Pickwick Papers is probably an easier read, because it's episodic. Bleak House I found interminable, although that may have been deliberate given the subject matter. I read A Christmas Carol last Christmas, and was quite surprised at how short and tightly structured it is. I'm currently reading Barnaby Rudge, which is set during the Gordon Riots, and some of the riot scenes are quite reminiscent of A Tale of Two Cities.

I live in Kent where Dickens lived for so many years and there are reminders of his work in some of our towns and cities. I shall be spending Easter overlooking a bay with 'Bleak House' on one side and a Dickens museum in the middle!

A Tale of Two Cities is heart rending. I feel so lucky to have lived after Dickens, so I can enjoy all his books.

Dickens was a favorite of my grandfather's, and we had all the books around the house when I was growing up. I read Two Cities first as a teenager and took it as heartbreaking gospel. Now I see that it was a work of political comment, like most of Dickens' works. He was a powerful voice for social and political reform as well as being a very entertaining writer. Happy Easter, Anna.

Thank you, Barbm1020, I hope you have a happy Easter too.

If I had to choose one writer's work above all others, I think I would choose his. Yes, that voice did contribute to improving the lot of so many. I suppose his childhood would have been a driving force in his writing.