The Old Curiosity Club discussion

Chapter the First

At last we settle in for our reading of The Old Curiosity Shop. We will find the individual chapters somewhat shorter due to the fact this book was published in weekly, not monthly instalments. Still, there are many similarities between OCS and its predecessors. Once again, our protagonist is a child, and, like Oliver Twist and Nicholas Nickleby, the novel follows much of the pattern of a Bildungsroman. We will, however, see in this novel Dickens attempting new stylistic features. There will be times when we will see Dickens change his mind as to how to proceed, both in terms of the narrative point of view and the development of some characters.

My approach for this novel will alter slightly from our earlier novels. Rather than replay much of the plot, I intend to highlight and focus more on individual stylistic elements of the novel, to tie together apparently disconnected bits and pieces, and offer more of my personal opinions. I hope you find this helpful. I encourage you to question or disagree with me, and I trust that together we will appreciate the unique talent that was Charles Dickens. As always, please be patient with my computer skills.

The first word of the novel is “Night.” TOCS will indeed be a novel of darkness, of the grotesque, of nightmare and horror. There will be settings, circumstances, and even characters that will seem to be ripped from the pages of a horror magazine. We will look for and note them as they occur. The novel begins with a first person narrator who we learn has an infirmity. He is the first of many characters who will have some form of infirmity in this novel. We need to watch for the others as they appear and see how they fit into the matrix of the novel’s structure. The narrator remarks on a “never-ending restlessness, that incessant tread of feet” and talks about “listening to the footsteps.” This will be a novel of movement. Please wear a comfortable pair of shoes.

One night on the narrator’s wanderings a “ pretty young girl” approaches him and tells him she is lost. She wants to find her way home. Here we have the initiating point of the novel. Over the course of the chapter the narrator refers, with different phrases, to her youth over 20 times. The narrator takes the little girl home and there he meets her grandfather. The little girl’s home is a place for “old and curious things ... musty treasures ... fantastic carvings brought from monkish quarters ... and strange furniture that might have been designed in dreams.” It is a dreamscape, an unreal place. Again, please note the series of nightmarish images which will occur throughout the novel.

The grandfather seems dependent on his granddaughter; his contribution to the relationship appears to be a belief that the child “shall be rich one of these days, and a fine lady.” How this will occur, is not explained.

Thoughts

Although we are in the very early stages in the novel, in what ways is Little Nell different from Oliver Twist and/or the slightly older Nicholas Nickleby?

Dickens frequently incorporates a person’s residence as a physical expression of the people who live within it. How does the Old Curiosity Shop complement the characters of grandfather Trent and Little Nell?



The next character introduced is Kit. This young man makes Nell burst into laughter. He is described as having “the most comical expression of face” the narrator ever saw. The narrator entertained “a grateful feeling towards the boy from that minute.” Kit loves to laugh “violently” and it is clear that he holds special emotions for Nell. Kit appears to be an odd job person at the Old Curiosity Shop.

The narrator feels uneasy about the situation and circumstances at The Old Curiosity Shop so he returns to its front door and lingers there. He introduces to the reader his thoughts that the old man’s nightly absence was not for any good purpose, but there is no question in his mind that the old man does love Nell. The narrator cannot forget the “heaps of fantastic things” he saw at Nell’s home and comments that “she seemed to exist in a kind of allegory.” And so with thoughts of wondrous and bizarre objects swirling over Nell, the first chapter ends.

Thoughts


There is much to reflect upon in first chapter.

Who is Nell? For this question I think we must consider the direct comment from Dickens that she is to be seen as more that simply a character. Dickens clearly raises Nell to the status of an allegory. “As it was”, writes Dickens, “she seemed to exist in a kind of allegory.” As we go through the novel we must always consider this directive from the author. At this point in the novel a good question to consider is what initial traits of Nell would suggest the role of an allegory? What allegorical type could she be?

On what does her grandfather base his faith that someday all will be well for him and Nell? What does this suggest about his character?

What role can the simple but apparently faithful Kit play in the novel?

What are your first impressions of the first person narrator?

Last, but, of course, not least, are the early comments about birds. As a fair warning, you should know that birds will play a significant role in this novel. :- )). The early mention of Covent Garden Market initiates the presence of birds. We read how sun and early morning awaken the “dusky thrush, whose cage has hung outside a garret ... [who was] half mad with joy!” And yet freedom is an elusive thing. Other birds, “the other little captives,” are not so successful. Their lives are in jeopardy, and can only be free when they are, when in either fact or imagination, having their breasts filled “with visions of the country.” We need to watch how birds will be used to parallel the life of Little Nell.

Chapter the Second


In the next few chapters we will be meeting some of the main characters in the novel. We will pause to take a look at them as they will form the nexus of our story. First, however, we read that the first person narrator, who has yet to be named by Dickens, has been drawn back to the Curiosity Shop for a second look at it in the daylight. This time he stumbles upon Mr Trent and a much younger man having “high words” with each other. The old man says that “[i]f oaths, or prayers, or words, could rid me of you, they should. I would be quit of you, and would be relieved if you were dead.” Harsh words, especially when we learn that they are directed at the old man’s grandson, Nell’s brother Fred. During this heated discussion we are introduced to the grandson through his appearance. He “stood lounging” and had a “contemptuous sneer” upon his face. He was about 21 years of age, “certainly handsome” and had “a dissipated, insolent air which repelled one.”

Our narrator must have been rather distressed to find himself in the middle of a family quarrel. The grandson then calls for his friend to enter the store and we meet “a figure conspicuous for its dirty smartness.” This man’s name is Dick Swiveller, a person we need to pay much attention to as the novel progresses. Swiveller’s appearance suggests he is a man of little means and less self-esteem. Fred accuses his grandfather of hoarding money and can’t understand why his grandfather will not lend him a few pence. For his part, the grandfather comments:

“[w]hy do you hunt and persecute me, God help me? ... Why do you bring your profligate companions here? How often am I to tell you that my life is one of care and self-denial, and that I am poor?” to which his grandson replies “[h]ow often am I to tell you ... that I know better?”


Thoughts


There is clearly a chasm in this family’s relationships. Our problem as readers is that at this point in the novel we do not know who is speaking the truth. Who do you think is speaking the truth, or at least the closest version to the truth? What has lead you to this early assumption?



The chapter ends with the grandfather and grandson hurling more warnings and predictions at each other. The grandfather seems to be developing a mantra that the future will be brighter for Nell and himself. “Hope and patience, hope and patience” he chants. In the last sentence of the chapter Nell appears in the doorway.


Thoughts


What were your first impressions of Fred Trent and Dick Swiveller?

Money, or the lack of it, seems to be a major issue in this chapter. What evidence is there that the grandfather has as much money as Fred seems to think?

What suggestions are there so far in the novel that the grandfather is not financially secure?

I found the line “would be relieved if you were dead” to be a harsh statement for a grandfather to speak to his grandson. Nevertheless, in Dickens’s own life he wrote a similar sentiment about his own son Sydney Dickens. Sydney Dickens was a young man who was not too good with saving money. On many occasions he found himself in debt and asked his father for help. In May 1870, Dickens wrote to his son Alfred Dickens about his brother Sydney, “I begin to wish that he were honestly dead.” One wonders if Dickens was, in any way, thinking back to Fred Trent.

Chapter the Third


Closely following Little Nell into the Curiosity Shop at the beginning of the chapter is “an elderly man of remarkably hard features and forbidding aspect, and so low in stature as to be quite a dwarf, though his head and face were large enough for the body of a giant. His black eyes were restless, sly, and cunning; his mouth and chin, bristly with the stubble of a coarse hard beard;”. This man is Daniel Quilp, and my first question to you is what aspect of the lengthy description did you find most interesting, most repulsive, most nightmarish? With such a description it is obvious that Quilp is the opposite to our gentle Little Nell. Indeed, Dickens has framed these two characters as opposite as can be. As the novel progresses we will follow these two characters very closely. As Nell is gentle and kind, Quilp is grotesque and horrid. Each will intensify the character of the other.

The presence of Quilp upsets Nell’s grandfather. Quilp’s inhuman nature is further accentuated when he questions who Dick, Nell’s brother Fred and the narrator are by using the word “that” rather than a pronoun. The conversation between Quilp and Nell’s grandfather reveals to us one other important fact. We learn that on the night the narrator was approached by Nell she was coming from the home of Quilp. We also learn that between the grandfather and Quilp there are a few “mysteries and secrets” and that Quilp has some “influence” with the grandfather. As grotesque as Quilp appears to be, I must say that Nell’s brother speaks rather abruptly to his grandfather. As Fred and Dick Swiveller make their exit, Swiveller tells Quilp that the “watch-word to the old man is - fork.” I’m using the Penguin edition of TOCS and its notes point out that the work “fork” means “fork out, to give” which to me suggests money. We then get a short definition of Mrs Quilp from Quilp. To be brief, he says she is “well-trained.”


Thoughts


If we are looking for clarity of plot in this chapter we have not found it yet. Quilp is a grotesque man. What business could Nell have with him, at night, and so far away from her home? Why does the grandfather seem to be both fearful and attracted to Quilp at the same time? What purpose was there in introducing Dick Swiveller to this chapter?


Perhaps the answers come, at least partly, in the next paragraphs. Quilp gives gold to the grandfather and says the package was too “heavy for Nell to carry in her bag. She need be accustomed to such loads betimes though, neighbour, for she will carry weight when you are dead.” Quilp furthers the mystery of his parcel of gold by commenting “I would I knew in what good investment all these supplies are sunk. But you are a deep man, and keep your secret close.” The grandfather then takes the money and locks it in an iron safe. With that, Quilp leaves the Curiosity Shop and the narrator remarks that “if my curiosity had been excited on the occasion of my first visit, it certainly was not diminished now.” With that, Little Nell brings some needle-work to a table and the narrator wonders what will become of Nell when her grandfather dies. It is, of course, interesting to note how Nell’s pet bird with a green bough in its little cage” lends a “breath of freshness” to the otherwise depressing thoughts of the narrator as he reflects on the recent events he has witnessed. Nell’s grandfather refers to her caged bird when he comments “[t]he poor yonder bird is as well qualified” to exist in the future as Nell is. The old man then pleads with the narrator to understand and believe that he has done everything he can to provide for Nell.

Kit arrives for a writing lesson from Nell which was a time of mirth for both Kit and Nell. The narrator relates to the reader that “evening passed and night came on - the old man again grew restless and impatient - that he quitted the house secretly at the same time as before - and that the child was once more left alone within its gloomy walls.” Next, in a surprising comment, the narrator detaches himself from continuing his function as a narrator and decides to “leave those who have prominent and necessary parts ... to speak and act for themselves.” Strange, very strange.


Thoughts

Where to start? It is apparent that there is a clear link between Quilp and Nell’s grandfather and that Nell functions as a go-between. What could the reason for the connection be? What lead you to that conclusion?

We have established that there is a patina of the eerie and the grotesque swirling around the story. With the introduction of Daniel Quilp the element of the grotesque has increased significantly. If we reflect back to OT and NN we see that the presence of a villain is a trope in Dickens. Did you find that Quilp’s first appearance rivalled that of Bumble or Ralph Nickleby?

In order to highlight Quilp’s repulsive character Dickens’s description of him extends over a few paragraphs. Do you think Dickens overdid the introduction of Quilp to his readers?

What did you make of the narrator’s rather hasty withdrawal from the novel? Why do you think Dickens decided to alter the narrative point of view?

Ah birds. Perhaps Nell’s bird will continue a role in the novel. What is the bird’s initial function as a symbol in the novel? How might Dickens further evolve and enhance the bird’s role in the novel?

Chapter the Fourth


In this chapter we have the transition from the first person narrator to the third person. This narratological change is fascinating. As we read through this chapter and the ones that follow it will be interesting to ask ourselves if the narrative point of view alters the reader’s reception and enjoyment of the story.

This chapter continues the introduction of Daniel Quilp. We learn that he lives on Tower Hill, collects “rents of whole colonies of filthy streets and alleys by the waterside, advanced money to the seamen and petty officers of merchant vessels ... [and] smoked his smuggled cigars under the very nose of the Custom House.” Quilp is also the owner of a “rat infested dreary yard called ‘Quilp’s Wharf’” a place as dirty, dingy, and fetid as his own self. His wife is described as “a pretty little, mild-spoken, blue-eyed woman.” They, along with Quilp’s mother-in-law, all live at a Tower Hill. Mrs Quilp and her mother are entertaining a group of women for tea at Tower Hill and a discussing Quilp. They find Quilp “not quite a - what one would call a handsome man, nor quite a young man neither, which might be a little excuse for him if anything could be; whereas his wife is young, and is good-looking, and is a woman.” Faint praise, but this pseudo-kindness towards Quilp may well be the only praise we encounter for him. Almost on cue, Quilp enters the room, and, talking about food rubs his hands. In the future notice how and when Quilp rubs his hands. It will become quite telling. Quilp’s entrance is the cue for the visiting ladies to leave.

Once alone with his wife Quilp looks “steadily at her for some time without speaking.” When he does speak, his words are those of consumption. “Oh you nice creature! ... smacking his lips as if this were no figure of speech, and she were actually a sweet meat. Oh you precious darling! oh you delicious charmer!” Quilp then continues “She’s such a treasure! I’m so fond of her.”

To conclude his demeaning of his wife, Quilp warms her that “[i]f you ever listen to these beldames again, I’ll bite you.”


Thoughts


What do you think Quilp’s rubbing of his hands might signify?

Dickens has put a strong spotlight on Quilp in the past few chapters. When such attention occurs, it is reasonable to assume that the character will develop into a central character in the story. From your point of view how successful has Dickens been in creating Quilp as character of interest?

In terms of narrative structure how might a character such as Quilp be incorporated into the story?

Quilp’s home and his warehouse are both extensions of his own personality and character. In what ways do physical structures help enhance and develop character?

We learn much about Quilp’s businesses. Since we already know that Quilp and Nell’s grandfather have some connection, what might that connection be?

If we reflect on this chapter we will notice that there are many places where food is discussed. When we focus on Quilp’s words, we see that the concept of food and consumption goes beyond food and relates directly to the consumption of his wife as well. Quilp’s “smacking his lips” is, as Dickens tells us, “no figure of speech.” What exactly do you think Dickens is suggesting about Quilp and his character? It is interesting to reflect back to NN and realize that Dickens has already introduced the concept of a male consuming a female into his story.

Wow! Lots of questions and considerations about Quilp to consider. Could Quilp’s presence, in time, over-shadow Bumble’s presence and help negate Ralph Nickleby as characters to dislike?



To end the day, and to put his wife in her place, Quilp decides to spend the rest of the night smoking. In order to fully assert his dominance over her he demands that she “sit where you are, if you please, in case I want you.” His wife meekly responds “Yes, Quilp.” Quilp then drinks and smokes the night away, and has a “grin of delight” on his face each time his wife appears uncomfortable.


Thoughts


As we sit in the 21C century it is difficult to speculate exactly how Dickens’s first readers would have responded to this chapter. What are your feelings about this chapter? What do you think the initial response to this chapter would have been?

Chapter the Fifth

My goodness. More Quilp. Morning arrives and Mrs Quilp’s eyes looked “in mute appeal to the compassion and clemency of her lord.” Their relationship is an uneven one, and it is apparent that is exactly the way Daniel Quilp wants it. I think Quilp actually goes out of his way to cultivate subservience in others. Doesn’t it just make your “flesh creep” when Quilp refers to his wife as “sweet” as if she is a morsel of food to be devoured? His wife’s mother Mrs Jiniwin comes into the room. Quilp catches his mother-in-law shaking her fist at him in the mirror and she sees “the reflection of a horribly grotesque and distorted face with the tongue lolling out;” again we read of Quilp’s ugliness, his ogre-like appearance, and a further suggestion of his mouth and its consumptive-like presence. We read that for breakfast Quilp ate “hard eggs, shell and all, devoured gigantic prawns with the heads and tails on, chewed tobacco and water-cresses at the same time and with extraordinary greediness drank boiling tea without winking, bit his fork and spoon until they bent again and in short performed so many horrifying and uncommon acts that the women were nearly frightened out of their wits” so much that his wife and her mother “began to doubt whether he were really a human creature.”


Thoughts


It is evident that Dickens is creating in Quilp a grotesque character. We should always keep our eyes open to further incidences and descriptions of Quilp as being something out of a nightmare. When we couple Dickens’s description of Quilp with his earlier comment that Nell “seemed to exist in a kind of allegory” (Ch 1) we see that Dickens may well be formulating this novel to be a text that operates on both the level of a novel and to suggest something else. To what extent do you think it possible that TOCS could become a text operating on more than one level of presentation and meaning?

Quilp heads off to his counting house at the wharf and here we are confronted with his boy servant whose “eccentric spirit and having a natural taste for tumbling was now standing on his head.” Quilp tells him he will “beat [him] with a iron rod, I’ll scratch you with a rusty nail, I’ll pinch your eyes” and then proceeds to give the boy “three or four good hard knocks.” Summing up, Quilp tells the boy that if he stands on his head again “I’ll cut one of your feet off.” In a masterly stroke of understatement Dickens says that between these two there existed “a strange kind of mutual liking.”

Quilp’s counting-house is also reflective of Quilp himself. It is described as “rough and jagged and studded in many parts with broken nails.” There is also a clock that has not worked for “eighteen years.” Quilp’s servant boy announces to Quilp that there is a visitor who the boy does not recognize. This person is Nell and she brings to Quilp a letter and Quilp makes himself “acquainted with the contents.”

And so ends the chapter.


Thoughts


The world of Quilp is certainly bizarre and misshapen. The counting-house boy by his standing on his hands further defines the inverted world that Quilp not only lives in but clearly rules through intimidation, threat, and physical violence. Into this world enters Little Nell with a letter. In this chapter we have yet another meeting between Nell and Quilp that we, as readers, experience. What do you think was Dickens’s reason for showing us this meeting?

Is it too soon to conclude that we will have a battle of good versus evil with Nell as the force of good and Quilp as the force of evil?

What might be the contents of the letter?

To what degree have you noticed the switch from the first person narrator to the third person? Could the story, to this point in time, been as effective if it remained in the first person? Why or why not?


My Reflections

As our first section of reading comes to an end there are some overall thoughts I have. I found it interesting and perhaps important that we are given details of the homes and sleeping habits of both Quilp and Nell. Both their locations contain furniture and objects that are apparently useless. We are given a description in different chapters of both Nell and Quilp’s evening of sleep - or lack of it. Nell is able to sleep soundly amid the clutter of the Curiosity Shop while her father wanders away from their home. On the other hand, Quilp delights in staying awake amid the scattered objects of his home. Unlike Nell’s father who leaves her to sleep, Quilp demands his wife stay with him and suffer throughout the night. Is there any reason for these settings?

The novel begins with a first person narrator but this style is dropped at the end of Chapter the Third. We then switch to the third person narrator. This narratological shift intrigues me. Did Dickens realize the trajectory of TOCS would not support the first person narrator? Was Dickens still not prepared to use the first person narrator as his narrative voice? Does he have some plan to re-introduce the first person narrator later in the novel? I don’t think it is a spoiler to point out that Dickens would not incorporate the first person narrator again until David Copperfield. Later in his career we will read Bleak House, a novel that incorporates both a first person narrator and a third person narrator. Later still we will read Great Expectations. We

We have Dickens presenting the reader with the suggestion that this novel can be seen as allegorical. Will this alter his method of presentation? Is there a specific allegory that Dickens has in mind, or was he using the word in a broad context?

Peter wrote: "Chapter the First

At last we settle in for our reading of The Old Curiosity Shop. We will find the individual chapters somewhat shorter due to the fact this book was published in weekly, not month..."

I’ve always been fond of Dickens’s first chapter(s) as they’re not only full of imagery, or happen to set the stage for what is to follow, but there’s this enhancement to these details by means of either a first person mystery narrator or a third person omniscient one. This latter aspect breathes life into an already dreary setting making it visceral in nature. The images created are seen through the point of view of a bystander who prefers to observe people and occurrences in an environment that is absent of light, preferring the night sky, because revelation in the daylight…too often destroys an air-built castle at the moment of its completion. Dickens with his nameless first person narrator, in this chapter, has painted a picture of the Baroque persuasion: it’s full of movement, emotion, drama, it’s dark in tone and color. That is, until Nell is introduced. He props Nell up as an ethereal being, Fairy-like, or considers her to exist in an allegory like an angel, while he imagines her isolation surrounded by the strangeness of her surroundings.

Chapter 1 read to me like an intricate piece of artwork, but when stripped all away, it appears I’m essentially reading a story about a little girl living alone in a most curious of shops with her grandfather, and the impression she has made on a stranger passing by. Even in its most simple form, building upon the dualities in life, Dickens maintains an intrigue in this reader. I look forward to the rest of this section.

As an aside, one of the many things I love about this group is that we read Dickens in the original serialized format…or at least I’ve been under the impression that we do. Which format of TOCC are we reading? My copy states Chapter 1 was the first installment in the 1841 version.

Hi Ami

I agree with you. Chapter One is quite the opening chapter. To me, I see a change, an evolution, in how Dickens deals with this opening chapter in contrast to NN or OT.

I am glad you enjoy being a Curiosity along with the rest of our group. As to the reading sections that are presented to the group each week, we are aware of the original serialized versions. Ideally, reading them as originally published would be the perfect scenario. TOCS was published weekly. We considered following the original format but felt since the original chapters are generally shorter in length and fewer in number than the monthly serialization, we would be faced with a much longer time to read through the novel. We thought we may lose the rhythm and momentum needed to sustain and keep an interest in the text over a number of months. Our decision was to divide the weekly reading into five chapters per week, with a minor alteration in the last two weeks of the novel.

In a shorter novel, such as Hard Times, which was also published weekly, we were able to follow the original published format.

I hope you continue to enjoy the novel and its pace as we follow the story of Nell.

Peter wrote: "Chapter the First

At last we settle in for our reading of The Old Curiosity Shop. We will find the individual chapters somewhat shorter due to the fact this book was published in weekly, not month..."

We will, however, see in this novel Dickens attempting new stylistic features.
I'm looking forward to you pointing these out as we come upon them in the reading.

There will be times when we will see Dickens change his mind as to how to proceed, both in terms of the narrative point of view and the development of some characters.
Wow! Will it be that obvious...How curious?

Rather than replay much of the plot, I intend to highlight and focus more on individual stylistic elements of the novel, to tie together apparently disconnected bits and pieces, and offer more of my personal opinions. I hope you find this helpful.
I welcome your approach to these discussions, Peter. I'm sure I'll have plenty of questions. Book the second, as short as it is, I found to be most confusing.

The first word of the novel is “Night.” TOCS will indeed be a novel of darkness, of the grotesque, of nightmare and horror.
I automatically was drawn to the darkness of the novel, it had me thinking about "Our Mutual Friend..." even the curiosity shop in comparison to the taxidermists shop, the clutter of the oddities described all sitting in a gloomy room.

What role can the simple but apparently faithful Kit play in the novel?
Kit was a breath of fresh air as he came bouncing into the shop, but I was taken aback by how Dickens describes him as jovial and bright as he seems, there's something odd about him too. To laugh violently, he's shock headed, has wide eyes, and a turned up nose; the narrator describes Kit as the comedy in Nell's life... Kit turned into a clown-like figure quite quickly for me, and I've always thought clowns to be more creepy than comical. Hopefully, he remains true to Nell in this sense. While I was reading about Kit, initially, my thoughts went straight to Uriah Heep in "David Copperfield..." their peculiarity.

Dickens frequently incorporates a person’s residence as a physical expression of the people who live within it. How does the Old Curiosity Shop complement the characters of grandfather Trent and Little Nell?
In this instance, Peter, the residence of the shop further enhances the character of Nell...like our narrator, the shop too elevates Nell's character as an outlier amongst her surroundings.

Who is Nell?
Trying to answer this question brings about more questions in my mind. While I read Chapter 1, I could not help but be as worried as the narrator at finding this lonely girl on a street corner at night. They strike up a relationship easy enough, but I was most struck by realizing Nell was not found to be where she was by mistake...she was on a mission, on an excursion of sorts where she became lost, she was following an order, if I read it correctly. What purpose does a little girl serve on the night streets of London, a long ways away from the shop? Also, Kit too arrives back at the shop around the same time...was he too out on the same excursion as Nell? Grandfather does say to Kit something along the lines of "it was a long ways wasn't it," which is why I thought so.

I missed the birds, Peter! Agh! I'll go back and reread it.

Peter wrote: "Chapter the Second


In the next few chapters we will be meeting some of the main characters in the novel. We will pause to take a look at them as they will form the nexus of our story. First, howe..."

What were your first impressions of Fred Trent and Dick Swiveller?
I was surprised by Fred, that Nell was not an only child. I was disheartened by the disrespect for his grandfather with whom he has no problems asking for a couple pieces of tin. Fred seems entitled and of poor form, considering how he treats his grandfather and with whom he keeps company.

Money, or the lack of it, seems to be a major issue in this chapter. What evidence is there that the grandfather has as much money as Fred seems to think?
There's that assumption where some think having one's own business is a direct correlation to having money, or perhaps, grandfather is a miser?

Who do you think is speaking the truth, or at least the closest version to the truth?
Keeping in mind Fred's behavior towards his grandfather and ask of him and the type of person Dick Swiveller appears to be, I believe the Grandfather. However, this doesn't mean to say grandfather doesn't have the money Fred seems to think he does. Grandfather could be a miser, living under the disguise of poor man. Maybe he thinks he has to live this way to ward off people like Fred.

What suggestions are there so far in the novel that the grandfather is not financially secure?
He clearly has assets, but it's obvious the business is not thriving. I don't think he's as liquid as Fred thinks him to be.

I found the line “would be relieved if you were dead” to be a harsh statement for a grandfather to speak to his grandson.
I do too, but I don't think this is Fred's first visit to his grandfather's shop. I can't imagine being as old as the grandfather, and as young and able bodied as Fred...to cause an old man grief the way Fred does, to be entitled as he is. Fred is just as cruel if not more so because he should know better, act better, and he does not. To wish for Fred's death is vile in nature, but I wonder if grandfather doesn't really wish for his own death...no longer having to deal with Fred, or because he may have failed Fred while saving Nell? I don't know, it's still too early to tell.

I thought the dynamics in this chapter to be so odd, especially because the narrator is back at the shop witnessing the argument like a fly on the wall. Both grandson and grandfather proceed with their biting words for one another as if they're the only ones in the room when quite clearly, they are not! Earlier we wonder who is Nell, but I've always thought...who is this narrator, is he so strange that he blends in that well in the dark streets...in this curiosity shop?
Yes, he is distressed by what he's watching; but, it's also comical in a sense picturing him sinking further and further into his seat, eyes batting left and right, while the argument ensues. At least this is the way I imagine it. There's a drawing in my book depicting this particular scene, I'm not sure if he's the one sitting or standing, it's possible I missed this detail.

Aside from the "dirty smartness" comment about our socially lubricated friend/nemisis, Dick Swiverller, I was rather confused by by him. His contribution to the argument between grandfather and grandson, I didn't understand the point. His speech was convoluted, too wordy, full of false airs...like a bad salesman, a swindler. You're right, I should keep my eyes on him, he appears to be a snake...those who have nothing to lose, including self-respect, are the most dangerous type of people.

Still have some reading to do in this week's allotment. See you soon.

Peter wrote: "Hi Ami

I agree with you. Chapter One is quite the opening chapter. To me, I see a change, an evolution, in how Dickens deals with this opening chapter in contrast to NN or OT.

I am glad you enjoy..."

Got it. Thanks.

Ami wrote: "Kit was a breath of fresh air as he came bouncing into the shop, but I was taken aback by how Dickens describes him as jovial and bright as he seems, there's something odd about him too. To laugh violently, he's shock headed, has wide eyes, and a turned up nose; the narrator describes Kit as the comedy in Nell's life... Kit turned into a clown-like figure quite quickly for me, and I've always thought clowns to be more creepy than comical."

Same. I didn't have to read very far before I remembered why I quit reading OCS early on the first time I tried. I know people have strong feelings about Nell, but I don't mind her so much--there's not enough of her in these early chapters to mind. What did make me want to quit reading was how grotesque all the other characters are. As Ami points out, there's something disturbing about Kit, who's supposed to be the relief note. The grandfather seems to me extremely selfish--he puts Nell into danger and then leaves her by herself unguarded every night, but what's he offended about? That the narrator suggests he's not taking care of her well. He *isn't* taking care of her well, but it's all about him and his sense of pride, not her well being--he cares less that she's being neglected than that the narrator thinks he's a lousy guardian. I'm with Fred in thinking the grandfather mostly just lets Nell wait on him (granted this is not how the grandfather sees it, but in practice, that's precisely what's going on), but obviously Fred's only out for his own interest as well, or he would take care of Nell himself, instead of using her as his leverage over their grandfather. And then there's Quilp. I could take some delight in just how demonic Quilp is, but it's just miserable watching him abuse his wife, especially since her mother is no help to her at all--quite the opposite really. Also I hate that Dickens made Quilp a dwarf, as if dwarves didn't face enough prejudice without his help. I am currently also reading Hard Times, with a dwarf (Childers) in it who comes off as smarter and more compassionate than anyone else in the book so far, and reading OCS next to this makes me wonder if this was atonement on Dickens's part, the way people argue sometimes that Our Mutual Friend tries to atone for his treatment of Jews in earlier books.

ANYWAY--rant over. If I were to put a more positive spin on it, Dickens promised us a shop full of grotesques and that's what we're getting. Also I am really enjoying Peter's insightful introduction, and hoping that if I read this more as an allegory of types than as about real people with real feelings, it will go down more easily.

I also do find myself wondering whether that first-person narrator is coming back, and what was the infirmity he mentioned?

Oh, dear. I'm already behind, and have not even finished the first chapter yet. Therefore, I've also not read this discussion. I do hope you've addressed the first-person narration, as that's what's jumped out at me in chapter one. I googled it, and was interested by what I found, but won't go further about that for now in case it might be a spoiler.

It seems like Dickens jumped right into the story for this novel, which I quite enjoy. He still set the atmosphere with descriptive passages but, perhaps because of the narrator, it didn't seem as tedious to me as it often does (forgive me -- I know many of you are fans of CD's more descriptive passages, where I prefer a little less of that to dialogue).

Anyhow... now that I've finished a couple of non-Dickens books that I'd been reading, I'll try to catch up!

Julie wrote: "Ami wrote: "Kit was a breath of fresh air as he came bouncing into the shop, but I was taken aback by how Dickens describes him as jovial and bright as he seems, there's something odd about him too..."

Hi Julie

Great rant. You have touched on many issues that we will need to address as the novel moves along. Thank you. I agree that the presentation of Quilp is unsettling and distasteful. This is due, in part I think, to the time difference between when the novel was first written and our much more advanced, informed, and sensitive insights into the treatment of others. Quilp is a man from a nightmare. His living quarters, his expressions, his aggressive physical actions towards his wife are all repellent. As we progress through the novel I think we will discover that Dickens has a deeper and darker purpose in store for him (and his readers).

I do think that to approach this novel as an extended allegory is both instructive and helpful. It may even ease the pain of our perception of Nell. In the coming weeks I will suggest we look at the novel from a Jungian perspective, but we don’t have enough material for a good discussion yet.

I like the first chapter and the idea of a shop with strange "curiosities" in it.

Nell's tiny bed in the closet reminds me of Harry Potter who slept in a cupboard under the stairs. It's fairy tale-like.

It's interesting how the grandfather's love for Nell is brought into question. The grandfather was too defensive, which makes me wonder what's going on. He loves Nell, but is clearly insecure. Their living arrangement is precarious.

Is Kit with the violent laughter another Charlie Bates? I wonder what his function will be.

That was creepy when Quilp made his wife stay up all night, while he sat there smoking, for no other reason than to intimidate her. Sleep deprivation is a tactic used by cults and abusive people to control others. His violence and verbal abuse to the boy were horrible too (threatening, hitting, calling him "dog").

Quilp is the worst villain I've seen so far, making Fagin and Ralph look meek by comparison.

I have to admit I laughed at the eating scene, when Quilp ate eggs with the shells on, drank boiling tea, and other crazy things. Also, when he smiled and shook himself like a dog,

"The pleasure of this discovery called up the old doglike smile in full force. When he had quite done with it, he shook himself in a very doglike manner, and rejoined the ladies."

Maybe he's not human, but a monster or demon in this fairy tale. That would explain his evil and unnatural acts.

I'm just getting started, so the initial comments and Peter's introduction have been insightful for me.

I must admit, having read so much biographical and critical material through the years, I have already prejudged this work as weak and unsatisfactory compared to his entire canon.

The Cambridge Companions to great authors may be a highly considered series, but it can have the effect of pushing you away as much as it draws you in.

Alissa wrote: "I like the first chapter and the idea of a shop with strange "curiosities" in it.

Nell's tiny bed in the closet reminds me of Harry Potter who slept in a cupboard under the stairs. It's fairy tale..."

Hi Alissa

I never thought of the Nell and Harry Potter link(s). Perhaps more to come.

The world of allegory gives us much area to explore.

John wrote: "I'm just getting started, so the initial comments and Peter's introduction have been insightful for me.

I must admit, having read so much biographical and critical material through the years, I ha..."

Hi John

TOCS has struggled to keep its head above water with many. It is a novel of some length so it may wear down many of us as we get deeper and deeper into it. While it does not rank in my top Dickens novels, I find it has many avenues of interest and approach. I hope to suggest some ideas that will make our reading worthwhile.

No doubt Kim and I will have to employ our best skills of persuasion in the next while. If for no other reason, I hope that the Curiosities will enjoy the illustrations. The original illustrations are diverse, entertaining, and highly suggestive of how to read the text and intuit its story. Not to give a spoiler, but rather to create some anticipation, I think one of the Cattermole illustrations we will view is one of best in all of Dickens.

Alissa wrote: "I have to admit I laughed at the eating scene, when Quilp ate eggs with the shells on, drank boiling tea, and other crazy things. Also, when he smiled and shook himself like a dog,

"The pleasure o..."

And to think there is much more to come ... :-)

Peter wrote: "The original illustrations are diverse, entertaining, and highly suggestive"

Peter, you missed a few more things that the illustrations are, annoying and time consuming. Because TOCS was published weekly instead of the good old slow monthly, Dickens felt that one illustrator couldn't keep up. I feel the same way. So instead of one illustrator he hired four, and now we have more illustrations than we would have the usual way he published which usually had two or perhaps three illustrations a month. More than this, Phiz added more illustrations to the book than he had in the serial printings, so searching for them isn't always easy, some of my favorite places for them don't have them, my book even has more text than places online do. And that is before anyone else with a pencil or a paintbrush gave it a try. I already have a dozen of them for this week and while there are more I think that's enough. We'll see, I didn't even get to Kyd yet. :-)

(Don't worry I'm still having fun though, especially with the illustrations that show poor, sweet, Little Nell exactly the way that would annoy Tristram the most.) :-)

Alissa wrote: "That was creepy when Quilp made his wife stay up all night, while he sat there smoking, for no other reason than to intimidate her. Sleep deprivation is a tactic used by cults and abusive people to..."

I agree, Squeers was at the top of my list of villains, but at least he loved his wife and children in his own awful way. Queers is mean to everyone.

John wrote: "I'm just getting started, so the initial comments and Peter's introduction have been insightful for me.

I must admit, having read so much biographical and critical material through the years, I have already prejudged this work as weak and unsatisfactory ..."

Grump. :-)

Kim wrote: "Peter wrote: "The original illustrations are diverse, entertaining, and highly suggestive"

Peter, you missed a few more things that the illustrations are, annoying and time consuming. Because TOCS..."

Kim

Ultimately, it is all about Nell. The illustrations only featuring her should bring everyone to our side of the argument. Fingers crossed ...

Mary Lou wrote: "Oh, dear. I'm already behind, and have not even finished the first chapter yet. Therefore, I've also not read this discussion. I do hope you've addressed the first-person narration, as that's what'..."

Were we not told in the first few chapters who the narrator is? I can't remember, I've known it for a long time, but I've read TOCS often and can't remember if it tells us in the novel or what "surrounds the novel".

Alissa wrote: "I have to admit I laughed at the eating scene, when Quilp ate eggs with the shells on, drank boiling tea, and other crazy things. Also, when he smiled and shook himself like a dog,

"The pleasure o..."

Once upon a time my sister decided to cook. I guess she didn't really decide to, she had to, her husband began a new job working different hours so he wasn't home in the mornings to make breakfast for their daughter before she went to school. So it was up to my sister to make her a nice breakfast before she left for first grade, I think a bowl of cereal would have been better, but it had always been scrambled eggs and toast, and scrambled eggs and toast it was going to be. A few weeks went by and my niece told me she didn't want to eat her mom's eggs anymore they were too crunchy. Crunchy? why are they crunchy? She didn't know so I asked my sister and she said she couldn't understand it, she smashed the shells up until they were in little pieces, but my niece still complained. I think the cereal started after that.

Once upon a time I called my sister to tell her what time our Thanksgiving dinner would be ready the next day, but she said they weren't coming she was going to make their own this year. Hmm, well OK, I'll see you later. The next day I got a call from her:

"Kim, do I put the can of corn in the microwave the way it is now or should take the lid off first?"

I don't remember what I answered, but the next year they were at our place for Thanksgiving and every year since.

Once upon a time we were having our annual Fourth of July picnic and my sister told me she was making potato salad. Hmm, OK, see you there. And that's what she did, brought a big bowl of potato salad. My husband got the first spoon full and when he took a bite he had a strange look on his face, when I asked him what was wrong he told me the potatoes were raw.

Kim wrote: "Alissa wrote: "I have to admit I laughed at the eating scene, when Quilp ate eggs with the shells on, drank boiling tea, and other crazy things. Also, when he smiled and shook himself like a dog..."

Kim, those are some good stories! One time, the fish sticks I cooked caught fire, but that is nothing compared to eggshell omelettes. :-)

Peter wrote: "TOCS has struggled to keep its head above water with many. It is a novel of some length so it may wear down many of us as we get deeper and deeper into it..."

I am determined to make it through this time, out of sheer stubbornness if nothing else! But I'm also hoping to discover some new angles worth pursuing.

I am presently reading Dickens's Artistic Daughter Katey: Her Life, Loves & Impact. by Lucinda Hawksley. In it is a comment Dickens made to his son-in-law about creating character. “[W]hen I had shadowed a certain course for one of my characters to pursue,” wrote Dickens, “the character took possession of me and made me do exactly the contrary to what I had originally intended.” Regrettably, Dickens does not identify the specific character, but it is interesting to learn that on at least one occasion a character dictated to Dickens what was to become of his/her fictional destiny.

Perhaps we will meet such a character in this novel.

Hello everyone,

First of all, I‘d like to express my thanks to Peter for his very lavish and enthusiastic introduction into the first five chapters of our new group read. I am really looking forward to exploring the depths and dark nooks of The Old Curiosity Shop with you all, although I must confess that it is not one of my favourite novels. Peter‘s promises, however, have made me curious, and the spirit with which he presented to us the first few chapters is most certainly catching.

Since our colleague John has already been called a grump in the course of this thread, and since I lay a kind of jealous claim on grumpiness myself, I will not lose any time of pointing out certain things I dislike about the characters:

1) Grandfather Trent is a lachrymose, egoistic and hypocritical man who fails to inspire me with anything remotely akin to sympathy or pity or kindness. He has no qualms whatsoever of sending his granddaughter across the metropolis to run errands for him and risk losing her way into the bargain. She is apparently not very familiar with people, either, or why else should she have entrusted herself into the hands of the first-person narrator to lead her back home. This grandfather is definitely very thoughtless, and not only does he have his granddaughter run errands for him, but he also leaves her alone every single night. He also exercises moral pressure on her, as will be exemplified by the following situation:

“‘Ah!‘ said the old man turning to me with a sigh, as if I had spoken to him but that moment, ‘you don't know what you say when you tell me that I don't consider her.‘

‘You must not attach too great weight to a remark founded on first appearances, my friend,‘ said I.

‘No,‘ returned the old man thoughtfully, ‘no. Come hither, Nell.‘

The little girl hastened from her seat, and put her arm about his neck.

‘Do I love thee, Nell?‘ said he. ‘Say--do I love thee, Nell, or no?‘

The child only answered by her caresses, and laid her head upon his breast.

‘Why dost thou sob?‘ said the grandfather, pressing her closer to him and glancing towards me. ‚Is it because thou know’st I love thee, and dost not like that I should seem to doubt it by my question? Well, well - then let us say I love thee dearly.‘“

Well, is this not a case of moral and emotional manipulation, this old man calling the young girl to bear testimony of his own love for her in front of a half-stranger? What a cheap effect, besides!

Another cheap effect is achieved when Old Trent makes the narrator enter into the quarrel between himself and his grandson, the dissolute Fred. I‘d say that family quarrels should remain within the family, but Old Trent addresses the narrator, saying that he has come just in time since his grandson is the man to murder him one day. Drawing a stranger into a private conversation is bad style - as can be seen in Fred himself, who has availed himself of the company of Dick Swiveller.

I will certainly keep a keen eye on grandfather Trent because I don‘t trust him.

2) Little Nell is already beginning to get on my nerves. You call her an allegory, and I must confess that I am not overly familiar with the exact definition of what an allegory is, mixing it up with all sorts of other literary terms more often than not. However, if Little Nell is an allegory, I‘ll no longer do so because in that case I can tell an allegory from any other figure of speech by the amount of tears an allegory seems to weep and its inclination to sob its way through the day.

Let‘s just consider this example:

“‘Oh, yes, I don’t mind that, but I am a little frightened now, for I had lost my road.‘

‘And what made you ask it of me? Suppose I should tell you wrong?‘

‘I am sure you will not do that,‘ said the little creature, ‘you are such a very old gentleman, and walk so slow yourself.‘

I cannot describe how much I was impressed by this appeal and the energy with which it was made, which brought a tear into the child's clear eye, and made her slight figure tremble as she looked up into my face.“

She is a fourteen-year old girl, and pointing out that she trusted in the narrator because he is old and walks slow himself brings a tear into her eyes! If I had a penny for every situation in which Little Nell all of a sudden has a tear in her eyes, I would be able to buy Gad‘s Hill in no time. Now I know that Dickens had a soft spot for sentimentality, but in Little Nell‘s case, he surely overdid it. In the first five chapters, I think Little Nell cries or sobs or sheds the odd tear at least four times. Kerchief vendors in her vicinity will never have to worry about their incomes!

3) Quilp is also a bit over-the-top, isn‘t he? It was this above-quoted meal of his, when he was depicted as eating the eggs with the shells and drinking the tea boiling hot that I started to ask myself whether we can really take this character seriously. He is an arch-villain, but on the other hand he has the redeeming quality of being too grotesque to resemble any real human being. Just compare him to Ralph Nickleby, who is also a downright blackguard, but who could still be a person you might run into tomorrow. You‘ll never run into anyone like Quilp, though.

Okay, after venting my spleen on the novel for a while, I‘ll promise to tell you what I like about it tomorrow or the day after tomorrow ;-)

Tristram wrote: "although I must confess that it is not one of my favourite novels."

Really? I never would have guessed.

Tristram wrote: "Grandfather Trent is a lachrymose, egoistic and hypocritical man"

Grandfather Trent is an ass.

OK, here we go.

Illustrations for The Old Curiosity Shop, which appeared in Dickens weekly Master Humphrey's Clock, were engraved in wood and dropped into the text. The names of the engravers Landells and Gray can be seen along with the initials of the illustrators: George Cattermole and Hablot Browne, with a single illustration each from Samuel Williams and Daniel Maclise.



The Old Curiosity Shop

Chapter 1

George Cattermole

Text Illustrated:

A part of this door was of glass unprotected by any shutter, which I did not observe at first, for all was very dark and silent within, and I was anxious (as indeed the child was also) for an answer to our summons. When she had knocked twice or thrice there was a noise as if some person were moving inside, and at length a faint light appeared through the glass which, as it approached very slowly, the bearer having to make his way through a great many scattered articles, enabled me to see both what kind of person it was who advanced and what kind of place it was through which he came.

It was an old man with long grey hair, whose face and figure as he held the light above his head and looked before him as he approached, I could plainly see. Though much altered by age, I fancied I could recognize in his spare and slender form something of that delicate mould which I had noticed in the child. Their bright blue eyes were certainly alike, but his face was so deeply furrowed and so very full of care, that here all resemblance ceased.

The place through which he made his way at leisure was one of those receptacles for old and curious things which seem to crouch in odd corners of this town and to hide their musty treasures from the public eye in jealousy and distrust. There were suits of mail standing like ghosts in armour here and there, fantastic carvings brought from monkish cloisters, rusty weapons of various kinds, distorted figures in china and wood and iron and ivory: tapestry and strange furniture that might have been designed in dreams. The haggard aspect of the little old man was wonderfully suited to the place; he might have groped among old churches and tombs and deserted houses and gathered all the spoils with his own hands. There was nothing in the whole collection but was in keeping with himself nothing that looked older or more worn than he.

As he turned the key in the lock, he surveyed me with some astonishment which was not diminished when he looked from me to my companion. The door being opened, the child addressed him as grandfather, and told him the little story of our companionship.

‘Why, bless thee, child,’ said the old man, patting her on the head, ‘how couldst thou miss thy way? What if I had lost thee, Nell!’

‘I would have found my way back to you, grandfather,’ said the child boldly; ‘never fear.’

The old man kissed her, then turning to me and begging me to walk in, I did so. The door was closed and locked. Preceding me with the light, he led me through the place I had already seen from without, into a small sitting-room behind, in which was another door opening into a kind of closet, where I saw a little bed that a fairy might have slept in, it looked so very small and was so prettily arranged. The child took a candle and tripped into this little room, leaving the old man and me together.

‘You must be tired, sir,’ said he as he placed a chair near the fire, ‘how can I thank you?’

Commentary:

Because he and his publishers, Chapman and Hall, were about to embark upon a weekly serialization which would require quick turnaround from the illustrator and woodblock engraver, Charles Dickens determined to assemble a small team of artists for his next novel, The Old Curiosity Shop, the weekly installment of which would be the principal feature of Master Humphrey's Clock (1840-41) from the fourth number, a publishing experiment in a style of periodical harking back to Oliver Goldsmith's The Bee and Joseph Addison and Richard Steele's The Tatler and The Spectator in the eighteenth century. However, having failed to attract other contributors to provide the ingredients of a typical miscellany — poems, essays, and short stories, Dickens by the seventh number realized that it was his serialized novel and nothing else that the public was demanding. From the twelfth number of the weekly magazine, Dickens used Master Humphrey's Clock merely as a vehicle for publishing weekly installments of the novel.

Although the mode of illustration upon which Dickens had decided for his novel, the woodblock, offered the advantage of being printed with the text rather than on a separate page, it was time-consuming to execute so that a single illustrator — Hablot Knight Browne or "Phiz" had become his usual collaborator — would not be equal to the task. The collaborative team (or "Clock Works" as Dickens dubbed it) consisted of Samuel Williams (1788-1853) and Daniel Maclise (1807-1870) supporting the chief illustrators, George Cattermole (1800-1868) and Phiz. However, in the end the supporting artists contributed only a single plate each while Phiz contributed the designs for most of the plates and Cattermole contributed fourteen drawings for ten plates and tail-pieces.

Since Cattermole's strength lay in the depiction of architectural backdrops as opposed to character drawings, his plates are set largely indoors; his execution of the old curiosity itself is highly effective. With his antiquarian and architectural bent, Cattermole was the logical choice for executing what Valerie Lester Browne describes as the story's "loftier" subjects, including the highly emotional scene of Nell's death. Jane Rabb Cohen has described the scenes that Dickens allotted to Cattermole and Brown respectively as "picturesque" and "grotesque". Chapman and Hall published the first volume edition of The Old Curiosity Shop on 15 December 1841, priced at thirteen shillings and printed from the Clock's stereotype plates.

The door being opened, the child addressed him as her grandfather

Chapter 1

Charles Green

Scenes and Characters from the Works of Charles Dickens

Text Illustrated:

It was an old man with long grey hair, whose face and figure as he held the light above his head and looked before him as he approached, I could plainly see. Though much altered by age, I fancied I could recognize in his spare and slender form something of that delicate mould which I had noticed in the child. Their bright blue eyes were certainly alike, but his face was so deeply furrowed and so very full of care, that here all resemblance ceased.

The place through which he made his way at leisure was one of those receptacles for old and curious things which seem to crouch in odd corners of this town and to hide their musty treasures from the public eye in jealousy and distrust. There were suits of mail standing like ghosts in armour here and there, fantastic carvings brought from monkish cloisters, rusty weapons of various kinds, distorted figures in china and wood and iron and ivory: tapestry and strange furniture that might have been designed in dreams. The haggard aspect of the little old man was wonderfully suited to the place; he might have groped among old churches and tombs and deserted houses and gathered all the spoils with his own hands. There was nothing in the whole collection but was in keeping with himself nothing that looked older or more worn than he.

As he turned the key in the lock, he surveyed me with some astonishment which was not diminished when he looked from me to my companion. The door being opened, the child addressed him as grandfather, and told him the little story of our companionship.

"Do I love thee, Nell," said he; "say do I love thee, Nell, or not?"

Chapter 1

Felix O. C. Darley

1861

Text Illustrated:

The old man had again relapsed into his former abstraction and took no notice of what passed, but I remarked that when her laugh was over, the child's bright eyes were dimmed with tears, called forth by the fullness of heart with which she welcomed her uncouth favourite after the little anxiety of the night. As for Kit himself (whose laugh had been all the time one of that sort which very little would change into a cry) he carried a large slice of bread and meat and a mug of beer into a corner, and applied himself to disposing of them with great voracity.

"Ah!"said the old man turning to me with a sigh, as if I had spoken to him but that moment, "you don't know what you say when you tell me that I don't consider her."

"You must not attach too great weight to a remark founded on first appearances, my friend," said I. "No," returned the old man thoughtfully, "no. Come hither, Nell."

The little girl hastened from her seat, and put her arm about his neck.

"Do I love thee, Nell?"said he. "Say — do I love thee, Nell, or no?"

The child only answered by her caresses, and laid her head upon his breast. —Vol. 1, Chapter 1

Commentary:

Just as the passage from the opening chapter of The Old Curiosity Shop, first published on 25 April 1840 as the first installment in Dickens's own weekly journal Master Humphrey's Clock, so the Darley illustration demonstrates the deep sympathy of little Nell for her grandfather that becomes the basis for the story's role reversal in which the child becomes guardian and caregiver. The Darley frontispiece is a realistic reworking on the first illustration in the novel, Cattermole's. The door being opened, the child addressed the old man as her grandfather, and told him the little story of our companionship, which offers so much detail that the three human figures (Kit Nubbles is not in evidence) are lost in the stage properties, which include two suits of armor, copious furnishings, and almost nowhere for Grandfather Trent to sit. The addition of Kit Nubbles proved less of a problem for Darley than the issue of how much bric-a-brac to include as Phiz had already given him a useful image in Kit at Home in Chapter 10.

Here they are in the shop kept by Grandfather Trent, with the assistance of the shop-boy, Kit Nubbles, "a shock-headed shambling awkward lad with an uncommonly wide mouth", depicted as consuming some bread, meat, and a glass of something (in the text, Dickens specifies "a mug of beer"). The fourth and dominant figure in the 1861 Darley illustration is the narrator, Master Humphrey himself. In the background are the medieval armor and weapons which are the specialty of the shop:

There were suits of mail, standing like ghosts in armor, here and there; fantastic carvings brought from monkish cloisters; rusty weapons of various kinds; distorted figures in china, and wood, and iron; and ivory; tapestry and strange furniture that might have been designed in dreams.

At best, Darley merely suggests the diverse contents of the shop, so that the shield and morning-star above Kit and Master Humphrey, the plate armor and pike behind little Nell and her grandfather, the carved chair and table, and the crossbow and firelock pistol in the foreground are mere metonymies for the items in Dickens's catalog. The novelty in Darley's frontispiece is the presence of "the single gentleman," Master Humphrey. Although usually thought of as "a misshapen, deformed old man," Master Humphrey in this composition, despite his cane and eighteenth-century mode of dress, seems more vigorous, the kind of man capable (like Charles Dickens himself) of walking miles at night.

The Old Curiosity Shop

Myles Birket Foster (1882)

About the artist:

Myles Birket Foster was an English genre artist, best known for his Victorian-era illustrations of rural scenes and children. Born on February 4, 1825 in North Shields, England, Foster was celebrated as one of the most popular watercolor artist of the era. His idealized, sepia-toned countryside prints and paintings were popularized and reproduced on the cover of books, magazines, and chocolate boxes. Developing a love for the arts through apprenticing under the engraver Ebenezer Landells, Foster quickly moved from commercial printing to the fine arts. An autodidactic watercolor painter, he traveled throughout Europe to immerse himself in varied environments, finally settling in Witley, England where he produced the works which brought him widespread recognition. Before his death on March 27, 1899 in Weybridge, England, Foster exhibited over 400 paintings at the Royal Academy of Arts in London.

Nell In Bed

The Child In Her Gentle Slumber

Chapter 1

Samuel Williams

Text Illustrated:

We are so much in the habit of allowing impressions to be made upon us by external objects, which should be roduced by reflection alone, but which, without such visible aids, often escape us; that I am not sure I should have been so thoroughly possessed by this one subject, but for the heaps of fantastic things I had seen huddled together in the curiosity dealer's warehouse. These, crowding upon my mind, in connexion with the child, and gathering round her, as it were, brought her condition palpably before me. I had her image, without any effort of imagination, surrounded and beset by everything that was foreign to its nature, and furthest removed from the sympathies of her sex and age. If these helps to my fancy had all been wanting, and I had been forced to imagine her in a common chamber, with nothing unusual or uncouth in its apperance, it is very probable that I should have been less impressed with her strange and solitary state. As it was, she seemed to exist in a kind of allegory; and having these shapes about her, claimed my interest so strongly, that (as I have already remarked) I could not dismiss her from my recollection, do what I would.

'It would be a curious speculation,' said I, after some restless turns across and across the room, 'to imagine her in her future life, holding her solitary way among a crowd of wild grotesque companions; the only pure, fresh, youthful object in the throng. It would be curious to find - '

I checked myself here, for the theme was carrying me along with it at a great pace, and I already saw before me a region on which I was little disposed to enter. I agreed with myself that this was idle musing, and resolved to go to bed, and court forgetfulness.

But all that night, waking or in my sleep, the same thoughts recurred and the same images retained possession of my brain. I had ever before me the old dark murky rooms - the gaunt suits of mail with their ghostly silent asir - the faces all awry, grinning from wood and stone - the dust and rust, and worm that lives in wood - and alone in the midst of all this lumber and decay, and ugly age, the beautiful child in her gentle slumber, smiling through her light and sunny dreams.

Commentary:

Samuel Williams was a skilled wood engraver who had cut several blocks for Master Humphrey's Clock. When Hablot Browne and George Cattermole were both unavailable to draw a needed illustration for The Old Curiosity Shop, Dickens asked Williams to draw it. Dickens was reportedly pleased with the result but Williams never did another illustration for Dickens.

In The Old Curiosity Shop, Little Nell Trent is a symbolic child figure clearly distinct from her uncongenial environment. In the inserted paragraphs for the 1841 edition, Dickens tells us that “she seemed to exist in a kind of Allegory…the only pure, fresh, youthful object in the throng” (OCS, 20). The separation of Nell from her surroundings is a prominent image in the novel and Dickens underscores this fact by having her read The Pilgrim’s Progress at the first opportunity during her journey away from London into the countryside. Nell certainly shares key traits with Bunyan’s Christian in that they are both allegorical figures of good, in narrative trajectories which require them to negotiate unsavoury landscapes, and fend off temptations and vice from other characters. In other words, both Nell and Christian are allegorical figures alienated from the world. The description of Nell as seeming to “exist in a kind of allegory” is a significant passage in the novel which undergoes a few rounds of revision during Dickens’s writing process, as Dickens’s conception of Nell’s isolation from her surrounds evolves and becomes more overt. A close study of the passage’s revision history will reveal Dickens’s evolving understanding and presentation of the figure of the unprotected and separated child figure.

This “allegory” section occurs at the close of the first chapter, where Nell is depicted sleeping, and surrounded by the clutter of her grandfather’s old curiosity shop. Dickens works in tandem with his illustrators and reviewers, in depicting Nell as an increasingly threatened and separated figure of good through each revision. In the original version of the scene, written sometime between 8 and 25 March 1840, the figure of Nell is simply described thus:

“alone in the midst of all this lumber and decay and ugly age, the beautiful child in her gentle slumber, smiling through her light and sunny dreams” (OCS, 20).

This is the most unelaborated version of Nell as an allegory of good. Even though her youth is discordant with her lifeless surroundings, her positive smile emanates through the darkness.The first revision, and in this case, elaboration, of the same passage occurs in Dickens’s instructions to his illustrator Samuel Williams, whose first attempt at portraying the sleeping Nell failed to fit Dickens’s vision. In his letter to Williams, Dickens reiterates that his object is to

“shew the child in the midst of a crowd of uncongenial and ancient things… If the composition would admit of a few grim, ugly articles seen through a doorway beyond, for instance, and giving a notion of great gloom outside the little room and surrounding the chamber, it would be much better.” (Dickens, Letter to Samuel Williams, 31 March 1840.)

Nell’s alienation and separateness from her surroundings however, sets her apart as a beacon of light within her unsavoury environment. In the illustration, the brighter and softer hue of the girl in her bed is centralized and clearly standing out from amongst the darkness. By setting up the contrast between the illuminated Nell and her oppressively dark surrounds, the young heroine of the novel is not only an idealized figure, but also one that appears grossly unprotected. The utter incompatibility between Nell and the physical objects around her is a direct response to Dickens’s instructions to the illustrator, to show “the child in the midst of a crowd of uncongenial and ancient things”. (Dickens, Letter to Samuel Williams, 31 March 1840). This idealization is however a double-edged sword that serves not merely to venerate her, but, because she is represented as such a bright and attractive figure, draws unwelcome attention to her physical body.

The iconography of the Williams illustration contains not just cluttered objects of war, death and decay, but many of these are strange and oppressive male figures. Within the murky darkness at the top centre, the silhouette of a tall knight hovers. At the bottom right is a mask of a clown with a hideous grin. Moving across to the left, a Roman senator snarls at the sleeping girl. Finally, on the mantelpiece at the top left are two exotic “Oriental” male figures staring straight into Nell’s bed. The crowded objects that give Nell her “claustrophobic” nightmare now extend beyond Chris Brook’s description of the “oppressiveness of the world of physical objects”, to include an overwhelming masculine energy pressing upon the young girl

That this uncomfortable scene seems a projection of dark male fantasy is not confined to these awful objects alone. The figure of the sleeping Nell actually exists entirely in the imagination of the novel’s narrator, haunting the dreams of Master Humphrey, who pictures the sleeping Nell as “the only pure, fresh, youthful object” among “a crowd of wild grotesque companions” (OCS, 20). While the crippled and aged Master Humphrey is probably not a figure whom readers would expect to exude erotic energy, the fact that the image of the sleeping Nell is so much dictated and organized by the male vision speaks of her disadvantaged position within the male-dominated world. It underscores a version of childhood she embodies that is vulnerable, innocent and in need for protection.

Nell is the archetype of the child who is “not-over-particularly-taken-care-of”, as a result of her “holding her solitary ways among a crowd of wild grotesque companions” (OCS, 20), as well as her representation as the young and ideal female figure amidst an oppressively male-centered world. I think that the constant depictions, whether in Dickens’s text or Williams’s iconography, of the separateness of Nell from her oppressive and threatening surrounds, underscore the dangers an innocent child faces in the real world. The representation of Nell as the allegory of “the only pure, fresh, youthful object in the throng” (OCS, 20) and the underscoring of her status as an unprotected female within a crowd of oppressive masculine energy has autobiographical resonances for Dickens.

Harold Copping

From Dicken's Dream Children by Mary Angela Dickens and Others

Here's the link to the book, but if you read it, it has lots of spoilers.

https://archive.org/details/dickensdr...

Mr. Swiveller seeks to gain attention

Chapter 2

Phiz

Text Illustrated:

The old man sat himself down in a chair, and with folded hands, looked sometimes at his grandson and sometimes at his strange companion, as if he were utterly powerless and had no resource but to leave them to do as they pleased. The young man reclined against a table at no great distance from his friend, in apparent indifference to everything that had passed; and I—who felt the difficulty of any interference, notwithstanding that the old man had appealed to me, both by words and looks—made the best feint I could of being occupied in examining some of the goods that were disposed for sale, and paying very little attention to a person before me.

The silence was not of long duration, for Mr Swiveller, after favouring us with several melodious assurances that his heart was in the Highlands, and that he wanted but his Arab steed as a preliminary to the achievement of great feats of valour and loyalty, removed his eyes from the ceiling and subsided into prose again.

‘Fred,’ said Mr Swiveller stopping short, as if the idea had suddenly occurred to him, and speaking in the same audible whisper as before, ‘is the old min friendly?’

‘What does it matter?’ returned his friend peevishly.

‘No, but is he?’ said Dick.

‘Yes, of course. What do I care whether he is or not?’

Emboldened as it seemed by this reply to enter into a more general conversation, Mr Swiveller plainly laid himself out to captivate our attention.

He began by remarking that soda-water, though a good thing in the abstract, was apt to lie cold upon the stomach unless qualified with ginger, or a small infusion of brandy, which latter article he held to be preferable in all cases, saving for the one consideration of expense. Nobody venturing to dispute these positions, he proceeded to observe that the human hair was a great retainer of tobacco-smoke, and that the young gentlemen of Westminster and Eton, after eating vast quantities of apples to conceal any scent of cigars from their anxious friends, were usually detected in consequence of their heads possessing this remarkable property; when he concluded that if the Royal Society would turn their attention to the circumstance, and endeavour to find in the resources of science a means of preventing such untoward revelations, they might indeed be looked upon as benefactors to mankind. These opinions being equally incontrovertible with those he had already pronounced, he went on to inform us that Jamaica rum, though unquestionably an agreeable spirit of great richness and flavour, had the drawback of remaining constantly present to the taste next day; and nobody being venturous enough to argue this point either, he increased in confidence and became yet more companionable and communicative.

‘It’s a devil of a thing, gentlemen,’ said Mr Swiveller, ‘when relations fall out and disagree. If the wing of friendship should never moult a feather, the wing of relationship should never be clipped, but be always expanded and serene. Why should a grandson and grandfather peg away at each other with mutual wiolence when all might be bliss and concord. Why not jine hands and forgit it?’

‘Hold your tongue,’ said his friend.

‘Sir,’ replied Mr Swiveller, ‘don’t you interrupt the chair. Gentlemen, how does the case stand, upon the present occasion? Here is a jolly old grandfather—I say it with the utmost respect—and here is a wild, young grandson. The jolly old grandfather says to the wild young grandson, “I have brought you up and educated you, Fred; I have put you in the way of getting on in life; you have bolted a little out of course, as young fellows often do; and you shall never have another chance, nor the ghost of half a one.” The wild young grandson makes answer to this and says, “You’re as rich as rich can be; you have been at no uncommon expense on my account, you’re saving up piles of money for my little sister that lives with you in a secret, stealthy, hugger-muggering kind of way and with no manner of enjoyment—why can’t you stand a trifle for your grown-up relation?” The jolly old grandfather unto this, retorts, not only that he declines to fork out with that cheerful readiness which is always so agreeable and pleasant in a gentleman of his time of life, but that he will bow up, and call names, and make reflections whenever they meet. Then the plain question is, an’t it a pity that this state of things should continue, and how much better would it be for the gentleman to hand over a reasonable amount of tin, and make it all right and comfortable?’

Having delivered this oration with a great many waves and flourishes of the hand, Mr Swiveller abruptly thrust the head of his cane into his mouth as if to prevent himself from impairing the effect of his speech by adding one other word.

Commentary:

The mode of publication — weekly instead of the usual monthly installments — with "woodcuts dropped into the text," as well as collaboration with two artists (Williams and Maclise also contributed one cut apiece to The Old Curiosity Shop.), led Dickens to new use of illustrations for the two novels which constitute the bulk of his periodical, Master Humphrey's Clock. Not only Dickens have in his service George Cattermole's Gothic, architectural talents in addition to Browne's comic, sentimental, ones, but the illustrations — more numerous and placed precisely where the novelist wanted them in the text serve to sustain certain moods and tones more extensively could two etchings per monthly part. In some respects the ones for The Old Curiosity Shop and Barnaby Rudge are truly integral parts of the text than any of the other illustrated Dickens' novels.

At the same time, because each cut illustrates a relatively larger portion of the text, each one usually can bear less freight thematic significance than the etchings for the monthly-part novels. The result is something closer to the modern comic strip to the Hogarthian moral progress, though those two also are related. Dickens could have Browne devote three cuts to the dents surrounding (view spoiler)[Dick Swiveller's illness and the Marchioness' heroism (hide spoiler)] (in chapters 64, 65, and 66), when one or at most two etchings would have been provided according to the usual ratio. Indeed, sequences of up to nine (or, if the definition is broadened, eighteen) cuts can be identified, with the result that if one goes through the illustrations with brief quotations from the text (as in Hammerton's The Dickens Picture Book), the effect is virtually like reading a complete comic strip, with few details that are totally obscure to someone who has never read the novel.

Some statistics will indicate how this sequential specificity is possible: The Old Curiosity Shop is about five-eighths the length of a novel like David Copperfield, while Barnaby Rudge is about three-fourths the length of such novels; but the Shop has seventy-five illustrations and Rudge seventy-six, compared with the usual forty. Thus proportionately there are two to three times as many illustrations in the weekly installments of Master Humphrey's Clock as in a monthly-parts novel.

--- and they haven't been fun finding them all either.

The old man sat himself down in a chair, and, with folded hands, looked sometimes at his grandson and sometimes at his strange companion.

Chapter 2

Charles Green

Scenes and Characters from the Works of Charles Dickens

Text Illustrated:

It was perhaps not very unreasonable to suspect from what had already passed, that Mr Swiveller was not quite recovered from the effects of the powerful sunlight to which he had made allusion; but if no such suspicion had been awakened by his speech, his wiry hair, dull eyes, and sallow face would still have been strong witnesses against him. His attire was not, as he had himself hinted, remarkable for the nicest arrangement, but was in a state of disorder which strongly induced the idea that he had gone to bed in it. It consisted of a brown body-coat with a great many brass buttons up the front and only one behind, a bright check neckerchief, a plaid waistcoat, soiled white trousers, and a very limp hat, worn with the wrong side foremost, to hide a hole in the brim. The breast of his coat was ornamented with an outside pocket from which there peeped forth the cleanest end of a very large and very ill-favoured handkerchief; his dirty wristbands were pulled on as far as possible and ostentatiously folded back over his cuffs; he displayed no gloves, and carried a yellow cane having at the top a bone hand with the semblance of a ring on its little finger and a black ball in its grasp. With all these personal advantages (to which may be added a strong savour of tobacco-smoke, and a prevailing greasiness of appearance) Mr Swiveller leant back in his chair with his eyes fixed on the ceiling, and occasionally pitching his voice to the needful key, obliged the company with a few bars of an intensely dismal air, and then, in the middle of a note, relapsed into his former silence.

The old man sat himself down in a chair, and with folded hands, looked sometimes at his grandson and sometimes at his strange companion, as if he were utterly powerless and had no resource but to leave them to do as they pleased. The young man reclined against a table at no great distance from his friend, in apparent indifference to everything that had passed; and I—who felt the difficulty of any interference, notwithstanding that the old man had appealed to me, both by words and looks—made the best feint I could of being occupied in examining some of the goods that were disposed for sale, and paying very little attention to a person before me.

The Old Curiosity Shop

Chapter 3

John Watkins Chapman

Text Illustrated:

The opinion was not the result of hasty consideration, for which indeed there was no opportunity at that time, as the child came directly, and soon occupied herself in preparations for giving Kit a writing lesson, of which it seemed he had a couple every week, and one regularly on that evening, to the great mirth and enjoyment both of himself and his instructress. To relate how it was a long time before his modesty could be so far prevailed upon as it admit of his sitting down in the parlour, in the presence of an unknown gentleman—how, when he did set down, he tucked up his sleeves and squared his elbows and put his face close to the copy-book and squinted horribly at the lines—how, from the very first moment of having the pen in his hand, he began to wallow in blots, and to daub himself with ink up to the very roots of his hair—how, if he did by accident form a letter properly, he immediately smeared it out again with his arm in his preparations to make another—how, at every fresh mistake, there was a fresh burst of merriment from the child and louder and not less hearty laugh from poor Kit himself—and how there was all the way through, notwithstanding, a gentle wish on her part to teach, and an anxious desire on his to learn—to relate all these particulars would no doubt occupy more space and time than they deserve. It will be sufficient to say that the lesson was given—that evening passed and night came on—that the old man again grew restless and impatient—that he quitted the house secretly at the same hour as before—and that the child was once more left alone within its gloomy walls.

About the artist - all I can find anyway:

John Watkins CHAPMAN (1853-1903). Chapman exhibited prolifically, mainly in London at the Royal Society of British Artists at Suffolk Street (where he showed one hundred and twelve works), the Royal Academy and the British Institute. He produced genre paintings as well as pictures of dogs, landscapes, interiors, still life of game and flowers and portrait engravings after John Hoppner and Joshua Reynolds. Many works by the artist have been sold at auction, including 'The Old Curiosity Shop' sold at Christie's London 'Victorian Pictures' in 1999 for $29,528.

When he did sit down, he tucked up his sleeves and squared his elbows and put his face close to the copybook

Chapter 3

Charles Green

Scenes and Characters from the Works of Charles Dickens

Text Illustrated:

The opinion was not the result of hasty consideration, for which indeed there was no opportunity at that time, as the child came directly, and soon occupied herself in preparations for giving Kit a writing lesson, of which it seemed he had a couple every week, and one regularly on that evening, to the great mirth and enjoyment both of himself and his instructress. To relate how it was a long time before his modesty could be so far prevailed upon as it admit of his sitting down in the parlour, in the presence of an unknown gentleman—how, when he did set down, he tucked up his sleeves and squared his elbows and put his face close to the copy-book and squinted horribly at the lines—how, from the very first moment of having the pen in his hand, he began to wallow in blots, and to daub himself with ink up to the very roots of his hair—how, if he did by accident form a letter properly, he immediately smeared it out again with his arm in his preparations to make another—how, at every fresh mistake, there was a fresh burst of merriment from the child and louder and not less hearty laugh from poor Kit himself—and how there was all the way through, notwithstanding, a gentle wish on her part to teach, and an anxious desire on his to learn—to relate all these particulars would no doubt occupy more space and time than they deserve.

Kit's Writing Lesson

Chapter 3

Robert Braithwaite Martineau

1852

Commentary:

Robert Braithwaite Martineau's Kit's Writing Lesson (1852), which fully represents Kit's pose and gestures as he begins to write (tucked up sleeves, squared elbows, face close to the copybook, and squinting). Glossing this picture, Underwood argues that the addition of Nell doing her needlework (which she actually does not do in the text) adds "a greater depth of reference to the novel and reinforces messages about little Nell's idealized and doubly nurturing femininity". An elaboration of this point might have shown more fully how Little Nell, as emblem of idealized femininity, had fully entered Victorian culture by the time of Martineau's painting, and also how the sentimental adoration of Nell was eventually replaced in Victorian culture by less cloying images.

Little Nell and her grandfather in the Old Curiosity Shop

Chapter 3

Arthur David McCormick (1860-1943)

Text Illustrated:

Nell joined us before long, and bringing some needle-work to the table, sat by the old man’s side. It was pleasant to observe the fresh flowers in the room, the pet bird with a green bough shading his little cage, the breath of freshness and youth which seemed to rustle through the old dull house and hover round the child. It was curious, but not so pleasant, to turn from the beauty and grace of the girl, to the stooping figure, care-worn face, and jaded aspect of the old man. As he grew weaker and more feeble, what would become of this lonely little creature; poor protector as he was, say that he died—what would be her fate, then?

The old man almost answered my thoughts, as he laid his hand on hers, and spoke aloud.

‘I’ll be of better cheer, Nell,’ he said; ‘there must be good fortune in store for thee—I do not ask it for myself, but thee. Such miseries must fall on thy innocent head without it, that I cannot believe but that, being tempted, it will come at last!’

She looked cheerfully into his face, but made no answer.

About the artist:

McCormick was born in Ulster and, after education at local schools, went to London on the same ship with Hugh Thomson. McCormick was educated at the Royal College of Art in 1883–1886. He worked for The English Illustrated Magazine. He was in 1892–1893 an artist on Sir Martin Conway's expedition to the Karakoram subrange of the Himalayas and in 1895 an artist on Clinton T. Dent's expedition to the Caucasus Mountains. His first exhibition at the Royal Academy of Art was in 1889, and through the end of 1904 he exhibited there eleven paintings, including Sakar, India: moonlight (1895) and A Hunter's Shrine, Central Caucasus (1901). In 1927 he painted Head of a Sailor for John Player & Sons for the promotion of Player's Navy Cut cigarettes.

Chapter 4

Phiz

Text Illustrated:

Notwithstanding that the fact had been notorious beforehand to all the tea-drinkers, and had been discussed and expatiated on at every tea-drinking in the neighbourhood for the last twelve months, this official communication was no sooner made than they all began to talk at once and to vie with each other in vehemence and volubility. Mrs George remarked that people would talk, that people had often said this to her before, that Mrs Simmons then and there present had told her so twenty times, that she had always said, ‘No, Henrietta Simmons, unless I see it with my own eyes and hear it with my own ears, I never will believe it.’ Mrs Simmons corroborated this testimony and added strong evidence of her own. The lady from the Minories recounted a successful course of treatment under which she had placed her own husband, who, from manifesting one month after marriage unequivocal symptoms of the tiger, had by this means become subdued into a perfect lamb. Another lady recounted her own personal struggle and final triumph, in the course whereof she had found it necessary to call in her mother and two aunts, and to weep incessantly night and day for six weeks. A third, who in the general confusion could secure no other listener, fastened herself upon a young woman still unmarried who happened to be amongst them, and conjured her, as she valued her own peace of mind and happiness to profit by this solemn occasion, to take example from the weakness of Mrs Quilp, and from that time forth to direct her whole thoughts to taming and subduing the rebellious spirit of man. The noise was at its height, and half the company had elevated their voices into a perfect shriek in order to drown the voices of the other half, when Mrs Jiniwin was seen to change colour and shake her forefinger stealthily, as if exhorting them to silence. Then, and not until then, Daniel Quilp himself, the cause and occasion of all this clamour, was observed to be in the room, looking on and listening with profound attention.

‘Go on, ladies, go on,’ said Daniel. ‘Mrs Quilp, pray ask the ladies to stop to supper, and have a couple of lobsters and something light and palatable.’

‘I feel in a smoking humour, and shall probably blaze away all night. But sit where you are, if you please, in case I want you.’

Chapter 4

Phiz

Text Illustrated:

Instead of pursuing the theme he had in his mind, Quilp folded his arms again, and looked at her more sternly than before, while she averted her eyes and kept them on the ground.

‘Mrs Quilp.’

‘Yes, Quilp.’

‘If ever you listen to these beldames again, I’ll bite you.’

With this laconic threat, which he accompanied with a snarl that gave him the appearance of being particularly in earnest, Mr Quilp bade her clear the teaboard away, and bring the rum. The spirit being set before him in a huge case-bottle, which had originally come out of some ship’s locker, he settled himself in an arm-chair with his large head and face squeezed up against the back, and his little legs planted on the table.

‘Now, Mrs Quilp,’ he said; ‘I feel in a smoking humour, and shall probably blaze away all night. But sit where you are, if you please, in case I want you.’

His wife returned no other reply than the necessary ‘Yes, Quilp,’ and the small lord of the creation took his first cigar and mixed his first glass of grog. The sun went down and the stars peeped out, the Tower turned from its own proper colours to grey and from grey to black, the room became perfectly dark and the end of the cigar a deep fiery red, but still Mr Quilp went on smoking and drinking in the same position, and staring listlessly out of window with the doglike smile always on his face, save when Mrs Quilp made some involuntary movement of restlessness or fatigue; and then it expanded into a grin of delight.

Quilp's Wharf

Chapter 5

George Cattermole

Text Illustrated:

Daniel Quilp, who was not much affected by a bright morning save in so far as it spared him the trouble of carrying an umbrella, caused himself to be put ashore hard by the wharf, and proceeded thither through a narrow lane which, partaking of the amphibious character of its frequenters, had as much water as mud in its composition, and a very liberal supply of both. Arrived at his destination, the first object that presented itself to his view was a pair of very imperfectly shod feet elevated in the air with the soles upwards, which remarkable appearance was referable to the boy, who being of an eccentric spirit and having a natural taste for tumbling, was now standing on his head and contemplating the aspect of the river under these uncommon circumstances. He was speedily brought on his heels by the sound of his master’s voice, and as soon as his head was in its right position, Mr Quilp, to speak expressively in the absence of a better verb, ‘punched it’ for him.

‘Come, you let me alone,’ said the boy, parrying Quilp’s hand with both his elbows alternatively. ‘You’ll get something you won’t like if you don’t and so I tell you.’

‘You dog,’ snarled Quilp, ‘I’ll beat you with an iron rod, I’ll scratch you with a rusty nail, I’ll pinch your eyes, if you talk to me—I will.’

With these threats he clenched his hand again, and dexterously diving in between the elbows and catching the boy’s head as it dodged from side to side, gave it three or four good hard knocks. Having now carried his point and insisted on it, he left off.

‘You won’t do it agin,’ said the boy, nodding his head and drawing back, with the elbows ready in case of the worst; ‘now—’

‘Stand still, you dog,’ said Quilp. ‘I won’t do it again, because I’ve done it as often as I want. Here. Take the key.’

‘Why don’t you hit one of your size?’ said the boy approaching very slowly.

‘Where is there one of my size, you dog?’ returned Quilp. ‘Take the key, or I’ll brain you with it’—indeed he gave him a smart tap with the handle as he spoke. ‘Now, open the counting-house.’

The boy sulkily complied, muttering at first, but desisting when he looked round and saw that Quilp was following him with a steady look. And here it may be remarked, that between this boy and the dwarf there existed a strange kind of mutual liking. How born or bred, and or nourished upon blows and threats on one side, and retorts and defiances on the other, is not to the purpose. Quilp would certainly suffer nobody to contract him but the boy, and the boy would assuredly not have submitted to be so knocked about by anybody but Quilp, when he had the power to run away at any time he chose.

‘Now,’ said Quilp, passing into the wooden counting-house, ‘you mind the wharf. Stand upon your head agin, and I’ll cut one of your feet off.’

The boy made no answer, but directly Quilp had shut himself in, stood on his head before the door, then walked on his hands to the back and stood on his head there, and then to the opposite side and repeated the performance. There were indeed four sides to the counting-house, but he avoided that one where the window was, deeming it probable that Quilp would be looking out of it. This was prudent, for in point of fact, the dwarf, knowing his disposition, was lying in wait at a little distance from the sash armed with a large piece of wood, which, being rough and jagged and studded in many parts with broken nails, might possibly have hurt him.

Daniel Quilp sat himself down in a ferry to cross to the opposite shore

Chapter 5

Charles Green

Scenes and Characters from the Works of Charles Dickens

Text Illustrated:

Slight and ridiculous as the incident was, it made him appear such a little fiend, and withal such a keen and knowing one, that the old woman felt too much afraid of him to utter a single word, and suffered herself to be led with extraordinary politeness to the breakfast-table. Here he by no means diminished the impression he had just produced, for he ate hard eggs, shell and all, devoured gigantic prawns with the heads and tails on, chewed tobacco and water-cresses at the same time and with extraordinary greediness, drank boiling tea without winking, bit his fork and spoon till they bent again, and in short performed so many horrifying and uncommon acts that the women were nearly frightened out of their wits, and began to doubt if he were really a human creature. At last, having gone through these proceedings and many others which were equally a part of his system, Mr Quilp left them, reduced to a very obedient and humbled state, and betook himself to the river-side, where he took boat for the wharf on which he had bestowed his name.

It was flood tide when Daniel Quilp sat himself down in the ferry to cross to the opposite shore. A fleet of barges were coming lazily on, some sideways, some head first, some stern first; all in a wrong-headed, dogged, obstinate way, bumping up against the larger craft, running under the bows of steamboats, getting into every kind of nook and corner where they had no business, and being crunched on all sides like so many walnut-shells; while each with its pair of long sweeps struggling and splashing in the water looked like some lumbering fish in pain. In some of the vessels at anchor all hands were busily engaged in coiling ropes, spreading out sails to dry, taking in or discharging their cargoes; in others no life was visible but two or three tarry boys, and perhaps a barking dog running to and fro upon the deck or scrambling up to look over the side and bark the louder for the view. Coming slowly on through the forests of masts was a great steamship, beating the water in short impatient strokes with her heavy paddles as though she wanted room to breathe, and advancing in her huge bulk like a sea monster among the minnows of the Thames. On either hand were long black tiers of colliers; between them vessels slowly working out of harbour with sails glistening in the sun, and creaking noise on board, re-echoed from a hundred quarters. The water and all upon it was in active motion, dancing and buoyant and bubbling up; while the old grey Tower and piles of building on the shore, with many a church-spire shooting up between, looked coldly on, and seemed to disdain their chafing, restless neighbour.

Daniel Quilp, who was not much affected by a bright morning save in so far as it spared him the trouble of carrying an umbrella, caused himself to be put ashore hard by the wharf, and proceeded thither through a narrow lane which, partaking of the amphibious character of its frequenters, had as much water as mud in its composition, and a very liberal supply of both. Arrived at his destination, the first object that presented itself to his view was a pair of very imperfectly shod feet elevated in the air with the soles upwards, which remarkable appearance was referable to the boy, who being of an eccentric spirit and having a natural taste for tumbling, was now standing on his head and contemplating the aspect of the river under these uncommon circumstances. He was speedily brought on his heels by the sound of his master’s voice, and as soon as his head was in its right position, Mr Quilp, to speak expressively in the absence of a better verb, ‘punched it’ for him.