Girl in a Blue Dress

Longlisted for both Man Booker and Orange Broadband prizes, this is Ms. Arnold's first novel. She has based the story told from the wife's point of view on the marriage of Charles and Catherine Dickens. While reading, I found my memories of the two Dickens biographies read some time ago interfering with my appreciation of this book as a novel. Now that I have finished, I find that understanding the Victorians is just as unlikely for me as it ever was.
Dorothea "Dodo" Millar was exactly the young woman for Alfred Gibson to idealize when he first met her: pretty, modest, ready to worship him. His imagination imbued her with every positive quality, and he felt himself betrayed when she turned out to be spoiled, slow-witted, and prone to show more pregnancy after their marriage. Ms. Arnold clearly shows his disillusionment and her incomprehension as their marriage disintegrates with his increasing fame and their growing family. When, eventually, he allows himself to fall in love with a young woman again, he justifies his decision to separate his wife from her home and family. She goes and remains in seclusion until his death ten years later.
Her reemergence into the world is never sufficiently motivated. She had never been content, but she had not stirred from her three rooms in those ten years until he died; she had not been in touch with any of her children; she had never tried to see her husband again. Over the course of the next few weeks, she has an audience with Queen Victoria, visits her own home and confronts her sister who had remained as housekeeper to the Gibson family, reunites with her children, visits the other woman, visits her husband's tomb, and after a vision, takes the first step in carving out a new life for herself. I just don't believe it. The fact that all of this actually happened more or less as Ms. Arnold presents it, hardly makes it more believable. So I'm left with a sense of an interesting story with deft characterization in part and with more questions raised than answered. I loved the picture of Alfred Gibson, full of life however reprehensible; I still don't understand Dodo. show less

This is another of these books to come from a creative writing course - so many around at the moment, and often of dubious quality.

Inspired by the life of Charles Dickens, the story is told from Alfred Gibson's wife's perspective. Dorothea, or Dodo, first meets Alfred at a young age, and is swept off her feet by his charm and unpredictable sense of fun (he actually comes across as really irritating and reminded me of Russell Brand). They marry, and in the following years, Alfred becomes a world-renowned author.

But Dodo has been living alone in modest rented quarters for the last ten years and the book tells the story of how she came to be in this situation. Dodo is an absolute pain, to be honest. Vacuous and conceited and wilfully show more naive. I'm not a historian, but I thought that being plump was considered to be a sign of wealth and standing in Victorian society. Dodo is obsessed with her appearance and weight and it gets boring after a while. I couldn't find much sympathy for her at all. show less

The thinly-disguised story of Catherine Dickens, wife of the famous author, is at the heart of this unpretentious, unassuming story.

The celebrated author Alfred Gibbons has died, leaving England in mourning. His estranged wife, Dorothy (or “Dodo”) sits at home as the funeral and reading of the will take place. As she sits, she looks back on her twenty-year-plus marriage to “the One and Only,” and “The Great Original.” An invitation to visit Queen Victoria, as well to her sister Sissy and the actress Wilhelmina Rickets, leads to another series of reflections on her marriage.

It’s a quiet novel, simple yet complicated in many ways. There’s not much action, certainly not in the present day, but there’s a certain show more gentleness of language that makes this book compellingly readable. Dodo, despite her shy, retiring ways, is a likeable heroine, strong in the ways a “typical” Victorian woman wasn’t supposed to be. In addition, I enjoyed the way the characters interacted with one another: Dodo’s daughter Kitty, the son-in-law who is obsessed with money; but most of all, Alfred Gibson himself: control freak, obsessed with keeping poverty at bay (even when he was in his most successful period), and eagerness to change the truth when it suits him. I get the feeling that Gibson isn’t supposed to be likeable, but he’s charismatic enough that the people around him tend to overlook his flaws. The only one who realizes who Gibson really was is, ironically, Dodo.

To the modern reader, Victorian England is a strange place—all those customs regarding mourning are simply mind-boggling. Dorothy’s world is one that’s strictly defined by traditions and conventions, and Dodo’s story is that of a woman who isn’t afraid to bend the rules a bit. In all, an excellent novel, worthy of having been longlisted for the Booker Prize. show less

I liked this book better than I thought I would going in. I knew nothing of the story of Charles Dickens' marriage to Catherine, so I found the story interesting and surprising. It provided a good portrait of marriage in the Victorian era, particularly one so public, as Dickens was well-known throughout their marriage. To me the most compelling part of the story was the way we peeked into the minds of both main characters and began understanding the marriage from each of their perspectives. It seems that the marriage was doomed to fail with so many factors working against them - Dickens' harsh, insecure childhood; Dodo's privileged background which was so different; too many children; a famous husband who called himself ' The One and show more Only' and who felt his duties to the public; a husband continually searching for a younger partner; most importantly, a lack of real knowledge of each other at the time of their marriage. I also found Dodo's adulation of her husband believable (considering who he was and given the era), but quite tragic. I think the flashback style works well. The book makes me want to go read a biography of Dickens. Well done. show less

This book is subtitled " A novel inspired by the life and marriage of Charles Dickens". It is told from the point of view of Charles Dickens's wife and I suppose would be considered historical fiction. However, the author takes wide liberties with the "truth". She even changes the names of the characters, making the book about Alfred and Dorothea Gibson rather than Charles and Catherine Dickens. Of course this leaves me wondering through the whole book "did that really happen?".

I hope not, because this is a horrifying picture of Charles Dickens and marriage in the 1800s. "Dorothea Gibson" marries "Alfred" at a young age - totally, blindly in love and unequipped to run a household or deal with her manic husband. She has 8 children in show more quick succession and loses two of them. Alfred is emotionally abusive and manipulative and ends up banishing Dorothea to a small, cramped apartment and separating her from her children while her sister remains in Alfred's house, running the home and raising the children. He takes up with a young actress while all the time publicly blaming his wife for the failure of their marriage.

Dorothea obviously suffers from depression and exhaustion (probably post-partum depression) and Alfred is unable and unwilling to support her or consider what her body and mind have gone through in bearing him 8 children. There is a feminist aspect to this book, as Dorothea begins to come into her own after Alfred's death, but I didn't find it totally convincing.

This book was long-listed for the Man Booker prize and the Orange prize. I found that a bit surprising since I thought a lot of the dialogue was pretty unsatisfying. In fact, I almost put down the book after the first chapter because I was so annoyed! But in the end, I became pretty absorbed in the story. I don't like what happened and I wish I could sort out fact from fiction more easily, but it was an interesting and engaging book to read. Because it's a quick read, I would say it's worth the time. show less

This book is the thoughts and reflections of Dorothea Gibson, estranged wife (and now widow) of the sensational Victorian novelist Alfred Gibson. In the days following the public mourning and hysteria of Alfred's funeral, Dorothea sits in the rooms in which she's been a virtual prisoner for the ten years since their seperation and recalls the Alfred she once knew and loved.

As a young woman she can't help but fall for the extrovert, larger than life character who charms her with his theatrical gestures. She marries him despite her parents' reservations. Yet it doesn't take her long to realise that Alfred will never really be hers. His enthusiasm for her is replaced with equal ardour by enthusiasms for various people throughout their show more married life, and Dorothea soon realises that his love for her has faded, like her looks and figure once the children start to come. Like many Victorian women must have been, she is exhausted and weakened by almost constant pregnancy. But even without this she could never compete with Alfred's two greatest passions - his love of writing and his love of fame. The more the Gibsons move up the ladder of society, the more popular they become, the more Dorothea loses him.

The Gibsons are very loosely based on the marriage of Charles and Catherine Dickens, though Arnold is keen to stress in her afterword that the characters and events are works of fiction. On the whole I'm enjoying this book, the narrative is even and it's an interesting portrait of a marriage from the female point of view - an angle that novels at the time rarely took.

There are points at the beginning of the book where the flashback set up is clunky (her daughter urging her to tell the story, yet again, of how she first met her husband), but this awkwardness disappears after the first 60 pages or so and the flashbacks become much more integral. There are also points where I feel Arnold shows off her research to the detriment of the narrative flow. At one point Dorothea worries over an audience with Queen Victoria because she's only wearing light mourning and she knows the Queen is a stickler for decorum. Yet during the scene her dress is not mentioned at all. In fact the whole scene is clunky and unnecessary, I get the feeling it's a set piece Arnold just didn't want to let go of. There's another scene at Westminster Abbey later on that I also feel adds nothing to the narrative.

The reader is aware of the marriage becoming increasingly unhappy but not in detail, and I found this a little frustrating as I could only get a grasp of the state of the relationship in brief, flashback snatches. Obviously Arnold has a lot of ground to cover - Alfred and Dorothea's marriage lasts 20 years - but I would have hoped for a little more emphasis on their 8 children, if only so that the deaths of two could be felt more keenly rather than be passed over in a few paragraphs. As it is, I felt more moved over Dorothea's realisation that her husband has moved to a seperate bedroom and they will never sleep together again than the death of a child.

Much is made of the idea that following the breakdown of the marriage, Alfred does not so much lie about Dorothea's abilities as a wife and mother, rather he convinces himself that what he says is the truth by creating his own version of events and replacing real memories with them. I spent so much time considering Alfred as a fabulist that it seemed natural to me to wonder about Dorothea's own version of events and how objectively accurate they really are. At first hinted at, this notion slowly comes to fruition as she's reunited with her estranged children and they each have their own memories of the marriage to add. Towards the end of the book one conversation with her son Eddie in particular confirms her views and causes some events to be seen in a new light. To me, the whole book turns on this conversation and a subsequent one with the woman Dorothea believes to have been her husband's mistress and to have caused the breakdown of their marriage. Suddenly I could see that everyone, not just Dorothea, had been a victim and had been effectively bullied by this remarkable, complex man.

Girl in a Blue Dress is a remarkable portrait of a stifled marriage and effective in evoking the limitations place on women in Victorian times. It also gives hints at a fascinating, complex character in the person of Alfred Gibson, and shows the effects such a man has on his family throughout his life. He holds his family under his spell even after Dorothea has left the household, but there is hope in the end as following his death Dorothea's children are freed from his spell and come back to know their mother better. It's quite a "feminine" book compared to many I usually read, but sometimes you can leave the path you've been walking along for so long and find some pleasant surprises. show less

Charles Dickens.

This is the fictionalised story of the lives of Charles Dickens and his wife Catherine, thinly disguised in the novel as Alfred and Dorothea Gibson.

Of course I knew of Dickens and his literature but I had no idea that he was quite such a larger-than-life character and I think it was this fact that remained with me after I'd finished the book.

Interestingly, the story is told from Catherine's (Dorothea's) point of view. She met and fell in love with Dickens while she was still very young and impressionable but she remained adoringly true to him throughout her life. He, on the other hand, was fickle and unfaithful, rejecting her so that she spent the last ten years of his life lonely and estranged. She was not even show more invited to the funeral or the reading of the will.

The characters were wonderful, especially their daughter Kitty, and, of course 'The One and Only', Charles Dickens/Alfred Gibson. But also Dorothea's sisters, Alice and Sissy, who lived with the family, and Kitty's money-grabbing husband, Augustus.

The clever use of capital letters for certain significant nouns also worked well, a device that can easily grate if abused.

Although this book slows a bit in the middle, it was overall, a fascinating and entertaining read.
Recommended . show less