Not an easy read but ultimately worthwhile
|
This was the first Dickens novel I read that I found myself harking back to my initial misgivings about the author.
The meat of the story is certainly interesting enough, but my mind did tend to wonder during the numerous visits to both the Veneering and Podsnapp households. I presume these sections would have been much more relevant at the time the novel was written.
Ultimately, however, the novel is redeemed through the usual Dickensian traits of superb characterisation, stoytelling and wit and whilst the characters in my opinion do not rival any of his greatest creations, there is enough to keep you entertained.
|
|
Darkly brilliant
|
|
A rich panorama of London life in the 19th century, this is one of the finest novels ever written. Henry James called Dickens' novels 'loose, baggy monsters', but this is splendidly constructed, a vision of a contradictory metropolis uniting the opposites of life in the most haunting way.
|
|
|
A timeless classic
|
A previous reviewer, Rufusred, is spot on with his comments about this book.
This is my favourite Dickens' novel. What motivated me to read it was its mention in Lost Series 2 by the character, Desmond. He said that he had read every wonderful word Mr Dickens had ever written but he would save reading Our Mutual Friend until he was near his deathbed. This was a clever self-reflexive ploy by the scriptwriters of Lost
as reading Our Mutual Friend soon demonstrated.
In OMF, as in Lost, we are introduced to a large assemblage of seemingly unconnected characters, who become intertwined with each other following an event. In Lost, it is the plane crash and in OMF it is the apparent murder of John Harmon and the discovery of his body in the Thames (of course, it turns out that John Harmon is very much alive). The structure of Lost is very similar to the narrative structure of OMF. Each chapter is written in serial form and takes turns to examine a different character or character units, eg, the Veneerings, the Lammles, the Wilfers, the Boffins. Like the island in Lost, the Thames plays a central role in the narrative.
The characterisation is superb. The highlight for me was Dickens' portrayal of Bradley Headstone. His obsessional behaviour and his gradual psychological disintegration leading to one attempted murder and a simultaneous murder and suicide is brilliantly and viciously documented. There is little chance of redemption for this man; Dickens is merciless with him. Previous reviewers have drawn comparisons with Hardy's tone of darkness and cynicism. I would agree. For those who have read Hardy's The Mayor of Casterbridge, one can draw parallels with Hardy's merciless portrayal of Michael Henchard's rise and fall and eventual suicide with that of Headstone's. The scene with Rogue Riderhood taunting Headstone in front of his students is loaded with frightening tension.
The plot itself is fairly ordinary but with all Dickens' work it is the quality of the prose, the characterisation, the humour, the pathos, the vision and the moral virtue that are the classic ingredients.
This book is timeless.
|
|
Verbose, baggy and inappropriately comic.
|
I've rated Dickens's last finished novel a three for its skill, coherence, imaginative characters, enormity of scope, and the haunting brilliance of some of its scenes and imagery. But I didn't enjoy it.
The second half is certainly better than the first, but this book, like many of Dickens's works, labours under three perennial Dickens problems: (1) the tendency to use ten words when three would have sufficed, (2) bagginess, in that it seriously lacks pace and (3) the seriousness of the subject and themes is continuously undermined by the tone which is, almost without exception, humorous (and this kind of sarcasm - or irony, or whatever - is not the type to induce belly laughs, trust me).
I ploughed on. And on. After an inordinate amount of time, in which I started and finished many other books, I eventually finished it. Maybe in another five years I'll brace myself and read another of these verbose tomes, which certainly aren't devoid of genius.
In the meantime, I'm sticking to lighter fare.
|
|
|
Dazzling!
|
|
I was quite simply dazzled by this book and zoomed my way through it in a few days. I wanted more, even after this race through its nearly 900 pages, taken in by the breathtaking scope not only to be found in the diversity and credibilty of even the most eccentric characterisations, such as Wegg or Podsnap, something only to be expected from Dickens, but by the moral flux of so many situations and in the thoughts of the likes of Mrs. Lammle or Bella Wilfer. The cruel satire encarnated in the figure Mrs. Wilfer alone had me laughing out loud and the Society scenes around the Veneering's table are so marvellously observed that they had me wondering how on earth Dickens could have had a friend left in Victorian 'polite society'! Brilliant. The river-shore scenes are amongst the most wonderfully atmospheric I've come across in his work: one wonders again what manner of 'field work' Dickens did to to depict this strangely amphibious half-world and it's population. The tone of the prose, too, was in marked contrast to the only very slightly earlier Great Expectations; greater in breadth of style and scale, with far sharper social criticism and biting humour. In fact, it's the humour, and its very darkness, which I felt most stood out in this tour-de-force. Yes, it's a whopping great book: yes it might take you time to get through, and yes again, the very wealth of its style, the range of personalities, settings, motives and dilemas will inevitably mean that one's attention becomes selective. Yet this only means the challenge is greater and, for this reader anyway, the rewards higher. I really loved it, and would encouarge anyone who's enjoyed a Dickens to have a bash.
|
|
|
United States | 
United Kingdom | 
Canada