crissfm's review against another edition
2.0
En realidad no he llegado al final pero sé lo que pasa porque lo he visto en clase. Y debo admitir de una vez que no voy a terminarlo...
viljaneito's review against another edition
3.0
Kolmesta lukemastani Dickensistä tämä on ollut tylsin. Loppu tuli kuitenkin aivan puun takaa, joten nostan kirjailijalle hattua siitä. Aion kuitenkin edelleen Kahdesta kaupungista lumoutuneena jatkaa Dickensin parissa.
katiebell1515's review against another edition
emotional
funny
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
jessica_flower's review against another edition
2.0
CW: Domestic violence, abusive and toxic relationships, general violence (not graphic)
Well that was quite the 19th century ride. I'm not sure if I love the story that much, but boy do I have things to say about it.
First, to get it out of the way, that ending, that last line specifically, confused the hell out of me when I read it the first time. I had to read over the last chapter before I realized it was meant to be ambiguous. (I'm not a huge fan of open endings, so that left me a bit upset).
Dickens writes great characters, I will give him that. They have layers of complexity that makes them seem like real, flawed people. And even in a story where a lot of sad and emotional things happen, Dickens manages to put in some humor to lighten things up. Wemmick and his castle was my favourite, I think.
Through the narrator Pip, his perspectives and his experiences, this novel brings up a lot of commentary on wealth and the want of it, how it shapes people and how it can change people when they get it; on the ambition of climbing the social order of the 19th century, and where that leaves you, psychologically, emotionally, if you, by some miracle, manage to do so. It also brings up the struggle of identity: what do you see yourself as, how does that change when you grow up, and how your actions reflect that (or don't).
Through Estella, we see how a parent's internalised anger and resentment over the past can be passed on to their offspring, where it is given new space to take root and ferment. Estella's pride and vanity is often talked about, but what people don't seem to notice as often is her anger. Her distinctly female anger that covers up any softness she claims she doesn't have, her inner rage that builds as she grows older and sees what she's become under Miss Havisham's teachings. Estella, flawed though she is, seems like one of the rare female characters written by a man whose anger feels very real. It shines off the pages when she's in a scene as an adult, cold and hard and deep as the years she's spent in Satis House with Miss Havisham. (I could be wrong about this, but that's just my impression upon reading this for the first time.)
All that being said, by God the dialogue and just the language in general was sometimes hard to get a hold of. It really goes to show how 200 years can change the way people talk to each other and describe things. Victorian vocabulary is a bitch. The Gothic atmosphere was pretty good, though, most of the time.
Victorian England being what it was, domestic violence as we know it was commonplace, but it didn't make it any less discomforting to read through. Jesus, if Mrs. Joe lived nowadays, CPS would've been called ASAP. Mrs. Matthew Pocket too. Not to mention Miss Havisham (Estella would be the modern queen bee bully, no doubt about that), although she and Mrs. Pocket being rich and white they wouldn't have faced many (any) consequences. It still turned my stomach to read it, though.
It can't be left out that I think Pip continuing to be in love with Estella after she treated him so cruelly was a really stupid thing to do. But given that he doesn't see examples of healthy marriages and romantic relationships until much later in life, that's not entirely his fault.
Long story short, everyone in this novel would benefit from seeing a therapist. Minus Biddy. She got sense. Minus Wemmick and Herbert and their fiancées. They're pretty chill. (Yes, I'm including Joe because he needs to talk out his issues from his own childhood and from having Mrs. Joe as a wife).
Jaggers is the lawyer to end all lawyers.
Well that was quite the 19th century ride. I'm not sure if I love the story that much, but boy do I have things to say about it.
First, to get it out of the way, that ending, that last line specifically, confused the hell out of me when I read it the first time. I had to read over the last chapter before I realized it was meant to be ambiguous. (I'm not a huge fan of open endings, so that left me a bit upset).
Dickens writes great characters, I will give him that. They have layers of complexity that makes them seem like real, flawed people. And even in a story where a lot of sad and emotional things happen, Dickens manages to put in some humor to lighten things up. Wemmick and his castle was my favourite, I think.
Through the narrator Pip, his perspectives and his experiences, this novel brings up a lot of commentary on wealth and the want of it, how it shapes people and how it can change people when they get it; on the ambition of climbing the social order of the 19th century, and where that leaves you, psychologically, emotionally, if you, by some miracle, manage to do so. It also brings up the struggle of identity: what do you see yourself as, how does that change when you grow up, and how your actions reflect that (or don't).
Through Estella, we see how a parent's internalised anger and resentment over the past can be passed on to their offspring, where it is given new space to take root and ferment. Estella's pride and vanity is often talked about, but what people don't seem to notice as often is her anger. Her distinctly female anger that covers up any softness she claims she doesn't have, her inner rage that builds as she grows older and sees what she's become under Miss Havisham's teachings. Estella, flawed though she is, seems like one of the rare female characters written by a man whose anger feels very real. It shines off the pages when she's in a scene as an adult, cold and hard and deep as the years she's spent in Satis House with Miss Havisham. (I could be wrong about this, but that's just my impression upon reading this for the first time.)
All that being said, by God the dialogue and just the language in general was sometimes hard to get a hold of. It really goes to show how 200 years can change the way people talk to each other and describe things. Victorian vocabulary is a bitch. The Gothic atmosphere was pretty good, though, most of the time.
Victorian England being what it was, domestic violence as we know it was commonplace, but it didn't make it any less discomforting to read through. Jesus, if Mrs. Joe lived nowadays, CPS would've been called ASAP. Mrs. Matthew Pocket too. Not to mention Miss Havisham (Estella would be the modern queen bee bully, no doubt about that), although she and Mrs. Pocket being rich and white they wouldn't have faced many (any) consequences. It still turned my stomach to read it, though.
It can't be left out that I think Pip continuing to be in love with Estella after she treated him so cruelly was a really stupid thing to do. But given that he doesn't see examples of healthy marriages and romantic relationships until much later in life, that's not entirely his fault.
Long story short, everyone in this novel would benefit from seeing a therapist. Minus Biddy. She got sense. Minus Wemmick and Herbert and their fiancées. They're pretty chill. (Yes, I'm including Joe because he needs to talk out his issues from his own childhood and from having Mrs. Joe as a wife).
Jaggers is the lawyer to end all lawyers.
diamontique's review against another edition
3.0
"Great Expectations" is a classic novel by Charles Dickens. It has everything in it: romance, suspense, drama.. and yet for some reason it's one of the 'hardest books to read'. It isn't. I could read it just fine. But, GE is certainly a good book, it also is a bit lacking. The original ending is just way too short, which may be why Dickens rewrote it. And the whole Pip/Estella thing: get together or don't. The whole cat/mouse thing was driving me nuts!
marshallce's review against another edition
3.0
I’d give this more like. 3.75. It was definitely a more difficult read because of the older English that’s used, but I enjoyed the story. Whether he intended to be or not, Dickens is a funny writer and I liked his style.
rachelb36's review against another edition
1.0
1.5 stars
This book was way too long for what it actually contained. The story is rather boring, as nothing really happens with either the plot or character development. Also, very few of the characters were likable or interesting to me.
There were a few good lines here and there, but I'm so glad I'm done. I read both endings, and I preferred the more-concise original ending.
"There was a gay fiction among us that we were constantly enjoying ourselves, and a skeleton truth that we never did." p 256
This book was way too long for what it actually contained. The story is rather boring, as nothing really happens with either the plot or character development. Also, very few of the characters were likable or interesting to me.
There were a few good lines here and there, but I'm so glad I'm done. I read both endings, and I preferred the more-concise original ending.
"There was a gay fiction among us that we were constantly enjoying ourselves, and a skeleton truth that we never did." p 256
robdawgreads's review against another edition
4.0
It was hard to finally get through but afterward, I kept ruminating about the characters, the decisions they made, what their motives were, and about what I would have done in their situation. I think this makes it a great book!