Written at a time when all of Europe feared revolutionary forces, A Tale of Two Cities, carries the reader on a journey through late 18th century Paris and London. Look for the many literary devices Dickens employs to help us connect with the characters. Your research into the Revolution will help you engage the storyline even more so you may wnat to do that part of the assignment first.
Be sure to respond to other students posts often.
Posts must be made by July 27
Best. Story. Ever.
ReplyDeleteI really love this book! I loved it the first time I read it and I love it more with each subsequent reading. Dickens paints a tale of vivid images and compelling characters. The book draws you in and holds you captive, filling your mind with the pictures he describes and the scenes he writes so eloquently. The way he writes makes it easy to imagine yourself in Paris or London at the time, either as a terrified aristocrat or an angry revolutionary. You can feel the emotions of the characters, and Charles Dickens even adds humor to round out this fantastic tale.
@MSchaller
ReplyDeleteI think Dickens did a remarkable job in A Tale of Two Cities. His portrayal of both the rule of the aristocrats and the Terror was very vivid due to his extensive descriptions of characters he had created to represent the different factions of the people. The character Alexandre Mannette was, in my opinion, the most dynamic character in the story, especially when his own words are used against him by the Defarges (another fantastic pair of characters) and we feel the hurt and anguish he feels when his unwilling testimony condemns his own son in law. This being my first reading of the book, I felt that the first two books were a bit slow in comparison to the third, where the majority of the work's great conflicts take place. Anybody feel the same way?
In A Tale of Two Cities, the major plot is the conflict between the new Republic in France and Charles Darnay (and likewise all supposed enemies of the Republic). This conflict is crucial to the story because it is the backbone for some of Dickens' best writing in the book (my favorite was Dr. Manette's letter). We see through this conflict how dangerous the Revolution was in France, with executions taking place after hurried trials in which the public opinion was the overwhelming factor. We see the hate that the Defarges hold for Darnay, an innocent man about to be executed for the crimes of his family. Through this conflict we see the sacrifice paid by Sidney Carton to show his undying love for Lucie. Dickens shows, through the character of the seamstress, how even one sent to die unjustly believed that she was "not unwilling to die, if the Republic which is to do so much good for us poor, will profit by my death" (347). This leads me to a question. Why were these peasants, so wrongly tried and convicted of crimes they did not commit by a group they believed to be the bearers of their new freedom, still holding fast to the belief that the Republic had their best interests at heart?
ReplyDeleteI have not yet finished the book, but so far I have found it to be very interesting. One topic that caught my attention, though probably not as relevant as other subplots, was Mr. Manette's lock-up. Dickens mentions that he was locked up for a very long time, without so much as an accusation against him. I think this speaks in regards to the dysfunction of justice systems of the time. Still though, similar things have been seen in more recent years. To me, it seems life would be extremely difficult to return to after being incarcerated unjustly for so long. I was wondering if anyone else had thoughts on the topic?
ReplyDeleteJust a quick question, though kind of random:
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone know why the "today" or "tomorrow" is separated like "to-day" and "to-morrow"? Maybe its just my copy or the publisher, but I was just wondering if anyone had an explanation?
@Megan R
ReplyDeleteIt's clear that under the aristocrats the justice system was lacking, but we must take into consideration that in that time period every nation's system featured much harsher punishments than would be seen in the justice systems of today.
My favorite part of A Tale of Two Cities is the reading of Manette's letter denouncing Darnay's family. This answers to Manette's imprisonment, the reason behind Madame Defarge's hatred of Aristocrats (especially Darnay's family). It so perfectly ties up many plot elements in a very dramatic plot twist. My least favorite part is that I believe the first two books could have been more compact as to the fact that the third book contains more crucially important events than the other two combined and does so at a pace that kept me very intrigued.
There are many passages to choose from in this work that tremendously convey the emotions that the characters hold. I chose this one due to its service as both a conclusion to the novel and as a conclusion to one of its most dynamic characters.
ReplyDelete"I see the lives for which I lay down my life, peaceful, useful, prosperous, and happy, in that England which I shall see no more...I see that I hold a sanctuary in their hearts, and in the hearts of their descendants, generations hence... I see her and her husband... and I know that each was not more honoured and held sacred in the other's soul, than I was in the souls of both... It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to than I have ever known." (366-367).
This passage is important to the novel because in it we see that Carton is truly at peace with the decision he made, and sees its vast importance to the Darnay's future. He realizes that his happiness was greatly tied to the happiness of Lucie, and that this sacrifice will be the fulfillment of his earlier commitment to her. Carton had been seen as a drunkard, as a man with little ambition or care for others, and as a unsatisfied suitor for Lucie. With this passage, we see that now he feels himself to have importance and can now rest knowing he does matter to those he cares for. I was very pleased that Dickens chose to end the book this way. I believe he intended to show that Carton would live on in the hearts of those lives he touched and that in his moment of death he finally began to truly live. When I read this ending to the book, I also felt that Dickens meant for this passage to convey that even in the darkest of times we can still hope for a better future. I was captivated by this passage. What are your opinions on it?
When I lived in Knoxville, Tennessee, the most important thing on most everybody's minds was University of Tennessee football. When our head coach, Lane Kiffin, announced he was going to leave in the middle of the night to take the coaching job and Southern California after only one season at Tennessee, many people (including some friends of mine) rushed to the coaching complex downtown to try to surround the coach before he left. Thousands showed up, and through their presence together the tension rose to a point at which they escalated their actions to burning mattresses, vandalism, and chanting obscenities about the coach and his staff.
ReplyDeleteThis is similar to the mob mentality we see in A Tale of Two Cities. Crowds would surround trials, armed with weapons (and sometimes using them), and oftentimes would demand the execution of prisoners for little than to see the violence themselves. After the reading of Manette's letter, "a terrible sound arose...a sound of craving and eagerness that had nothing articulate in it but blood" (325). The group together had a violent tendency, much more than they would likely have had by themselves.
These two actions, while in completely different contexts, show that the presence of a group of people with similar feelings towards a singular opponent can cause hysteria to break out in a quick moment.
Make sure you respond to each others questions. Due date is July 27. Be on time!
ReplyDeleteHi all!
ReplyDeleteLike Megan I am not quite finished with the book, I have a few more pages to go. I cant help but agree with Thomas' earlier comment concerning the fact that the book started out slow. I found myself not grasping the appeal of the story and actually questioning why it was considered a classic. As the book picked up, near the middle/end of the second story I started to really get into the book.
In restrospect to the earlier parts of the book, where people were ravaged with poverty and abused by leaders, I am having trouble figuring out which period was better to live in as a rational citizen. Obviously in the earlier period a lot of people died of starvation and suffered from most aristocrats, but in the Revolutionary period anyone could be put on trial and murdered for scant reasons.
ReplyDeleteThis book can be looked at from a few different points of view, all of which seem fraught with difficulty. Unless of course you escape France. In response to Thomas' latest comment about mob mentality, The Revolutionaries in "Tale of Two Cities" reminds me of a book I read in eighth grade called "Lord of the Flies" by William Golding. In this book, stranded boys try to create order and survive on an island but are taken over by savage mentality and succumb to actually murdering other boys and losing their civilized way. These boys lose all of the 'ego' psychology where they think about fair and civilized actions, and revert to the 'id' mentality where they do whatever they want to each other. In "Tale of Two Cities" the leaders of governmental France are murdered and civilization is definetely shaken but saved by the loose "Republic" enstated. I cant wait to finish this book and will post soon!
ReplyDelete@Megan R
ReplyDeleteI think "to-day" and "to-morrow" were just earlier ways of writing those words. Of course, now, the regular spellings of those words do not include the dashes.
Hi everybody! I have not yet finished A Tale of Two Cities, just a little more to read, but I have not found it to be as enjoyable to read as The Decameron was. I agree with Thomas' and Duke's comments about the book starting out slow, I think that it's because the beginning of the story is swimming with imagery without much action to follow. This would be good for a person who needs detailed descriptions to visualize the story, but I am a more action oriented reader and have found A Tale of Two Cities hard to follow. Another reason I have not enjoyed A Tale of Two Cities as much as some of my other classmates is because I find that even though it was written in English, the vocabulary, phrases, and even the humor that Dickens uses to tell the story at times seems to be a foreign language to me. Turn of the century English conversation can seem like a foreign tongue to me.
ReplyDeleteFor anyone who is having similar challenges reading A Tale of Two Cities, here is a tip that was shared with me. Dickens has a tendency to make seemingly insignificant characters turn into important people later in the book, so keeping a notebook on any and all characters you encounter may help to keep track of a plot that grows with complexity.
@OMcHugh
ReplyDeleteIt's amazing to read the book and see how the english language has evolved in 150 years to where we've completely lost phrases and expressions and added new ones. The humor in Dickens' writing is sometimes hard to find but I've found it to be enjoyable when I encounter it.
Also, having finished the book, I agree with the insight Owen shared that Dickens does use at first relatively unimportant characters in significant roles later on.
@thomasowen
ReplyDeleteI agree that sometimes the humor can be difficult to find in A Tale of Two Cities, though a few parts literally made me laugh out loud. My favorite funny part was from Book Two: "(Mr. Cruncher himself always spoke of the year of our Lord as Anna Dominoes: apparently under the impression that the Christian era dated from the invention of the popular game, by a lady who had bestowed her name upon it."
I think parts like these were skillfully placed by Mr. Dickens in parts that he thought readers might become less attentive.
Also, has anyone noticed that Mr. Dicken's writing style seems to be that he uses long, thorough introductions, riddled with many similes and metaphors to develop the characters' personalities in favor of using their own dialogue?
Hi everybody! A Tale of Two Cities is captivating and easily propels the reader back into the lives of characters at a time of war and desperation in the 18th century. Dickens has certainly stood the test of time as a great American author, so my criticism is around the margins. He has an incredible ability for describing scenes and characters but can drag on about some insignificant details. For example, in chapter 7 of book 2, when Monseigneur is being introduced, pages are dedicated to describing how he needed help eating chocolate or when he went to the theater, instead of directly showing how Monseigneur is relevant to the story. Most chapters fly by in a whirl of suspense and enthusiasm while a few seem to get lost in the specifics of the surroundings and the nitty-gritty of everyday life. The story is extremely entertaining but it takes too long for the plot to develop.
ReplyDeleteDickens uses techniques such as crafty phrases sneaked in at the end of a chapter to foreshadow events to come. This literary device entices the reader to reflect on its meaning and keeps them intrigued. In the chapter devoted to the wine in the street, Dickens vividly describes puddles of wine and the groups of people surrounding them. The wine in this scene seems to foreshadow or even symbolize the blood of the French Revolution. It leaves a dark red stain on the streets, hands, feet, and faces of everyone who touches it. A man smears the word BLOOD on the wall and Dickens writes "The time was to come, when that wine too would be spilled on the street-stones, and when stain of it would be red upon many there." The anxiety of the characters and desperation of the time spoils the pages and leaves the reader fearing the inevitable.
ReplyDelete@OMcHugh
ReplyDeleteI completely agree that this book was not as easy to enjoy as The Decameron. Like Owen has pointed out, A Tale of Two Cities is full of imagery and sometimes insignificant descriptions which allow the reader to imagine and visualize each scene in the story. This particular writing style, in my opinion, made the story harder to follow. Another thing I noticed, especially in the first few chapters of the book, is that there were many lengthy, detailed sentences that I thought were particularly difficult to understand. Nevertheless, towards the end of the second book, I did start to enjoy the novel and I found the third book especially to be quite exciting.
With that being said, one thing that I really enjoyed about A Tale of Two Cities was the remarkable characters. Dickens gives distinct and vivid depictions to help give the reader a greater feel for each of the individual characters. Each character had a unique and crucial role in the story, whether as a petrified aristocrat or a cruel revolutionary. Although it was very difficult for me to pick one favorite, I would have to say that my favorite character was Sydney Carton. I found Carton to be such a noteworthy character because in the beginning of the story, he lived a life of laziness and alcohol, with a lack of concern for others, but in the end he turns out to be the “hero” of the book. His unrequited love for Lucie inspires him to sacrifice his own life to save the life of her husband. This heroic act leaves Carton certain that he has a special place in the hearts of all the people he loved. Does anyone else have a favorite (or least favorite) character?
Hey everyone!
ReplyDeleteI LOVE this book. Dickens is an author whose style of writing must be understood before fully grasping the ideas he is portraying. When I begun the book I thought that there were many unnecessary details. For example, there was a whole paragraph describing a piece of furniture. As I read on I found these long descriptions to be quite amusing and witty. The main story line is sometimes hard to follow as Dickens jumps into smaller details or very long sentences, but it gives the story depth and makes the characters more believable. Any thoughts on his style of writing?
Hey Everyone!
ReplyDeleteThe Tale of Two Cities was a great book and I definately enjoyed reading it. At the start of the book, it was hard to follow. It takes a few chapters of reading to be used to the style of writing Dickens uses and for a plot to develop. I liked how Dickens could use his words to create such vivids images and settings to show how the characters felt and how they lived life during this difficult time. I disliked, however, when these explanations went on for pages about simple things that did not help to understand the story. As i said before, it was hard to follow, and for me, these extra pages of explanations did not help understand the plot but made it more difficult to grasp.
@Lucy S
ReplyDeleteI agree with Lucy that Dickens style of writing is different, however, it is beautiful in my opinion. I liked his descriptions and how he created them but I do not like the the ones that read on and on for pages about simple things such as pieces of furniture.
The descriptions, despite their overly large size (or perhaps because of it), are definitely a work of art. Dickens word can paint a picture in one's mind, allowing them to see everything in amazing detail- from the most mundane of objects to his elaborate descriptions of people's facial features.
ReplyDelete@OMcHugh and SMcShea
ReplyDeleteI also found that "A Tale of Two Cities" started off slowly but picked up momentum as the book continued. One reason why I think it seemed to progress so slowly was because it was told in short installments, as a continuing story in a newspaper. Dickens does a good job of peaking interest just as the weekly installment ends. I thought Dickens was very clever in this writing technique. He found the best way to draw readers' attention and keep them coming back week after week.
Another aspect of this book that I especially liked was the mystery that seemed to surround everything. There were so many questions posed that are later answered. For example, in the first few pages of the book, Mr. Lorry talks about recalling a yet unnamed person back to life. We later find out much more information on this.
I think that Dickens did a very good job of captivating readers by using suspense and mystery in his writing.
@MeganR and CPoblete
ReplyDeleteI have another idea on the alternate spellings. I have noticed many spelling differences in British writings compared to American writings. For example, many words have alternate spellings such as "color" and "colour" and "hemorrhage" and "haemorrhage." I think this, combined with time, leads to these spellings that seem so strange to us.
I have to agree with John Paul....
ReplyDeleteI personally find the descriptions critical for me as a way to personally connect with the characters. Although some of the descriptions may not seem to be important, I think they give a better insight to the times. The furniture paragraph Lucy referenced earlier, for example, had me picturing the piece in my head and imagining myself there. I need descriptions to really get into the book and feel what the characters feel. The first time I read the book I cried through pretty much all of chapter 15. The section where Sydney Carton and the seamstress are awaiting their deaths, but have a heartfelt dialogue resulting in Carton comforting the seamstress instead of caring for his own needs really struck a chord in me.
The imagery Dickens uses in The Tale of Two Cities is a major part of the book. Without the long and specific descriptions, the book would not be the same. It would change opinions and change how people see the book. They truly make this story a work of art. I believe that those are what made this book to be a literary classic.
ReplyDeleteAnyone agree?
@MSchaller
ReplyDeleteI agree that the last chapter of The Tale of Two Cities definately touched me. In all the chaos around Carton and the seamstress and the terror of walking to your death, Carton showed his true colors by comforting the seamstress. And by doing this, I believe, Carton was actually also comforted just knowing that he had helped the seamstress.
The characters in the book are so dynamic. They start in the story as mysteries. You don't know who they are or what they will do, but you do know what they look like. As the story continues, the mystery unravels and the characters begin to change from what you first perceive them to be. Dickens does a wonderful job of doing this in the book. Any thoughts on this?
@VGlick
ReplyDeleteYes, Dickens does a wonderful job of developing characters. In the chapter "The Jackal", Carton is depicted as an insensitive slob who was barely in touch with his own life. He was a jackal, a scavenger. However by the end of the book, Carton was willing to sacrifice his own life to save the people he loved.
Does anyone think Dickens intended his death to symbolize Christ's death on the cross?
I finally finished Tale of Two Cities and I have to say in retrospect the slow beginning I experienced was understandable. Dickens had to build up his characters and the imagery of the harsh times just like many of our classmates said, and build up an animosity toward the French monarchs and put us on the poor Frenchman’s side in all of this. When the revolution begins, we are thrown into a state of confusion as the French become like animals and relish the slaughtering of dozens of people every day. Now we don’t know who is in the right, and we can only follow the consciences of our protagonists, Lucie, Charles Darnay, Sydney Carton, Doctor Mannette, and Mr. Lorry. And we know that Madame Defarge and her followers are the bad guys. As we can see the Republic spins out of control and their goal for freedom is greatly distorted. I think the famous quote at the beginning of the book is the best way to put it: “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.” (pg. 13)
ReplyDeleteI have one question: after Doctor Mannette recovered from his captivity, why did he keep resorting to shoemaking whenever he was under a lot of stress later in life? I don’t understand if it was a psychological breakdown sort of thing or if he inadvertently went back to what he knew. He didn’t seem to respond to people who talked to him which would lean towards the psychological side of things.
ReplyDeleteI really liked the rising action part of the book, when the French people finally took action. I liked the suspense when Carton was brought back into captivity and convicted, and although kind of monotonous in the beginning of the book, as the story progresses the imagery really picks up and becomes important for the telling of the tale. I also liked how our protagonists prevailed in the end and the sinister Madame Defarge was killed.
ReplyDeleteOther than the personal dislike of the introduction, Dickens did a wonderful job on A Tale of Two Cities, and I can see why this was made a classic. However I do not like the exalted status of Doctor Mannette, I do not think revolutionary France would allow this ex-captive to meddle in their executions and save his friends and in-laws. If the Republic wanted him dead they probably would be steadfast on their grounds.
As I wrote in my earlier blog, the Revolutionaries’ ‘id’ mentality reminds me of the book Lord of the Flies. Here the children, who are worse off, just like the French commoners, eventually become savage and murderous. They relish this, and even though the French set up the republic, both groups are loosely ruled, and all who disobey are punished.
“In a word,” said Madame Defarge, “my husband has not my reason for pursuing this family to annihilation, and I have not his reason for regarding this Doctor with any sensibility. I must act for myself, therefore…” (Pg 351) Here Madame Defarge acts on her own accord to destroy this innocent family, without consent or council with her husband, which was a very distrusting action, proving her and her husband don’t trust each other and are very different, something that makes me question their marriage. This passage also shows the brutality of the French Revolution, and the jealousy of those better off that started the whole thing.
ReplyDeleteI think the characterization of Tale of Two Cities is the chief literary device. Although Carton was painted as a slob in the beginning of the tale, love forced him to change into a caring being and sacrifice himself for Lucie. The caring of Carton is offset by French commoners, and the love of Doctor Mannette and his daughter is offset by Madame Defarge’s hate. However, on a deeper level, all characters are motivated by love, even if it is in the form of murder, if only to have a free Republic.
ReplyDelete@Vglick
ReplyDeleteI agree totally about the difficulty of the beginning, and the imagery he uses is really good. I think Giovanni Boccaccio did better though, I think the descriptions of the places the Decameron’s travelers was a lot better than a lot of other books I have read. But Dickens still did a great job!
I really enjoyed reading A Tale of Two Cities. What I liked most about the book was how everything fit together perfectly like pieces of a complex puzzle. It was interesting to see everything unfold, to find out how all of the characters and events were linked to one another. I was most fascinated with the role that Madame Defarge played in this story. We know that she is among the many Revolutionists against the aristocrats, particularly the Evremonde family. At first, I thought that was all there was to it. However, in Chapter 12, we learn that she is the youngest daughter of the peasant family, killed by the Evremondes, described in Alexander Manette’s letter. This made clear to me her malice towards Charles: at that point I understood why she so wanted Charles, the nephew of the former marquis, to be executed, although he himself had done nothing wrong.
ReplyDeleteAnother event that was particularly interesting was Charles’ trial in England, during which Mr. Stryver brought to everyone’s attention that Charles and Sydney Carton looked alike. I didn’t think much of this, except that it helped Stryver in defending Charles. Towards the end of the book, however, the fact that the two men looked alike helped Sydney in his plan to save Charles; he was able to trade places with Charles in prison and courageously face death at the guillotine.
What I most disliked about the book was how, as most of you have mentioned, some of the descriptions seemed to go on and on about particular things that didn’t seem too important to the story. It certainly did make the story seem like it was dragging in some parts. It wasn’t until much later in the book, particularly at the start of the Revolution, when the plot really began to pick up and the different threads of the story began to come together. On the other hand, I appreciated the details because they helped spark my imagination, especially when it came to describing the different characters and various settings. The details were like accents in my mind’s vision of the book, and it was as if I were watching a movie in my mind as I read.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMadame Defarge was definitely a very strong female character in this book. We know that she knitted the names of the people she condemned. Does anyone have any opinions as to why she knitted their names, rather than simply writing them on a piece of paper?
ReplyDelete“It was in vain for Madame Defarge to struggle and to strike; Miss Pross, with the vigorous tenacity of love, always so much stronger than hate, clasped her tight, and even lifted her from the floor in the struggle that they had. The two hands of Madame Defarge buffeted and tore her face; but, Miss Pross, with her head down, held her round the waist, and clung to her with more than the hold of a drowning woman.” (360)
ReplyDeleteI think this was an important passage in the book. Although Miss Pross certainly isn't as dynamic as some of the other characters in this book, such as Alexandre Manette and Sydney Carton, she still proves to be a strong character and plays an important role towards the end of the book by murdering Madame Defarge. Miss Pross was so driven by her love for Lucie that she was able to defeat Madame Defarge, who only had hateful intentions of bringing unhappiness and misery to Lucie and her family. This shows that, in the end, love is always stronger than hate and thus will always triumph.
“On the night of the day in which he had left the house, Mr. Lorry went into his room with a chopper, saw, chisel, and hammer, attended by Miss Pross carrying a light. There, with closed doors, and in a mysterious and guilty manner, Mr. Lorry hacked the shoemaker’s bench to pieces, while Miss Pross held the candle as if she were assisting with a murder—for which, indeed, in her grimness, she was no unsuitable figure. The burning of the body (previously reduced to pieces convenient for the purpose) was commenced without delay in the kitchen fire; and the tools, shoes, and leather were buried in the garden. So wicked do destruction and secrecy appear to honest minds, that Mr. Lorry and Miss Pross, while engaged in the commission of their deed and in the removal of its traces, almost felt, and almost looked, like accomplices in a horrible crime” (Dickens 204-205).
ReplyDeleteIn reading this passage, I thought its contents were critical to the development of the Doctor Manette character. After a major relapse, which found Doctor Manette sitting at his bench for nine days, Mr. Lorry decided it was time to have a serious discussion. They went on to concur that the materials needed to be destroyed for the doctor’s sake. Still though, Mr. Manette believed it better that he would not be there when it occurred. So this brings us to the above passage, which finds two of the doctor’s closest friends performing a great deed for him. It proves that the character of Mr. Lorry is a true man of loyalty. Even though Mr. Lorry seems to have difficulty in accepting that what he is doing is right, he does it because he knows it is what the doctor wanted and needed. Additionally, I believe it shows a major growth in Doctor Manette, who left knowing what would happen that night, and not attempting in any way to hinder those plans. In addition to the plot developments that occur, I just love the way Dickens writes the passage, describing how the characters looked and felt as if they were committing some great crime. It allowed me as a reader to really picture the scene, knowing it could come across as if the characters were up to some horrendous deed. From the very beginning, Doctor Manette has been one of my favorite characters. His story interested me in a way that others did not. There is no question, particularly after reading this passage, that the story of Doctor Manette is a riveting one which only continues from this point on.
"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way-in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its nosiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only." (Dickens 7)
ReplyDeleteThis first paragraph of the story is very important to the book as a whole. It lists several opposites such as good and evil, Light and Darkness, and the most famous, the best and worst of times. At the heart of conflict, is differences. The differences Dickens shows us here set up the story and show the conflict between the two cities. In the beginning, a reader may not see this as anything more than another one of Dickens long explanations, but in the end, you see that this sets up the story of the book and outlines the conflict.
You also notice the Dickens capitalizes words such as Light, Darkness, and Fate. These play a role in this book and in the stories of each character. Each character as a Destiny, their stories connect and show many points of view and lifestyles during this difficult time. It shows how important each character is to the story. Without one, a lot would not happen. Dickens creates the perfect mix of each personality and type of character to make a wonderful book.
Any other thoughts on the conflict of the people and "destiny" of the characters?
Oops! Regarding my first post, I meant celebrated "British" author.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that intrigued me about A Tale of Two Cities was how often Dickens jumped around in his writing. Oftentimes he would come away from the main story line to talk about something almost completely different, and sometimes never follow up on it. For example, in chapter 22 of the second book, the author introduces a character named Foulon, who told people who were starving to eat grass. While this was somewhat of an interesting chapter, it really had nothing to do with the main plot, and he was never mentioned again after that chapter. I think that by including these side stories, in many ways they helped the reader get a better understanding of how brutal the Revolution was, and added to the suspense in the story. It also made the story more interesting at times, and added to the humor of the novel. I understand that this book was written in short installments in a newspaper, and this could be one answer to my question, but does anyone have any other thoughts as to why Dickens might have jumped around so much in his writing?
ReplyDelete“For you, and for any dear to you, I would do anything. If my career were of that better kind that there was any opportunity or capacity of sacrifice in it, I would embrace any sacrifice for you and for those dear to you. Try to hold me in your mind, at some quiet times, as ardent and sincere in this one thing. The time will come, the time will not be long in coming, when new ties will be formed about you—ties that will bind you yet more tenderly and strongly to the home you so adorn—the dearest ties that will ever grace and gladden you. O Miss Manette, when the little picture of a happy father’s face looks up in yours, when you see your own bright beauty springing up anew at your feet, think now and then that there is a man who would give his life, to keep a life you love beside you!” (156)
ReplyDeleteI have found this passage, in which Sydney Carton addresses Lucie Manette, to be very touching. It is here that we see Carton’s true and undying love for Lucie. Having finished the book, I now realize that this passage was foreshadowing Carton’s heroic act in the end of the novel. In this passage, Carton indicates that he would do anything, and sacrifice anything, for Lucie or for anyone she loves; and that is exactly what he does. He sacrifices his own life for Lucie, Charles, and their family. As I have stated in a previous post, Carton was my favorite character, for this exact reason. He was willing to do anything, even give up his own life, for a woman he dearly loved, even though he knew she would never be his.
I am going to have to echo many of thomasowen’s original posts. Dickens did a wonderful job in writing A Tale of Two Cities. He does an incredible job in portraying the battle between the newly formed Republic and the enemies of the Republic. I agree with Thomas that the story of Charles Darnay’s struggle against the Republic in France truly is the backbone to this story. And while I agree that the reading of Doctor Manette’s letter was one of my favorite parts of the book, I have to say it was not my single favorite. Instead, I would say that the small passage where Madame Defarge admits her secrets as to why she is so hateful towards the aristocrats, especially Charles Darnay. Throughout the book, she has been an intriguing character, if only because her hatred seemed a mystery. Here, though, it is finally revealed as to why she is as she is. Finally her mystery is revealed.
ReplyDeleteIn reading this story, I often wondered what it was that drew me in. Why was I so interested and why did I want to continue reading? The answer is simple: the characters. Characterization is most definitely a prime literary device used in creating this work. Dickens, in writing this book, developed some of the most interesting characters I have ever read. Their backgrounds and intertwining lives are what made this story worthwhile to read. Charles’s battles, Doctor Manette’s struggle to leave his past behind, Mr. Lorry’s devotion to the Manette family, but also to his business, and Madame Defarge’s disconcerting hatred of the aristocrats are just some of the issues that make the story interesting. These characters have such deep emotions that Dickens brings out slowly throughout the developing stories. The characters and their developments throughout the book, as well as the unraveling of the mysteries regarding their actions and feelings, are what made A Tale of Two Cities a classic.
ReplyDelete@CMea
ReplyDeleteI could not agree more with you that Dickens does a wonderful job in using mystery as a means of gaining the interest of readers. I also agree with what many of you have said; the book does seem to start slow. Though I agree with this statement, and concur that the first two books were not as captivating and the third, I think this can be explained by a simple fact. The answers are in the third section of the book. Dickens uses the first two books to pose so many enthralling questions that a reader wonders whether they will all be answered, and if so, how? So, by the time the reader reaches the third book, they are excited to learn that the questions are finally answered. Dickens, in creating so many questions, makes it so that the third section seems much more fast-paced than the first two, and therefore more interesting to the readers.
@Duke Roach
ReplyDeleteIn regards to your question about Doctor Manette, I had similar questions. I think he reverted to his shoemaking as a way of protecting himself from the difficulties of the outside world. Even though he was imprisoned for so long, he did not have to deal with any of the hardships being faced in the world. Whenever something stressful seemed to arise in his life, or he lost any sort of self-esteem, it seemed he would revert to his old ways. I believe this could be a result of the way he felt in prison. During his lock-up he probably had little self-esteem. When this feeling returned in the outside world, he went back to his bench. When Charles Darnay, Doctor Manette’s son-in-law, has been sentenced to death, the doctor feels as if it is his own fault, seeing as it was his own letter that caused the sentencing. In dealing with the guilt, the doctor lost self-esteem; at least it seemed as such to me. He then pleads for someone to take him to his bench (which at this point has been destroyed). This is just one example of a relapse, and it seems to be a psychological breakdown, as well as a result of a feeling he seems to get that reminds him of imprisonment.
@SMcShea
ReplyDeleteI think you bring up an interesting topic. I believe Dickens jumped around so much to do just as you said: to paint a picture of a terrifying and troublesome time. He adds little bits, like the chapter on Foulon, which may have been somewhat insignificant to the main plot, but added to the readers understanding of the time and setting. Additionally, it could have been to add a bit of intrigue to the reading.
@CPoblete
ReplyDeleteI agree! Madame Defarge was a game-changing character for the revolution, and we never knew the source of her anger until the end, which I also think is a great job by Dickens. I love it when a story ties everything together at the end, it provides closure and also sometimes reveals foreshadowing.
@MSchaller
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with your assessment about Dickens’ superior literary skills. He captivates the readers with very imaginative scenes and descriptive imagery. In addition to your comment, Dickens employs several varieties of literary devices and techniques to captivate the potential and intended readers.
The opening passage in Book 1, Chapter 1, “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way – in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil in the superlative degree of comparison only” (13), draws the attention of the readers to the paired of competing ideas.
When two parallel or competing ideas are deliberately paired, the readers’ minds are drawn on the words that underscore the comparison or contrast. This kind of doubling technique not only draws out immediate comparisons but also uncovers the mystery of parallelism.
@OMcHugh
ReplyDeleteI share the same predicament with you when it comes to deciphering the true meaning of the words, phrases, etc. I guess Victorian readers won’t have a hard time understanding the novel than we do. Simply because the written/spoken words, portrayed scenes/images, and narrations are inherently known or traditionally spoken by those people of that particular era.
@Lgant
ReplyDeleteI couldn’t agree more with your observations, “He has an incredible ability for describing scenes and characters but can drag on about some insignificant detail.” Writers sometimes go to the extreme in putting more images and scenes at the pages than its structure can bear. The writer who exaggerates to emphasize ends up emphasizing nothing. Also, I agree with your comments, “Dickens uses techniques such as crafty phrases sneaked in at the end of a chapter to foreshadow events to come. This literary device entices the reader to reflect on its meaning and keeps them intrigued.” Dickens purposely engages the readers intrigued by simply first highlighting the events superficially, withholding important details that connect the surrounding plots between episodes and involving some element of surprise or twist to the plot. For example, Madame Defarge who is a sinister figure and known for her vengefulness turns out to be the surviving sister of the woman raped by Marquis Evrémonde’s brother.
Hi, everyone! I just finished A Tale of Two Cities, and I’m currently searching my house for a book of tissues. What a dramatic and moving ending to such a remarkable book.
ReplyDeleteThought this book was entertaining, there are some things I disliked about the literature. I agree with anyone who thought the beginning of the book started out slow. I realize now that so many details, crucial to the plot, were slipped into that interminable first half. On an even broader scale, I think that Dickens’ writing was excessively flowery in some chapters. I completely agree with Lgant; those descriptions about the Monsieur’s lavish lifestyle could have been summarized in a paragraph. Instead it takes pages until Dickens is satisfied with enough run-on sentences and unnecessary adjectives. Chapters like this didn’t add anything to the book for me.
Everything else was organized beautifully. The plot twists; the amusing characters, and exciting settings were woven together perfectly to create a classic.
"But in the ocean of faces where every fierce and furious expression was in vivid life, there were two groups of faces - seven in number - so fixedly contrasting with the rest that never did sea roll which bore more memorable wrecks with it. Seven faces of prisoners, suddenly released by the storm that had burst their tomb, were carried high overhead: all scared, all lost, all wondering and amazed as if the Last Day were come, and those who rejoiced around them were lost spirits. Other seven faces there were, carried higher, seven dead faces, whose drooping eyelids and half-seen eyes awaited the Last Day." (page 226-227)
ReplyDeleteThis passage really speaks to me. I think it uses imagery to convey powerful emotions felt during the French Revolution from all parties involved: the revolutionaries, the freed prisoners, and the aristocrats. The people described that caught my attention the most were the seven freed prisoners. You would think they would be happy to be finally released, but at the same time very confused by the means in which this was done. In this passage I sensed many raw emotions: the yearning for freedom, vengeance, and confusion.
I think this passage was important to the novel because it briefly makes clear the standings of all the people of the time. I also think it gives insight into Dr. Manette's emotions as he was finally released from prison. We come to realize that he was probably in a trance like the prisoners described above. This passage also was important because it reminds us of the pain experienced by all during the French Revolution, and all of the conflicting emotions.
@EMorrison
ReplyDeleteI agree with you; the information on Monseigneur probably could have been contained in a few paragraphs. However, I think Monseigneur was important in second book. To me, he seemed to be a very general character who was supposed to represent the nobility and aristocratic class as a whole. By going on with the bizarre story about chocolate, I think Dickens was trying to evoke sympathy for the peasant class, who had so much less than this indulgent man.
@ Duke Roach
ReplyDeleteAddressing Dr. Mannette’s shoemaking habit, it seems to be something he does when he is upset. I don’t know about anyone else but I know I tend to bite my lip or fiddle with the closest object when I’m upset, stressed, or uncomfortable. He also could be using to clear his mind, like a long walk or massage. Since it was a horrible time in Paris and London, you can try and imagine the stress he had on a daily basis, not to mention hearing about the guillotine’s victims.
@ VGlick
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with you about Dickens’s ability to build a character throughout the story. Knowing how they look adds suspense and does get your mind to imagine purposes for the characters.
@ JP Ryan
ReplyDeleteIn regards to your Carton to Christ comparison, I’d relate him more to Abraham. I see what you mean about Christ and Carton both sacrificing themselves out of love, but Christ was never an “insensitive slob” or “jackal.” Abraham made many mistakes in his life. In Genesis 12:10-17 it says; “There was famine in the land; so Abram went down to Egypt to sojourn there, since the famine in the land was severe. When he was about to enter Egypt, he said to his wife Sarai: "I know well how beautiful a woman you are. When the Egyptians see you, they will say, 'She is his wife'; then they will kill me, but let you live. Please say, therefore, that you are my sister, so that it may go well with me on your account and my life may be spared for your sake." When Abram came to Egypt, the Egyptians saw how beautiful the woman was; and when Pharaoh's courtiers saw her, they praised her to Pharaoh. So she was taken into Pharaoh's palace. On her account it went very well with Abram, and he received flocks and herds, male and female salves, male and female asses, and camels. But the Lord struck Pharaoh and his household with severe plagues because of Abram's wife Sarai.” Abraham tells Sarai to lie and lies himself, he submits to cowardice and deceit, and causes others unnecessary pain. Later in Genesis 16:1-6, it talks about Abraham taking concubines, which although acceptable to society at the time, is morally wrong. The reason I picked Abraham to relate to Carton was because although he made mistakes, he was willing to sacrifice Isaac, his beloved son, out of love for God.
@ CPoblete
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, Madame Defarge knitted the names for several reasons. One, knitting was common for ladies to do at the time and she probably was good at it, where penman ship skills could have been lacking. Two, the names were hidden in the knitting, so it could have been a way to try and make the list as inaccessible as possible. Finally, writing it out, although easier, makes the list quicker to read. If someone was to get a hold of the list, they could just read it off and run, where as if it’s hidden; it takes time to decode and potentially copy.
What I really love about this book is the imagery that Dickens gives you. He paints pictures so that I can’t help but to picture them in my head. This, in my opinion, makes the story relatable and emotionally relevant. I can see the pain the aristocrats went through, but at the same time the anger the Republicans harbor toward the upper class. I honestly don’t have anything I really didn’t like about the book. I love most of Dickens works and I believe he was a phenomenal writer.
ReplyDeleteIn today’s day and age, negative feelings are everywhere. People go through life getting hurt by others and we can’t do anything about it. These aristocrats feel the betrayal of their country, and that’s hard to fathom. I think we can all say we know what it feels like to be betrayed in some way, but I hope never to this extent. The sad thing was, these people being persecuted, were attacked because of their ancestry.
ReplyDeleteI would recommend, if you enjoyed this book, to read The Scarlet Pimpernel by Baroness Orczy. It is another story about the French Revolution and how an Englishman helped many French aristocrats escape.
“It was nothing to her, that an innocent man was to die for the sins of his forefathers; she saw, not him, but them. It was nothing to her, that his wife was to be made a widow and his daughter an orphan; that was insufficient punishment, because they were her natural enemies and her prey, and as such had no right to live. To appeal to her, was made hopeless by her having no sense of pity, even for herself. if she had been laid low in the streets, in any of the many encounters in which she had engaged, she would not have pitied herself; nor, if she had been ordered to the axe to-morrow ,would she have gone to it with any softer feeling than a fierce desire to change places with the man who sent her there.” (pg 367)
ReplyDeleteTo me this passage shows a lack of humanity in Madame Defarge. She is so caught up with her incurable hatred of a class that she doesn’t care about the fact that these people could not change what their ancestors did. When I read this passage I actually had to reread it a few times to make sure that I grasped the meaning. I think it’s important because it shows her as a meeting point of history and social opportunity. Her past caused her to jump at the opening she was given to seek vengeance. Since you don’t find out about her troubled past till later, it makes it hard to pity or sympathize with her.
I have a question though. Why does Monsieur Defarge remain a semi-decent guy while his wife becomes a monster?
I think imagery is very important in this book. Dickens uses imagery to foreshadow events. For example, when the wine cask breaks in front of the shop it stains the streets. This in my opinion shows that blood will soon stain the streets when the guillotine does her work.
ReplyDeleteImagery makes the book more relatable and easier to read. I have trouble trying to paint my own pictures in my head, and Dickens all but draws the picture on the page. He also goes into detail that might not be necessary. Many people have said his story skips around, but the imagery, in my mind, makes it somewhat cohesive. The way he skips around causes me to be captivated and keeps my mind busy. I know no one likes a boring or predictable book. Dickens uses words like his paint brushes and paints, and his descriptions are never bland. That’s something I really like about his writing style. In many of his works, if not all of them, he tries to give an inclusive description of the settings, people, and events. The way he says things draws you into the book and into the lives of his characters.
@VGlick
ReplyDeleteI agree with your assessment on the characters and the mystery that continually surrounds them. Now that you have pointed this out, I have realized that this is what kept me interested in the book. The fact that we don’t know exactly who each character is, or what they will do, in the beginning of the story made me want to keep reading to find out. This, in my opinion, gave me the feeling that I must keep reading until all the mysteries were unraveled. I also noticed, like Virginia said, that the characters are constantly changing. For example, in the beginning of the book, Alexandre Manette spent his life unconsciously making shoes, but eventually he turns into a gentle and devoted father. These character changes, though many were quite subtle, helped the book become more engaging for me, and they continually sparked my interest as the book went on.
It is typically very frustrating to get penalized for something that you didn’t do, or didn’t mean to do. Unfortunately, this is exactly what happened to Charles Darnay in A Tale of Two Cities. Darnay was punished for the cruel deeds of his ancestors, just because he was part of their family. There was no just reason for Darnay to be killed; as a matter of fact, it was completely unreasonable. However, Darnay did not complain or argue, because he knew there was nothing he could do about it. And as it turns out, Darnay was saved, and there was no harm done to him. I think we have all had similar, yet less drastic, experiences, when we get disciplined for something that a sibling or a friend has done. Unfortunately, since nobody can be perfect, this type of thing just happens, and we have learnt that there is usually nothing we can do about it.
ReplyDeleteI think one of the most important literary devices Dickens utilizes in his writing is characterization. As I have previously stated, the characters are what I enjoyed the most about A Tale of Two Cities. Dickens does such a great job developing each character throughout the story. I agree with Megan that these are some of the most interesting characters that I have ever come across. These unique and fascinating characters, along with their own internal conflicts, are what I think makes this book so intriguing. I have also found that each character is so different than every other. Some characters, like Lucie Manette, lack the complexity that others have, as she lives a fairly simple life. In contrast, there are some more involved characters, such as Doctor Manette, who drastically changes from a nearly insane prisoner who makes shoes, into a compassionate, loving father. Additionally, like Owen has pointed out, the author tends to create characters in the beginning of the story that seem fairly insignificant, but later on they turn out to be important and crucial members of the storyline. Those types of characters, such as Sydney Carton, also add to the suspense of the story, creating such an appealing and exciting novel like this one.
ReplyDeleteSome of you need to pick up the pace with posting. I would like to see more interaction in regard to the questions you are posing. Think about whether it is the plot or the characters that drive the plot forward.
ReplyDelete@SMcShea
ReplyDeleteShannon I too have found the way Dickens jumps around in his writing quite confusing. As I said in an earlier post, I believe gives the writing depth, although it can be very hard to follow. I think Dickens might have done this to give more of an insight on the time period as well as background on the the new characters he is introducing. For example in chapter 22 he uses the character Foulon to show the rage of the people at the time. It also would not have made sense if Dickens had not told the side story about Foulon and telling the starving people to eat grass, because we eventually find him stuffed with grass as a revengeful end.
Once, one of my friends told someone else a secret I made him promise not to tell. He and his friend teased me about it for weeks. I stopped talking to them and tried to think of ways to retaliate. However, I never did. I realized that forgiving them was the best thing to do; it was certainly more mature than getting my revenge on them, which probably would have made the situation worse.
ReplyDeleteI think this somewhat relates to Alexandre Manette’s situation. While he was in prison, Alexandre wished for revenge on the Evremonde family. However, he later forgives their wrongdoings, especially for Lucie’s sake, so she can be happy and marry Charles. In turn, his daughter’s happiness makes him happy. However, we see that the former hatred he felt toward Charles’ family only brings about bitterness and devastation, as shown during Charles’ second trial in France when Alexandre’s letter is read.
I also think my situation relates to that of Madame Defarge’s. Madame Defarge was so set on getting her revenge on the Evremondes by trying to get Charles executed. She even began to plan out how she would make Lucie and her child look guilty, and therefore see them executed as well. As we know, Madame Defarge was unsuccessful in her plans and was killed by Miss Pross. I believe that Dickens used Madame Defarge’s death as a way of showing how her strong desire for revenge would only result in misery for herself.
These situations suggest that revenge can only lead to unhappiness and destruction. Of course, the anger and sadness that came with my friend’s betrayal and the teasing have faded. In fact, I am still in touch with those people and to this day we remain on friendly terms. Thus, in the end, I’m glad that I forgave them back then.
One literary device I thought was crucial to the work was characterization. I think the development of the characters was very important to the story. The fact that all the characters were somehow linked with each other shaped the events that happened throughout the book. Of course, Sydney Carton played a very important role by dying for Charles at the guillotine. “O Miss Manette, when the little picture of a happy father’s face looks up in yours, when you see your own bright beauty springing up anew at your feet, think now and then that there is a man who would give his life, to keep a life you love besides you!” (156) Indeed, he did give up his life, and if it weren’t for Sydney, who else would have been able to save Charles from the guillotine? I found Sydney’s transformation remarkable: whereas before he was portrayed as a lazy alcoholic, by the end he had become a courageous man willing to sacrifice his own life for the sake of the happiness of the woman he loved.
ReplyDelete@Cpoblete
ReplyDeleteAbout your knitting question, I think Madame Defarge planned the execution of the people who wronged her mostly during the period where the nobles still had control. Since she had no influence she couldn't just go writing freely the death sentences to nobles. This is why she had a secret system that only her and a few other people could read. Also, she could condemn nobles in broad daylight as knitting was a completely acceptable thing to do in that time.
"Down, and up, and head and foremost on the steps of the building; now, on his knees; now, on his feet; now, on his back; dragged and struck at, and stifled by the bunches of grass and straw that were thrust into his face by hundreds of hands; torn, bruised, panting, bleeding, yet always entreating and beseeching for mercy; now full of vehement agony of action, with a small clear space about him as the people drew one another back that they might see; now, a log of dead wood drawn through a forest of legs; he was hauled to the nearest street corner where one of the fatal lamps swung, and there Madame Defarge let him go - as a cat might have done to a mouse - and silently and composedly looked at him while they made ready, and while he besought her: the women passionately screeching at him all the time, and the men sternly calling out to have him killed with grass in his mouth. Once, he went aloft, and the rope broke, and they caught him shrieking; twice, he went aloft, and the rope broke and they caught him shrieking; then, the rope was merciful, and held him, and his head was soon upon a pike, with grass enough in the mouth for all Saint Antoine to dance at the sight of."(pg. 231-232).
ReplyDeleteThis passage from A Tale of Two Cities recounting when the revolutionaries publicly executed Foulon, stood out to me more than anything else in the book. It is an excellent portrayal of the kind of turmoil that occurs when society is faced with a crisis, in this case a revolution. This passage of the book reminds me of the introduction to the Decameron, when it talked about the state of the towns affected by the plague, it said that "societal bonds had finally snapped."(pg.xxii of the Decameron). The plague was a crisis as significant as the French Revolution, in both cases officials failed to gain control of the situation and societal norms broke down until it seemed the people had lost the virtues that defined humanity and turned into beasts. I think that Dickens does an excellent job of describing this chaotic situation; it shows his ability to paint an extremely detailed mental picture in the readers mind.
@CPoblete
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. I think that Charles would most definitely have died had Sydney Carton not sacrificed his life to save him. I found this transformation of Sydney Carton amazing. He completely changed from a slacker and slob into a noble, kind gentleman. I do wonder what the true cause of this was. In this case, I think the plot motivated the actions of Carton. Although he had always loved Lucie, he seemed to truly change his whole outlook towards life and love very suddenly. What do you guys think? Was Carton motivated based on Dickens' plot, or was his transformation due to something greater? Had Charles's situation not occurred, would he still have changed his attitude and outlook?
@MSchaller
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that Dickens wrote so vividly that you could imaginarily see the images, scenery, and feel the emotions of the unforgettable characters. It really was like watching a 3-D movie that projects the visual images right in front of your eyes. Just as the majority of you suggested that the opening scenes seemed to start out slow, the plot took awhile to develop and unfold; however, it became interesting and thrilling towards the end. Speaking of movies, do you think film makers have adopted Dicken’s style of writing?
@VGlick
ReplyDeleteI also agree with you that there were unnecessary, lengthy explanations in the book. Sometimes I would look back at the paragraph I had just read and I noticed how many phrases there were in just one paragraph. Hoping to sound profound and poetic, Dickens embroiders his narration with large words, and flowery phrases – a language that in fact sounds pretentious. The pretentious language is so ornate that it sometimes obscures the thought that lies beneath. Furthermore, some of the pages are filled with similes and metaphors that make the paragraph long and lumpy.
Nevertheless, as I turn more pages, the real plot begins to unfold. Then, I realized that Mr. Dickens deliberately repeated some words or phrases to affect controversies and instill more questions than answers. That is why the reader cannot wait for the next week issue of this weekly installment-series of tales. The weekly episode is addicting and makes the reader craving for more. While the first few chapters of the novel seem boring and uninteresting piece of work for 21st century readers, the Victorian readers label it exciting and thrilling.
@JP Ryan
ReplyDeleteYes, I also think that Carton’s death parallels that of Jesus Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection. Like Christ who died for us and redeemed us from the bondage of sins in spite of our unworthiness, Carton out of unconditional love for Lucie willingly sacrificed himself to the razor-sharp blade of the guillotine. Also, as Christ resurrected from the dead and attained his right place in everyone’s heart, mind, strength and soul, the same happened to Carton as he resurrected in the hearts of those he had saved. I have a question about this though, was Carton also willing to die for Dr. Manette?
@McShea
ReplyDeleteIn response to your post about Dickens jumping around in his writing, I was thinking that maybe Dickens knew that some readers would become disinterested so, he added bits of humor and out-of-the-blue sub-plots, like that story of Foulon, the wealth man who declared that starving people should eat grass, just to keep the reader interested and intrigued.
@MSchaller
ReplyDeleteI think that Mr. Defarge manages to remain a semi-decent character because he really is only going along with his wife's wishes. During the Storming of the Bastille he fought, but, it was his wife who was fighting with passion and with a thirst for blood. To me, it seems that it is on his wife's behalf that he is willing to seek vengeance. I think he was driven to act because of her, and she was the motivation for all of his actions.
It is plain to see that the most important literary device in A Tale of Two Cities is imagery. Dickens is able to paint a picture in your mind that makes you feel as if you are there. In the passage of the book I referenced earlier, the way Dickens described the mob scene made me feel as if I was one of the revolutionaries beating and heckling poor Foulon. Although I think that the excess use of imagery distracts the reader from the storyline and makes it difficult to follow, I respect Dicken’s use of imagery and can see that it was his strong suit in writing.
ReplyDelete@ Mrs. Gilligan’s comment about whether the plot drives the characters or vice versa, my opinion is that the plot drives the characters in Dickens’s book, A Tale of Two Cities. Dickens seems to make seemingly insignificant characters become more important people later in his books; this is seemingly driven by fate, or in this case, the plot of the story. For instance, Charles Darnay was just a man accused of committing treason in the beginning of the story, and then he becomes the husband of Lucie Manette and a main character towards the end.
ReplyDelete@CMea
ReplyDeleteIn regards to your question about Sydney Carton, I have similar feelings. Obviously, the plot is what influenced his decision to take Darnay’s place at the guillotine. If Darnay was not sentenced to death, Carton would not have died for him and his family. However, I think his transformation took place before his decision was made to save Darnay. I firmly believe that it was Lucie who transformed Carton into the benevolent gentleman he was in the end of the novel. Specifically, I think that after his conversation with Lucie in chapter 13 of book the second, Carton began to think that he could still turn his life around for the better. In this chapter, Carton makes his mind up that he is going to do something special for Lucie and her family, whatever that may be, as he says to Lucie, “…For you, and for any dear to you, I would do anything.” Ultimately, I think Lucie is what gave Carton the motivation to make his transformation, and the plot set him up with a way to pursue his dream: to sacrifice anything for the woman he loved so immensely.
A part of this book that really stood out to me was Doctor Mannette’s shoemaking. The Doctor returned to this habit whenever he was afflicted with great pressure or emotional distress. His tendency to continue his work reminded me of my grandmother’s dementia. Just like her, Doctor Manette’s breakdowns were provoked by the changes around him.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I think that the way people treated the Doctor after he slipped into his distracted state was very well written. Just like Mr. Lorry, when my family found out we were confused, but just wanted to help. Every aspect of the book involved with the Doctor’s condition was accurate based on my family experience
@ Thomas’s comment about Kiffin leaving Tennessee and the resulting riot is exactly what I was talking about in my previous comment. Chaos still follows emotionally charged events, even today in our seemingly “civilized” society. It is a little unsettling that an event as trivial as the changing of a football team’s coaching staff (sorry Thomas) can start a riot scene like we saw in A Tale of Two Cities. It’s also interesting to think that time and again, individuals interacting within a group during an emotionally charged response tend to exhibit a lack of judgment that they would normally have if responding to the same event as an individual.
ReplyDeleteI think that imagery was very important to this book. Dickens's whole book is interspersed with amazing descriptions of all sorts of people and situations. Dickens very skillfully uses similes to convey the mood. In the beginning of the book, Mr. Lorry is traveling on a dark night to inform Lucie that her father is alive (at this point of the book, though, we do not know what he is doing). Dickens describes the scene saying, "There was a steaming mist in all the hollows, and it had roamed in its forlornness up the hill, like an evil spirit, seeking rest and finding none. A clammy and intensely cold mist, it made its slow way through the air in ripples that visibly followed and overspread one another, as the waves of an unwholesome sea might do." (page 10) This passage gave me a sense of foreboding and added a sense of excitement and mystery.
ReplyDeleteAnother example of imagery that caught my attention was when Dickens describes the stone faces on the house of the cruel Marquis as morning draws near. He says, "Then, the gray water of both began to be ghostly in the light, and the eyes of the stone faces of the chateau were opened." and "At this, the nearest stone face seemed to stare amazed, and, with opened mouth and dropped under-jaw, looked awestricken." (page133) Although it was not really necessary to the plot to describe the chateau and the faces in this way, I found this passage very interesting. This description brought to life the chateau of the cruel Marquis.
I really enjoyed Dickens' use of imagery. I think it enhanced the story in many ways and gave insight into the time period. When the plot seemed to be going slowly, Dickens used imagery to keep things new and interesting. He also was very poetic in his descriptions, and to me, they came across as quite beautiful.
My family has a history of military service. Both of my grandfathers have served, and my dad serves in the military. They all have been lucky to come back from war-zones healthy in mind and body. However, some are not as lucky. Many men and women come back with injuries or post traumatic stress disorder. The definition of post traumatic stress disorder is "a condition of persistent mental and emotional stress occurring as a result of injury or severe psychological shock, typically involving disturbance of sleep and constant vivid recall of the experience, with dulled responses to others and to the outside world" (Dictionary). This reminds me very much of Dr. Manette. He had been through a terrible experience, and all he could do was make shoes: a painful reminder of his experience in prison. He could barely talk or interact with others. However, Dr. Manette, like many soldiers, was able to recover from his condition with help and support from his daughter and his friends.
ReplyDeleteAll in all, I really enjoyed "A Tale of Two Cities." As I said earlier, I loved the imagery and descriptions that Dickens had. I also really enjoyed the characters. By the end of the book, I had come to care about them, their fates, and their feelings. I liked how the book was full of mystery, and how seemingly insignificant facts became important facts by the end of the book.
ReplyDeleteMy only complaint with the book, is, like many of you said, that the story started off very slowly. Luckily, Dickens did put in his great descriptions which did keep things moving along. All in all, I think "A Tale of Two Cities" was a really good book, that had the elements that all great stories should have.
@SMcShea
ReplyDeleteI completely agree that with your opinion that Lucie is the person that motivates Mr. Carton, though I pose a different theory about his true feelings towards her. I can't help but question whether or not he loves Lucie. Of course, Carton is willing to sacrifice his life for her husband but is the driving emotion love, or an obsession? Carton is a self professed ne'er-do-well drunk, while Lucie is a pure, beautiful girl. Could his attraction to her be based on the fact that she represents everything he will never be and never have? I think there is a possibility that this is the case. Anyone else agree?
@SMcShea
ReplyDeleteAlthough it’s hard for me to pick a favorite character as well, I would say mine is Miss Pross. It’s true that she isn’t as dynamic as some of the other characters, as I have mentioned before. However, I like that she is loving, caring, and loyal, despite being described as having a manly appearance. We can see how caring she is through her devotion to Lucie. Also, I admire how she still had faith in her brother, Solomon, otherwise known as John Barsad, although he had abandoned her, leaving her poor and alone. It’s amazing how, when she encountered him in France, she was absolutely delighted to see him again, though he, in my honest opinion, didn’t deserve the love and admiration she still had for him.
In addition to her other characteristics, Miss Pross proves to be strong-willed, brave, and confident. She was especially bold and brave when she confronted Madame Defarge. The fact that she kept responding to Madame Defarge, despite the fact she could barely understand a word she was saying, showed that she was confident and unwavering in her desire to protect Lucie. As a result of her struggle with Madame Defarge, Miss Pross permanently lost her hearing. In spite of this, however, I believe that she was proud of being able to protect Lucie and her family and did not regret doing so.
"Madame Defarge took him to the door, and put her arm on his, in pointing out the road. The English customer was not without his reflections then that it might be a good deed to seize that arm, lift it, and strike under it sharp and deep." (page 334)
ReplyDeleteI think that this passage is important to the book because it captures the level of deception essential for survival at this time. Mr. Carton is having a casual exchange with the woman determined to exterminate the Darnay family. He resists his impulses knowing that if he acts rashly, nothing will come of it. Instead Mr. Carton must play along to achieve his goals.
In his notebook, “Memoranda,” Dickens envisions that at an opportunate time, he will come out with a story that will “join ideas of time to ideas of space.” Influenced by Thomas Carlyle’s History of the French Revolution, and inspired by his role-play portrayal of Richard Wardour of the play “The Frozen Deep,” Dickens was able to create a remarkable piece of work – A Tale of Two Cities. And of course, who else can scribble thousands of words and hundreds of phrases full of suspense and mystery, which is narrated and captured in such an imaginatively vivid manner, other than the author himself? In his thirst to search the nameless element missing from his life and a wish for a transformation into a hero, Dickens who said, “that this novel has had complete possession of me and that what is done and suffered in these pages . . . I have certainly done and suffered it all myself “ has incorporated his own personal unmeaningful life into his own work.
ReplyDeleteI found this novel thrilling and intriguing. Dickens, who is considered one of the best novelists of all time, has to employ a variety of literary devices and techniques to captivate his potential and intended readers. With that being said, the various elements of a good literary work can be compared to the spokes of the wheel of a bike. Every spoke, which is of equal in diameter, length, shape, and distance, plays an equally important role in the overall operation of the bike as a whole. The spokes must function together to support the outer wheel to allow the bike to move. The same thing happens in Dickens’ novel in which each of the elements, the setting, characterization, conflict, imagery, and dialogue, plays important roles in the overall package in bringing the plot into the heart of the readers.
The opening sequence of paired competing and contradicting ideas foreshadows the two dominant themes: redemption and transformation. The words that underscore comparisons or contrasts between the time, setting, attitude, and character remind the readers’ minds of the dearly prize for personal and societal redemption – that is sacrificial death.
Imagery is also equally important in providing the necessary background for the plot. Dickens did a remarkable job in using concrete and descriptive language to paint the images of the scenes in the readers’ mind. Likewise, Dickens has to create unforgettable characters from a wide range of backgrounds to represent the different societal class of men and women. Each of the characters whose lives and fates are intertwined plays a pivotal role in bringing the plot into conclusion.
Furthermore, Dickens credibly structures his narration with words that evoke strong emotions, and similes and metaphors that paint vivid examples - all of these points to the novel’s dramatic eloquence. Also, Dickens employs extensive symbols to represent the various abstract ideas or concepts of the story. For example, the broken wine cask tells us about the social ill that is devastating the republic and its citizenry. Madame Defarge’s knitting on symbolic level represents fate. Like the Greek fates, she knits the fabric of individual destiny.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI want to single out one of the passages that strike me the most, “The vigorous tenacity of love [is] always stronger than hate” (360).
ReplyDeleteIt is out of filial love that gives Lucie the will to care for her father, Doctor Manette.
It is out of agape love when Darnay decides to save Gabelle from the hands of the oppressors.
It is out of determined love for Lucie that Miss Pross saves her from the sinister plot of Madame Defarge to have her and her family executed.
It is out of fatherly love that Jerry Cruncher asks Mr. Lorry a favor to allow his son to inherit his own job at the bank.
It is out of storge love for his daughter, Lucie, that Manette is recalled to life.
It is out of true, genuine love that patiently enables Lucie to get a glimpse of her husband through the prisoner’s window.
And of course, the final act of Carton’s sacrificial death out of his unconditional love for Lucie whom he owed his personal redemption. With this being said, “love conquers all” – that is why love is God’s greatest commandment.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI understood the book fairly well. Nothing in the book troubled me much. However, I did come across a few things that weren’t quite clear to me.
ReplyDeleteFirst, why do John Barsad and Roger Cly resign from their jobs as English police spies and travel to France to become spies during the Revolution? Second, why was the seamstress killed along with Sydney Carton at the end of the book? She was not an aristocrat, and her crime was not stated. So would she, a mere peasant girl, be sentenced to death?
Third, why does Miss Pross have such a strong attachment to her brother, Solomon (John Barsad), even after he stole from her many years ago? The question is mentioned at various stages throughout the book, but it is never explained in full. I guess Miss Pross is just a very affectionate and forgiving woman.
Lastly, in chapter 10 of Book 3, (Manette’s old writing is being read aloud), why would the Evrémonde brothers ask Dr. Manette to treat a boy who was stabbed by the “younger” Evrémonde and to treat the boy’s sister, who had been raped by the “younger” Evrémonde and was dying of a fever? Why would the two Evrémondes want two people who they intentionally harmed to be cared for?
"It happened, at length, that he had occasion to change the instrument in his hand, for his shoemaker’s knife. It lay on that side of him which was not the side on which she stood. He had taken it up, and was stooping to work again, when his eyes caught the skirt of her dress. He raised them, and saw her face. The two spectators started forward, but she stayed them with a motion of her hand. She had no fear of his striking at her with the knife, though they had."
ReplyDelete(pg.
This scene stood out to me immediately for a personal reason. My Great-Aunt had dementia, like Eleanor's Grandmother. It was a difficult disease where she forgot everything, including her loved ones. She lashed out a few times in violent ways because her mind was clouded with the truth on who we were and what was happening. As Lucie Manette was not scared to approach the one she truly loved, I was not scared to approach my Great-Aunt. She was someone I had a very personal connection with and I knew she would never mean to hurt me. Like Lucie, I looked past the outside and possible risk and looked for affection.
I can’t say I have anything to criticize about the book. However, one thing I noticed is that Charles Darnay is not quite as developed as the other main characters. As a reader, I didn’t feel as though I grasped his traits and qualities as well as those the other main characters. He proves to be honest, (he tells Manette that he is an Evrémonde before marrying Lucie), he handles his time in prison with bravery and composure, but he just doesn’t seem as vivid as the other characters. The actions of Sydney Carton, Dr. Manette, Jarvis Lorry, and Lucie Manette seem to expose their character adequately, but I don’t feel quite the same in regards to Darnay. I also wish Dickens had condensed the book just slightly. I feel that the book could’ve been a little shorter, and he takes a lot of time to get to the central elements of the plot. (e.g. the storming of the Bastille, the establishment of the French Republic, Darnay’s imprisonment and trial in France).
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe part of A Tale of Two Cities that I enjoyed most was the many mysteries that were presented. Also, it is a very well written masterpiece and definitely deserves the title as a classic.
ReplyDeleteThe only part of A Tale of Two Cities that I did not enjoy was the fact that Dickens rambles on about things that I did not find vital to the telling of the story. Instead, Dickens could have stated what took him pages in as little as a paragraph.
The personal connection that I found in this book was also Dr. Manette’s shoemaking. I found his shoemaking similar to the mindless activities that many people do when they are so stressed that they don’t know what to do with themselves. I think that his shoemaking ultimately saved what little sanity he had left until Lucie came and helped him.
I think the most important passage of this book is the first sentence: “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way—in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only.(p. 1)”
ReplyDeleteI find this passage vital to the book because it describes the whole book in one sentence. It shows that some people will have happy endings while others will have sad ones. It also shows that some people are good while others are evil and there may be a struggle between the two. Finally, it shows that while some people have a promising future, others are without hope.
The literary device that stuck out to me in this story was characterization. The ways that the characters were described was vital to the telling of this classic. Such as Lucie’s influence on her father, Dr. Manette, and her outward appearance of good. Contrasting to Lucie however was Madame Defarge, who was ruthless and evil. This is also one of the great things about A Tale of Two Cities because almost every character had an opposite. Also, the way that all of the characters’ stories became linked together was amazing.
ReplyDelete@EMorrison
ReplyDeleteIn some ways I agree with you that Carton only loved Lucie because he could never have her. However, he may have truly loved her because he was willing to die for her happiness, even though it meant that she would remain with someone else. If he had not sacrificed himself he may have had a chance to marry the widowed Lucie and be happy.
I don’t have too many questions about this book but I am wondering why Dickens had such a small, background character like Miss Pross kill a main character like Madame Defarge?
ReplyDeleteOnce in awhile, I see myself in Dr. Manette’s predicament of relapsing back to shoemaking when faced with seemingly life denying experiences.
ReplyDeleteI always wanted to be in the first honors list. To pursue this goal, I devoted all my time and energy to my studies. I do always find time to do homework and projects during the downtime in between my hectic 3-5 hours/day extra-curricular activities. There is no such thing as free time! Most of the time I find myself pushing myself too much physically and mentally that I end up so exhausted.
Everything is going so smoothly until one day, I was stunned by the grade I got in one of my subjects. It was an embarrassment not only to me but also more to my parents who always expect the best out of me. I saw how sad and disappointed they became upon seeing how unsatisfactory my grade was. So, I just stayed in my room crying. I thanked the Lord that I have caring, loving, and nurturing parents. I resolved to study harder. I only needed to persevere. I gave my studies everything I had. And all the hard work paid off when I emerged in the first honor’s list. My classmates started looking up to me and seeking me out regarding their projects and homework. I was so happy and I became even more inspired to study harder. I was “recalled to life.”
“I see the lives for which I lay down my life, peaceful, useful, prosperous and happy, in that England which I shall see no more. I see Her with a child upon her bosom, who bears my name. I see her father aged and bent, but otherwise restored, and faithful to all men in his healing office, and at peace. I see the good old man, so long their friend, in ten years’ time enriching them with all he has, and passing tranquilly to his reward.” (p. 389-390).
ReplyDeleteI touched on it before, but I wanted to reiterate again on Sydney Carton’s humility, unselfishness, and genuine love. In this quote at the novel’s end, Dickens describes what Carton would have written down before his death had he gotten the opportunity. As opposed to thinking of all the events that have occurred in his lifetime, he thinks completely of his old friends. He hopes that Charles and Lucie live happily together, have a son, and name the child after him. He hopes that Dr. Manette lives a long life and is able to continue in his profession for years to come. He then hopes that Jarvis Lorry will remain a close friend of the Darnays and will die peacefully in the years to come. Notice, not once does he pity himself. Knowing that his death means life for Darnay and that Darnay’s life equates to Lucie’s joy, he courageously takes the place of Darnay at the guillotine. He also accepts a very difficult truth… The people he loves would rather that he die than Darnay; Darnay brings more happiness to Lucie, young Lucie, and Dr. Manette than he does. So, he endures what very few people would have the fortitude to endure, and that is his own execution. Carton’s death in this novel is truly the epitome of an act of love.
"The latent uneasiness in Darnay's mind was roused to vigorous life by this letter. The peril of an old servant and a good one, whose only crime was fidelity to himself and his family, stared him so reproachfully in the face that, as he walked to and fro in the Temple considering what to do, he almost hid his face from the passers-by." Charles Darnay wrestled with the pros and cons of going to France to save his old servant from a terrible fate. "But, he had oppressed no man, he had imprisoned no man; he was so far from having harshly exacted payment of his dues, that he had relinquished them of his own bread." "This favoured the desperate resolution Charles Darnay had begun to make, that he would go to Paris." (pg 248-249)
ReplyDeleteCharles Darnay's decision to go to Paris, though small in comparison to the novel, became not only dramatic in regards to his own life, but led to the thrilling and unexpected ending to the book. When he concluded that he must leave for France to help his family's long time servant be released from prison, his life and the lives of his family were thrown into undeserved turmoil. He unknowingly put himself, along with his wife, daughter, father-in-law, and friends, in grave peril. As a result of traveling to France in the midst of its upheaval during the revolution, Charles Darnay was held under lock and key for more than a year, while his family and friends had only a desperate hope of returning to England with Charles alive. His decision and the resulting tragedies of his life paved the way for the fantastic culmination of the book.
Because of Charles' moral choice, though seemingly insignificant to the tenor of the novel, the heartless villain of Madam Defarge was given a chance to make her final stand and the heroes of the novel rose up to stand against her. Evil Madam Defarge's malicious plot, with her hands constantly knitting the names of the people she had killed or planned to murder, was revealed to the reader. Conversely, her innocent victims became even more beloved because of the threat hovering over them. Mrs. Pross became an unexpected hero due to her valiant stand against the heartless Madame Defarge, as the two fought and Madam Defarge's own gun finally ended the terror she caused. Sydney Carton emerged as an admirable yet tragic figure as he gave his life for the happiness of a woman he could never have. The single decision of Charles Darnay to go to France changed not only his life, but was the first step towards the epic and passionate conclusion to an unforgettable novel.
One important literary device found in A Tale of Two Cities is foreshadowing. Way back in chapter 5 of Book 1, Jarvis Lorry and Lucie Manette are in France going to meet Dr. Manette at Defarge’s wine shop. As they are roaming the streets, a barrel of wine falls from a cart and crashes to the ground. The wine spills all over the road, and the peasants who could not afford to buy very much wine sprinted where it had fallen and started drinking it.
ReplyDeleteThis event is a prelude to the Revolution. Just as the wine coated the streets, blood of the aristocrats would soon coat the streets of Paris. The peasants, likewise, would thirst for the blood of noblemen just as they thirsted for more wine.
I thoroughly enjoyed the book. One of my favorite aspects was Sydney Carton's conversion from a slovenly alcoholic to a brave, unselfish martyr. It is easily one of the best character transformations I've seen in literature. (I suppose that's to be expected from Dickens, who formed the legendary Ebenezer Scrooge). The fact that the reader never really anticipates Carton to be the hero makes the story all the more intriguing. Although his death is quite sad, the way he boldly steps up to the guillotine with a Stoic expression, knowing that happiness awaits him in Heaven, makes the ending hopeful and comforting. His selflessness is also unquestionably inspirational. The fact that he is willing to die in place of Darnay, who married the woman that he (Carton) loved, is a mark of true human love.
ReplyDeleteI also thought the father-daughter relationship between Dr. Manette and Lucie was touching. It was beautiful to see that the depressed, shoe-making Manette, who had recently been released from prison, could only be comforted by his lovely daughter, whom he had never even met before! Their bond is unbreakable from thenceforth. In fact, Lucie is so worried that her marriage will come between her and her father that she ponders whether she even should marry. However, Manette, knowing that she herself cannot be fully happy without a husband, says to her, “Only ask yourself, how could my happiness be perfect, while yours was incomplete?” (195).
The two love each other, and they would sacrifice their own happiness to ensure the other’s happiness. If I were ever to have a daughter, I would hope our relationship would be as strong as theirs.
I also liked Dickens’s depiction of Madame Defarge. She is a sinister character who will stop at nothing to kill all the French aristocrats, because the evil Evrémonde killed her family long ago. She feels that justice will only be served when all noblemen, whether they themselves are guilty of any crime or not, lie dead on the streets of France. However, regardless of how many people are killed, she is never satisfied. She is a reminder that taking one’s pain out on innocent people accomplishes nothing, for if Defarge had seen all the Evrémondes dead, that still would not have brought her beloved family back.
One thing I can relate to in this story is Carton’s belief that he has led of a life of so much vice and wrongdoing that he cannot attain salvation regardless of how much good he does for the rest of his life. Many people are under this false delusion that they’ve become so immoral that they are incapable of converting and becoming good. Throughout much of the story, Carton feels this way. However, in the end, he makes an incredible sacrifice by taking the place of Darnay on the guillotine. In essence, he repents of all his prior wrongdoings in this act of extreme love. I think Carton is a great example that regardless of how much one sins, they can be forgiven both by God and neighbor with kind, compassionate deeds.
ReplyDeleteAnother part of the story I can relate to is the pain that Dr. Manette feels when Charles is sentenced to death. He had done all that he could to ensure the happiness of his daughter and her husband, but in the end, he was one of Darnay’s accusers, for he had long ago wished that the whole Evrémonde family suffer for their cruelty and unjust behavior. Sometimes, one might do a lot to try to make someone else happy, but a slight mistake can make all the effort seem meaningless. In that sense, I feel sorry for Manette.
Hello again everyone!
ReplyDeletePersonally, I really enjoyed A Tale of Two Cities. I loved how Dickens used a lot of detail in presenting the characters to the readers. I also enjoyed how the chapters in the beginning related to other chapters later on in the book. I thought the book started off to a slow start because I personally did not understand the real reason for the information in the beginning that Dickens gave us. Did anyone else feel this way? I later realized how the first chapter held some of the characters that were crucial to the rest of the book. I went back and read it after I had finished the book and I had a “Light bulb moment” so to speak. Did anyone else enjoy how Dickens laid out the chapters in the book? I found it very interesting.
The piece in this book that I did not care for as much was the amount of detail. Do not get me wrong, I love the detail put into the characters and all the situations that Dickens wrote. For me, I thought to myself, “Get on with it!”, but that is because I liked the plot a lot and so I wanted to continue to read the rest of the story without all of the details. Overall, I do not have many things that I dislike about this beautifully written classic.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Characterization is important to the book. This was important because the way Dickens describes characters in the book has much detail and is done with much care. An example is, “…Some long-obliterated marks of an actively intent intelligence in the middle of the forehead, gradually forced themselves through the black mist that had fallen on him” (Page 50). This is direct characterization because Dickens explains Dr. Manette’s facial expression explicitly. This is done many times throughout the book and is a big piece of Dickens’ book.
ReplyDeleteA passage from the book that I think is important is, “‘Whatever is, is right’; an aphorism that would be final as it is lazy, did it not include the troublesome consequence, that nothing that ever was, was wrong” (Page 69). I had to stop reading for a second to analyze this quote. I came to realize that this quote is very bad. We need to come away realizing that we must make the most out of everything that we are given. This does not give us room for marginalization in our work or in anything in our lives. We must be at 100% all of the time. This quote gives an excuse to those of us who do things that are not appropriate because since it is, it must be right. On the other side, the part of the quote that says “nothing that ever was, was wrong.” This says that if we do not know “it” it is wrong. Obviously this quote is not a good standard to live by but it helps us to look at what we have in life and to appreciate it and use it to the fullest.
ReplyDeleteA connection to a personal experience that a person in A Tale of Two Cities is the feeling that Dr. Manette had before he was reunited with his daughter. He was like more of a Robot at the time more than a human. Then, when his daughter comes to his rescue she is the only on who can draw The Doctor out of his “Black Cloud.” I know of a person that is the exact same way. Doctor Manette reminded me of this person very much. The only way the person I knew would come out of their haze would be if their sister would talk to him/her. This person was very close to their sister and that kept him/her grounded. There are many a time in books where I have met a person with the same problem and this was another time. This type of circumstance usually happens when the person has gone through a traumatic instance and this happened in both cases.
ReplyDelete@Megan R
ReplyDeleteI found that the reason that “to-day and to-morrow were written this was because it is old English. It was just the way the words were written back then. For them, writing to-day and to-morrow is just like us writing hello and goodbye. It was just the way it was done back then.
@VGlick
ReplyDeleteI agree that Dickens vivid descriptions are what make the book. They are, in the most part, the large mass of the book. The descriptions literally draw a picture in the mind of the reader and allow them to look into a “Looking Glass” to see into the situation. This book captures the mind of the reader and keeps them hooked because of the amount of detail. Although it can be a little overwhelming at times, it is most definitely a beautifully written book and I can not express that enough.
Regarding my post from earlier, my quote was from pages 47-48.
ReplyDelete@VGlick
I could not agree more about your idea of why Dickens capitalized words in the opening of the book. Later on, I believe his objective changes.
"Hunger was patched into them with straw and rag and wood and paper; Hunger was repeated in every fragment of the small modicum of firewood that the man sawed off; Hunger stared down from the smokeless chimneys, and started up from the filthy street that had no offal, among its refuse, of anything to eat) pg. 34
In this paragraph, Dickens uses Hunger almost as a character. He expresses the way Hunger tears down the people like a mortal enemy. He uses Death in the same way. This is not only an example of personification but a wonderful example of direct characterization.
Is it a courtroom drama, romance novel, or even a mystery? Though this novel is considered historical fiction, it could easily fall under numerous other genres. The trial in the Old Bailey Courthouse and the trials before the condemning of Charles Darnay toward the end of the story, suggest A Tale of Two Cities is a stimulating courtroom drama. The lion of Mr. Stryver and the jackal of Sydney Carton get Charles Darnay acquitted against all odds. The jurors, Judge, and prosecution, in a famous courthouse also known as Justice Hall, compete for justice. The spectators, expecting a quick verdict and bloody sentence, all described in perfect detail by Dickens, are shocked by the outcome. In the end, the defense team led by Carton and his penetrating cross examination, and characterization of circumstantial evidence raises enough reasonable doubt to free an innocent man.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, Dickens brilliantly weaves a tale of the true love that Sydney Carton holds for Lucie Manette. Can Dickens' A Tale of Two Cities compare to one of the greatest love stories of all time, Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet? The sincerity of Sydney Carton's love for Lucie and the selfless affection he has for her is proven when he dies to save her husband, a man other than himself, even with knowledge that she will never be his. In Romeo and Juliet both characters die at the end in order to not live without the other and to sustain their own happiness. Which story best demonstrates true love? In A Tale of Two Cities, Dickens writes not only a memorable love story but a Shakespearean tragedy where the hero and one of the lovers dies in the last few pages.
Finally, A Tale of Two Cities could also be considered a classic mystery, with the questions Dickens weaves into the plot. For example, as Megan pointed out, how Doctor Manette is sent to prison for eighteen years without an explanation, or the phrase used often to refer to when Doctor Manette was finally released, "Recalled to Life". It is referred to again after the trial Charles Darnay, describing how he, as well as Doctor Manette, was been "Recalled to Life". What exactly does Dickens mean by this phrase? Also, during the first trial, what happens to the jurors in that room behind closed doors for them to proclaim Charles Darnay innocent? Everyone, including the man Jerry Cruncher spoke to at the beginning of the trial believed Charles Darnay would be drawn and quartered within twenty-four hours. Instead he was set free. Finally, not until the very last chapters does Dickens address the constant knitting of Madam Defarge, weaving suspense along with the scarf. Does anyone have any other ideas on this topic or another genre it could be considered?
Metaphor is also a device used at times throughout the book. Dickens at times compares the bloodthirsty guillotine to a woman who is thirsting for wine. Peasants are also referred to as "rats" throughout the book to emphasize their low status.
ReplyDeleteThe elation of Lucie Manette when she discovered that her father was alive, brought not only a euphoric feeling to the otherwise dark story, but allowed the reader to experience her joy and the heartwarming scene. After spending her life as an orphan and believing her father was long dead, Lucie hoped beyond reason that the rumor he was alive was true. When first reuniting with him, Lucie was hesitant not to cause her father any further discontent, because of his long confinement in prison. Dickens wrote, "With tears streaming down her face, she put her two hands to her lips, and kissed them to him; then clasped them to her breast, as if she laid the ruined head there." (Page 48) Lucie spent the rest of her life caring and reminding her father that he was finally safe and she would never leave him. Doctor Manette, a prisoner of France for eighteen years, soon loved his beautiful daughter and remembered himself after being shut away for so long.
ReplyDeleteThis scene is a reflection of what military families witness in their daily lives.
The homecoming of the fathers, mothers, brothers, daughters, sisters, and sons, who leave the comfort and warmth of their lives at home to fight for our country, can be compared to the return of Doctor Manette to Lucie. The glorious image of soldiers or Marines, dressed in camouflage and boots, running to finally hold their loved ones, is forever imprinted in all our minds. My father, a retired Colonel in the Marine Corps, went to Iraq for three months. Though the time was short in comparison to many other servicemen, the time he spent away in a place where danger lurks around every corner seemed to last a lifetime. I remember being dressed from head to toe in blue stars with white stripes and running as if my entire life depended on it, into his waiting arms as he climbed off the plane. The almost overwhelming anticipation beforehand, the relief and bliss that filled me afterwards, were what both Lucie and the loved ones at home feel at being reunited with someone that has been gone for what seemed like forever.
@OMcHugh
ReplyDeleteI understand what you mean about Dickens's inclination to have unimportant characters developing into the main ones. I wouldn't have guessed that the elder Madame Defarge, who spends all her time knitting in the wine shop, to be the malicious, vengeful villain. She seemed rather negligible until midway through Book 2. Also, Sydney Carton surprises the reader in the end. His exploits hadn't been talked about in tons of depth, but he suddenly comes out as the hero in the end of the story.
I personally like that aspect of the book. It makes it more compelling and less predictable.
@CPoblete
ReplyDeleteEarly in the book, I thought the fact that Carton and Darnay looked similar was unimportant also. It's funny how sometimes what seems to an unnecessary detail in a story can turn out to be one of the most critical aspects of the entire tale.
@thomasowen
ReplyDeleteI feel pretty much the same way you do about the pace and action of the Book 3 in comparison to Books 1 and 2. Dickens spends much of the time detailing the characters in the first two books. The characters seem to propel the first two books, whereas the actual story is what drives the third book. It seems like the plot really just begins when the French Revolutionists storm the Bastille in chapter 21 of Book 2.
@Giovanni
ReplyDeleteI know exactly what you mean in saying, "I also enjoyed how the chapters in the beginning related to other chapters later on in the book. I thought the book started off to a slow start because I personally did not understand the real reason for the information in the beginning that Dickens gave us. Did anyone else feel this way? I later realized how the first chapter held some of the characters that were crucial to the rest of the book. I went back and read it after I had finished the book and I had a “Light bulb moment” so to speak. Did anyone else enjoy how Dickens laid out the chapters in the book?"
I may have had a "Light bulb moment" but it was on a dimmer switch and didn't reach its full wattage until the last few chapters of the book. I did enjoy how Dickens arranged the chapters, because it kept me wondering to the final pages. Towards the end of the book when characters from the first few chapters are suddenly referred to again, such as Cly and Mrs. Pross' brother, Solomon Pross, or as he was named at the beginning John Barsad, it took me a minute, and some double checking, to remember who these characters were. Using this technique to bridge the first and second halves of the novel, Dickens wrapped the book in a nice little package and tied it with a bow. Many of the seemingly insignificant details at the beginning became surprisingly important to the ending to the story.
In fairness, because Dickens released his book in weekly increments, in his journal All the Year Round, the book is a little more spaced out than it normally would be. A Tale of Two Cities was the soap opera of 19th century Britain. The suspense kept the entire country captivated and anticipating the next portion of the story. Due to the time in between publications, Dickens referred back to characters and scenes mentioned earlier in the book in order to weave them back into the plot.
One literary device that I think is very important to the story is dialogue. Charles Dickens uses the conversations between characters to give them more depth and personality. I think that a perfect example is in the wine shop in chapter 12 in the 3rd book.
ReplyDeleteThis is where The Vengeance, Jacques Three, and both Defarges, are having a conversation about exterminating the Doctor and his daughter. Defarge is attempting to defend both of them with this passage: "Extermination is a good doctrine, my wife, in general, I say nothing against it. But this Doctor has suffered much; you have seen him to-day; you have observed his face when the paper was a read." This quote shows use that Defarge has limits; unlike his bloodthirsty wife Madame Defarge.
I have to agree with Owen, the plots drive the characters. Without the intricate plot the characters would be insignificant and somewhat boring. The characters develop because the plot provides the "drive" so to speak. I also have to agree that Darnay seems a bit under emphasized detail wise. Like I said before, I had a great time re-reading this book and I hope the other two are just as enjoyable!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete