A Tale of Two Cities

“Liberty, equality, fraternity, or death; – the last, much the easiest to bestow, O Guillotine!”

What a book. It was Dickens but also not really Dickens. This book, imo, is my best enjoyed for its abstract ruminations about the brutality of humanity that is ubiquitous through the social classes, rather than waiting for the plot to kick in tbh.

Gone are Dickens's signature grimy sights and sounds of the poor working class of London, replaced instead with an even grimier and bloodier countryside of France. In place of his very-English plots, we instead get something revolving around the French Revolution, which is almost a little out of character for Dickens (at least based on my own poor knowledge of him). This book is also tremendously more violent than his usual, but that's perhaps unavoidable given the subject matter. But what still makes this very much a Dickens novel is his unwavering interest in examining the class wars that precipitated the Revolution.

The Revolution, of course, took place more than a century before Dickens was writing, making this essentially historical fiction. Not that it matters since his plot is not concerned with the social niceties or customs of the 1750s, but the actual historical moments of the Revolution.

The overall theme that human beings are just awful no matter what class you are is a little depressing but honestly not unjustified given our track record in history. Dickens did a pretty masterful job at showing the apathy and lack of compassion that the nobility showed to the peasants, which then precipitated the Revolution characterized also by an identical apathy, lack of compassion, and even a tyrannical bloodlust from the peasant classes.

There were plenty of parts in the book that seemed a little excessive and meandering, but ultimately it was generally enjoyable because of Dickens's hard hitting commentary. The first third of this book was actually surprisingly witty and satirical, a little Austen-esque in the sharp barbs and jabs that Dickens takes at his own characters and which I don't usually associate with his writing.

The plot itself is pretty straightforward and if I were simply to read a blurb on it, my reaction would probably be, “That's it? How did this take so many pages to say?” But it's also about how Dickens wrote it. No part of this book embodied this better than the very ending. Without spoilers, I'll just say that while I had pretty quickly guessed how the plot was going to resolve itself so there was no anticipation or tension for me, Dickens still managed to hit me in the feels anyway by the sheer force of his writing.

Dickens has always been a hit or miss author for me as I don't completely jive with his plots or writing style but I'm happy to say that this one is definitely shaping up to be one of my favorites from him.

This was a very demanding read personally. As a non native English speaker, I viewed this book as a way to challenge myself to follow a difficult plot till the end, and also as a tool to expand my vocabulary.

Looking back I think it was a very important and useful experience in my reading life, and I look forward to reading it again in the future, plus some other works by Dickens that are supposedly easier and less substantial than this one.

Ah, what a story!

I cried, I laughed, I was outraged, I was on the edge of my seat. And more than anything, this book sparked a tremendous curiosity about the 18th century France.

I loved the plot of the story, but even more, I loved the author's writing style. There is such skill, such subtlety - it is truly exquisite!

If there's one thing the book lacks in, at least at first glance, that will be character work - the author drops these people in the action and doesn't spend too much time dwelling on their personalities or quirks. Personally, I do not find this to be a negative, as it's my impression that this is not the point of the story itself. It is to some degree an action-drama (if that is a thing you can imagine) and to a greater one a social commentary. The personality of the characters is not as relevant as their unique position in the more global events in which, through no fault of their own, they have been pulled.
The society itself is the main character of this story, and the protagonists and villains we follow are the supporting cast to help showcase the character and sensibilities of said society.

Do not be fooled by the page count, this is not a light read to pick up for pure entertainment (though I myself was greatly entertained). It pays off to take your time and think through the meaning behind the specific words utilised by the author. I promise you, the deservedly famous opening paragraph is not the only infinitely quotable one in this story.

A Tale of Two Cities indeed! The first two parts of this three-part text, located in England for the most part are a slow read. The book has a very strange pacing to it. It threatens to be interesting only to peter out, and its narrative simmers but never quite gets going until the final third, when the narrative focus switches primarily to Paris. And what a final third it is.

My early impressions of this book, which continued well into the second segment, were that although the characters were memorable, they appeared a little two-dimensional, although the plot was potentially very interesting, it wasn't quite going anywhere, and that the writing actually got in the way of these two strengths. The book simply felt overwritten; it was bloated with extraneous detail of menial events (The mail chiefly comes to mind, amongst other affairs), and my cynicism was drawn to the fact that Dickens was paid accordingly as each instalment was made available.

Having said that, these criticisms cannot be levelled at the final segment of the text, and the sparse flourishes of beautiful prose which just about kept me going through the middle of the text are much more regular; one suddenly understands why this is a ‘classic'. Furthermore, the characters possess more clarity, more of an identity in fact, and the plot quickens to make up for the earlier slack. It reads like a much more refined book.

A Tale of Two Cities is an inconsistent novel capable of menial and delectable prose in equal excess, but persevere. It is more than worth your time. The closing pages are some of the best you will read.

It is a masterpiece, and it has many different elements: intrigue and politics, romance and morals, love and fight. Still, I had reouble with the narrative chapters, - as opposed to the dialogues, which I saw as fluid and portraying the real people, the descriptions were for me sometimes too long and dull.

This is my absolute favorite book that I was forced to read in high school. Well, it didn't actually feel like being forced. The characters and story are so rich, detailed but not boringly so. I'm sure I wrote a nice literary analysis of it, but I can't recall that now. I just know that I was enthralled with this book and could not put it down.