A Tale of Two Cities is one of the best written stories I have ever read. I know I’ve said this time and time again but this book is so well crafted it blows my mind-grapes. Right after I wrote that last piece, literally, one page later, Carton reappeared and made sense of his role in Dickens’ story. Just when I was wondering what had happened to him, fearing he had disappeared in some Wiseau-like fashion, he comes right back and answers all my questions. I must say, the ending is predictable a good 70 pages or so out but I don’t think that is the point here (in fact, I rarely thing the ending of a story is the most important part. Unless, of course it is a mystery and the plot is the most important thing in the book… or the only important thing in the book. Unless we are speaking of Holmes, Marple and Poe, I guess…). The world and characters are so well done, the predictable ending is a moot point. But are the characters so well done?
In my last post I griped a bit about Darnay and his lack of depth. I stand by that claim 100%. If you use that argument that the Protagonist of a story is the character that changes the most, you would have to argue that Carton, not Darnay is the Protagonist. But he isn’t. The book isn’t A Tale of Two Gentlemen. Much like Lope de Vega’s Fuenteovejuna, the protagonist is not a person but an entire village. Or a city. Or cities, in this case. No, let’s say city. Paris changes the most in this story above all else… London? Eh, we don’t really get a good feel for what happens to London during the course of this novel. The book should be called A Tale of a City or Paris: A REVOLUTION!
Back to Darnay. He is one of the only major characters that lack depth and psychology. Manette, Cruncher, Pross, Carton, Lorry and Stryver are all “better” characters than Darnay. It seems that the only two bland and 2-dimensional characters are Darnay and Lucie… a boring man and his boring wife. Sure, they’re pretty and noble and honorable and full of love but they’re like 2 ingenues in a musical: I don’t care about them. If this were Les Miserables they would be Marius and Cosette, two boring characters that pale in comparison to Eponine and Enjolras (and Jean Valjean, Javert, Fantine and… Gavroche). And, Dickens does not do a great job of making Darnay and Carton “rivals.” Maybe I’m just stupid, but I did not get the impression that Carton was as in love with Lucie as he was. It felt forced. It was necessary for his final redemption at the end of the novel but it didn’t seem real.
And surprisingly, that was the only thing in the novel that seemed forced to me. All the other little threads and connections, the way that all of these characters are so intertwined beyond their knowledge (like some 1990’s “edgy” film…) and control came off so well. None of it is trite or forced.
I blame my shitty english teachers in High School (really, just one. 9th grade. Mr. Turner) for dumbing down my literary diet when it comes to the classics, thus my complete ignorance of Dickens (and most of the classics for that matter). Nevertheless, this is my post-grad education.
Up Next: Monsieur Pain
The Uneasy Reader 
February 21, 2012 at 5:28 pm
I have finally got round to reading this and so agree about Darnay’s disappoing lack of depth.
I expected it in Lucie because of Dickens ‘Angel in the Home’ views, but this is a very passive, dull hero. He does seem to spend a lot of time getting rescued, which is usually the lot of heroines…
I heard that Dickens meant to reveal character through the action rather than their dialogue but here it doesn’t seem to work. In fact, the reader is almost never shown his mental processes except in the courtroom scene and when he decides to risk his life in France.
There’s all sorts of unanswered questions about his motivations. Does he know that Carton loves Lucie:? Is he meant to care if he does know? Is his sullenness when Carton mentions Lucie in the pub after the trial meant to indicate his distaste at him, or a becoming diffidence?
With geeky ardour, I note that there is an obscure reference to his visting Dr Manette between his meeting Lucie and her father on the trip across the channel and his court case, but do we ever find out why this is? I haven’t finished the book yet, but I begin to think that Dickens forgot it, or my memory is playing up!
Carton is for sure more interesting, yet surely Darnay is meant to be the hero?