Monday 19 November 2012

Dickens' year almost over (thank heavens!)

At the beginning of 2012 I gave myself the task of re-reading, in this 200th anniversary year of his birth, all fourteen of his major novels in chronological order of their publication - and, apart from the Christmas stories (including, of course, 'Carol'), which I traditionally read in December, I've achieved it. Never again! At least not to read them all in close succession. Before half-way through the year I was aware of developing an 'indigestion' in my brain. All that sentiment, all that waffling, those tear-inducing sufferings of 'innocent' parties, and numerous stoically-borne deaths - but more than any of this, those docile, meek, obedient female characters displaying a superhuman forbearance to their lowly circumstances that made me just want to scream!
Of course I recognise that the expectations of what was considered in the 19th century to be the accepted, decorous conduct of the female in polite society has shifted markedly. Women have, quite rightly, for a long time now, been considered quite as entitled as men to live as reactively to life's trials, rather than with the 'shut-up-and-put-up-with-it' expectations of Victorian repressedness. But, all the same, that particular aspect does make for rather depressing reading.
   I did, however, get much of the expected pleasures from re-living the very many amusing passages, a lot of which are very funny indeed - and his character word-paintings are surely second to none in entire English literature. But for the first time my patience with the stretched-out plots was becoming so threadbare that I was longing to get to the end of each novel. Also, must confess that I 'glided' over more pages than in any previous readings, either skimming them, or with my mind on 'auto'. Anyway, I've now read them all at least three times, some (Oliver Twist, Nicholas Nickleby, Great Expectations, David Copperfield) four times. Of course I'm not saying that I'm never going to re-read any of them again because I certainly will - but not more than a couple in such a short period of time. 

  So, with this year's 'project' almost done, what's 2013 got in store? Well, one thing that just has to be done is to make a third assault on the seven volumes of 'A la Recherche...' - though my pipe-dream of tackling it in the original language will have to remain just that for a bit longer.
   I've already embarked on a sixth reading of the Bible (King James edition this time, again) as well as an eighth foray into the Qur'an - making copious notes on both, while trying to make sense of both of these often contradictory exemplars of 'Holy Writ', and which get increasingly and frustratingly baffling on each reading. (The nicest people I've known in my own life have had a superior moral code, and one that was genuinely worthy of respect, than has either of these versions of a Supreme Being!)
    Then there are other 'classics' that have been waiting several years for a re-read which I want to get down to before it's too late - 'Ulysses', 'War & P', 'GWTWind', 'Karamazov Bros', 'Clarissa', 'Canterbury Tales' (in medieval English), 'Rebecca', 'A Dance to the Music of Time', then there all those early Stephen Kings when he was so very good, not to mention the incomparable Patricia Highsmith, and in addition there's.... .....oh, but life is just too short!
   

13 comments:

  1. "jane eyre" and "wuthering heights".

    we had to read dickens in high school english classes. BORING! I just could NOT get the hang of his writing; I make an exception for "carol".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'll let you into a 'secret', A.M. I just couldn't 'get' Dickens until I was into my 40s. Then it struck me that I was making the same mistake with him as I was with many 'classical' writers (Jane Austen above all) - I'd been reading them far too fast. For full appreciation the words need to be mulled over and 'savoured' - and that is basically why I've gone adrift with C.D. this year. I've been so anxious to get the books over and done with and to get onto reading something else that they just became a blur.
      I would still defend Dickens as one of the half-dozen greatest authors in the English language - but in future I shan't attempt more than a max of three of his works in any one year from now on.
      And 'C. Carol' I know more than any other of his novels because, as I say, I read it every Xmas season - and it's a lovely (and short!) work.

      Delete
    2. Oh, 'Jane Eyre. I've only ever read once and badly need to acquire another copy for a further read.

      'Wuthering Heights' took me some time to like - and even now, after having read it 3 or 4 times, I do wish E.B. had chosen completely different names for her elder and younger characters instead of giving them identical or very similar ones. But I suppose that was in an age where deference to an older generation was imparted by calling children after their parents. Still, it's a jolly good book.

      Delete
  2. A word in your opening sentence says it all: 'task.' I got through Dickens during my learning years, but you know, never again.

    I notice that you saved the best for last - Patricia Highsmith. Always a treat to read again the evilness of Ripley and then watch "The Amazing Mr. Ripley." Since a brand new year will be upon us, I'd like to recommend a new author to those of us who are Patricia Highsmith admirers: Gillian Flynn and the book is "Gone Girl" - could not put it down.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was only a 'task' seen in retrospect, Paul. I wouldn't use that word to describe an isolated reading of just one of the novels, which is usually one of unalloyed pleasure.

      I'm glad you're also a Patricia Highsmith fan. I don't think she ever got more than a fraction of the recognition she deserved. Her clarity of language was, and still is, an object-lesson for all writers. I think I've read every one of her books and short stories though there may just be the odd one or two that have sneaked by. Always got my eyes peeled for them.

      Don't know the name of Gillian Flynn at all, but because of your bringing her to my attention, I shall now be on the alert. Thanks.

      Delete
  3. I too read Dickens in school mainly because we had to and I didn't much fancy a ruler over the knuckles every English lesson for a month! However, now though, it's a real delight to take on one, only one at a time of course. Yet I almost feel like I missed out on not enjoying them when I was younger!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know exactly what you mean, Jase, because I feel the same way. In my first comment above I mention being over 40 before Dickens made sense to me - and only wish I'd enjoyed him in the prior decades. Now I'm making up for lost time - and sometimes overdoing it!

      Delete
  4. Blasphemy!!!
    Dickens is my favorite, and all who say ilk of him shall be given to Daniel Quilp for supper !!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, I was wondering what your reaction to this blog would be, Dr Spo. But don't be concerned as we are still in concordance. Disbelieve it if you want, but Dickens is still one of my VERY favourite writers of all. My point is simply to make others beware of glutting on him - and thereby meeting the same fate (in literary terms) of 'little' Mr Quilp.

      Delete
    2. Find a copy of the Robertson Davie's short story "Dickens Digested" it's a hoot.

      Delete
    3. Okay. Don't know how or when but I'll bear it in mind. Thanks.

      Delete
  5. Wow! What an effort. I recently reread four of his classics (well, first time, amazingly, for one) and truly enjoyed it. But after the fourth, I needed to move on for a while. Maybe I'll get back to him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You learned your lesson quicker than I did, Mitch., though I'm in danger of giving the impression that I DISlike Dickens (witness Dr Spo, above), when the complete reverse is true.

      Delete