Tuesday, May 11, 2010

NUMBER 40! Someone pop a balloon!

Returning to the original purpose of this blog: counting books. Though the AP use was very useful in the very short time I actually used it. It kind of makes me sad that I didn't get to use One Hundred Years of Solitude, though. It's funny. I printed off my posts about only 3 books and still the went to about 4 pages in size 9 font. That's a lot of writing. Huh.

Anyhow! I finished my 40th book on the list after about 3 months due to school distractions: A Tale of Two Cities! I wish I could have devoted more attention to this book. Obligations left me reading this book at 11 for 15 minutes wishing I could justify staying up till 1 to read. I just couldn't. But today I pushed through and presently need a new book to start summer with (but don't worry, I'm working on that).

I LOVE Charles Dickens. He has gorgeous, thick, rich language which he uses to express subtle, or not so subtle, ideas and create odd yet very credible characters that you can easily envision with your mind's eye. My favorite in Great Expectations was Miss Havisham, of course, but I had several favorites in TOTC. First, there was Cruncher. He is such a minor character and it amazes me Dickens spent so much time developing someone who would be of fairly important, yet minimal use in the novel. Things I know that I didn't need to really know about him. He has a wife who is a good, yet persecuted, Christian. He has a son who for some reason really looks up to his father. He is a grave robber. He is an odd-job guy. Actually the last two have quite some importance in the plot. I also enjoyed Miss Pross. She is genuinely English through and through. These ladies are a marvel in British literature. It is the British recognizing the stereotype of strong spinsters, being proud of it, then making fun of it. Amazing. Miss Pross is amazing and useful in several different ways. Her brother is important, as well as herself and her devotion to "ladybird." I'm not even sure what she looks like, but Dickens describes her so well, I instantly connect her to a character from one of the Britcoms I like. The third is Madame, sorry, Citizeness Defarge, of course. She is one of the prime characters of the novel and appears again and again, accompanied by her knitting. She even elevates to an angel of death in her last scene. Dickens and characters go together.

Dickens also knows how to make an entrance and an exit. The first line is still slightly hokey to me because of its overuse (juxtaposition? Nah.) but the last line which is also frequently quoted has garnered so much more respect because of the ending scene. But I'll let you decide for yourself:
- It was the best of times, it was the worst of times; it ws 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 directly to Heaven, we were all going the other way.
-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.
Ah. The last quote just hits me. It means more than one thing and is sentimental and heroic and touching as all get out. Please. Read the book. But DON'T be an idiot and read the last few pages. Grr.

Though there is so much more to the novel, I will limit myself to the views it takes on female strength. But you cannot have female strength without mentioning the strength of the common people in this book. They go together. I will examine the dynamics of two relationships. First, the relationship between Citizeness Defarge and Citizen Defarge. There is a reason that everyone remembers Madame Defarge over her husband. To put it in perspective, they are the common man in France and the movers of that bloody revolution. They own a wine shop. She is always the stronger one over her husband. He is impatient and seemingly weak of character. He sympathizes with the plight of the Manette's. He is weak next to her. She is the true mover of the Revolution and at first mainly works through her husband, though she reveals herself more and more as time goes on. Second, lets move to Miss Pross and Cruncher, of all people. Pross is strong. In fact, in a show of love vs. hate, she triumphs over Madame Defarge. When push comes to shove, Cruncher starts blithering about his wife and child in England and Pross is the one evaluating the situation and figuring out a logical solution. In this book, it is always the female that has the clear head, logical mind, resourcefulness, and generally strength of character. Correction - it is the lower class women who have these virtues. For example, "Ladybird" does not have any of this strength of character. Now she is a lovely, patient, virtuous lady, but lacks the nitty gritty that the other two have. In fact, the Darnays are so nice, that you just know something is going to happen to them. Now, it seems that Dickens celebrates woman's strength of character. He also values the value of the "common man," but with the latter comes a warning encapsulated in the character of "Vengance." Revenge became a huge part of the novel, and Dickens has a great quote concerning it. For now, I will end with some quotes.
-Sadly, sadly, the sun rose; it rose upon no sadder sight than the man of good abilities and good emotions, incapable of their directed exercise, incapable of his own help and his own happiness, sensible of the blight on him, and resigning himself to let it eat him away.
-I see a beautiful city and a brilliant people rising from this abyss, and, in their struggles to be truly free, in their triumphs and defeats, through long years to come, I see the evil of this time and of the previous time of which this is the natural birth, gradually making expiation for itself and wearing out.
-Crush humanity out of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it will twist itself into the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of rapacious license and oppression over again, and it will surely yield the same fruit according to its kind.
-Waste forces within him, and a desert all around, this man stood still on his way across a silent terrace, and saw for a moment, lying in the wilderness before him, a mirage of honorable ambition, self-denial, and perseverance. In the fair city of this vision, there were airy galleries from which the loves and graces looked upon him, gardens in which the fruits of life hung ripening, waters of Hope that sparkled in his sight. A moment, and it was gone. Climbing to a high chamber in a well of houses, he threw himself down in his clothes on a neglected bed, and its pillow was wet with wasted tears.
-I have sometimes sat alone here of an evening, listening, until I have made the echoes out to be the echoes of all the footsteps that are coming by and by into our lives.
-I have sometimes sat alone here of an evening, listening, until I have made the echoes out to be the echoes of all the footsteps that are coming by and by into our lives.

I know they are a bit out of order, but something has come to my attention: I have failed to expound the wonderful character of Mr. Sydney Carton. Sigh. He is a tragic hero. I love him very much. That's not so much expounding as rambling, but there it is.

My next books:
Nonficiton: How to Become a Writer. It looks very...interesting. Almost like the Strunk and White of writing.
Fiction: Hopefully, The Plauge, by Albert Camus. Technically, it is not on my list, the Stranger is. But I find myself craving his writing. I got sucked into some post-war essays at the book store the other day and realized it was my signal that I needed to read Camus, who has beautiful writing. I have opportunity once more to stay up till 3 in the morning just to read and I feel it is high time already. Welcome, summer. I may read now.

6 comments:

  1. What the hey. Get off of my Dickens. He writes beautifully.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I actually went and looked at a copy of Great Expectations just before I saw this post the other day. Same thoughts as ever. Book = do not want. Movie = do want.

    ReplyDelete
  3. ARE YOU SERIOUS!? Disowned. Movies can never be better than books. It's impossible. Unless it's a really crummy book. REALLY crummy book. Then it isn't really literature, is it? I mean, plays are a good supplement and allowed. They are even having Oliver around here soon....But REALLY RT?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I will admit, Bridge to Terebithia the movie was very, very good. Not better than the book, but very, very good. It's probably the best book-to-movie translation I've ever seen.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yeah. Yeah, really. The old movie version of Oliver Twist was much more engaging than the book.

    ReplyDelete