The Old Curiosity Club discussion

Hello Curiosities


As we enter 2021 we also begin Bleak House. It is a massive, sweeping, and powerful novel. There will be something for everyone. We will encounter both a first and a third person narrator, more than one mystery, one of the first depictions of a detective in English literature, a delightful abundance of birds and lovers of birds :-) incredible descriptions of people and places, and some of Hablot Browne’s finest illustrations. What else could we ask for as we move through the winter months of Covid and head towards summer. Yes, it’s a long novel, so settle into your most comfortable chair and let’s begin.

Chapter One

In Chancery

“London.” That’s all. The novel Bleak House begins with one word. Dickens has many well-known first sentences in his novels, but do any match the sweep, majesty, and power of the one word “London?”

Bleak House will centre itself in London. The next sentences of the first paragraphs give the time of year and a weather report. The wet November weather suggests that it is possible that one could meet a forty foot long Megalosaurus. Why is London likened to a prehistoric beast? London’s inhabitants slip and slide and add “new deposits” to the crusts of mud which accumulates “at compound interest.” By the end of the first paragraph of Bleak House Dickens has blended people, mud, and monsters together and introduced words such as “new deposits” and “compound interest.” Those words suggest money. That said, the first chapter of the novel hangs most clearly on the first word of the novel: “London.”

The second paragraph’s first sentence expands to two words. “Fog everywhere.” The word “fog” is everywhere in this paragraph. I count eleven instances. With so much fog there is little clarity anywhere you look. London is not a clear place of vision. Dickens then blends the fog into the High Court of Chancery when he introduces the case of JARNDYCE AND JARNDYCE - all in capitals - and tells us that this case has gone on so long that virtually no one has any interest in it “because no one cares” except one “little mad old women in a squeezed bonnet, who is always in court.” Apparently, she expects “some incomprehensible judgement to be given in her favour.” We are told that in the case of Jarndyce and Jarndyce people have been born into it, married into it, and died into it. The legal case is, like London, a Megalosaurus.

In this opening chapter Dickens presents us with names that both clearly define and obviously clearly make fun of the court and legal officials. We briefly meet a Chuzzle, a Mizzle and a Drizzle as well as a man aptly named Tangle “who knows more of Jarndyce than anybody.” I don’t think it is by chance that Tangle addresses the court with the word “Mlud” and not “my Lord.” If we drop the “l” we find the word mud and that is how transparent the court case is. It is “as clear as mud.” That’s an expression I use all the time. Is it an expression particular to Canadians?

As the chapter ends we learn from the Chancellor that there is a boy and a girl who are remotely connected with the case and a cousin apparently equally remote who is willing to have the children live with him. How all these people are, in fact, connected, remains to be seen. And so the court lurches much like a Megalosaurus to an end for the day, and the Jarndyce case continues on towards what is apparently an endless conclusion.

Thoughts

Dickens has written many memorable introductory sentences in his novels. “It was the best of times ...”, “Marley was dead, to begin with ...” “Whether I shall turn out to be the hero ...” and “NOW, what I want is facts ...” among others come to mind. What is your impression of the beginning to Bleak House in comparison?

What purpose do you think Dickens had in beginning this novel with a single word?

Weaving through this chapter are subtle but ever-present words that suggest money and finance. To what extent do you think this is a coincidence? Could Dickens be subtlety signalling a motif in the coming novel?

We have read several novels of Dickens starting with The Pickwick Papers. To this point, which novel do you think was most closely associated with London?

Reflecting back on the previous novels, what might be some of the motifs and themes that emerge from a novel primarily based on London? Why?

Chapter 2

In Fashion

In Chapter 2 we leave the Court of Chancery and enter into another world, a place called Chesney Wold. It is outside of London in Lincolnshire, but the weather is the same. It is soggy, it is wet, and, overall, the place is melancholy. In Chesney Wold we find Lady Dedlock. Now, since this is a Dickens novel, that name made me perk up. Let’s take a closer look at her.

Lady Dedlock, we are told, is childless. On her estate of Chesney Wold is a place called the Ghost’s Walk. She is married to Sir Leicester Dedlock who is very rich, very respectable, honourable, obstinate, truthful, high-spirited, intensely prejudiced and perfectly unreasonable. Sounds like a great neighbour to have. Doubt it. Dickens doesn’t water down that description, does he? Lady Dedlock is twenty years younger than Sir Leicester which makes her in her mid-forties. Sir Leicester married Lady Dedlock for love we are told. Lady Dedlock has an elegant figure and is very well groomed.

We then meet a lawyer by the name of Tulkinghorn who “is surrounded by a mysterious halo of confidences.” He is a man of secrets, who knows secrets, and guards secrets. He is known by the greatest of peers in England. What I found most disturbing about this man is that he appears to be an inscrutable presence.

We learn that Tulkinghorn is with the Dedlock’s to bring news about the Jarndyce case. Here, we get our first link and hint that the court case has something to do with Lady Dedlock. But what? She knows the case has been going on for years. What is the connection? Tulkinghorn shows her some papers relating to the case and, for the first time, we see Lady Dedlock express an interest in anything. She wants to know who was responsible for copying one of the documents in “law-hand.” Lady Dedlock appears to be ill, to be faint, after seeing the handwriting. We learn that Lady Dedlock has never had such an episode like this before. Sir Leicester thinks it must just be the weather and being bored.

Thoughts

In the first chapters of most Dickens novels we meet many of the principal characters. In this chapter we meet three characters. What is your first impression of each?

Dickens has subtlety but cleverly already begun to link the first elements of the narrative together. First, the weather permeates the first two chapters. Second, the presence of the Jarndyce legal issue has been mentioned in both chapters. The question is how is this law suit connected to the Dedlock’s? I am more curious about the lawsuit because of the name Dedlock. What does the name Dedlock suggest to you? Can there be anything good about such a lawsuit connected to a person named Dedlock?

As we have seen in earlier novels by Dickens, lawyers are not among his favourite occupations. Tulkinghorn seems shrouded in mystery. What do you make of him so far?

Here we have a mystery. Whose handwriting has so interested Lady Dedlock?

Chapter 3

A Progress

Well ... what do we have here? The first two chapters were written in the third person omniscient voice. This chapter begins with the word “I.” We are now in the first person. Bleak House will offer us both the perspective of the third person narrator and the presence of a first person narrator. This is a major departure from earlier Dickens novels. To enjoy the novel as fully as possible, one must pay attention to the two modes of narrative voice and ask ourselves how they are similar and how they differ.

Unlike the character David Copperfield who began his first person narration pondering the nature of heroes, our present first person narrator Esther begins by confessing not to be very clever. Esther is young, female, shy, and believes she has been raised by her godmother. In BH we have, in the tradition of Oliver Twist, a child seemingly without parents. Bleak House will be, among other things, a Bildungsroman.

Our first person’s name is Esther Summerson. She was raised by a woman who was good, and yet stern. Esther’s earliest memories are ones of guilt and inadequacy. She never heard anything about her mama. While Esther did attend school at an early age she never had friends although see thinks herself to be affectionate. If one wants gloom and doom let’s recall that her godmother tells her that “it would have been far better little Esther, that you had no birthday; that you had never been born.” Esther knows nothing of her mother except that she is alive and, according to her godmother “is your disgrace, and you were hers.” Esther is also told that her mother did wrong to Esther’s godmother, and that Esther would be best to forget her mother altogether.

One day Esther’s godmother introduces Esther to a kindly man. When Esther was fourteen her godmother dies suddenly and the man who visited her two years ago appears again. His name is Kenge. We learn that Esther’s godmother is actually her aunt, “in fact, though not in law.” Her name was Miss Barbary. The case of Jarndyce is mentioned and everyone is amazed that Esther has never heard of it. We learn that Mr Jarndyce offers to pay for the completion of Esther’s education at a first rate school. And so off to school goes Esther after burying her doll and packing up her bird in a cage.

Thoughts

Well, the name Jarndyce appears again, in yet a different place and connected to a different place. What is Dickens up to?

We know little of Esther’s past, but I suggest we make note of her background. What has happened to Dickens’s orphans in past novels?


On the way to her new school Esther takes a coach. In the coach is a man who appears to take little notice of her. He does, however, offer her some plum-cake. Esther tells the man the cake is too rich so he tosses the cake out the window. Esther arrives at her new school and soon the name of Jarndyce crops up again. We learn that Mr Jarndyce is her guardian. We learn that “six-happy years” pass at Greenleaf school. This makes Esther now 20 years old. Then, seemingly out of thin air Esther receives a letter from the law firm of Kenge and Carboy informing her that she is to be a companion in Mr Jarndyce’s home. Esther’s parting from the school is emotional which attests to how kindly people look upon her. On arriving in London the first thing she notices is a dense fog. At the law offices Esther takes a “peep” into a mirror but only sees a “bonnet in the glass.” Curious, why does Dickens make the reader aware of the fact that Esther does not look at her face in the mirror? This may well become important later in the novel.

Thoughts

Have you noticed how shy and apologetic Esther is to everyone? Now, as she looks into a mirror she only sees her bonnet. What do these early actions suggest about Esther’s personality and character?

Briefly, Esther meets with Mr Kenge who introduces her to a young lady and gentleman. Esther notices that the young lady, whose name is Ada, is beautiful and the young man whose name is Richard is handsome. Ada is 17 and Richard is 19. Soon the three find themselves in front of The Lord High Chancellor. The Chancellor is satisfied with the situation and assigns Ada and Richard to the care of Mr Jarndyce of Bleak House with Esther as their companion. At this point a little old woman approaches the three and is thrilled to meet the wards in Jarndyce. She appears to be mad, does not deny that she might be, and tells Esther, Ada, and Richard that she expects a judgement in the case shortly. With this confusion of people, location, and motives the chapter ends. The mystery builds.

Thoughts

Do you recall where we have seen this mad old woman before? What might be the purpose of introducing her into the story so soon again be?

In David Copperfield we meet Rosa Dartle who was a companion to Mrs Steerforth. While it is early in the novel, what appears to be the main differences between Rosa and Esther?

We still have not met Mr Jarndyce. What are your early speculations as to what his motives might be in opening Bleak House to Ada, Richard, and Esther?

Chapter 4

Telescopic Philanthropy

Our first three chapters have given us a broad introduction to some of the major places and characters we will follow through the novel. Also, we have been introduced to a seemingly endless court case and even had some broad hints as to what may be motifs and themes that run through the entire novel. With this chapter, Dickens drops us right into a specific family situation, and a theme which will envelop the entire novel. Let’s see what’s up ...

Prior to travelling on to Bleak House and meeting Mr Jarndyce, Ada, Richard, and Esther will be spending the night at the Jellyby residence. Mr Kenge calls Mrs Jellyby “a lady of very remarkable strength of character, who devotes herself entirely to the public.” Well, perhaps. She is for now, we learn, entirely devoted “to the subject of Africa” and the cultivation of the coffee bean. That is, Kenge qualifies, “until something else attracts her.” We learn that Mr Jarndyce is a philanthropist who wants to do good work and has “a very high opinion of Mrs Jellyby.” As for Mr Jellyby, Kenge says that he is best described as “the husband of Mrs Jellyby.” Ah, Dickens, you say so much so often with many words, but just as frequently say even more with few words.

The Jellyby household turns out to be a disaster. One child has a head stuck through a railing, one child named Peepy fell down the stairs, and there were even more children scattered around the dirty dishevelled house which is full to bursting with papers. Mrs Jellyby is a short, pretty woman of about 45 whose eyes appear to be looking far away from her surroundings. There is also “a jaded and unhealthy-looking, though no means plain girl” who is smeared with ink at a writing-table. This is Mrs Jellyby’s oldest child. Mrs Jellyby’s pride, however, is not her home or her family. Rather it is in her vision of having up to 250 families cultivating coffee and educating the natives of Borrioboola-Gha. As the title of this chapter suggests, Mrs Jellyby’s vision comes by peering through a telescope rather than attending to her own back yard, or, even better, tending to her own home and family. In her home, one disaster begets another.

Esther tends to Peppy. Dickens wants to make it very clear that Esther is a person who nurtures others. Already we know that Esther will be the companion for Ada and Richard, and now here we see her tending to Peepy in the place of Peppy’s mother.Earlier in the novel we recall how attached others were to Esther at Greenleaf school. As focussed as Mrs Jellyby is to what is far away, Dickens wants us to know very clearly that Esther is the opposite of a telescope. Esther is a microscope, a person who sees, and knows, and feels for those closest to her and for those most in need around her.

We learn that Ada has never seen her cousin Mr Jarndyce. Richard has seen him only once, years ago, and recalls him as being a “bluff, rosy fellow.” As Esther wonders more and more about Mr Jarndyce a knock comes to her door. It is Miss Jellyby who is all stained with ink. Suddenly she says, “I wish Africa were dead! ... I hate it and it’s a beast!” We learn that all she does is write for her mother. Miss Jellyby says that her house is disgraceful, the children are disgraceful, even that she is disgraceful. This is a very interesting discussion between Esther and Miss Jellyby. Miss Jellyby sobs, she wishes for an education, says she is miserable and even states that she wishes she were dead. After unburdening herself she falls asleep in Esther’s room. And so this most revealing chapter ends.

Thoughts

What happened here? Well, we have Dickens drawing our attention to the plight of the Africans and the plight of at least one family of Londoners. Can we say that Mrs Jellyby is a good mother? To what extent are her efforts in Africa meeting with success?

It is evident from the first four chapters that Esther is a rather meek and self - effacing person. In this chapter, we also see Esther as a very keen observer and probably the most mature person in the Jellyby household. What are your first impressions of Esther?

The court case of Jarndyce and Jarndyce seems to be one that will continue indefinitely. Here, in the Jellyby home, we learn that Miss Jellyby is involved in a seemingly endless task as well. What similarities might Dickens be developing between Jarndyce and Jarndyce and the Jellyby household?

Looking forward ...

This is a massive book with multiple themes, motifs, characters, symbols, and settings. I’m not giving any specific spoilers away, but here are some issues and ideas you may want to keep an eye on as they will be popping up frequently.

Paper. There is so much paper in this novel.

Wealth. What wealth can do, and,in contrast, what it is like to survive without wealth.

Settings. Talking about wealth ... there will be a wealth of physical settings, buildings, and places in the novel. Dickens will use each of the individual examples to build major ideas and themes in the novel.

Character. Esther will be a major character. Watch how Dickens evolves her through the use of both the first and the third person format of narration.

Secrets. We have many secrets already upon us. Where does Esther come from? Who are her parents? What could possibly be interesting about the handwriting on a piece of paper?

Love. Yes, in a novel this hefty, there must be love somewhere. Perhaps even everywhere if we look carefully for Dickens’s clues.

Character names. We have already met people with self-revealing names. In this chapter, for instance, there was a brief appearance of a lawyer by the name of Guppy. Don’t be surprised if his very brief introduction will be followed by a longer appearance soon.

As always, feel free to ask your own questions to the group, or begin a discussion about what is not mentioned in these commentaries but that interests you. There will be GREAT chunks of the novel not covered by the mods.

With regard to the opening line, I always came to a stop with the word Michaelmas. I had no clue. But at least now I know it refers to the autumn session. Dickens makes clear that November is implacable because of mud and fog. The first two paragraphs start so strongly with two metaphors for, in my opinion, slow-going and not knowing where one is going.

Steeling myself for the beginning of this discussion... deep breath... dive in!

Chapter 1:

London.
This reminded me of a dateline used in journalism. Perhaps Dickens' occupation as a court reporter made him want the illusion/allusion of this being the beginning of an article rather than a novel.

Oh! the description! I'm generally fonder of dialog than descriptive passages, so this chapter is a slog for me, in more ways than one. I felt as if I was in quicksand, sinking deeper with each paragraph. Between the dismal title and the fog and mud of chapter one, I'm surprised I ever continued reading the first time, but this is my fourth go-'round with Bleak House. If there are any others of you who also felt like you wanted to kill yourselves by the end of Chapter One, fear not. Things lighten up! Though, perhaps, not right away....

Chapter 2:

Tulkinghorn (Talking, hulking, horn) reminded me a bit of Uriah Heep, without the writhing clamminess. Surely, Tulkinghorn is not 'umble, but he and Heep both keep their ears open and seem to hoard information. Nothing gets past him. I imagine if I put my mind to it, there are similar characters in nearly every Dickens novel. But it's early, and my brain isn't up to that examination just yet.

At any rate, we notice Lady Dedlock's unusual reaction to the handwriting because Tulkinghorn notices.

Mr. Tulkinghorn stops short, surprised by my Lady's animation and her unusual tone.

She recovers her bored demeanor quickly, and there's no mention of Sir Leicester picking up on it. Tulkinghorn, though, doesn't miss a trick.

Chapter 3:

Oh, my. Dear Esther. I do love her. We're meant to, after all. But perhaps Dickens could have done with a female editor. We're finally seeing Dickens' perfect little woman from what he perceives as her own perspective. Adjectives used by Esther about herself (either her own opinion or what she believes are others' opinions of her):

-not clever
-shy
-not quick
-not charming
-poor
-trifling
-far off
-unworthy
-timid
-retiring
-industrious
-contented
-grateful
-diligent
-quiet
-kind-hearted
-cheerful
-thankful
-gentle
-frivolous
-dear
-unpretending

That's a lot of adjectives, some used repeatedly. No subtlety here.

Miss Barbary is a cold bitch, isn't she? Sorry for being vulgar, but no other word quite hits the nail on the head like that one. Telling a child she should have never been born... wish I could have been there to slap her for that. Rachael isn't any better. Pious old biddies.

Esther's immediate and overwhelming affection, and her endearments for Ada are unsettling. If I ever met another woman (or girl, back when I was young) who started calling me "my darling" and "my pet", I'd back away and look for help.

My questions:

~Why did Esther bury her doll before leaving for Greenleaf? An odd and unlikely thing to do, I think.

~What is Jarndyce's interest in Esther? Apparently, Kenge's first visit was to offer Miss Barbary the opportunity to rid herself of the girl -- Why? And why didn't she accept it?

~Where have Ada and Richard been? We know they just met, so they've not been together. And they're both orphans. For how long? Who's been caring for them until now? And with what money?

Mary Lou wrote: "Steeling myself for the beginning of this discussion... deep breath... dive in!

Chapter 1:

London.
This reminded me of a dateline used in journalism. Perhaps Dickens' occupation as a court repor..."

Hi Mary Lou

You are right, the opening is not an action-packed grabber for the reader. I wonder if, in part, the intention of Dickens was to make the chapter’s feeling of slogging intentional? Mud, fog, wetness all stacked together to give the reader a feeling of forlornness and depression.

Perhaps that was the mood Dickens was trying to establish. Might Dickens have wanted the feeling of London’s weather to pervade the Court of Chancery, the case of Jarndyce and Jarndyce, which, in turn, drags down the spirit of the people. With all this dreariness, only a seemingly little mad old woman could find hope.

Here in Toronto it has been grey, cloudy, and drizzling for over a week. I have not seen any blue sky or sunshine. I am beginning to appreciate and understand the acronym SAD ( Seasonal Affected Disorder) much better. :-(. Fortunately, no Megalosaurus yet.

Good to have you on board for our discussion.

Sir Dedlock is just like our neighbours, but then rich. I can tell you, neighbours like that are simply a horror story.

Something that struck me as coming back quite a lot already (and somehow I missed it in all of my previous times of reading this book) is the contrast between education and ignorance. Greenleaf seems heavenly, structured, there is a time for everything and girls get a good (for the times) education. On the other hands there are the Jellybys, and while Mrs. Jellyby is obsessed with the education of African natives, she ignores her children's need of education, as pointed out by Caddy.

I wonder by the way, how do others pronounce Jellyby? I always combined Jelly and be (from 'to be') in my head, but just realised it could also be Jelly and then 'by' (as in 'by the door').

Anyway, something else that is a mystery, is what would have happened with Esther's education if her godmother/aunt hadn't died. It seems like her aunt tried to keep her ignorant of her own background and away from Mr. Jarndyce, and apart from that she was different from the other girls there is nothing said about school or what she learned. I have the gut feeling that if she was set apart like she was at Greenleaf, because she was prepared to teach as well, that would have been mentioned.

Also, how would Kenge have known Esther's godmother was her aunt? If he knows that, does he know who Esther's parents are too - and if that's the case, why would he never say anything to anyone about it? Apart from perhaps the Chancellor, because it might be what he was whispering about?

Hi Peter, could you please mention book’s name in the title of the thread or it’s abbreviation BH. I missed this thread yesterday. Thanks.

Chapter 4:

I may have mentioned at some point that I was once a less exaggerated (thank God!) version of Mrs. Jellyby. I had a cause about which I was passionate, and it was rather consuming. Not to the point where I neglected my home and children, but much of my kids' childhoods were spent being dragged along to fundraisers, committee meetings, and such. I've no doubt I was a huge bore to my friends and family. Wish I'd read Bleak House earlier, and I may have recognized myself in Mrs. Jellyby, and changed my ways sooner. When I did read this chapter for the first time, though that intensity was a thing of the past, I felt as if Dickens was writing about me. I can only imagine how having that mirror held up to them publicly must have made the people feel who were Dickens' real inspirations.

Jantine wrote: "I wonder by the way, how do others pronounce Jellyby? "

I've always pronounced it "jelly-bee". I think it must have been said that way in the BBC adaptation, also, or the different pronunciation would have jumped out at me.

Mary Lou wrote: "Chapter 3:

Oh, my. Dear Esther. I do love her. We're meant to, after all. But perhaps Dickens could have done with a female editor. We're finally seeing Dickens' perfect little woman from what he ..."

Mary Lou

What a list you have provided us with regarding how Esther is defined and defines herself. Thank you. In these opening chapters her character is puzzling and mysterious. Given the fact that we will have her in the first person present herself and Dickens in the third person present her as well we are in for a treat and a new method of presenting a character.

Nidhi wrote: "Hi Peter, could you please mention book’s name in the title of the thread or it’s abbreviation BH. I missed this thread yesterday. Thanks."

Nidhi

Ah, yes, I see what I did at the beginning of this thread as it would appear to you. I will try and remember to add BH to the Chp 5-7 header that will appear next Saturday. Sorry about any confusion.

If it happens again just let me know again. Thanks.

Please don’t apologise Peter it’s not your fault that I use an app and that I get notifications from 26 groups🤣.


I finished 1 chapter tonight and its bleak. And got a glimpse of Dickens ‘s humourous ( but befitting) names.

My focus went somewhere else this time, but yes, I have wondered why Esther buries her doll too. My theory is that she realised she went somewhere where she wouldn't need the venting outlet the doll was to her, somewhere where she could make real human connections instead. These whole two chapters showed a lot how she was very indoctrinated by her aunt and Mrs. Racheal, the bitches indeed, but also that she was aware of that and tried to get out of that indoctrination. Perhaps that is also why she is so focused on calling Ada names of endearment - to try and make sure Ada will not feel as unwanted and unloved as she did? Although it is quite creepy in a way, I think I can understand a little. She simply wants that human connection with all she has in her, after being deprived of it for almost all of her childhood. Also, there might be a difference in how women who knew they'd have to be close approached each other in this time, that makes us not understand now.

I completed Chapter 1 this morning and have these thoughts.

I always thought the case was Jarndyce versus Jarndyce. But, alas, it is Jarndyce and Jarndyce. I take legal proceedings to be adversarial. But in this case, it appears there are two Jarndyces. Why not make the case just Jarndyce?

Given the first chapter sets out the framework of this case, as skeletal as it is, is there a play on the word “jaundice”? I assume there is, but jaundice is an odd word. It can be for a medical condition, but I always aligned it with bitterness, irony, and skepticism.

I dove into it a little. People get yellow from the gall that's not been broken down by the liver. From gall I got to bile, and then to bilious fever, which is another name for typhus. I believe gall was indeed also aligned with things like bitterness, and mental illnesses, in the time.

In Chapter 2 I am further intrigued by the significance of character names. I had not even considered the idea of deadlock, as Peter pointed out. But other than a husband, a wife, and their lawyer, I am not left with a lot. Yes, Tulkinghorn is the skulking character, an omnipresence, but I don’t see much yet to be concerned.

Finished Chapter 3. We covered an awful lot of ground in this one. A life story, it would seem, in a chapter. The shift to first person is interesting. My initial take on it is Dickens is setting up a mystery and prefers that events unfold only as a first person narrator can experience them. My sense is, this is being done by Dickens as almost a guarding action so that not too much is revealed ahead of things by a third person narrator, an all knowing narrator. The limits of the story reside within the limits of how Esther can experience them.

The Jarndyce / jaundice and Dedlock / deadlock similarities somehow never occurred to me, yet they seem so obvious when you point them out.

Lindsay wrote: "Peter, I thought according to Tristan's reading schedule chapters 1-4 were from
Jan 7 to Jan 13???"

Lindsay

Yes. The schedule does note the opening of BH postings as January 7th. I rolled the opening to the week after the last of The Holly Tree.

I will be doing the next four weeks as well so please note the new postings will always occur on the Saturdays. Not to worry, however, as all the threads always remain open. Read at the post or schedule that suits you best.

I love the description of Mrs Jellyby and her poor family. I am listening to the audiobook as narrated by Miriam Margolyes.

Mary Lou wrote: "Steeling myself for the beginning of this discussion... deep breath... dive in!

Chapter 1:

London.
This reminded me of a dateline used in journalism. Perhaps Dickens' occupation as a court repor..."

Mary Lou,

What helps me normally when faced with long descriptive passages is reading them aloud because then I am better able to picture what I am reading. In the case of superior prose, which we can rely on with Dickens, it also gives you the sense of reading poetry, and man! was this not an example of poetry hidden in prose lines? Peter went through some of the most memorable beginnings Dickens gave to his novels, but as far as I am concerned, Bleak House has the most memorable beginning - what with all the fog, all the dirt, and all the bad mood. You soon have the impression of being led into an intellectual quagmire, as is only fitting for the kind of legal system that the Court of Chancery stands for. According to the description, the Lord Chancellor is the King of this Fog, which is actually circling around his head like a crown. What a great beginning this was for me!

Mary Lou wrote: "Chapter 3:

Oh, my. Dear Esther. I do love her. We're meant to, after all. But perhaps Dickens could have done with a female editor. We're finally seeing Dickens' perfect little woman from what he ..."

Hmm, I can't say that I like Esther at all. Quite the contrary is the case. I mean she is going on and on about how dumb and insignificant she is - okay, this could be a consequence of the dehumanizing conditions in which she was brought up, and I think that you summarized Miss Barbary's character quite well with those two words - but still, her confessions of humility are not quite genuine to me because she also makes a point of going into detail about how everyone was cut to the quick when she finally left the Donny sisters, and if she really did not want to make much of herself, would she then invest so many words in a description of how people said they would miss her? Maybe, she was moved and grateful because of all these professions of love and affection after the emotional barrennness of Miss Barbary, but then she should not always make a point of her own modesty. Not to put too fine a point of it, she almost seems like a female Uriah Heep to me, minus the writhing and the clammy hands, and the loving mother.

I thoroughly distrust her, but I know, of course, that Dickens means us to like her. Still.

As to your questions,

- I think that Esther buried her doll as a sign of her infancy being over. After all, she was fourteen years old when she did this, which is quite old for a girl to play with dolls.

- I don't know what Jarndyce's interest with Esther is, but I imagine that Miss Barbary kept Esther for two reasons, none of them being quite nice. First, she might have kept her out of shame, because apparently, Esther, her sister's child, was born out of wedlock, which is why Kenge always makes a point of Esther's not being Miss Barbary's niece before the law. Miss B. is a very pious woman - pious in a not very humane sense - and so she would feel shame at her illegitimate niece's going out into the world. The second reason is even worse: I think she kept her because it gave her a perverse sort of pleasure to put the girl down and lead her a dog's life. She cannot have her vengeance on her sister, but she uses her sister's daughter as a scapegoat instead. Plus, looking after that unwanted girl also imbues her with a sense of martyrdom.

- As yet, I have no answer ready for your last question. Let's keep reading and looking out for hints ;-)

Mary Lou wrote: "Chapter 4:

I may have mentioned at some point that I was once a less exaggerated (thank God!) version of Mrs. Jellyby. I had a cause about which I was passionate, and it was rather consuming. Not ..."

My wife is a little bit like this, although, thank God, she does not neglect our family - quite on the contrary. But she always volunteers whenever something has to be organized at school, or in some of our children's clubs, and she also always cudgels her brains to solve other people's problems and improve their lives. With me, charity begins - and also ends - at home ;-)

John wrote: "Finished Chapter 3. We covered an awful lot of ground in this one. A life story, it would seem, in a chapter. The shift to first person is interesting. My initial take on it is Dickens is setting u..."

I quite like the two narrative perspectives, and I think that Dickens might have decided to set an omniscient narrator alongside Esther because he may have felt that a first person narrator limits him in his narration. Reading DC, we have remarked on the fact that David always has to be present and sometimes quite awkwardly is lurking in the wings, for instance in the scene where Emily is heavily berated by Miss Dartle. Maybe, Dickens wanted to avoid such a limitation.

Peter, I found your question as to the similarities and differences between Esther and Rosa Dartle very interesting. At first sight, I couldn't spot any similarities, but then I noticed that Ester describes herself as being able to notice lots of things, to be a good observer, which is very convenient, because, after all, she is the first-person narrator of part of the novel. Now, Miss Dartle is also a very astute observer, isn't she, but probably a lot more manipulative than Esther.

You also asked which of the novels we have read so far is most connected with London. For me, this is Barnaby Rudge because of the Gordon Riots, which mainly happened in London. PP takes us on a tour around much of South England, and many other of the novels we have read so far also have large parts set in other parts of England (or America even). Saying that, however, London is usually the place we have come to associate with Dickens, isn't it?

A very enjoyable first 4 chapters these are. So dark and cosy at the same time, as only English novels can be. I love it how the opening paragraphs of the book are dense and almost impenetrable as though they were fog banks made of prose! I agree with you Tristram, it is poetry. The tone of this book is very different from that of David Copperfield. It's amazing how Dickens is able to vary the hues of his canvass from novel to novel. His contemporaries and later critics considered him the least artistic of the great English novelists. I really don't see this. They must have been terribly jealous of him to say this.

Ulysse wrote: "almost impenetrable as though they were fog banks made of prose!..."

You're a bit of a poet, yourself, Ulysse. :-)

Tristram wrote: "...I can't say that I like Esther at all. Quite the contrary...
and
Esther buried her doll as a sign of her infancy being over. After all, she was fourteen years old

I know you have strong feelings about Esther. The first time I heard you voice them, I was quite taken aback, because I quite liked her. I'm afraid your opinion has started to color my own, which is why that list of descriptions jumped out at me. I'm not sure that wearing my Tristram-colored glasses will do poor Esther any favors as we forge ahead, but I doubt I'll ever feel as strongly as you do.

As for the doll, it was obviously Esther's "security blanket", and would have been even more important to her than to the average child as the only object that provided love and comfort in the absence of loving adults or friends. At a time of such upheaval - going to a new home and school where she didn't know what awaited her - Esther would have been even less likely to leave the doll, which, like those wire monkeys in the horrible Harlow experiments, would be her only source of comfort and continuity. Yes, she was 14, but this was more than just a toy for her. And I know plenty of grown women who still have beloved dolls or stuffed animals from their childhood. (Alas, my favorite stuffed St. Bernard was lost on a vacation one year when I was younger than Esther, but I still remember it fondly, despite having a loving family and plenty of friends.) We'll see if this little episode becomes important later in the book but, if not, I think Dickens got this wrong. Of course, if it doesn't become important to the plot, perhaps we've already spent more time than necessary analyzing it. :-)

Tristram wrote: "because she also makes a point of going into detail about how everyone was cut to the quick when she finally left the Donny sisters, and if she really did not want to make much of herself, would she then invest so many words in a description of how people said they would miss her?"
I just realised that it of course was a very stark contrast to how Mrs. Rachael took leave of her. So perhaps it was more meant as a 'compare and contrast' thing than boasting, and perhaps a bit of amazement because it was the complete and utter opposite of what she was used to. Or at least, I think Dickens might have tried to up the contrast and took the 'boasting' because the point he wanted to make was more important. Or something like that.

Ulysse wrote: "His contemporaries and later critics considered him the least artistic of the great English novelists. I really don't see this. They must have been terribly jealous of him to say this. "

I bet they were jealous. I don't know a lot of Victorian authors who can hold a candle to Dickens in terms of inventiveness of language, originality of image, vividness of dialogue, humour, power of description.

George Eliot is the only one that springs to mind here as the one to come closest to Dickens in genius - and then there are Joseph Conrad and Thomas Hardy, but they are no Victorian authors if you take a strict definition of the word Victorian.

Braddon, Collins, Mrs. Wood are good story tellers, but their prose is not as brilliant as Dickens's. Reade is very inventive at times, but on the whole no Dickens. Trollope is a master of characterization but his style is limited. Bulwer-Lytton is often too lofty, and Mrs. Gaskell is also prone to bungle things up from time to time, as in North and South. And then there is the often soulless Thackeray, who rarely appreciates his own characters.

Give me Dickens anytine, in regular doses, and since he is still one of the most famous writers world-wide, there must be something in him most critics seem to overlook ;-)

Mary Lou wrote: "Tristram wrote: "...I can't say that I like Esther at all. Quite the contrary...
and
Esther buried her doll as a sign of her infancy being over. After all, she was fourteen years old

I know you ..."

You are right, Mary Lou, given Esther's cold and contemptuous treatment by her aunt and Mrs Rachael, it does not make any sense at all that she should readily bury her doll, which has proven her only companion. The right moment she could have done this might have been after she left the Miss Donnys.

I am now through chapter 4 and must say that here, too, I found some instances of Esther's indirect self-praise. Look at this, for example:

Ada laughed and put her arm about my neck as I stood looking at the fire, and told me I was a quiet, dear, good creature and had won her heart. “You are so thoughtful, Esther,” she said, “and yet so cheerful! And you do so much, so unpretendingly! You would make a home out of even this house.”

My simple darling! She was quite unconscious that she only praised herself and that it was in the goodness of her own heart that she made so much of me!

A truly modest person would have omitted Ada's praise, let alone have topped it with that exaggerated renunciation at the end. This does not sit well with me at all.

Peter mentioned the importance of education in Bleak House, and I think Caddy Jellyby is a good example of a young woman who knows that she does not have any proper education and feels very bitter about this. She seems to be a bit envious of all the accomplishments Esther and Ada were granted whereas she herself is merely seen as an amanuensis by her mother. I once read somewhere that Dickens himself resented it very much that he was not given a good education as a child - instead his father sent him to Warren's whereas one of his sisters was allowed to stay at a music school -, and interestingly, David Copperfield was also very worried about having to waste his young years in the factory with no chance of getting any education. Was this not also one of the reasons he finally decided to look for his aunt in Dover?

Ulysse wrote: "A very enjoyable first 4 chapters these are. So dark and cosy at the same time, as only English novels can be. I love it how the opening paragraphs of the book are dense and almost impenetrable as ..."

Ulysse, this is what struck me as well. The dense language mirrored his description. I liked how the language worked. When I got into Chapter 3, I must say that whether we like Esther or not, her first person narration had the effect on me of a wind clearing out some of the fog.

John wrote: "...her first person narration had the effect on me of a wind clearing out some of the fog...."

Yes! Well put, John.

Tristram wrote: "she herself is merely seen as an amanuensis by her mother...."

And now I'm off to look this word up....

Amenuensis: one employed to write from dictation or to copy manuscript

In Dutch the word amenuensis can have the same meaning, namely a clerk or scribe, but it's in use more in it's meaning of a science-based assistant on a school or in a lab. The person who makes sure the test tubes are properly cleaned, things like that. In our school it was the amenuensis who was allowed to put that metal that explodes when getting wet into some pool outdoors, while we all peeped through the window xD

Jantine wrote: "Amenuensis: one employed to write from dictation or to copy manuscript

In Dutch the word amenuensis can have the same meaning, namely a clerk or scribe, but it's in use more in it's meaning of a s..."

Interesting. I always took amanuensis to have several possibilities: a colleague; a kindred spirit; a boyfriend or girlfriend.

Perhaps there is some overlap.

John wrote: "Ulysse wrote: "A very enjoyable first 4 chapters these are. So dark and cosy at the same time, as only English novels can be. I love it how the opening paragraphs of the book are dense and almost i..."

John, your analogy is spot on. The first chapter she narrates is a breath of fresh air in the otherwise pestilential atmosphere of the novel's beginning.

Tristram wrote: "Ulysse wrote: "His contemporaries and later critics considered him the least artistic of the great English novelists. I really don't see this. They must have been terribly jealous of him to say thi..."

Tristram, your knowledge of Victorian novelists is impressive! But you seem to have made one unpardonable omission: the Brontë sisters :-)

Mary Lou wrote: "I know you have strong feelings about Esther. The first time I heard you voice them, I was quite taken aback, because I quite liked her. I'm afraid your opinion has started to color my own, which is why that list of descriptions jumped out at me. I'm not sure that wearing my Tristram-colored glasses will do poor Esther any favors as we forge ahead, but I doubt I'll ever feel as strongly as you do. ."

It's funny--I have felt both ways about Esther.

The first time I read Bleak House was 19 years ago. I remember the time very well because I believe I have mentioned to all of you already that I was then involved in what felt like an interminable court case. I used to sit there waiting while things got stalled in the courthouse and reading Bleak House and wondering if anyone would notice how fitting that was. As far as I can tell, nobody did.

Anyway, I loved the book so much I thought it might be my favorite Dickens. Then I went back to read it again about 8 years ago and Esther was annoying me so much, I gave it up after a few chapters. So I was wary of her this time around.

Strangely, I'm enjoying her again. I like her grit. And I kind of like the doubleness Tristram points out--that on the one hand she's so ridiculously modest but on the other very aware that she's been dealt a bad hand and done very well by it. I guess this could be seen as hypocritical. And I admit the self-deprecation comes across as a bit much--I suspect I don't mind it this time around because it's a relief after David Copperfield, who was so certain he was destined for greatness.

But I think it also works because in Esther, Dickens is trying out another kind of heroism--Esther is not destined for greatness; she isn't particularly talented; but she is good and determined to make the best of her place in life even as she knows that place isn't fair.

I'll put spoilers here for people who haven't read David Copperfield, but (view spoiler)[ Esther is like a combination of David and Ham. I loathed Ham, because he was so stupid and flawless and sanctimonious even as we were supposed to think him humble. But I think he was also hard to take because it was impossible to imagine being him: he was such an idealized working class guy that he comes off as a sort of display-object. Esther is also someone, like Ham, who appears destined to serve rather than be served, but we do have to imagine being her, because like David she's the perspective character. I am pleased that she is every bit as much of a center for this story so far as Ada might be--really more so, and I'm curious as to how a person like this will work out as a Dickens character. (Unless it turns out she's a secret princess or something.) (hide spoiler)]

Sam Weller was also a non-gentlemanly character a person could imagine being, but Sam was comic. With Esther, as Peter points out, we're looking more at a Bildungsroman. So that's different and new and interesting.

Ulysse wrote: "I love it how the opening paragraphs of the book are dense and almost impenetrable as though they were fog banks made of prose! I agree with you Tristram, it is poetry..."

I agree too! I can see why people would feel it goes on too long, but I love this opening and the description here and the way we're as smothered in fog as the Londoners.

"Mr. Guppy" is my new favorite Dickens name. I hope we see more of him.

Ulysse wrote: "Tristram wrote: "Ulysse wrote: "His contemporaries and later critics considered him the least artistic of the great English novelists. I really don't see this. They must have been terribly jealous ..."

Thanks, Ulysse, but a lot of my reading has always been dedicated to the Victorians, and if there were the chance to travel in time I know where I'd go. As to the Brontes, I am always afraid of mixing them up, although they are quite different from each other. The one who wrote Wuthering Heights cannot be the same who wrote Jane Eyre, but I never know which is which.

Julie wrote: "Mary Lou wrote: "I know you have strong feelings about Esther. The first time I heard you voice them, I was quite taken aback, because I quite liked her. I'm afraid your opinion has started to colo..."

Julie, after your thoughtful comments on Esther I try to give her her due by saying that I spotting at least one good talent in her, namely the one to make immediate friends with children and to genuinely care for them. It definitely showed in the way she befriended the neglected Jellyby offspring and even cracked Caddy's hard shell. Still, I always have misgivings when she makes so little of herself, and feel that she is fishing for compliments.

Julie wrote: ""Mr. Guppy" is my new favorite Dickens name. I hope we see more of him."

Hi Julie

No worries. I don’t think it is too much of a spoiler to say that Mr Guppy will be with us for the long haul.