Victorian Books

Persuasion is Jane Austen's last completed work before her death. It differs from her other more well known works such as Pride & Prejudice, and Emma. It focuses on a relationship who have a second chance to re-ignite true love but whether or not they will depends on so many things that make a good story and are still applicable today.
A crazy family, social expectations, unforgiveness, competing love interests, and a little bit of that classic Austen wit that bites in just the right places.
It's shorter than Austen's other works as well, and the plot less complicated and detailed than Pride & Prejudice and Mansfield Park.
If for no other reason than the famous "you pierce my soul" letter, this should be a must on everyone's read list.

I have no right to review Jane Austen. I give this book 5 billion stars.

Persuasion is a small novel, but it is Jane Austen at her best. Her commentary on the English gentry and the restrictions of "society" are well presented in this story of Anne who was once persuaded not to marry a man with no prospects and no station in life, at least compared to hers as the daughter of a baronet. Jane Austen proves there can be passion without being graphic. A great lvoe story!

The story is good but I don't like the edittion, is to small and for me is hard to read.

Anyone who enjoys reading Jane Austen, will be very please with this book. After reading it, you will find yourself still thinking about it and enjoying it's memories.

I am so glad I read this book. What a treat! The names even fit the characters. It was a wonderful book and I now look forward to reading Moonstone.

This was my first time reading Wilkie Collins. I loved it. I truly didn't expect what happened to happen. It was a great mystery and kept me very entertained.

Similar to Wilkie Collins other masterpiece, The Moonstone, various characters narrate sections of The Woman in White and the story is told as the characters look back on what has already happened. This method of building a mystery is fantastic because we, as readers, also become sleuths in the mystery that takes place. Collins ability to get into characters heads enhances the level of suspense, and gives it a sense that we are right there with them.

In The Woman in White, Walter Hartright decides to take a job as a drawing instructor at the Fairlie House, where Laura Fairlie, Miriam Holcombe, and Laura's uncle reside. Once there, Walter is enchanted with the beauty of Laura, but discovers that Laura's uncle has already arraigned a marriage between Laura and Sir Percival, a diabolical man whose interests lay mainly in greed and deception. While there, Walter has a few strange incidents, one of these being an encounter with a mysterious woman in white who appears to have run away from an asylum. Walter is a little distraught after this encounter, wondering why she appeared and what she could have wanted from him. Things get more extraordinary as this random encounter seems to propel Walter into the Fairlie family secrets, and a villainous scheme by Laura's husband Sir Percival and his accomplice, the equally ruthless Count Fosco. Walter finds himself right in the middle of Sir Percival's plan, which is to not only take the Fairlie fortune but "rid" himself of various individuals one way or another. Walter, with the aid of Laura and Miriam, tries to foil this plan.

Collins has an extraordinary method of creating plot, tying all loose ends, all the while having intricate and complex narratives and twists. Moreover, he is a suburb storyteller, and although some may not like his deeply detailed methods, I feel that these give credence to character and story depth. There is a dark Gothic kind of feel to The Woman in White; it is a perfect read for a cold, rainy, thundery night. Heroes, villains, deception, twists, turns, secrets revealed, and supernatural elements: The Woman in White is a page turner despite its daunting length.

For sheer mystery and excitement," The Woman in White ", was unmatched in the genre of 19th century literature. That is what one must keep in mind when reading this extraordinary novel. Written in 1860, nothing approaching it had ever been attempted, and if the New York Times best seller list had been in existence at the time, it would have topped the list for countless numbers of weeks. Like many authors of the period, the book was serialized, and it was followed voraciously by tens of thousands of readers. It continued to remain popular when published in book form. For those who relish an intricate plot, serendipitous chance coincidences filled with its share of villains, heroes, and fragile heroines in distress, along with a modicum of amateur detective work, then this is the novel that will entertain and satisfy those who are avid readers of the likes of Dickens, Conan Doyle, and Thackeray.

I don't mind admitting that I discovered this book because I had read that Matthew Broderick and Sarah Jessica Parker named their child Wilkie after Wilkie Collins, an author I had never heard of. I am a huge a Dickens fan, and when I read of his and Collins' connection after doing a little research, I bought the book, and I'm so glad I did. The reading experience I got from this book was off the charts. This work of art must rank--in its intricate plot, jaw-dropping language, and overall perfect execution--with Dickens' best and even the Russians. Certainly this book doesn't have the philosophical ambition of War and Peace, but, you know, who said genius and entertainment are mutually exclusive? While reading the book I stopped several times to close the book and look at the cover and just marvel at the experience I was having, savoring the pleasure and admiration I had for such a brilliant, brilliant piece of literature. Many paragraphs of the book I re-read dozens of the time and were better written than most books I'll read in a year. And when Count Fosco appeared in the heroine's journal, I was genuinely frightened. It was as uncannily like the moment in Rear Window when Raymond Burr finally looks up and sees Jimmy Stewart--and me, the viewer--for the first time. I wish The Moonstone had been as good, a book which is strangely more revered and famous than this one. But for anyone out there who enjoys the act of reading and stories told in beautiful language, I just can't say enough about the experience you are going to have. Every single note is so, so, so perfect. If you're not swept up in the first ten pages, well, send your copy to me and I'll read it again myself.

Charles Dickens' David Copperfield is said to be Dickens' favorite book that he ever wrote. Copperfield's and Dickens' childhoods were classically the same and many critics believe that David Copperfield was actually a Charles Dickens autobiography. He modeled many of the characters in this novel after people he knew; for instance, Micawber was modeled after Dickens' own father who was sent to debtors prison. However, Micawber becomes a humorous, amiable character who was quite different from Dickens' own father. This book is definitely of 5 star quality and I will teach it in my College English classes when I begin teaching.

What could be more prosaic? A physically abused child surmounts all obstacles through diligence, devotion, goodness, and terrific good luck at key moments. But within this simple frame Dickens paints a tapestry of pity and terror and epiphany. To encounter such a broad spectrum of good and evil - the pure femininity of a lover, the earthy sweetness of a nurse, the generosity of a mentor, the frivolity of a sweetheart, parental naivete and cruelty, the destructive arrogance of a best friend, the viciousness of a Uriah Heep - would be an object lesson in Humanity. But we encounter all this each day. This dawns on you with each passing chapter - and that you are confronting yourself as you confront them: Your own evil and your own goodness rising above the shadows. Copperfield is a quick course in religion and philosophy and psychology. By the end, you're transformed vicariously and like David Copperfield dismiss the shadows: "Thus I leave them; thus I always find them; thus they wear their time away, from year to year".

Please note: Dickens is not my favorite author. His style at times is too melodramatic. But David Copperfield is wonderful. If we had only this, it would be clear Dickens was a master who walked the talk. Highly commended even for those who are not Dickens fans.

I have read and listened to many of Dickens' novels, and this is, without a doubt, my favorite. In fact, this is my favorite audiobook bar none.

This BBC Radio adaptation is the perfect introduction to Dickens and to David Copperfield in particular for those who may be dissuaded from reading Copperfield because of its length. It is impossible to imagine that the BBC could have found better performers for the roles--I can easily hear their voices in my mind as I recall the story. Although the story is abridged, you don't get the sense that you are missing any of the important points of the story. In fact, it's a much more satisfying "read" than most books in their unabridged version.

"But one face, shining on me like a heavenly light by which I see all
other objects, is above them and beyond them all. And that remains. I turn my
head, and see it, in its beautiful serenity beside me. My lamp burns low,
and I have written far into the night, but the dear presence, without which
I were nothing, bears me company."
[David Copperfield]
Timeless, full of plastic characters, entertaining, colourful, warm. Imagine Dostoevsky, but with more optimism and respect and deep love for humans. Kind regards, Mario.

For the price of the Everyman edition, one would expect the pages to be cleanly printed. Instead, the letters are faded and weak on many pages. On many pages, parts of some letters are missing altogether.

Masterpiece? Greatest English novel? Well, I don't know about that -- it's very good, but it's not perfect. But it is funny, and it's a page-turner. Our heroine, Dorothea, is an intellectual stuck in a very provincial town, and she just wants someone she can have an intelligent conversation with, and whom she can help do some kind of serious work. A very marriageble but not especially bright gentleman courts her, and brings her a puppy as a present. Dorothea doesn't _mean_ to be rude, but she speaks her mind, that she doesn't approve of having pets just to pet them -- she thinks dogs are happiest when they have some serious work to do. I laughed out loud at this point, as at so many others. I know just how she feels! And I also understand the sighs that her friends sighed as they rolled their eyes. That's our Dorothea! The gentleman caller eventually marries Dorothea's sister, and they (and the puppy) live happily ever after. Dorothea lives happily ever after, too, but only after being very, very serious about things for several hundred pages. You'll love her, and you'll laugh all the way.

Middlemarch is a challenging book to read for several reasons. One, it is too long. Two, the author has a tendency to go off on philosophical tangents. Three, the author will sometimes spend several paragraphs on the inner workings of the mind of a very minor character who is hardly pertinent to the story. These flaws aside, I will say that I enjoyed Middlemarch very much. It is easy to get caught up in the lives of Dorthea, Will, Fred, Mary, Dr.Lydgate and Rosamond and many others. George Eliot wrote wonderful dialogue in this book--the conversations between characters are very interesting. I thought Dr. Lydgate was the most compelling person in the book. He had such high hopes and was a good and honorable man. Yet, he let himself be ensnared in a silly marriage and here the author is very insightful in portraying Dr.Lydgates trapped, disappointed existence with Rosamond. What he wants in a wife and marriage and what she wants in a husband and marriage are miles apart and so, in the end, they resign themselves to one another. I also liked the character of Mary. She's a strong woman who knows what she wants. Although Dorthea can be irritating at times, with her insistence that everyone see things the way she does, she is good and goodness is appealing in a central character. Her relationship with Will Ladislaw is portrayed well. Their love for one another was truly believable. While reading Middlemarch, there were a few times in which I felt as if I were slogging through, but there were many more times when I didn't want to put it down. So, all in all, a good read and worth the effort.

Everyone should read this book before they get married. George Eliot is a master at rendering human character. She is a true sympathizer with the human condition, and merciless at the same time. Beautiful.

The version of Middlemarch I read was the Modern Library edition with an introduction by A.S. Byatt. Ms. Byatt mentions that Eliot was the great English novelist of "ideas", and as such was the progenitor of Proust and Mann. Reading Middlemarch, I can understand her point. As far as Victorian novelists go, George Eliot was Dickens with a finer sense of wit, and a subtler intelligence.

Middlemarch centers on Dorothea Brooke, a young woman with fervent and noble ideas and ideals, and a hunger for intellectual enrichment. Unfortunately, she lives in a time and place which is not conducive to the attainment of her aspirations, and winds up in an unfulfilling marriage to Casaubon, a sickly cleric much older than herself, a pedantic scholar of theology and antiquity, who wanted an obedient secretary for his life's work as well as a dedicated and subservient wife, more than (as she had hoped) a life partner on the road to discovery. While married to him, she meets his cousin Wil Ladislaw, a young man of keen intellect and a passion for art, but with a dubious past and unsettled future.

Another key character is Tertius Lydgate, a young doctor who comes to Middlemarch to do research, make great discoveries for the benefit of mankind, run a hospital and practice that will utilize his knowledge for good more than for personal financial gain. He falls in love with, and marries the mayor's daughter Rosamund Vincy, a very pretty but shallow woman. Related to the Vincys through marriage is Peter Featherstone, a miserly old landowner in failing health whose demise might benefit Rosamund's brother, and Nicholas Bulstrode, a wealthy banker (with an overly pious attitude) and influential member of the town council, who has many important enemies in Middlemarch, as well as an awful secret to hide.

Middlemarch is a novel about relationships and about human aspirations and how society (in this case provincial 18th century English society), conspires to thwart those aspirations. Unlike Dickens, who likes to paint in broad strokes and vivid colors, Eliot is much subtler in her craft. Her characters have complex tones to their personalities. Middlemarch is a finely wrought study of these characters and of the times that nurtured them, influenced them, and ultimately affected their fortunes.

George Eliot is a keen observer of her environment, and beyond the people themselves, of the religious, social, and political factors which complicate interpersonal relationships. All this done with a wit and wisdom as well as a sense of understanding and compassion that exude from every page.

I love this book (I have read it before) and thought I would get it on Kindle since it is one of my favorites. Unfortunately the Kindle version must have been slapped quickly into digital format via optical character reader or something similar, with no quality check done on it. It is full of typos that would have been easily caught with a simple spellcheck, for example instead of the word "call" it said "cal:" There are numerous examples of this and it is very distracting.

I actually loved this book and can't wait to read the next in the series. I found it entirely enjoyable and thought the chemisty between Julia and Brisbane is infectious! As an avid historical mystery fan, I recommend this to anyone else who enjoys them, also.

Very disappointing let me count the ways. At first it was entertaining and witty. But after the first 100 pages I kept waiting for the mystery to snag me. Soon after I figured who the murder was (predictable) and I lost all interest on the motive. When I jumped to read the ending I was glad not to have wasted another minute on this book. I bought it because the book was recommended as being similar to books by Tasha Alexander. I beg to differ!

Kept me entertained. The wry, witty writing kept me reading. Really enjoyed it and plan to read more by this author. Skillfully done.

Not a great read. The characters could be a little flat but the setting and mystery were terrific. Looking forward to the sequel.

This was a good read. It had a lot more substance than your ordinary murder mystery. The author does a good job of developing the characters. The heroine is not as analytical as I would like her to be, but then not everyone is all that analytical!

Great historical fiction has to carefully balance being true to both history and humanity. Often when a piece is well-researched the people in it are no more real or human than marble statues. When the people in it are real and warm, the historical facts often aren't.

Not only is this piece well researched, and there are believable real flesh and blood humans in it, but it's taken one step further.

Susan is not only realistic, but is likable beyond that. She is truly someone you find yourself cheering for. This book is a rare find.

This one has something special. Author Eisdorfer does a near perfect job of recreating the meter and rhythms of Old English. Savoring this exquisite narrative is pure joy as Susan Rose, wet nurse and homespun philosopher, begins to lay out the story of her life, and the lives of those she comes in contact with. These will be stories of innocence lost, of poverty, pain, of the human condition, and if Susan's outlook is any kind of indicator of what is yet to come, they will also tell of triumphs and at least the coming to terms with the harshness of existence, and it will not matter on which side of the curtain those she tells of happened to be born. All are subject to the same trials.

After critiquing more than a million words of text as part of an online critique group, I've developed a strong feel for mechanics. If I read two sentences and find a mistake, then read another two and find another, my mind starts to concentrate on the mistakes rather than on the story. This virtually always results in a truncated read and a less than glowing review. "The Wet Nurse's Tale" is one of the few excerpts I've read so far that didn't stop me early on. The story is compelling, the voice vibrant, and the author has the mechanical aspects under control. I thoroughly enjoyed the read.

That said, reserving judgment on whether or not a full size manuscript of this same exact voice would become a bit much, five stars for Erica Eisdorfer on this excerpt.

Erica Eisodorfer has written a genuinely fine piece of literature. She tells a wonderful tale of an English wet nurse in the 1800's. it is written with such passion and a feeling of "being there." I can't wait until the rest of the novel is published!

I have long followed the writings of Erica Eisdorfer, who has several manuscripts that ought to be published, and hope this leads her to a publisher.

--Marly Youmans

This isn't the kind of novel I normally pick up, but the main character, Susan, is so well portrayed that I found myself enthralled by her story and eager to keep reading.

This is a truly excellent book! I just couldn't put it down and the story just gets better and better.... a must-read!!!!!!

Mark Frost is best known as the writer on Twin Peaks, and he brings a similarly twisted vision to this wonderful neovel set in a slightly skewed Victorian England.

The protagonist is Arthur Conan Doyle, still a doctor, and with no inkling of his creation of the worlds greatest detective.

That's before he gets involved with a secret service agent with amazing deductive skills, a penchant for morphine, and a twisted, brilliant older brother.

This may sound like a Holmes pastiche, but Frost's imagination takes it way beyond that. We get a flight through the British Museum vaults, chased by the undead. We get a visit to Whitby abbey in the dead of night alongside an Irish writer named Bram Stoker who gets the idea of his life on the trip, and we get a glimpse of what might have happened if Victorian ingenuity had taken a slightly different turn into Zombie armies and vast, impersonal factories.

All that, and more literary references than you can shake a stick at, alongside pathos, friendship, betrayal and loss.

Frost is a fine, intelligent writer, with a unique vision, and this is his best work.

Mark Frost grabs your attention and gives you a thrill ride mixing historical events and figures. Think Sherlock Holmes hopped up on Red Bull meets Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde while riding a roller coaster.

Attracted to Frost due to his exceptionally good non-fiction works on golf, thought I'd try his fiction, and so here it was.

And what a was it was, a breath-consuming romp through mythology and paranormal and literature and medicine, etc. all tied in to a plot loaded with well-developed characters that slowly unfolds in the typical climax which leaves room for sequels.

How many plots feature a child gone demonic almost who seizes a family and then unplays a sinister plot to go world conquering through bringing satanic rule to physical presence? Couple this with Aruthur Conan Doyle and a supposed agent for Her Majesty galavanting around the English countryside and you've got one read you won't quickly forget.

If you're anything like the consumate reader that I am, this one will have you scrambling for your dictionary to see the likes of such vocabulary as: lyceum, mendacity, rumbustrious, hansom, tessellated, etc.

Such will captivate and hold your attention and live you vicariously winded and unnerved as a reader.

1. Because even though this is a "sleeper" book it's right up there with the Da Vinci Code in terms of not being able to put it down. Except for one thing...it's much better written.

2. Because you can read it once a year and still feel the same sense of "the game is afoot" adventurous pleasure. I've read it about 6 times since I bought it years ago (in the bargain bin no less).

3. Because Mark Frost weaves a supernatural thriller, "Sherlock Holmes meets the mummy" kind of tale that keeps you hooked from page one. The characters and emotions are strong, the action and mystery keeps you on edge and you can't help but stay up at night turning pages (nestled in that huge cozy high-backed leather armchair next to a crackling fire in the library whilst sipping a snifter of brandy and wearing an ascot); it's the kind of book I'd wish I had written. In the right hands this book could be a fantastic movie and a good bet for blockbuster success (I think Universal bought the rights in 1997 but so far it's never been greenlit).

4. Because at 7.99 it's a steal. I'd get the hardcover edition if you can though, because it belongs in your permanent library.

5. Because if you read most of these reviews you'll see that I'm not the only one who feels this way about this book (fifty 5 star reviews at the time I wrote this).

I STARTED WITH PILLARS, THEN WORLD WITHOUT END AND THIS WAS MY THIRD KEN FOLLETT BOOK AND I MUST SAY, I WAS THRILLED AGAIN!!! I LOVE HOW INVOLVED I BECOME IN HIS CHARACTERS LIVES, AND WITHOUT FAIL SEX EVERYWHERE!

I wasn't really expecting much of this book, but was pleasantly surprised. I have read two other Follett books, The Pillars of the Earth and Night Over Water. Pillars is great, aside from the dismal sex scenes, and Night Over Water is completely forgettable.

This one is a nice page-turner. On top of the surprisingly interesting setting of 19th Century merchant banking, the characters are pretty well-developed. It takes a little while to get immersed, but once you are in there, it's easy to follow and enjoyable. I found myself really rooting for the protagonists, and without being a spoiler, it's nice that while everything doesn't turn out just peachy, basically everyone gets "what they deserve." There are some surprising twists -- some a little melodramatic, but not too over the top.

Overall, I'd recommend this. Not good for reading at night in bed.... I stayed up WAY to late to finish it!

I didn't think I would like this book because I'm not typically a fan of this period of history, but Follett managed to keep my interest piqued throughout the entire book. It starts out with kids at boarding school that are part of a nasty, secret accident and then follows the boys as they grow up and how their secret haunts them. Very twisted tale!

Written with typical style the characters are described and built so well you feel like you know them. Great story telling as always, plenty of drama, action and a little romance thrown in.

If your a fan or just looking for something new to read I recommend this book to you.

This is a quite unremarkable, moderately entertaining work of fiction set in late 19th century England. As with another of Follett's works, A Place Called Freedom, it has little to recommend it over dozens of other similar novels set in the period.

The plot revolves around the Pilasters, a wealthy and contentious banking family, whose various branches struggle for control of the family business. Subplots involving a fictitious South American country and members of the British "underclass" bring some spice into the history. However, as with A Place Called Freedom, the most striking aspect of the novel is its utter predictability. Twists in the story become strikingly obvious scores of pages in advance.

I would rate this novel slightly above the aforementioned A Place Called Freedom, but both pale in comparison to Follett's two novels Pillars of the Earth and World Without End. Readers familiar with those works will likely be disappointed with this effort.

This dose of English culture was recommended to me as one of the finest in classic literature. Mysteriously the story moves along quite well, even with the aggravating English dialect, the multitude of characters, and the uninteresting, almost banal style.

We return to the simple life when the word gay meant joyous, not the corrupted word it is now. Written in first and third person, this drawn out, hard to follow telling of a lawsuit over an estate inheritance was a struggle to get through (contradicts "moves along quite well"?..................no). Any climactic moments are few and slowed, with subtle impact. Of course it would not be what it is if it was shortened----all 900 pages.

What brings such praise for this book over the years?: the eloquent and sometimes quotable passages are spotty; the only power I see is the improvement it may give to our writing, and that may be its only praise. There are a plethora of outstanding authors with more interesting stories without going through the pain of the "intellectual classics". I am not to say we are to rid them; it is more likely that Bleak House just left much to be desired. Who knows, maybe it has effected me in ways I will only discover later, for that is probably its mystique.

I expected the afterward to summarize my ineptness of understanding this difficult read. Instead it concentrated on the authors greatness and the resources used.

Wish you well
Scott

I, too, leave it to better reviewers to describe it in detail... but I feel that something must be said about these characters. They are ideal, yet complex enough to be real, all of them, in their kindness and intensity, their darkness and meanness, alike. They are absolutely more interesting than any people today... it makes you wonder if people were ever so thoughtful and contemplative - if we have lost something, or rather if Dickens was imaginative and wonderful beyond his experiences could have ever shown! A wonderful book told with care and modesty by two of the best narrators I've ever read.

I purchased Bleak House after watching the PBS series recently. Having familiarity with only A Christmas Carol, I was eager to read such an engrossing, complex, but very entertaining story. Dickens' characters are gems, and the atmosphere of mid-19th century London are captured so beautifully. I recommend this title to anyone with the patience to savor the language, characters, and social criticism found in Bleak House.

The Introduction by Bradbury in the Penguin version, which I would suggest not looking at until you read the novel, agrees with my point: the novel lacks focus and wanders with too many sub-plots. Bradbury calls it "competing plots." So, that point of view is not my imagination nor a unique perspective on Bleak House. This is a very slow moving 1000 page novel which is unlike any of Dickens's other works, i.e.: most of his novels are more entertaining than Bleak House. In fact, it takes 500 pages to get some direction in the story, and there is little in the way of action or suspense until beyond page 600.

Part of the problem is the protagonist, Esther Summerson, who has the potential to be an important character in the book, but (mostly) she is detached from the primary action, and is one of the narrators.

In Bleak House, Dickens tries to weave two or three social issues with a series of plots or sub-plots. Overall, it is a bit of a disappointment and is not his best effort. Clearly the writing is good, but the characters are not as interesting as some of his other novels and there is not much action. Some critics hail the work as his best, but I found it a bit dull: the plot is too diffuse, the story wanders, the characters lack colour and intensity, and the level of the suspense and mystery is low. The second half of the book is better than the first, which is almost a disaster, and the last 300 pages or so is the best part of the book and tends to save the book.

Bleak House falls short in entertaining the reader compared to Oliver Twist, Nicholas Nickleby, David Copperfield, and Great Expectations. Those novels are compelling reads, and Bleak House is not. However, Bleak House is a complicated and well written 5 star novel.

I bought the Penguin Classic version and recommend that purchase highly. As background information, I am in the process of reading most of Dickens's 22 novels and longer short stories, and set up a Listmania list. As a suggestion, avoid the Penguin Popular Classics with the plain green covers (I bought two). They fall apart and do not stand up to a read, especially books over 500 pages in length. The Regular Penguin Classics with the photo or painting on the front are excellent and some have maps and illustrations (drawings). The Wordsworth Classics are not as good, and some are illustrated.

Having read many of Dickens's novels I still rate David Copperfield and Nicholas Nickleby as the best two and rate Oliver Twist and Great Expectations as close seconds behind Copperfield - and these four books are must reads. Bleak House is optional and does not follow the basic Dickens formula - where the protagonist is central to the plot.

There are several subplots rummaging throughout Dickens' lengthy Victorian novel Bleak House: 1) the mystery behind Esther Summerson's disgraceful birth and her subsequent arrival at Bleak House, 2) John Jarndyce's fatherly influence over Esther, Ada and Richard, and its eventual effects on the three, 3) Lady Dedlock's mysterious persona, and the secrets she keeps within herself and 4) the general seemingly never-ending process of the Jarndyce suit in the High Court of Chancery, its ill-effects on those who have an interminable will to prosper off of it, and the general dreary feeling it casts over the whole of society.





One of the interesting and yet sometimes tedious aspect of this work, and something to get used to while reading, is the various narrative voices used by Dickens. This can make the work a challenge to read, but helps to give the story a "series" or "drama" feel to it. Esther Summerson, the protagonist, narrates throughout the book at various times, and comes across fairly enough as a reliable narrator. The other two points of view are a bit more anonymous. One type has an element of stream of consciousness, where the narrator takes you quickly through random thoughts, observances and lists of various characters. In this point of view where Dickens attains the greatest amount of satire to this work, and usually makes the entire Jarndyce and Jarndyce case the butt of his joke, as well as the general scenes of the eccentric characters (and there are plenty). The final narrative type is clearly 3rd person, who simply tells the story looking down upon it without any bias or angle, almost a "fly on the wall" kind of perspective, and this voice seems to be used most throughout the novel.





Dickens employs many memorable and eccentric characters as usual. There is Tulkinghorn, a malicious, unmoved, and unsentimental lawyer, the antagonist who holds key secrets and has no pity for individuals. There is Guppy, who is awkward, a bit "slimy", and has a fascination with Esther that lasts throughout the novel. Allan Woodcourt and Captain George are both noble characters who help others in times of need, Woodcourt having ties to saving people's lives during a shipwreck and also is Richard's friend in his time of financial difficulties, and George aiding in the help of the sick child, Jo. Mr. Bucket is the quick-witted detective, who solves many of the mysteries late in the novel.





The neat aspect of Dickens' book is his ability to introduce many characters, many plot lines, symbols and then weave them together into a tight fit, and intertwine and solve them at the end. Esther learns more and more about her past, and the history of her mother, as the novel progresses, and this seemingly brings into the forefront other scenes which at first may have seemed unimportant. Over all this is a novel which essentially depicts one journey, but uses many characters to arrive there; Esther's journey is one in which she learns who she is, and becomes a stronger character by novel's end.





You can definitely say that in Dickens work, the sum is much greater than its parts. This is a book that adds up to much in its finality, and it is clear that Dickens was writing this in a series format, ending chapters right where we are getting to important information or something that is pertinent to the over all story, leaving the mystery to be carried over to the next chapter.





Although this book is a beast (over 800 pages), if you enjoy Victorian novels, and enjoy Dickens use of satire and eccentric characters, this is one well-worth checking out. While this novel sometimes gets cumbersome with details, it really is a tribute to Dickens ability to illustrate this story and weave everything finely together. Like a painting, Bleak House must be viewed at several different angles before one can truly appreciate it.





4 1/2 stars





(This review refers to the Bantum Classic version of the novel)

By volume, this book competes with 'Crime and Punishment' by Dostoevsky. By content, it fails superbly not only in story, but in writing style as well.

In a nutshell, the story is about an individual who feels betrayed by fate for his insignificant rank in society and one day decides to punish a man he believes is responsible for this misfortune. In all honesty, this is it. For 700 pages the author introduces mundane dialogs and meaningless characters and finally manages to convince me, no, to force me to ache for the death of the poor man, just so that I can see this book end. I seriously don't recommend this book.

If, however, you are determined to spend many, many, many hours reading something from the distant past, try 'The Egyptologist' by Arthur Phillips. It is a much more entertaining novel and will make the time you invest reading it seem a lot more valuable.

by Simon Cleveland

I'm in the middle of the book, but couldn't wait to read others' reviews of this thoroughly satisfying book. I'm listening to the audio version, which is perfection. The story is doled out in delicious drops, sort of like eating your favorite ice cream one tiny teaspoon at a time, hoping never to reach the bottom of the bowl, and yet unable to stop. Yum. The characters are exquisitely fashioned; the author is a master of detail and human nature. I can't say enough good things about this incredibly entertaining work of art.

This book received a good bit of attention upon its release a year or two ago, described as "Victorian noir" in the vein of Dickens and Wilkie Collins - two of my favorite 19th-century English lit authors, particularly Collins (The Woman in White is one of my favorite gothic mystery/suspense novels of all time!). I guess I can see where the critics came up with that, as the story is set in the Victorian period and told in the first person, but frankly, I say that's where the comparison ends.

Edward Glyver, the narrator of the story, opens by confessing to a random murder he commits in "preparation" for the one he's planning for his arch enemy, Phoebus Daunt (this is not a spoiler, as it's right on the synopsis of the book), who has managed through circumstances and luck to take a position in life and society that was meant for Glyver. The remainder of the 700+ pages serve to tell us how and why all this came about, and Glyver's preoccupation with ruining Daunt.

Although I have a sincere appreciation for Cox's obvious and exquisitely detailed knowledge of the English Victorian period - architecture, the geography and demographics of Victorian London, and the literature of the day, I did not care for Glyver's character at all. One might assume that's to be expected given that he openly commits a vicious murder right at the outset, but to me it seemed as if the author was trying to make Glyver a `hero' nevertheless. Honestly, the murder would not necessarily have predisposed me to disliking him, believe it or not. One can commit murder and still get a little empathy from me, depending on the circumstances. I just didn't like him, murder or not. He was a dishonest, insecure lout, professing his undying love for a woman and in the next breath running off to a brothel and banging some prostitute (or two or three). He had no loyalty to anyone or anything, and although I completely understood and would have shared his obsession with taking what he felt was rightfully his and wiping out his enemy, I couldn't get past the fact that he was a self-serving, whiny little pedant.

All I know about the author, Michael Cox, is that he also wrote a well-received biography of M.R. James, the classic horror writer. I think this is Cox's first work of fiction. Not a bad one, either - I'm not saying that. In a nutshell, I thought it was well-written, rich in period detail and possessing a potentially terrific plot, but I disliked the main character so much that I couldn't fully enjoy it and was left more than a little disappointed. I at least found the ending somewhat satisfying, and maybe that was Cox's whole point. I won't give it away, of course.

"Revenge has a long memory," Edward hisses at Phoebus as he's expelled from Eton, a victim of Phoebus' malice and deceit. Disgraced and with his scholarly ambition thwarted, Edward returns home, whereupon the death of his mother leads to the chance discovery of her letters and journals. They suggest that Edward isn't really who he thinks he is. Rather, that he has ties to a wealthy and influential peerage. Back and forth from London to Northamptonshire, from the filth and squalor of the city to the grandeur of the barional estate, Evenwood, we follow Edward as he attempts to discover the extraordinary circumstances of his birth and compile the evidence that would prove his birthright. But Phoebus, his enemy, is forever an impediment to his plans. As the scheming and criminal protégé of an unsuspecting baron, Phoebus is soon to be named heir to the fortune that Edward believes to be rightfully his, and Edward is left with only one deadly option.

Set in mid-1800s England, "The Meaning of Night" is grim Victoriana that's dense with the enduring themes of betrayal and revenge. At close to 700 pages, it is a commitment, though one that doesn't come close to the 30 years its author, Michael Cox, dedicated to it. Mr. Cox said that he wished to emulate Wilkie Collins in this labor of love, and was enthralled by Dickens (specifically "Great Expectations") as a boy. The Collins influence is easy to see--"The Meaning of Night" is packed with intrigue; the Dickens influence obvious in its complex and delineated characters, and the muck and meanness of its London underbelly. Even their names are as Dickensian as they come--Achilles Daunt, Josiah Pluckrose, Fordyce Jukes, Willoughby Le Grice, etc. But in my mind, its protagonist, Edward G (Glyver, Glapthorn, and Ernest Geddington at various times), is nearer to a Trollope creation. In "He Knew He Was Right," Trollope introduced to 19th-century literature the term "monomania," a pathological and psychotic obsession to one subject, via his principal character, Trevelyan. In TMON, the bibliophilic Edward's object of his monomania is his archenemy, Phoebus Rainsford Daunt. The struggles between the protagonist, Edward, and the antagonist, Phoebus, also hint at Doyle's Sherlock Holmes and his nemesis Prof. Moriarty. I'm guessing that the decision to make Edward an opiate slave like Holmes was not arbitrary. The huge difference, however, is that Edward is not just obsessed and stoned out of his skull, he's also murderous. No doubt that TMON is a pastiche of the 19th-century sensationalist Victorian novel; the question is: Is it any good?

The novel's structure is creative. A fictional present-day professor, J. J. Antrobus, is presenting this unique find: a manuscript, positioned as "one of the lost curiosities of nineteenth-century literature" in which an Edward Glyver/Glapthorn/Duport has confessed to his crimes in stream of consciousness narrative (which really is this lengthy novel). In a further attempt at realism, Antrobus obligingly provides hundreds of footnotes to translate, define, and clarify its Latin chapter headings, obscure colloquialisms, bibliographic references, etc., as befits the fastidious academic that he is. The confessor, Edward, is an unreliable narrator, though; his mind, after all, is periodically clouded by opium and busied by hallucinations, and his actions do veer toward insanity. Like Dickens' "Bleak House," TMON is rambling, and events/storylines keep returning. It, too, has an overabundance of characters (I stopped counting at 30), but I didn't mind at all. I found all of it highly entertaining--the contrivances of its plot, the complexity of its principals, the drama and the intrigue. Unabashedly melodramatic, and overgenerous with Victorian staples and bizarrerie, it's derivative, alright, but it was also loads of fun.

I have three reasons for rating The Meaning of Night 1 star: it's not a good mystery novel; it's not a good historical novel; it's not a good novel. What makes this book just not good is: it's too long; key plot points make no sense; and the first person narrator, Edward Galpthorn Glyver Duport--for all his self-advertised scholarship, intelligence and perception--is a self-absorbed [...].

Through clumsy attempts at foreshadowing and irony, author Michael Cox gives away all his major plot points far in advance. There is no mystery, no tension and few surprises in the Meaning of Night. There is a great deal of tedium as you turn over page after page waiting for the narrator to catch up with what you've already figured out. What happens on all those pages--quaint period detail, erotic exploits and overheated philosophical discourse of the 2 a.m. in the dorm lounge variety--pads the book without adding substance. Feel free to skim and skip.

What you have figured out makes no sense. Consider the whole episode in the Temple of the Winds. Edward goes into the abandoned folly looking for who-knows-what, happens to find a dead blackbird which just happens to have dropped dead on top of a key piece of evidence. And then Emily shows up! She just happens to have gotten out of her carriage to climb the steep, difficult path of the Temple, on a cold blustery night and justifies her action with an obvious lie.

Edward the intellect never sees through any of this. Instead he falls hopelessly in love with her although he knows her to be engaged in two love affairs (one Sapphic) and often witnesses her wild mood swings.

Emily's unsuitability isn't all the ur-observant Edward fails to catch. Obvious aliases jump off the page at the reader while zipping over his head. For 50 pages Edward frets over the loss of a crucial document that you know he's had in his possession all along--he saw Mr. Carteret give it to the porter who gave it to him!

Edward's tone as a narrator is fatuous and irritating. I regularly read about 40 pages of whatever is at hand before lights out, but I could only stand Edward for 15 a night. And that was before he began missing clues.

The historic detail of the book is more a veneer, than in the grain of the text. Cox just doesn't have the chops of, say Peter Ackroyd, to bring the "Great Leviathan" of London to life on the page in all its filthy, teeming, fascinating flash and horror. Cox tries to up the historical authenticity by casting the novel as a discovered manuscript edited and annotated by JJ Antrobus (another obvious alias*). This gives him an esxcuse to pepper the text with footnotes that prove he did his research. He gives the addresses of places and editions of books mentioned. He even describes Boeuf a la Flammande. He provides a definition for "epergne" a word that can be found in any modern dictionary but omits one for "barege." The footnotes are more distraction than illumination.

If you want to read a really great mystery set in historical London and featuring real people, get The Trial of Elizabeth Cree (Dan Leno and the Limehouse Golem) by Peter Ackroyd. Or substitute New York for London and reread Caleb Carr's The Alienist: A Novel.To my mind it's the gold standards of the genre.

* Michael Palin, in full Spanish Inquisition drag, reads the line "Oh, Mr. Antrobus!" in a cut-away during a Monty Python Episode. It is also the name of the family in Thornton Wilder's The Skin of Our Teeth