I'm never sure if I dislike his beginnings or ends more. I'm currently inclined to say "beginnings," but that might be only because I'm in the process of reading one!
*points* That very one. For coursework, rather than by choice. I'm a victorianist who hates Dickens - it's complicated! I'm actually anticipating discussion, because I know a number of my classmates are nuts about BH, and I'll be interested to hear them talk about why.
All of Dickens' novels have coincidental elements, but Bleak House is *all* coincidences. Every character in the huge cast has at least two different lines of connection to other characters. There are so many coincidences that they go beyond contrivance, they're the *theme* -- and the theme, as the "objective" narrator states repeatedly, is that for good and ill every part of English society is connected. There is no such thing as being outside society -- what happens to Jo, the poor street-sweeper, spreads through the network of society and even into Society, the fools who think that they're the only people who count. Everyone counts.
I love seeing the complex network of connections and influences tying all the characters together, like an approximation of the mind of God.
Bleak House is also unique for Dickens (and the Western canon, if I'm not mistaken) in having two narrators with minimal similarities. The presumably-male, authorial narrator uses what I call "third-person sarcastic": not merely omniscient, but cynical. He doesn't just describe the action, he comments on it and he is usually *not* happy. In contrast, Esther is a rather naive first person narrator -- the only female POV Dickens ever uses, IIRC. Esther is never cynical, but that's not because she's always content. She can be quite angelic in her care for others, but she pities herself, too -- she's not unbelievably selfless.
I love seeing the world through Esther's eyes, and in particular to seeing her *work*: she's a woman who works because she's always expected to work, there's no shame in it. She's not an "angel in the house", because her housekeeping is not magic, it's effort -- like Mrs. Bucket, perhaps the most admirable older woman character. It's a relief as well as a pleasure to have the central POV character be a working woman.
Bleak House is mostly a tragedy, so I generally re-read it when I feel like having a good wallow and cry. No-one with power is just, no-one good has any real power: the best we can do is take care of the people within our reach.
Aw, now, you're hatin' on my main man. He could plot like nobody's business, and his secondary characters were to die for. I dare anyone to to ever forget Miss Havisham, or the purgatory of Jarndyce and Jarndyce, for that matter.
I have tried hard to like Dickens and started several of his books several times. *sighs* I can just about finish Tale of Two Cities, but only because I like Star Trek.
Have to be thankful to the Beeb for their adaptations of Dickens, which they have done a number of times and which I liked. My favourite was Little Dorrit, due to the fact that their sets for the Marshalsea were splendid, and gave me a good idea for one of my main fandoms, the Aubreyad. *g*
*dies* You have no idea how many times I said just that over the course of my undergrad degree. I tried to like Dickens, really, but, in the end, just no.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-08-28 06:35 pm (UTC)I still haven't forgiven him for the end of Hard Times.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-28 07:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-28 06:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-28 07:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-28 08:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-28 11:22 pm (UTC)What I love about Bleak House.
Date: 2011-08-29 05:57 am (UTC)I love seeing the complex network of connections and influences tying all the characters together, like an approximation of the mind of God.
Bleak House is also unique for Dickens (and the Western canon, if I'm not mistaken) in having two narrators with minimal similarities. The presumably-male, authorial narrator uses what I call "third-person sarcastic": not merely omniscient, but cynical. He doesn't just describe the action, he comments on it and he is usually *not* happy. In contrast, Esther is a rather naive first person narrator -- the only female POV Dickens ever uses, IIRC. Esther is never cynical, but that's not because she's always content. She can be quite angelic in her care for others, but she pities herself, too -- she's not unbelievably selfless.
I love seeing the world through Esther's eyes, and in particular to seeing her *work*: she's a woman who works because she's always expected to work, there's no shame in it. She's not an "angel in the house", because her housekeeping is not magic, it's effort -- like Mrs. Bucket, perhaps the most admirable older woman character. It's a relief as well as a pleasure to have the central POV character be a working woman.
Bleak House is mostly a tragedy, so I generally re-read it when I feel like having a good wallow and cry. No-one with power is just, no-one good has any real power: the best we can do is take care of the people within our reach.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-29 04:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-29 08:47 am (UTC)Have to be thankful to the Beeb for their adaptations of Dickens, which they have done a number of times and which I liked. My favourite was Little Dorrit, due to the fact that their sets for the Marshalsea were splendid, and gave me a good idea for one of my main fandoms, the Aubreyad. *g*
no subject
Date: 2011-08-29 09:47 am (UTC)