The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion

This is the thread to comment on the next six (6) chapters of the novel.

1. These six chapters focus more on one of Dickens's favorite topic- Law and Justice or mostly the perpetuity of Law and scarcity of Justice.
What is the tone of his voice in the first chapters of this book?

2. Dickens also introduces his favorite trick of uncanny similarity that in most of his novels results in twinness or siblingness or some blood relation. Do you think this is the case with Carton and Darnay?

Are they the doppelgangers or the opposites that are lookalike?

3. Who is more interesting as a character: Darnay or Carton? Why?

4. Did you find the story of the prisoner and the workman disturbing? Why do you think Mr. Manette found it quite startling?

5. Who are those 'hundreds of people', the phrase that serves as a title and also an allusion to those shuffling people who can become a part of Lucy's life?

Please post the comments below and enjoy this wonderful discussion. So far, it has been lovely!

Having castigated the one-note character of Mr. Lorry in book 1, I have to admit that I am charmed by the way he’s developing in book 2.

3. Who is more interesting as a character: Darnay or Carton? Why?

The "bad" boy (or girl) is always more interesting than the good one!

Robin wrote: "3. Who is more interesting as a character: Darnay or Carton? Why?

The "bad" boy (or girl) is always more interesting than the good one!"

I would like to point out that both seem to be a bit "bad" right now and equally interesting from my perspective (Darnay may have committed treason after all). And I'm at a loss as to Carton's motives: he is obviously an intelligent and cultured man who studied in Paris. Why doesn't he want to have his own life? I think there are many things to find out yet about both men and their past.

As for question no. 4, I was very surprised that anybody could be as insensible as to mention that kind of story in Mr. Manette's presence. Any mention of imprisonment seems to disturb him greatly. He is also a very interesting character with a past.

I agree with you, Teanka. His past seems to be the most intriguing plot line so far in this novel. Actually, the whole Manette family is shrouded in mystery.

Zulfiya wrote: "What is the tone of his voice in the first chapters of this book? ..."

Dickens' voice moves warmly downward from the first chapter where he speaks in a 'cosmic' or 'omniscient' tone; an 'ethereal' or 'knowing' manner; musing about the grand scale of heaven-and-earth-and-the-vicissitudes-of-the-era... then gradually descends to treat of more minuscule, pragmatic, forgiving, earthy, practical--and very cynical--matters, as he describes the lifestyle of Jerry Cruncher and the strategems of Jarvis Lorry.

Just my 0.2 cents.

I think Carton is definitely more interesting! From Dickens' description, Darnay seems to be a man of honor--boring! Carton, however, is an enigma. I love this description of him: "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" (93). This brings us back to the motif of imprisonment--Carton is imprisoned by his own limitations. Darnay,too, has now suffered imprisonment.

I love the comparison of the crowd to a swarm of blue flies! Comparing them to scavengers who are attracted to death is very apt. They are completely uninterested in justice, and would have been just as happy to see an innocent man put to death as a guilty one.

I love the comic relief of Jerry Cruncher and his long-suffering wife, and I also love Dickens' sarcasm! Okay, those are some of the things that I love. I'll stop--for now!

Zulfiya wrote: "his favorite trick of uncanny similarity ..."

This particular contrivance is one of the oldest devices of folklore and fable; well-represented and oft-relied on (for instance) throughout ancient Greek myths and adventure-stories.

To trace its origins I refer anyone interested to the researches of this author: Mikhail Bakhtin

Robin wrote: "3. Who is more interesting as a character: Darnay or Carton? Why?

The "bad" boy (or girl) is always more interesting than the good one!"

I don't think that he committed treason, but there is something about Darnay that I don't like. And it doesn't make sense why I don't like him - I don't like him because he seems like he would be a very entitled member of society, but if he is, why is he on trial?

Sydney Carton doesn't seem like much - he drinks too much and squanders his talents - but I like him and feel bad for him. He loves Miss Manette, but I going to quess that it is going to be unrequited love...she'll go for Darney. And who isn't going to feel for the guy who is going to get his heart broken?

Some thoughts:

Why did Dickens make Darney and Carton look alike (besides the obvious storyline reason)? We'll see, but at this point, I'm thinking that here we have two men, who on the surface may be alike, but because of circumstances and personal experiences go in two very different directions. Much like all humans - all men (and women) are created equal, but they don't end up equal.

I loved the conversation between Mr. Lorry and Miss Pross - "Do you imagine--" Mr. Lorry had begun, when Miss Pross took him up short with: "Never imagine anything. Have no imagination at all."

I also liked the foreshadowing at the end of Chapter 6, with the footsteps and the "great crowd bearing down upon us..."

Last point, I had to laugh about the comment about George Washington and the fact that they thought it was a heresy.

One of the themes that I see being presented here is the idea that little is what it seems to be. We are introduced to Darney as a criminal before the bar, which seems very out of character with everything we observe in his character. He is threatened with being drawn and quartered, and yet he is calm and self-contained. Carton is the professional, which should mean he is the distinguished actor, but he is seen as a man who has wasted his potential.

The contrasts between the two men are heightened by how similar they seem on the surface. And, I agree that Carton is immediately the more interesting of the two. Of course, we are told a great deal more about him than Darney in this section. I feel I know something about Carton while Darney is still a mystery. Is he really innocent of the accusations, what is doing in France that he was willing to lose his life rather than reveal?

Lots of mystery building in this section. We are reminded that we still do not know why Manette was imprisoned or who was behind it. The only characters who do not have unexplored depths are Lucie, who represents an ideal toward which the other characters yearn, and Lorry, who is a bit of comic relief. Even Jerry obviously has a hidden underside.

I was disturbed that Darney would bring up the story of the prisoner in the tower. How very insensitive, even though it has been five years since Manette was freed. But, this serves to make us wonder more about Manette's back story instead of losing sight of it in the developments with the other men.

The 'hundreds of people' are a great foreshadowing of the effects the masses will have on the life of these individuals. The crowds at Darney's trial are just as blood-thirsty and have the same lack of compassion as the revolutionaries in France. That this small group of people cannot avoid the sweep of the masses of society is evident. Little does Lucie know what she has predicted.

"I don't think that he committed treason, but there is something about Darnay that I don't like. And it doesn't make sense why I don't like him - I don't like him because he seems like he would be a very entitled member of society, but if he is, why is he on trial?"


I completely agree with your characterization of Darnay, speaking from personal experience, people can seem like a threat to something or someone. I think this would be the case concerning why Darnay is on trial and possibly even why Manette was imprisoned. Imprisonment and/or execution is an effective way to eliminate competition, especially treason, which seems to mostly be one person's word against another person's. Which person is lying? Are they both lying?

"I'm thinking that here we have two men, who on the surface may be alike, but because of circumstances and personal experiences go in two very different directions."

It's not just personal experience, but choices. My favorite part of this section was "The Jackal" when Dickens compared Carton to the Jackal and Stryver to a lion. Personality quirks associated with the jackkal include cunning, clever, trickery, etc. I think Carton may have chosen this position, because he would draw less attention to himself and be even sneakier. In that chapter he even says "I did exercises for other boys and seldom did my own." This implies that for moth of his life, Carton has chosen to be in what appears to be an inferior position, when, in fact, he is powerful in his own way. By doing the other boys' exercises he could earn favors and help them reach points of power, while he remained in the shadows to work out his sneakier plans. This type of relationship is illustrated by Carton saying that Stryver's success in part depended on him. In response to Stryver's question about how he did what he did, and Carton answers "Partly through paying me to help you, I suppose." Although Carton makes light of this statement, I believe it is the truth and that Stryver's success rests on Carton. The relationship between the two men is a lot more complicated than it seems.

^^well said

Nicole wrote: ""I'm thinking that here we have two men, who on the surface may be alike, but because of circumstances and personal experiences go in two very different directions."

It's not just personal experi..."

I don't think Carton works as he does because he is thus more powerful than Stryver. If so, he wouldn't feel himself always a disappointed man, nor drown himself in alcohol. He'd be more like what's his name in House of Cards, pulling strings on all his puppets from his background seat until he gets exactly what he wants!

No, Carton will remain a mystery for us for awhile longer, but there is definitely something tragic about his character.

As to the why the doubles, aside from the parallelism with the whole ''two''-ness concept of the novel, the fact that they look alike is essential to the plot in a number of ways. I won't spoil the plot by mentioning them!

Like Miss Pross, I, too, have exaggerated various things to "hundreds" (or is it 'thousands'?) when I am really out of joint with what's going on.
She can't abide Lucy having ONE suitor. One, or two, thus becomes.....100s....

Interesting that the side characters have more personality than what should be the main character. Miss Pross has much more depth than Lucy; ditto, Mr. Lorry and, oh, I don't know, how about boring Charles Darnay?
Mr. Lorry keeps showing us surprising bits of himself (the man of business who has adopted a new family in his middle age, has a new ''home.'' the man of business who is quite capable of holding his own with Miss Pross, who whould have eaten him alive!)

As if the main characters have to be there--the ingenue love interest aka angelic young lady; the apparent good-looking and upright hero--but Dickens let himself have fun with the extras.

Remember the fairy tale Beauty and The Beast? There is an element of that going on: Darnay as the 'Prince' side of the Beast, Carton as the apparent 'beast' who may not be (and who is the one the story centers around: the Beast, I mean, not Carton).

Though frankly, Charles Darnay reminds me more of Gaston in Disney's animated Beauty and the Beast: tiresomely good looking and good and glad of it!

Lynnm wrote: "Why did Dickens make Darney and Carton look alike (besides the obvious storyline reason)? We'll see, but at this point, I'm thinking that here we have two men, who on the surface may be alike, but because of circumstances and personal experiences go in two very different directions. Much like all humans - all men (and women) are created equal, but they don't end up equal."

Jekyll and Hide of sorts? In the sense that both of us can be boring and righteous ad naudeaum or l'enfant terrible?

I still feel that both characters are somehow incomplete, and even if we put them both together, if is is at all possible, that literary homunculus will not be complete, not perfect, but complete. Somehow they still seem a little bit caricaturish to me.