Rating: 
Summary: Deep, dark, delicious Dickens!
Review: "There is little to be satisfied in reading this book"?? I couldn't disagree more. Bleak House left a profound impression on me, and was so utterly satisfying a reading experience that I wanted it never to end. I've read it twice over the years and look forward to reading it again. Definitely my favorite novel.I don't know what the previous reviewer's demands are when reading a novel, but mine are these: the story must create its world - whatever and wherever that world might be - and make me BELIEVE it. If the novelist cannot create that world in my mind, and convince me of its truths, they've wasted my time (style doesn't matter - it can be clean and spare like Orwell or verbose like Dickens, because any style can work in the hands of someone who knows how to use it). Many novels fail this test, but Bleak House is not one of them. Bleak House succeeds in creating a wonderfully dark and complex spider web of a world. On the surface it's unfamiliar: Victorian London and the court of Chancery - obviously no one alive today knows that world first hand. And yet as you read it you know it to be real: the deviousness, the longing, the secrets, the bureaucracy, the overblown egos, the unfairness of it all. Wait a minute... could that be because all those things still exist today? But it's not all doom and gloom. It also has Dickens's many shades of humor: silliness, word play, comic dialogue, preposterous characters with mocking names, and of course a constant satirical edge. It also has anger and passion and tenderness. I will grant one thing: if you don't love reading enough to get into the flow of Dickens's sentences, you'll probably feel like the previous reviewer that "...it goes on and on, in interminable detail and description...". It's a different dance rhythm folks, but well worth getting used to. If you have to, work your way up to it. Don't start with a biggie like Bleak House, start with one of his wonderful short pieces such as A Christmas Carol. Dickens was a gifted storyteller and Bleak House is his masterpiece. If you love to dive into a book, read and enjoy this gem!
Rating:
Summary: Step back in time, '1984-Orwell'-1840's Dickens style
Review: Ada Clair and Richard Carstone come to live as wards of John Jarndyce at Bleak House, a manor in the English country side. Their governess is Esther Summerston, an orphan, who in the course of the novel gets three proposals of marriage. Quite an accomplishment for a modest unassuming Victorian maiden. One prospective suitor is a bit pesky, another too old and the third, well...you can imagine how perplexing this attention can all be for mild mannered Esther. As Richard Carstone matriculates to his majority he and Ada come to profess their love for one another. At the same time, Richard becomes preoccupied with a contested will, the infamous Jarndyce v Jarndyce which has wended its way through chancery for...could it be...decades? His zeal to win is reinforced by spendthrift man-child Harold Skimpole and a lawyer named Boythorn. Oh, there is intrigue aplenty here. Another lawyer seems to thrive on putting the screws to folks. Barrister Talkinghorn brings down the arrogant Lady Deadlock with his discovery of a child born out of wedlock. Instrumental in the unraveling of her mystery is a poor street urchin, Little Jo, whose life and fate are the stuff of nightmares. The mistreatment he receives make me shudder. Well, Dickens has in Bleak House quite a study in greed, primarily the greed of lawyers whose fees dry up the goods when petitioners come to chancery. It is a somber slow paced book well crafted and rewarding to the patient 21st century reader. For the instant, just add water types, skim the book, skip the slow laborious places...
Rating:
Summary: A Misnomer.....
Review: Bleak House, Charles Dickens' scathing look at the Victorian Legal system, is a wonderful portrait of people, ideas, and the power of fame and fortune to seduce even the most innocent. A house was never less bleak than the one that Dickens has portrayed in this book. The central thread of the novel, the suit being handled by Jarndyce and Jarndyce...involves a large inheritance. But the proceeds of such have been tangled up in legal jargon and shuffled papers for years, to the point where no one really knows what the basis of the suit is any longer. But year after year, lawyer after lawyer, the case progresses. Enter Esther Summerson, a young girl, orphaned at an early age, and raised in the care of an eccentric woman, who upon her death, leaves Esther in the charge of one of the aforementioned Jarndyce men, to ensure her well-being. She meets a myriad of other characters, some rich, some poor, all who influence her life in one way or another. There are far too many to name without slighting any others, but suffice to say that Dickens had an amazing ability to characterize anyone, from the simple street sweeper to the height of London's elite social scene...and does so with a deep, probing eye, and a proclivity for realism. Each character comes with unique traits and characteristics, and a wonderful story to tell. Although Dickens is often criticized for his loquacious writing style...the strength of his ability to bring characters to life is argument enough for the length of most of his works. Dickens ability to satirize almost any element of Victorian society is a must-read for anyone with an interest in history, and I am continually fascinated by aspects of many of these settings that still hold true in the present day world. The effect that the promise of wealth has upon people, the attraction of fame for those who do not possess it, and the truth that lies in the notion that money cannot always buy happiness. While Esther's life, and the lawsuit, are the main focal points of the novel, the rest of the various plots and subplots will engage and entertain. Dickens was truly a master novelist, and proof that classic literature endures for a reason.
Rating:
Summary: Many bleak houses and a few cheerful firesides.
Review: Generally regarded as one of Dickens' best novels, "Bleak House" comprises many special features.
Firstly there are several social evils of Dickens' time, evils which he either helped to expose or whose exposure by others he thought it prudent to incorporate. The aim of lawyers to make business for themselves he dramatized in the case Jarndyce v Jarndyce. The misguided missionary zeal of self-appointed philanthropists who set their vision on far away places, peoples, and cultures while ignoring the needs of the family and the situation at home is personified especially in Mrs Jellyby and Mr Chadband.
Secondly, there is the narrative format: the narrative is shared between one of the principal characters, Esther Summerson, writing in the past tense, and an anonymous narrator who writes in the present tense. The latter narrative contains some of the best imagery and most powerful prose to be found in Dickens' works. The novel's famous opening, depicting a London fog, is an example of this.
Thirdly, there is the presence of a detective, Mr Detective Bucket. Detective fiction, so large a section in book shops nowadays, was unknown in Dickens' time. He foreshadowed most of its elements in "Bleak House", although his incurable reliance on coincidence and rudimentary grasp of psychology militates against the creation of genuine suspense.
Finally, I identify the novel's structure as one of its special features. "It is the best constructed of all his books," wrote G K Chesterton.
On every page there is the stamp of genius, I believe, but I also believe that the novel has many flaws. Once the main plot lines are established, the pace slows down excessively, part way through, and a parade of tiresome characters like Harold Skimpole are allowed to occupy whole chapters at a time. There are mawkish deathbed scenes. Character drawing is not always successful. The best-drawn are the eccentrics or those who have some physical attribute or mannerism that Dickens can exaggerate.
"Bleak House" is the Dickens novel I have re-read most often. At all ages I have found it absorbing. In recent times it has received great advocacy by the issue of a complete reading of it - all 39 hours - by Hugh Dickson. The possessor of a pleasant natural voice, suggesting a tenor if he were to sing, Hugh Dickson contrives to adopt and project the voices of the more than 60 characters that people this novel. A masterly achievement.
Rating: 
Summary: It's Dickens, therefore it must be ...
Review: good? Dickens may be a venerated classical writer, but unless one is fascinated by books of this period, or by Dickens' writings, there is little to be satisfied in reading this book. I'm sorry, but Dickens' "Bleak House" is like a poorly done soap opera - it goes on and on, in interminable detail and description, and one comes to believe it will never end! There are whole chpaters where nothing happens yet, if you skip ahead, you may miss one important detail. It is, quite frankly, boring! The reader practically falls asleep reading and often even misses the interesting segments because their minds have been numbed by previous pages of undirected rambling. For this book to appeal to the average reader, it needs to be revised or abridged, so that the reader does not get bogged down in so much trivial detail. Yes, I know,this is Dickens,the great Dickens, but a reader cannot love a book based on the author's name. Yes, Dickens is important in an historical sense and the details are important to 1)understanding the society of the time, 2)seeing the metaphors created by well described scenes, 3)illuminating the pretensions that are satarized, etc. and there are parts that do have an important meaning for the book - the long description in the opening chapter of the London fog (as representative of the "fog" in the legal system of the day, is valuable and well-written and even keeps the reader interested), but others are superfluous and tedious - detailed descriptions of the horses in the stables on a rainy day at Chesney Wold. If one thinks to read this book to better understand the historical times, one would be more informed and entertained with a history text. You have to be patient if you want to read this book, and you have to have a large block of time set aside to read it. I do not wish to disparage Dickens, but I cannot agree that it is a fascinating book for the average reader (and I do not refer to the "average" reader as a primitive, thrill seeker looking only for sex and violence, I refer to readers as intelligent persons who enjoy reading and appreciate good literature). "Bleak House" has great litrary value but as an enjoyable read, it just does not make the grade.
Rating: 
Summary: Be warned, you have to pay attention
Review: I loved this book, for the following reasons. First, in Dicken's usual fashion, he makes his characters memorable. There is no character that Dickens does not take the time to make an intricate work of art. The criticism that these characters are "stock" seems ridiculous to me, since very few authors could create "stock" characters as memorable and lively as what Dickens does.
Secondly, this book has an amazingly intricate plot that Dickens somehow manages to keep under control. In some of Dickens' novels he loses control of the narrative and has to introduce last-minute characters and wildly hilarious coincidences in order to resolve the plot. Not the case here. Dickens does not have to resort to any desperate last-minute tricks to tie his plot strands together. However, there is so many plot strands to track, that if you read this book lazily, you will surely be lost already in the first 200 pages. So pay attention!
Thirdly, Dickens' satire of the court of Chancery and human foibles in general remains timeless, as it is in most of his novels I have read. Even though this novel is firmly set in the 19th century, I found myself recognizing today's situations in it. Not so much has changed, after all.
So why only four stars? Ultimately, I think Dickens could have served his purpose better with a less complex novel. Some of the stories which are told serve only as filler, and are a little tiring to work through. Also, sometimes Dickens' characters' behaviour is a little unbelievable, thinking especially of some characters' insane affection for one another.
However, I highly recommend this book. Dickens' style takes some getting used to, but it's well worth the effort.
Rating:
Summary: one of dickens' best
Review: I must confess that "David Copperfield" is still my favorite Dickens novel. However, I must also add that "Bleak House" comes close. Here we see Dickens the moralist at the height of his powers. Although the courts and the law as it then exist are his targets, he also takes on professional reformers and the tradition bound aristocracy (whose day was drawing to a close when "Bleak House" was composed). Society is what Dickens is showing us, with all its failings. This is supposedly one of the "dark" novels, but I do not agree with that characterization. While there is pathos (during the death of one particular character), this appears to be justified. Of all the novels that Dickens has written, this has the most unusual structure. He jumps back between third person narrative and first person (that person being Esther Summerson). As usual it is not Dickens main characters that are the most memorable, but Dickens great comic creations. Here I must confess to a certain anticipation whenever Mrs. Jelleby, always mindful of Africa, came on the scene. If you like Dickens, I would suggest reading this after "David Copperfield" and "Great Expectations."
Rating:
Summary: Why Only Four Stars?
Review: Let's get a few obvious truths out of the way: 1. Charles Dickens is a writer of almost unparalled talent who could write just about anything he wanted and write it so well that he could avoid insulting the intelligentsia while still managing to entertain the masses around the world. 2. While storytelling techniques haven't changed so much over the years, the expectations of modern readers are very different from those of the Victorians. 3. Dickens wrote what he wanted to write, to entertain the readership, to make money, for his own personal enjoyment and to comment on the harsh realities of his world. While I cannot deny that "Bleak House" is a work of genius, my review (presumptuous as it is for me to review Dickens at all) is that of a modern reader with different expectations than those who read his work 150 years ago. While I can appreciate his genius and talent, I don't have to find CONSTANT enjoyment in reading his works, which I do not. When I was young, my father would entertain me by asking me to write down a number between 1 and 9. From my awkward 6-year-old scribbling he would cleverly draw a face, a different face every time. This amazed and entertained me. Similarly, I think you could give Dickens a few human characteristics, (say something like "a tall thin man who wears glasses and has a big nose. He smokes a pipe and stays up late reading hunting magazines") and from this skeleton he could create a detailed and interesting character, complete with verbal idiosyncracies, facial tics and unique mannerisms, an appropriate home and friends, and a complete biography. And he could do it in an instant. But like my father's caricatures, Dickens' characters are mere cartoons next to portraits of everyday reality. You don't expect to ever meet anyone like Mrs. Jellyby, Mr. Skimpole or Mr. Bucket. But you remember them nevertheless. Still, they are nothing like real people. Esther Summerson should be in heaven at this moment, because she has never so much as lost her temper. Ditto for John Jarndyce, Ada and Allen Woodcourt. They're saints. Meanwhile, Grandfather Smallweed should be in hell, because he has never had anything but selfish motives for so little as waking up in the morning. But while you won't find too much reality or moral ambiguity in Dickens' works, that doesn't make his work less enjoyable. He creates so many characters that you're bound to like some while you hate others or are simply bored by a few. But somehow, in the vast gallery he creates, they are all different from one another, and instantly recognizable. Some of my favorites in Bleak House are Mr. Turveydrop, Gridley, Mrs. Pardiggle, Boythorn, Mr. Skimpole and especially Reverand Chadband. To me, at least, the pompous preacher is a laugh riot. But the minor characters hardly serve a purpose at all. Charley, Jo, the Snagsbys, don't have to be part of the story, they're just there because Dickens likes to introduce us to people. He's very good at it. Unfortunately, I don't feel the same enjoyment when reading about the major characters. While I'm interested in what happens to Richard and Ada, Esther Summerson and Allen Woodcourt, the Jarndyces and the Dedlocks, they're just not as fun to read about as some of the minor characters. But reading a Dickens novel has been compared to attending a large dinner party and being introduced to a few dozen guests. You're bound to meet people you like and people you don't like. And we all choose uniquely. But to my modern and cynical sensibilities, Dickens is first of all way too melodramatic. Understandable, I think, because that which shocked Victorian-era Londoners hardly raises an eyebrow among today's urban-dwelling Americans. Illigitemacy? Please, it's everywhere. Poverty? Suicide? Shocking? Hardly. There is also too much coincidence in his plots for my tastes, not to mention over-the-top pathos. The death of Jo, the crossing sweeper, for instance, leaves me cold. I feel absolutely nothing because it is so overdone. Ditto for Krook's death. I read it and yawned. Dickens' characters are seldom gray or morally ambiguous. And they behave predictably as a result. But all those criticisms aside, I still managed to enjoy "Bleak House" a great deal. I just feel like he could have been less verbose. He didn't need 50 or so characters and nearly 900 pages to tell this story. He introduces characters who speak a few lines then disappear forever. And though he does it well, he describes things endlessly. The brilliant opening, for instance, could be reduced (in ideas at least) to "It's a foggy and muddy November in London, and the weather reflects the ongoings within the Court of Chancery." But of course, that hardly contains any interest at all. The beginning, by the way, truly is magnificent writing, but to what end? It's just too much FOR MY TASTES. Read it, by all means, read it. You'll even enjoy huge portions of it. But don't expect never to be bored or confused by the lengthy convoluted sentences and SAT vocabulary where one-syllable words will do. Dickens is a genius, no doubt about it. And people will be reading his books 1,000 years from now. But how many of us read Shakespeare for pure enjoyment? Similarly, 1,000 years from now, Dickens will be an academic chore, not enjoyment. Luckily, that's still a ways off and you can still enjoy his works today without worrying about 1,000 years from now.
Rating:
Summary: Magnificent House.
Review: This is the second book by Dickens I have read so far, but it will not be the last. "Bleak House" is long, tightly plotted, wonderfully descriptive, and full of memorable characters. Dickens has written a vast story centered on the Jarndyce inheritance, and masterly manages the switches between third person omniscient narrator and first person limited narrator. His main character Esther never quite convinces me of her all-around goodness, but the novel is so well-written that I just took Esther as she was described and ran along with the story. In this book a poor boy (Jo) will be literally chased from places of refuge and thus provide Dickens with one of his most powerful ways to indict a system that was particularly cruel to children. Mr. Skimpole, pretending not to be interested in money; Mr. Jarndyce, generous and good; Richard, stupid and blind; the memorable Dedlocks, and My Lady Dedlock's secret being uncovered by the sinister Mr. Tulkinghorn; Mrs. Jellyby and her telescopic philanthropy; the Ironmaster described in Chapter 28, presenting quite a different view of industralization than that shown by Dickens in his next work, "Hard Times." Here is a veritable cosmos of people, neighbors, friends, enemies, lovers, rivals, sinners, and saints, and Dickens proves himself a true master at describing their lives and the environment they dwell in. There are landmark chapters: Chapter One must be the best description of a dismal city under attack by dismal weather and tightly tied by perfectly dismal laws, where the Lord Chancellor sits eternally in Lincoln's Inn Hall. Chapter 32 has one of the eeriest scenes ever written, with suspicious smoke, greasy and reeking, as a prelude to a grisly discovery. Chapter 47 is when Jo cannot "move along" anymore. This Norton Critical is perhaps the best edition of "Bleak House" so far: the footnotes help a lot, and the two Introductions are key to understanding the Law system at the time the action takes place, plus Dickens' interest in this particular topic. To round everything off, read also the criticism of our contemporaries, as well as that of Dickens' time. "Bleak House" is a long, complex novel that opens a window for us to another world. It is never boring and, appearances to the contrary, is not bleak. Enjoy.
Rating:
Summary: Probably the greatest English novel
Review: To my mind, this is the greatest novel in the English language, but that is a matter of personal taste. I won't bother summarizing the book or discussing the characters; you can find plenty of that elsewhere. Like many, if not most, great novels, this book needs to be read again and again, admittedly a daunting task for such a massive tome. I have a word of caution for those reading the Penguin edition: Be very careful of the editor's footnotes. They give away crucial plot elements! To my mind this is unforgivable! Suffice it to say that a murder occurs fairly late in the book, and this gives rise to a fascinating detective story subplot. But the footnotes not only tell you who was murdered but who the murderer was, some 600 or more pages before they occur! Since I had never read the book before, this came close to spoiling the book for me. I have written a letter to Penguin complaining about this, but so far I have received no response. The Penguin footnotes are helpful in explaining what some obscure or out of date phrases may mean, and in telling what real life figures some of the characters are based on, but dare to look at them only if you don't care if some of the surprise elements are spoiled. Otherwise a great novel.
|
