Reading this right now and I'm finding it boring as shit. The narrator is such a smug goody-two-shoes, and all the other characters are so forgettable. Does Dickens get better than this?
David Copperfield
Alexander Wilson
Other urls found in this thread:
Jack Myers
Don't worry the bad guy is assured to die for some bullshit reason out of nowhere and the goody two shoes kids will live happily ever after in every Dickens novel.
Cooper Taylor
>Does Dickens get better than this?
nah
Michael Moore
If you don’t find Dickens utterly hilarious then you’ve been pleb filtered
Evan Howard
Official Dickens ranking:
A Christmas Carol>dogshit>the rest>>>>Great Expectations
Asher Perry
Have you read Bleak House?
Luke Murphy
not yet, no, I might check it out though
Isaac Reed
If I had to rank what I've read by him:
Our Mutual Friend> Bleak House>David Copperfield>Little Dorrit>Dombey and Son>Nicholas Nickleby
Liam Miller
>Bleak House
Many things irked me about this book. Dickens’s sentimentality is often nauseating and sometimes comes across a cheap trick, like the overwrought string music playing in the background of a bad soap opera. The transition from an omniscient narrator to Esther’s narration was a brilliant device, but also made the book a bit difficult for me to follow, and easy to put down. Dickens’s characters are always exciting, but his descriptive language can be soporific. He has a tendency to let himself get carried away into prose poetry, all written in the passive voice. Occasionally, these are masterful, such as the famous beginning paragraphs of this novel; but just as often they make me drowsy.
What is miraculous about Dickens is that his books are so apparently simple and straightforward, and yet they can be endlessly analyzed. Perhaps this is because he effortlessly combines so many contradictory elements: social realism with imaginative fancy, sentimental prettiness with grotesque horror, moral preaching with biting satire, advocacy with art, propaganda with poetry. Dickens’s flaws leap to the eye—his inability to create three-dimensional characters, his lack of intellectual curiosity, his superficial view of the world, his insensitivity to the sublime, his clumsy plots, his mountains of petty details, his deadening prose style—and yet his appeal is nearly universal.
Michael Butler
Hard Times is also good.