Rating: 
Summary: Auobiographical, but still a good story!
Review: This book is a devastating expose of the treatment of children in nineteenth century England. This book written by Charles Dickens is probably one of his better known works. It has always been thought that the book is autobiographical, but it tells a really good story too, as all of Dickens' works do. I love Dickens novels for the characters and this one does not disappoint. We have David Copperfield himself who is the orphaned hero-narrator, and his mother Clara Copperfield and his cruel step father Edward Mardstone. We've also got friends of David's - Clara, Daniel, Ham and Little Em'ly Peggotty, plus a whole bunch of other wonderful characters. It's a coming of age novel for a boy of the nineteenth century, and Dickens covers all the pain and joy that goes along with growing up poor in England at this time. We see David grow up and get married. We see his pain as he watches his invalid wife sicken and die and his ultimate success as a writer. Don't miss Charles Dickens' great works in your reading adventures. I've read every one.
Rating: 
Summary: "David Copperfield" - A very touching story
Review: If Charles Dickens created his child hero Oliver Twist for his sympathetic commiseration of orphans and his discontent of the ill-functioning society, we could say that he created his other child hero David Copperfield for a completely different reason. Critics consider "David Copperfield" as Dickens' autobiographical novel that unmasked a great account of Dickens' early childhood upbringings. It is often said that it is impossible to understand a great classic work without understanding the writer first. To read "David Copperfield" is to understand Charles Dickens, which will further deepen the understanding of Dickens other works.
The Theme
Honestly speaking, I consider "David Copperfield" a bit dry in terms of plot development and dramatic climax comparing to "Oliver Twist". I understand that this has to do with the fact that this is a semi-autobiography that had to carry some purpose of relating to the realities in Dickens childhood. Another attributed reason is that unlike "Oliver Twist", "David Copperfield" is a bildungsroman, that is, a novel that develops a character from childhood to adulthood. It is understandable that climax is hard to be defined or to be captured when writing a bildungsroman where story is defined by time progress rather than events.
As Dickens' earlier works were published serially, his writings were also finished serially, either weekly or monthly, according to the needs of publications. It was not until the rather cool receipt of his "Martin Chuzzlewit" that Dickens started considering taking upon a more constructed writing style with numbered plans in plot development. "David Copperfield" was thus produced under such constructed and well-planned writing, which, I believe, added special dramatic affect to the stories. The repetitive reappearance of several important characters in David Copperfield's life confirms the reality in which we all experience the re-acquaintance with people we've met and that the relationship is strengthened with each re-acquaintance. Writing constructively, rather serially, gave Dickens the opportunity to cultivate each of these characters, their relationship with David Copperfield and the impact they have on David Copperfield. Instead of introducing minor characters that were forgotten later on, Dickens gave each character a purpose of existence in the story, which also engaged readers into the story and added flavor to the plot.
The story of David Copperfield ended in the most beautiful merriness, with David finding the true hero of his life - himself. However, an interesting question that we should ask is, has Charles Dickens let his own kindness take over the realism that fictional works should bring forward to the readers? Many critics seem to think Dickens plot his story to make the readers feel good, rather than show the reader what human life is really like. I don't think I have read enough of Dickens' works to pass any judgment, but I do like to point out that, as a writer, I do believe that a story to express realism makes a greater echo in readers' hearts than a story to please.
The Language
The more I read Charles Dickens' works, the more I am convinced that his works, his language, to be more specific, need to be appreciated only by imaginative minds. I am not advocating this because I am an immediate admirer of old British language style, I sincerely believe that it would be beneficial for people to appreciate more of beauty of the literate language used in Dickens' writings, or any old British writer's writings for that matter.
Rating:
Summary: Yes, it's a Classic
Review: It has boggled my mind how some people can straight-facedly claim, with incorrect spelling and in poor grammar no less, that 'David Copperfield' was either boring, stupid, or both. I am a young man (not yet in my twenties) and I found 'Copperfield' to be the most emotionally powerful book I have ever read, if not necessarily the best written.
'Copperfield' marks a bold step forward in Dickens' writing, both in terms of diction (though his syntax never changes throughout his career) and its use thereof in advancing and establishing multiple moods during the course of the book. From the grim severity of Murdstone's dominance over David's mother, to the unexpected charity and kindness of David's Aunt, to the shadowy, damp, foreboding deaths of several main characters throughout the course of the book, the tone of the writing conveys, powerfully and with undeniable precision, the appropriate mood and instills the reader with exactly the emotion that should be felt. Even the marriages and losses of minor characters shrouds the reader in exactly the right blanket of rejoicing or of sorrow. There is more symbolism both unabashedly apparent and subtly bestowed here than in any of Dickens' previous novels.
There is a reason why this book is considered a classic - the dialogue is crisp and believable, the characters not so much caricatures as they had been in novels past, but more plausible and defined (the despicable Uriah Heep being perhaps the sole exception). The impact apparent in the betrayal, death, and ultimate good fortune so prominent in the book is not lost on the reader, as it would be in the hands of lesser writers. The lone points in the novel where I found my mind to wander were during Mr. Micawber's lengthy expositions, in which he is supposed to be comically exaggerated but instead comes off as something of a blowhard, simply an over-enthusiastic debtor with a knack for paperwork. Otherwise, this book is one of undeniable and irrepressible strength and fervor, from David's fated escape from the factory to Agnes' memorable proclamation; the whole novel works in remarkable symphony to create something better than just a book. It becomes an experience. For those who cannot quite grasp the genius and subtleties of Dickens's work, who complain because it is a little lengthy or a little old-fashioned, I feel sorry. They will never know how much bigger 'David Copperfield' - both the novel and the character - is than them.
Rating:
Summary: Almost as good as Great Expectations...
Review: David Copperfield was Dickens' personal favorite and most autobiographical book. Long but vivid, this novel is chock-full of wonderful characters and excellent scenes. David's story is both happy and inspiring, although this book shouldn't be taken for sap. There's plenty of dark moments among the happy and funny. Also, while they'll never pass Pip and Estella, I love characters like David, Agnes, Steerforth, the Micawbers, and especially Betsy Trotwood. The book also has villians one loves to hate in Uriah Heep and the Murdstones.
It's not as tight as Great Expectations, but in this book what is most enjoyable about Dickens is revealed. His wonderful humor combines with his penchant for the dark to create an excellent and unforgettable novel.
Rating:
Summary: High marks for this one
Review: Three major pitfalls are usually inevitable in the work of an author who publishes his novels in serial format for literary magazines, as Charles Dickens did. The first is that the medium does not allow for editing and revision upon completion of a first draft. The second is that the author is under the constant pressure of a weekly deadline. And the third is that the author is paid by the word. All three flaws are glaring in David Copperfield.If Dickens had been able to look over this novel as a whole, surely he would have made serious revisions to it. The dramatic tension of the plot is poorly calibrated. It peaks a half dozen times throughout the book, which only confuses the reader and leaves him feeling betrayed when the plot simply moves on to something else. What was the point of the climax in the early pages of the book, when Mr. Murdstone takes over Copperfield's happy home and begins to wreak havoc? Murdstone's character should have reappeared later in the book in more prominent fashion, as the evil foil to our hero, and he surely would have in a book that had been properly revised as a holistic work. There are certainly many memorable characters and scenes in this book, but there are also several that should have been left out. But writing fifty chapters keeps an author employed for fifty weeks, and that is why this book is 750 pages instead of 450.
|
