A Tale of Two Cities
I'm having a hard time with this book. So far I'm finding it boring and dull to the max. My husband thinks I'm not giving it a chance as this was a book he really loved. I'm slothful in my approach to reading it.
However, *ahem*, given the fact that I've given 3 out of 4 of the book reviews this month, I think its someone else's turn to give a report. =) I'm hopeful that one of you have read this book and can offer some commentary and, perhaps, some motivation for me to keep plugging away.
Be my guest! =)
posted by Carrie @ 12:32 PM
5 comments
5 Comments:
Alas, I had high hopes of reading all of these books, and then I realized...TOMORROW IS THE LAST DAY OF SEPTEMBER. Quite honestly, after recommending the Count of Monte Cristo, I've barely cracked open the cover of the book. In my defense, I've moved, been working, had three sets of company from out of town, been out of town myself a couple of weekends this month and generally been over my head with busyness. While most of things are good things, I simply ran out of time. As a result, I haven't read anything this month.
Obviously I recognizes that others have lives as well, and my grumbling is doing no good. So, please accept my humble apologies at my lack of ability to keep up, and I will try harder next month. (Oh, and by the way, I still intend to read my own recommendation, just in case anyone was wondering. ;-) ).
On the Tale of Two Cities...its been several years since I've read that last, but I remember enjoying it very much -- for whatever that's worth.
I think the Tale of Two Cities is like Monty Python, you have to at least do it once!
(I remember enjoying it but it's been ten years or so...) I'm still trying to read and post!
We will all have to really step up and keep this going when JLB comes along! Carrie has definitely been our glue and soon it will be our turn!
I am tardy on this but I still wanted to chime in with my comments (especially, Carrie, if you're going to be in danger of not finishing it!) First, I haven't had a chance to re-read it this month, which is why I hadn't stepped up to the plate and initially reviewed it. Mea culpa.
Second, this is one of my all-time favourite Dickens books, right up there with A Christmas Carol. Some of Dickens' novels are a bit prosy (to the point of being tedious) such that it becomes evident he wrote most of his stories in serial form, and was paid by the word, but most of them I find nonetheless charming and witty if a bit-long-winded, with the exception of David Copperfield, which I always thought was boooooring. Not so with Two Cities. It feels much more efficient, compact, and action-driven than philosophical (though there's a lot of that too).
The plot is full of many different threads, and I like how they all tie into each other. The mystery of the grave-diggers and the mystery of Dr. Manette's imprisonment make for some intriguing unraveling.
I must admit that the main protagonists, Lucie Manette and Charles Darnay, have little interest for me. They seem shallow caricatures, too good and pretty to be of much interest, and they don't change much throughout the book but maintain their rather saintly demeanor. I don't dislike them at all, but they simply don't seem all that engaging.
I find the topic of Dr. Manette's memoirs scoffable, as I do most memoirs so discovered. If I had a most important message to impart and nothing to write it in but my own blood, I'd get right down to business and impart my important message without getting all technical about how I managed it. A small but irritating point.
I like the descriptions of the characters of Sidney Carton and Mr. Stryver, the one drifting along and the other shouldering his way into conversations and shouldering his way up in life. His self-important reasoning about proposing to Lucie is always entertaining.
The ending may seem a bit contrived, but I've always found it to be grand and glorious and intensely satisfying. I hope Miss Pross recovers her hearing, though.
Obviously, I didn't even get to this book, but I'll confess that I have an almost morbid dislike of Dickens. He bugs me, in a huge way. His portrayal of women is painfully Victorian, and I have a hard time sympathizing with any of his heroines. So, I'll pass on this one and restrict my Dickens reading to A Christmas Carol (which isn't so bad and is blessedly brief).
I cannot disguise the fact that Dickens is NOT my favorite author; far from it. But I do recognize his talent, although not my preference.
Tale of Two Cities first got me interested in the French revolution, and through that, French history (which I find all together confusing and fascinating; and continue to know nothing about). The story is rich in complexity, deeply descriptive narrative, and monumental moments. In fact, as I type this, I must confess my appreciation for Dickens has increased the more (and multiple) I read of his.
However, one of the main things that grates against me (aside from his ridiculous run on sentences) are his stereotypical male characters. His "ideal" man (which I could argue, from this book in particular, Dickens waffles on) is not someone I would want to be involved with. Noble, yes, when push comes to shove, but often only after shove; and talk about effeminate and sentimental! No, I must have my men meatier, even if they don't look quite so good in wigs and stockings. After all, one must make some sacrifices.
That's all ladies! Great pick.
Post a Comment
<< Home