For a long time after it was ushered into this world of sorrow and trouble, by the parish surgeon, it remained a matter of considerable doubt whether the child would survive to bear any name at all; in which case it is somewhat more probable that these memoirs would never have appeared; or, if they had, that being comprised within a couple of pages, they would have the inestimable merit of being the most concise and faithful specimen of biography, extant in the literature of any age or country.

Note: Dickens frequently refers to Fagin as "the Jew" or "the old Jew". There is another secondary character who shows up a few times who is called "the young Jew".I listened to this book & found it jarring even knowing the time period in which Dickens lived.

Written in 1837, during Dickens' astronomical rise to success, Oliver Twist is his third major work, second novel, and the negative counterpart to its exact contemporary, The Pickwick Papers. One could argue it's still the work that has had the greatest impact on the public psyche: Dodger, Fagin, Nancy, and Bill loom large in the collective cultural consciousness, don't they? Who can forget Oliver asking for more, or the climactic tightrope walk? In truth, this is not a brilliant work. Only Fagin has any sparks of internal life, and he's an unfortunate anti-Semitic caricature common to the era. Oliver Twist, carrying the torch from some of Dickens' sentimental Sketches is a rather lifeless little twig. What works in the story is the vividness of "low" culture, and Dickens' already fierce moral stance on the inhumanity of much of 19th century English culture. Certainly a worthwhile read, but possibly the least of Dickens' "Big Fifteen". The relatively straightforward Twist will give way to the diffuse, picaresque Nicholas Nickleby, and then the real Dickens will be formed. ( )

Interesting, kinda hard to follow with the writing style/language, but I got the gist. ( )

3.4

I don;t know what you can say about this that hasn't been said already. I was slightly surprised that what I remembered from the film took place within the first half of the book - I remembered nothing about the unveiling of Oliver's identity or Mr Monks and his shenanigans. I also had forgotten quite how feeble Iliver is at times - I;m surprised he;d have made it in the tough end of London. There is a huge level of co-incidence that you need to suspend disbelief over, but I suppose I can live with that. It feels, as so often with Dickens, that he spends a lot of the book setting up the final few chapters, and so it is here. The pacing is uneven, and, at times, it feels that we're revisiting certain characters for padding's sake.
It does feel like there is a certain amount of glee with which the fate of the less reputable characters are dealt with. But then, the Artful Dodger just vanishes, and he;d one of the more memorable characters. And poor Nancy. Oh! ( )