Charles Dickens is overrated

Seriously, he's not that great. Every book of his that I've read has been mind numbingly boring. Especially Hard Times.

 

I completley agree.

 

He writes very well for his generation. he was a revolutionary writer, who developed description and such themes that were unspokable in his era. He is a literaly hero... Ofcourse, if you compare him to other authors, of other eras, he might seem to be dull... yet, compare him to other people of his time in his society, and you will see greatness.

 

I agree with Pavel. The thing is you have to remember that Dickens was paid by how many words he wrote. That's why some of his work seems to just go on and on about nothing at all. But there really is something there, you just have to get passed all the "fluff" that he added.

 

I loved 'Oliver Twist'

'A Tale of 2 Cities', however, I could not get past the first page.

 

Yeah if you can just get over that 19th century style of being...creatively verbose, to put it nicely...he's appreciable. I don't think he translates as well as many other timeless authors.

 

I had to read oliver twist in school and I found it really boring. I have a hard time reading a lot of fiction though.

 

I disagree, I think Dickens is amazing. I've read a few of his books, one being Great Expectations and it changed my life. I think he's an awesome author, I'll be it a little dry, but still really wonderful.

 

Some say he's the greatest english novelist. I don't agree with that. but still, he was great, even if he had an odd kind of style, even for his time. The greatest stregnths of his work are in my opinion his characters, most of whom are larger than life, but still very real, and his enormous social conscience. The greatest weakness is an often overblown victorian emotionalism. But his work is interesting, and he deserves his place in the top rank of writers in the english language.

 

I think he's very good, but I find some of his books quite dull, and though I would agree with BlackBillBlake about the characters I'd have to say some of them seem quite bland and two-dimensional.

 

I don't know what to think. I've trawled through a few books (and I think trawled is definately the verb for it, in some circumstances), and overall I thought the stories were powerful book overlong.

I never knew he got paid by the word. Shit, if I got paid by the word, I'd write superflous prose as well! Interesting fact, though.

Thing with Dickens, and you're free to say this is crap, is I think his work translates really well onto stage and screen. I thought more or less the same with Tolkien. I read Lord of the Rings when I was younger and found it a real struggle. On the one hand I admired the enormous scope of the world he created, but I found the sheer amount of nitpicky detail made the book drag. I only got half-way through book two before I started skipping pages--but I think as films they're amazing, and all the Dickens I've seen, I've thought the same.

Tale of Two cities I sort of liked towards the end (but yeah, the first chapter reads like you're on a see-saw); and Oliver was fucking scary, especially the chapter when Nancy got killed.

Iris x

 

Thing to Remember about Dickenson. As opposed to You and Me.
I'm an amature author.
He's been Published. I haven't. Have you?

 

I try not to think about it, as I'm invariably consumed by bitterness. But I see your point....

....although some fool let Victoria Beckham publish her autobiography, while Mr Robbie Williams is busy with 'My Life : Volume 2492'. Just to give home to all the amateurs out there, can't we at least have a sense of superiority over these people.

Okay, but not Dickens. I'm not trying to deny his genius with his own time, his novels made very important points within their social context, and he could come up with a cracking plot ; but he doesn't half drag on...

Altogether now, 'It was the best of times, it was the worst of time....'

Iris x

 

I'm sorry, with regards to my last post. I just noticed you live in Nevada and are probably lucky enough never to have heard of the publicity beast that is Victoria Beckham.


If you have, my condolences.

 

lmao Iris moon you're hilarious.

And I've read Great Expectations and want to read others by Dickens. I agree, his work drags on but as an aspiring writer, I learnt a hell of a lot by reading how he describes his world.

 

Yeah, I liked Great Expectations too. There's a really haunting old film, I don't know if you've seen it, with Sir John Mills. Made in the thirties I think, with the scariest Miss Haversham I've ever seen.

If you're brave enough to try another, I'd recommend Oliver. It's a lot darker than the musical version, less Oompapah and more..er, blood. Definately an adult read. There's a really creepy subplot involving this guy named Monks. The only problem with the novel is that Fagin is constantly refered to as 'The Jew', and you get this uncomfortable air of anti-semitism whenever you read it. But I do know he always denied these claims, and it is a reflection of it's time, I suppose.

I like what you said about learning from how he describes the world at his time. Those are my favourite kinds of books. Have you read Frankenstein? I'm facinated by Mary Shelley, and how she wrote the novel at the height of the Enlightenment, when ideas surrounding the origins of life were being discussed. Her and Shelley and Lord Byron, exiled in...was it Geneva? With all these illegitimate kids in tow.

And the Bronte novels ; they had really unconventional upbringings for women of their time, and their novels are full of it. I love the little reflections, from what little we know about the authors lives, and what is translated in their novels.

Listen to me, I'm ranting.

Will go before I start trying to talk about Wuthering Heights again.

Great Expectations is cool.

Iris x

p.s. But Heathcliff is cooler.

 

I'm beginning to read Oliver Twist. So far I like it. I see what people mean about Dickens being rather wordy, but I don't mind, rather it helps with the imagination in my mind. Plus it helps with my vocabulary, since I have to look a word up in the dictionary every few minutes LOL

 

I still get shivers and chills when I remember old Scrouge hidding under the bed covers in his drafty stone cold house.

 

I have to agree his work is over rated, one dimensional and tedious however it can be carried to stage excellently.

 

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

Personally, I don't like Dickens' style. I find it frustrating to read, because I want to get on with the story and instead have to wade through too much surplus verbiage. I'm not saying writing shouldn't be descriptive, but Dickens is too descriptive in the wrong places, so there's rarely any sense of tension or of time passing. They come across more as a study of literature than books themselves.