Bleak House :: Week One
Welcome to the Bleak House read-a-long! We’re reading this book through March, April, and May. You can see the reading schedule and guidelines on the Starting Post Page.
Week One: Read to Chapter Six
Discussion:
It’s not just me is it, we don’t actually know what the Jarndyce and Jarndyce case is about at this point yet do we? Those of you who just finished Hemingway with me last month, is Dickens not the opposite of Hemingway??? Every description is so purposeful and rich. Dickens obviously took care choosing his words and building scenes… can you imagine what it must have been like to keep all of these details organized back then (no computers, no Office Max at which to buy filing cabinets)?
The beginning of Esther’s story kills me. Her mixture of innocence and optimism is utterly heartbreaking. What horrible people who take care of her! Did I miss why they are so hateful to her? Maybe it’s something that we learn later? I felt such relief when she went off to school and they were nice to her… I held my breath wondering if it would be another bad situation, but so glad Dickens didn’t torture her more. I wonder, though, why she buried her doll (her one friend), and didn’t take her with? Any ideas? It was so purposefully added that it must mean something. I am loving how she is the complete opposite of her nasty caregivers now that she is an adult and caring for Ada. It seems like this happens in real life as well; people who come from unbearable circumstances either turn out bitter and nasty, or as some of the most loving people of all (perhaps because they know what it feels like to be on the other end of horridness). I’m so pleased that Esther is the later… she is my favorite character so far.
How can I even start on the Jellybys? What a sad and confusing (yet lively?) home. They are poor, obviously, but not so poor that they don’t have a home to live in and a connection to Mr. Jarndyce (whom we know must have money). Curious. Any thoughts on them? It was Mr. Krook who reeeeeeally creeped me out. Dealing in cat-skins, staring at young girls, moods changing quickly, and having an attack cat — hmmm… not a place I would want to visit even once. He must play some role, however, because Dickens gave us a bit of a mystery to be solved with him asking Esther to read the letters that he spelled out from memory. Clever Dickens.
Please, somebody, explain to me what happened with Tom Jarndyce – did he kill himself or somebody else? I’m thinking it was himself, but just want to be sure. Obviously there are supposed to be questions hanging (as in why did he kill himself and why does it matter), but want to make sure I have my facts straight so that when those answers come I’ll get it!
I was actually surprised how quickly the reading went. In fact, I finished early this week- so that’s promising! It feels easier this time around… last time I read for over a week and only made it to chapter nine. Here’s to hoping the rest of the book is as entertaining and easy to read! What are you all thinking?
Who’s Reading Along:
** Please don’t forget to come to this blog each Friday and share your thoughts in the comments section of the weekly Bleak House discussion (see below for more information).**
Patty@taleofthreecities
Flo
Diane@BibliophileBytheSea
JacquelineM (@jackiemania)
Jeremy
Jude Crowther
Stephanie
Leah Mosher
Johanna
Lisa
Ashley J.
Margot @ Joyfully Retired
Ashley
jaynesbooks
thetruebookaddict
Susan B.
Sallie (FullTime-Life)
Whitney
Meg @ A Bookish Affair
Staci@LifeintheThumb
Patricia
Kensington
Girl Detective
Roberta
Sandra
Samantha McNulty (@samjaymc)
JoonAnn
jenn o.
Bunny Day
Kai Charles
Christine H.
Jillian ♣
erinee98
Scribacchina
Peggy Joan
Hannah
Annie @ButteryBooks
Ellen
Kate @ Kate’s Book Nook
Angie
Friendly Reminders:
- If you are participating and I don’t have you on this list, please let me know in the comments section. I did not include people who said ‘maybe’ so if you have changed your mind and are definitely reading along with us, let me know so I can add you. Also, if you are not going to be able to join us anymore please let me know and I will take you off the list.
- Comments from the previous week’s reading will be closing Thursday afternoon (before the next discussion takes place on Friday). If you would like to be part of the discussion, please remember to comment before then.
- Each week, on Friday, share your thoughts about the previous week’s reading. If you are stuck on what to comment about, you can respond to my post or others’ comments. Regardless, you MUST check in each week (two weeks without a response and you will be taken off of the list — see below for details on why). You may have only one “off week” (which may not be the last week of reading for obvious reasons) and still be kept on the list, but you must let me know in the comment section by saying something like, “I’m catching up,” or “I’m still reading.” ***for all week’s discussions please refrain from posting ahead, even if you have read ahead, as to not spoil the book for others***
- If you are a blogger you may post a link to your blog if you are posting about each of the each week’s reading. If I, or other readers, have extra time we will gladly try to visit your blog; however, you must make sure to share your thoughts here on this blog, and be part of the main conversation or your comment will not be counted.
- If you go for two weeks without commenting in my weekly update comments section, I will assume you are no longer participating and will take you off of the list (*NEW GUIDELINE*, in order to get back onthe list, you need to a.) Have missed no more than two weeks of discussion, b.) Let me know you would like to be on the list again, and c.) consistently be part of the discussion for the next two weeks after requesting to be put back on the list.). This is in no way to be discouraging, but helps to keep the read-a-long organized (and helps me remember who’s completed what read-a-long…there (ahem) might be something fun for different levels of participants at the end of the year! Thanks!
Like this:
Trackbacks
Comments are closed.
1/ First of all, I’m sorry Wallace but I’ve signed up with a bad URL. I’ve told you in another comment on the signing up post but I understand you don’t see it. So, now I’m commenting with the good URL. Sorry for the mess !
2/ Second, I’m going to post my thoughts as I’ve written them before reading your post and after I’ll reply to your post.
I read the book in French (for people who don’t know me, it’s not because I’m crazy but because I’m French and even if I can read in English, I don’t feel like trying Dickens in the text). This said, please excuse my English and particularly my grammar. If reading me is really too bad, don’t hesitate to correct me !
I own a very good edition (well, the only one existing in French) and the translator explains his choices and displays helpful notes concerning mostly the context (and sometimes the story, which spoils a little bit the thing but it’s ok).
The first thing he points to is the translation of the title of the book because for a long time, the book has been called “Bleak House” in French. In this “new” translation, he have tried to give a French title (“La Maison d’Âpre-Vent”) considering the intentions of Dickens and the general atmosphere of the book (he also highlights some names as “Dedlock” which is close to “deadlock”). And, in this week’s reading, what stroke me the most is exactly this point. Each time Dickens describes the Chancery and London, he uses words giving the idea of gloomy, dreary places. Dickens tends to compare Chancery and London, two places where things are lost in a particularly oppressing fog that also could hide the truth or prevent it to express itself. And, in fact, we know very few things about the main characters. Esther’s story is secret. The main lines concerning the Jarndyce trial aren’t clear. We only know that Richard and Ada are part of the trial for legacy reasons but that’s all. And the part of John Jarndyce isn’t already clear (to me).
In this book, I’ve found the Dickens’ touch : a lot of descriptions full of life, a taste for building characters even if they are secondary and finding them names that correspond to their personalities or to their physical appearances, a certain sense of humour, but also what I have difficulty to translate, his being namby-pamby (I hope it’s the good word – I’ve made researches – and that I’m not saying something improper. Otherwise, I would bury me six-feet under :S). I hate when an author try to make me cry. If I want to cry, I’ll do it by myself : I’m a big girl… Therefore, I’m not a big fan of Esther. She is so sentimental that it makes me puke (I’m sorry).
But in a few chapters, Dickens manages (always) to stick the reader. He is a really good story-teller !
3/ Comments on Wallace’s post
Concerning the Jardnyce case : no, we don’t, but it seems to me that Dickens try to show up that the justice, represented by the chancery, is bad delivered. A trial can last a very long time if you play with the procedural tricks.
For Esther, well… humm… I think that you know my point of view now
Concerning the doll, I think it is a symbolic sign, a way to say good-bye to the past.
I don’t know if the Jellybys are so poor. In fact, it’s difficult to know something about them. Dickens uses Mrs J. to criticize the women who give all their time to foreigners to the point they neglect their own children. Moreover, these people have a high opinion on themselves because they’re involved in “great causes” but are totally blind when it came to their family circle.
Krook’s shop is described as a little chancery and according to me it’s not by accident. I suppose this character could play his part later in the story.
Tom Jardnyce killed himself (I’m sure of this) and for what I’ve understood it was in Krook’s shop (I’m less sure of this part).
I’m afraid that this comment is really to long :S I’ll try to summarize my thoughts next week !
I agree!
Dicken’s seems a bit sexist regarding Mrs. Jellby–he implies that her children and home are neglected due to her lofty causes. Having said that, I know people exactly like that! At my work I see young people every day with parents who have been missionaries all over the world. Sadly, these children, or most of them, seem lonely and socially awkward.
I’m trying to get a read on Esther–I would like to know your view, Flo! she appears to be a little too sweet, maybe a bit of a martyr?
Mr. Skimpole was not endearing to me, just plain scary.
I don’t know if it’s sexism or simply criticism toward such people. In my edition the translator explains that Dickens had known (and helped !) such a woman and that he wasn’t really agree with his neglecting her own children. Therefore, it would be more criticism than sexism for the reasons you underline. But what I’ve liked is the way he did it : with a little bit of mockery. What is a little bit hypocrite is that Dickens himself wasn’t very concerned by his own family…
As Esther is the second narrator, I suppose that her character is not so insignificant than Dickens and Esther herself try to convince the readers
But as Jacqueline said it below, she represents the ideal woman at these times and I’ve got difficulties to along with such a character.
Who is Mr. Skimpole ?! Did I miss a character (there are so many !) ?
Mr. Skimpole, who calls himself a “child” and claims to have no idea about time or money, is a friend of Mr. Jarndyce. He appears not long after Esther arrives at Bleak House. He borrows money without the thought of ever repaying it and claims he is incapable of a real realtionship. John Jarndyce looks upon him with humor and kindess–I find him irresponsibe and selfish. I think he has a wife and children but spends little or no time with them.
Thank you for your suggestion that Dickens was critical rather than sexist reagarding Mrs. Jellyby–you are correct! I was not aware that Dickens wasn’t involved with his family–interesting.
So Mr. Skimpole was not implied in the chapters to read for this first week or am I wrong ? Because I stop at the end of chapter 5. Are you re-reading the book ?
Concerning Dickens and his family : he has left his wife & 10 children to live with an actress. He has also been to the USA with his wife, leaving the household in the hands of his sister-in-law, and he was involved in so many works and causes that I doubt he paid much attention to his family (which I suppose was quite “normal” for a man in these times). It’s not a crime but I’m not so sure that he’s the best person to be critical on this subject (personal POV), otherwise, you would be right : it’s sexism
Mr. Skimpole is in Chapter Six. I was confused where to “stop” in the last readalong, too. I think we read the last chapter mentioned but don’t go past that point.
Yes, Flo — Mr. Skimpole is in the next section of reading, Peggy went a little farther ahead, so don’t worry.
We stop at the chapter where I’ve marked “Stop At” … meaning, when you get to that chapter that’s where you stop (don’t read it).
Argh ! I’ve lost my answer :’(
Thanks Wallace for your precision concerning the last chapter to read. I was puzzled because, before the read-a-long began, I had read, re-read and re-re-read
this specific rule to be sure not to make a mistake.
Wallace, thank you for pointing that out. I was also in doubt, so read to the end of Chapter 6. Maybe you want to add this clarification to the original schedule post?
First, as always, I am SO impressed with your ability to read something in French and then discuss it in English!
Good point about the doll – that makes sense, “burying her past.” The reason I like her so much is not because she is kind, but because I like her story — she’s like a Phoenix (the bird that rises from the ashes). I felt so terrible for her beginnings and am fond of the way Dickens has brought love into her life in the form of other children and now her wards. I get how she could seem a bit sappy though.
I agree with Flo, I don’t think Dickens was particularly sexist (in this case), I think he was making a point of illuminating people who make a show of doing good deeds when they aren’t even taking care of the small things in front of their faces (most likely because they wouldn’t get recognition for it). I hadn’t thought of the fact that the Jellybys have money but are just neglectful in their house care… that must be what it is. Thanks, Flo!
Thank you
but I must admit that I don’t like when books are about “poor little things” and “how his/her life is horrible, please cry”. But don’t worry, Dickens has never appeared to me like a torturer. He likes happy endings (even if, in the process, some people may be unlucky).
I suppose my heart is made of stone
As for burying the doll, more than burying her past I took it to symbolize the burial of her childhood — like, she knows it’s time to change the way she lives her life. Also because it goes hand in hand with the moment when she decides that she needs to change her ways to make people love her (I can’t quote the exact words now, sorry). Am I making sense?
Dickens! Gosh I love this book
London. Couldn’t you just see the soot:
Smoke lowering down from chimney pots, making a soft black drizzle, with flakes of soot in it as big as full grown snowflakes – gone into mourning, one might imagine, for the death of the sun.
When I read the opening my heart was about to burst. I’m home! This is the type of writing that makes me want to do cartwheels and stand on a crate and read the first chapter aloud to passer-bys. I love his lists upon lists, and how he names characters and places and things, and how FUNNY and/but SATIRIC his writing is.
I love how he is using the dual point of view in this book, and is introducing a million characters and themes and it’s almost chaos. Almost. He takes it to the absolute brink but it doesn’t fall apart.
Ah, the Jellybys. As my coworker would say, “HOT MESS DOT COM!” The children falling down the steps and getting lost and getting stuck in fences whilst Mrs. Jellyby dictates her letters about Africa to poor instained Caddy. I love Caddy. I love that she’s angry
unlike Esther…
Esther is a problematic character for me. She represents the Victorian Ideal of Womanhood, I understand that – good, forbearing, forgiving, always available to help – and as a modern woman, I can’t help but find that, well, on a good day – unrealistic, and on a bad day nauseating! It’s interesting to explore in this book, that’s for sure.
Krook is beyond creepy! I completely agree! And, yes, I think Tom Jarndyce shot himself in Krook’s lil shop of horrors. How about that description of the shop! Bones and papers and rags and cat skins and human hair and urrrrrhhhhggg.
We also get introduced to Lady Dedlock and her world of fashion:
It is not a large world. Relatively even to this world of ours, which has its limits too (as your Highness shall find when you have made the tour of it and are come to the brink of the void beyond), it is a very little speck. There is much good in it; there are many good and true people in it; it has its appointed place. But the evil of it is that it is a world wrapped up in too much jeweller’s cotton and fine wool, and cannot hear the rushing of the larger worlds, and cannot see them as they circle round the sun. It is a deadened world, and its growth is sometimes unhealthy for want of air.
(*shivers* wow!)
We also meet one of my favorite extremely funny and incredibly sad characters, Miss Flite: “M-, Quite M-!”
OK, I’ll be quiet now. I will just end saying that I’m so glad to be reading this book with you all!!!
Lady Dedlock! I forgot about her! She intrigued me – falling “ill” after seeing the case paperwork. I’m curious to see how her character progresses
I may be wrong, but I thought she fell ill after seeing the handwriting. Also there is a lot of focus on the different handwritings? Like in the part about Mr Krook, and they mention that the other person living there accepts things to copy? I thought that was somehow connected.
I love your comment
And, even if I’m not so enthusiastic than you about the book (I’m a big fan of “Great Expectations” and I’m afraid that Dickens will never achieve to enjoy me better with another book than this one), I agree that Dickens is funny and satiric and I love this !
Concerning the dual point of view, I haven’t still understood its interest but we are just at the beginning. And you find a better description than me for Esther : I totally agree with your point.
Is Miss Flite the old lady living above Krook’s shop ? In the French translation she’s unnamed and only referred to the old lady.
Oh Jackie… PLEASE stand on a crate and read the first chapter to passers-by (and have your husband take pictures)!
I mentioned to Flo in a previous comment that it is not exactly Esther I love, but her storyline… I’m just so glad that Dickens didn’t keep beating her down, that she found some satisfaction in life after she left her godmother/aunt’s house. I get how people might not like that though.
Miss Flite… I must go back and look her up, I’m not remembering her right now… I don’t think she’s the old lady about Krook’s shop, is she?
Yes, Miss Flite is the old lady that lives above Krook’s shop and visits the Jarndyce trial (with “her reticule, which she calls her documents; principally consisting of paper, matches, and dry lavender.” I can picture her so clearly because of this detail!
Sadly my husband is in Alabama! I will have to ask a coworker
What a change from Gatsby and Moveable Feast! It took me a little bit to find my rhythm, going from those short, sparse novels to this 1000+ page behemoth, but I hit my stride when the Jellybys came on the scene. I can’t believe how many characters we are introduced to in such a short bunch of chapters. So far, I’m enjoying Esther – I found it disheartening, but not out of place in a Dickens novel that she had such a rough childhood, and kept waiting for the other shoe to drop after the godmother/aunt died and she went on to Greenleaf.
I feel like we keep hearing about the Jarndyce case, but no one alive in the story so far seems to know what the case is about… Well, maybe the crazy old lady in the first chapter, and Krook (who really was creepy, I agree) I can’t wait to see how everything is connected. From what I understood, Tom Jarndyce killed himself, but I wasn’t sure if it was in Krooks building.
I think the most upsetting Jellyby was the daughter, Caddy. I was confused by her appearance at Esther’s door, and then she was rubbing ink on her face while they were talking? When she said that everyone was so unhappy, and that she wished they all were dead, I wanted to reach through the pages and hug her. How upsetting! Poor dirty Peepy too.
I must admit, I am really enjoying the reading so far. It took me a while to really understand what was going on, but I am looking forward to reading everyone’s comments. I think my favorite thing so far was the way that Dickens created the atmosphere in the story (so far) with his constant descriptions of fog. It’s appropriate for the novel’s title, but also for the feelings surrounding the Jarndyce case – it seems murky and hazy, with not many people actually knowing the details.
Poor dirty Peepy! More laughing/crying/heartbursting. He gives me that Dickens Feeling. I don’t know how else to describe it!
I agree! Pip! He reminded me of Pip from Great Expectations
Yes, Caddy is disturbing, and I can’t help but wonder if she feels totally alone and disconnected becaue of her absent mother.
I wonder if we will ever hear what the Jarndyce case is about–maybe it just matters that even thought it is a debacle, it still binds all the main characters together.
I am thorughly enjoying all the quirky characters, and am already having to use the guide!
I have a distinct feeling that we never will hear what the Jarndyce and Jarndyce case is about – that it may never even be resolved!
I think you’re right, Lisa… I’m sure it’s not important (even though I am curious) and doesn’t actually add to the story, but rather gives a reason for the story to take place.
Yes… I purposefully gave us a few short ones before this (and some short ones after)!
Good point about the fog — I was so lost in the story I didn’t even think of it, but yes, very good on Dickens for using that!
How did I miss Caddy ribbing ink all over her face? I think I was distracted by the house (and Peepy). How strange. She felt very strange to me. I did feel bad for her, but at the same time she creeped me out a bit. She seems old enough to do something about her situation, which I know is not great – but doesn’t seem abusive (or did I miss something?).
About Caddy: I may be wrong, but I understood that she was rubbing vinegar on her face, and I supposed it was to clean away the ink (Esther does say that she’s covered in ink when she first describes her).
Ahh, that would make more sense.
hi everyone,
I started reading Bleak House right after finising a Tale of Two cities, which did not excite me. What a different writing style! From the beginning, a parade of words that seem to exaggerate, but actually have a purpose, to exactly describe the person, the case, the situation… (as in the helpnessness surrounding the Jarndyce case) — really enjoying this book!
As to Esther, I have to agree with Jacqueline – she’s too good… I hope there’s is a development in the next chapters that will show something dark in her character…
Oh I’m just waiting for Dickens to kill her (Esther) off now that he has us thinking she’s safe and sound. Still worried about that… things are going too well for her.
I think Esther is a wonderful mother figure to Ada though.
Dickens does have a tendency to kill off characters, even the ones we’ve come to love.
that would make me very upset as I’m already quite fond of Esther!
Oh no, really?! Shoot — I will prepare myself just in case.
Me too, Patty! I just finished A Tale of Two Cities (which I LOVED), but this one is quite different in style (and I also love it.)
I’m a newby, so here goes…
I enjoyed reading of the first five chapters and loved the descriptions of the characters. I wonder what parts in the overall theme the characters are going to play. It’s quite a motley crew that Dickens has assembled. Who is the old woman who just keeps showing up? Is she just there for some local color or will she become a major player? And how do the Dedlocks and Jellybys fit in? Guess I just have to keep reading to find out.
Esther is certainly an interesting character. I have to wonder whether her terrible childhood will prepare her for some rough times ahead. She almost seems too good to be true, but that goodness might be why she is able to survive the psychological abuse she endures from her godmother. I’m glad she found a guardian angel. At least, I hope John Jarndyce is a guardian angel, not only for Esther’s sake, but for Ada’s and Richard’s, as well.
On the other hand, Krook is just as creepy as his store. I loved the comparison of the Krook and his establishment to the court and what was going on there. Not having any background of the Court of Chancery, I am shocked that a court case can go on that long and use up an entire inheritance.
At the onset, Dickens describes the chilly, foggy, soot-filled city of London in such a way that the reader can almost feel the frigid air and see (actually, not see because of the fog) the streets. No doubt why he selected this background as an introduction to what is going on in court…the place is as nasty as Krook’s store. Once again, I have to question…what part will the court case play in this novel?
I’m looking forward to reading on.
I’m getting the feeling that all of these characters will be adding something to the story — it seems like a bit of a mystery that will be unraveled as we go along, and each character will add a piece to the puzzle. I can’t imagine him taking so much time introducing us to them without this being true.
My copy included a forward from Dickens in which he states examples of real-life cases like Jarndyce and Jarndyce which lasted for decades and wasted loads of money. (Perhaps where he got the idea?) He also stated that the use of spontaneous combustion that he uses (maybe later on in the novel?) has been scientifically proven… so who knows how accurate his research is.
Mine had that too. Barnes & Noble, right? I LOVE the footnotes and endnotes — so helpful.
I’m glad that it sounds like we’re all pretty much reading the same copy. I enjoy reading the introductions.
I guess the introduction is part of the book. I have it in my copy too, which is the gutenberg.org e-book with no footnotes/endnotes and no indication of the edition either.
I was confused about the Court of Chancery, too, but I found the appendix in the Barnes and Noble version to be really helpful. I had no idea what was going on and it really grounded my reading by describing how the court works.
I am so glad we’re reading Bleak House! It’s been a long while since I’ve read Dickens, and I had forgotten how much I love the way he writes. I did, however, have to go back and read the first chapter to get in the proper mindset for the rest of the novel. Dickens gives you so many details that it’s easy to miss things!
The first chapter really set the scene for me in terms of the mood for the chapters to follow. I loved Ashley J.’s comment about how the fog was so appropriate for both the title and the feelings about the Jarndyce case. I thought the same thing while reading! Fog presents an incomplete picture of reality – you can vaguely see something, but the details aren’t clear. That’s how I feel about so many things in the novel right now. I’ve got just a piece of the picture and can’t wait to see a more complete view.
I think Dickens made an interesting point in his explanation of Esther’s upbringing. She wasn’t starving, unclothed or without a home. She was without love. I just kept wondering whether it would be worse to have no one to take care of you OR to have someone who provides for you but tells you that you shouldn’t have been born. The sting of Esther’s situation isn’t that she isn’t taken care of – it’s that she isn’t wanted. I think I’d rather be alone in the world and be able to imagine that I had been loved then have someone around reminding me that I wasn’t.
This is the line that really broke my heart: “Imperfect as my understanding of my sorrow was, I knew that I had brought no joy, at any time, to anybody’s heart, and that I was to no one upon earth what Dolly was to me.”
I laughed when Esther was waiting for Mr. Kenge and noticed “a bookcase full of the most inexpressive-looking books that ever had anything to say for themselves.” I love how that one line says SO much about the kind of books you’d find in his office. Dickens’ descriptions are fabulous.
The story really seemed to pick up with the introduction of the Jellybys. That poor family! I particularly liked that Mr. Jellyby could only be described as the husband of Mrs. Jellyby. I feel like I know a husband or two like that…
And Mr. Krook! What a total creeper. I got the “ick!” feeling when he touched Ada’s hair and referenced his three sacks of ladies’ hair downstairs. I loved that Richard told him he had to “admire as the rest of us do, without taking that liberty.” Ha! Take that creepy Mr. Krook.
I love how the books are described too! Dickens makes everything alive and almost human! He did that with the soot, too – snowflakes in mourning
I loved the soot description, too. I know people sometimes think Dickens is too wordy, but I just love that about him. Everything comes alive, and I can “see” it all in my mind.
Krooks obsession with hair creeped me out. He really wanted a lock of Adas hair. And that strange cat – creepy!
I love his descriptive writing but I was so glad that by Chapter 3 I could actually start to understand what was going on!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I agree! The first chapter was beautifully written, but I didn’t feel like it was going anywhere.
Hannah — interesting concept to think about (to be neglected physically vs. emotionally).Now that I’m thinking about it, I think that’s something that Dickens wanted us to think about (and why so many of our heart strings were tugged in a certain way) because he made it a less conventional type of neglect and abuse. Good point, lady.
Great analysis, Hannah! It’s good to read such a book with such knowledgeable people!
And you quoted the exact point I was referring above: “I was to no one upon earth what Dolly was to me”, and I understand the burying of her doll as a declaration that she wants to be at the other end of such a loving relationship.
Hannah, you make a great point about Esther’s upbringing and how painful it was for her to not be loved or wanted. It’s interesting to me, especially compared with the Jellyby household, where the children are neglected in a different way. Whereas Esther was emotionally neglected, as Wallace said, the Jellyby children are not physically taken care of very well. Caddy really tugged at my heartstrings, and I wonder how her distressing upbringing will affect her development as she grows up.
It is interesting too, that Esther was raised by her godmother in a quiet, austere home while Caddy was brought up by two parents in a lively but messy (in many ways) home nearly overflowing with children. Despite their very different childhoods, both girls have suffered greatly because of their familial situations. It’s as if there isn’t a “right” type of family; one can be just as miserable as the other. I hope that, as Esther was saved from her loneliness by becoming a governess, Caddy will find some way out of her situation and flourish away from her family.
So true Leah! I had similar thoughts while reading about the Jellyby family. It’s interesting to me that Dickens seems to contrast the two different families so early in the novel. I think it’s interesting that the two families produced two girls (Esther and Caddy) that probably experience the same feeling of being unwanted. My heart broke for Caddy because I imagine that she only feels wanted by her mother for her usefulness (writing letters) and not for anything that is specific to herself. I wonder if Dickens will continue to explore family dynamics as the novel goes on.
I’m not sure that we’ll hear any more about Caddy, but I kind of hope we do! And that she’s found a way out of her situation.
Hi everyone!
This is only my first read along so here goes; I think I’m just going to do a list. Please feel free to elaborate on my points!
1. This novel is so descriptive and I really wasn’t expecting it to be so very descriptive (does this make sense?)
2. It took me forever to figure out that Jarndyce and Jarndyce was a court case.
3. By the end of chapter 1 I was utterly confused. I mean, hair pulling confused.
4. Because of above point, there was only certain parts of the opening chapters that I understood, but that lessened as I got further in.
5. I had no idea how anything linked together until we started on Esther’s story. Then it all came together for me.
I agree with you about everything coming together when Esther started narrating! I hated the opening–I felt so confused and bogged down! I think it was an actual character finally talking (not just dialogue, but revealing things about their life) that got me interested.
Exactly! Maybe that’s why I’ve warmed to Esther as well.
I think that Dickens was very intentional about confusing the reader in that first chapter (and talked so much about the fog). It really tells us something about the case and the court system that everything else is going to center around.
What a great analysis! I never thought of it like that…
Yes, yes, yes!
That’s a great point! Especially considering the inefficient way in which the Court of Chancery goes about things. It’s like we needed to be in the same confused mindset as the characters to understand their stories.
Don’t feel alone, Samantha! I felt that way too until I reached Chapter Three!
Am so glad I joined in. Have never joined a read-a-long before, but what makes this special is that reading Bleak House this way is similar to the way the folks read it in the l850′s as it was in serial form. I saw the PBS mini-series starring Gillian Anderson so am picturing all those actors as I read. It is excellent by the way, but don’t watch it til you have finished reading the book.
Tom Jarndyce did killl himself – “blew his brains out at a coffee house” – that appears
in the first couple pages. I assume Dickens did this to eliminate one of the heirs.
Dickens has certainly set the scene and can’t wait to continue.
You’re so right about the fact that our reading is similar to the way people read Dickens’ stories in these years ! I love this.
Me too. I hope I am disciplined enough to not read ahead and keep things fresh and exciting!
Reading like this, in small bits, makes all of that description so much more enjoyable. I found myself (well, most of the time!) really focusing on the picture Dickens was painting and not rushing over it, thinking that I still had so much more to read.
I like being able to read it in small bits too!!! I think it makes the story work so much better and gives you time to really soak in all of the information!
I’m so glad everyone likes reading this way! I find it does more for the discussion, if we waited for three months to talk about the book – half of us would have forgotten the details. Plus, I think it helps to talk it through in case there are points or references that are hard to grasp.
I DEFINITELY want to watch that edition of the movie, so am glad to hear that it is good! (I’ll be sure to wait until we are finished with the book though).
Tom Jarndyce’s suicide is mentioned briefly in chapter one (as the previous poster mentioned), and then Krook horrifies Esther and the others with the details in chapter 5. It sounded as if it had something to do with the case, because he said his judgment was up again. Maybe he was about to lose a lot of money.
It sounds like Esther was treated so badly by her godmother because of something her mother did. Obviously the godmother considers Esther’s mother a disgrace because it sounds like she had Esther out of wedlock. She also mentions that she has forgiven Esther’s mother for the wrong she did to her. Since we find out a few paragraphs later that Esther’s godmother is really her aunt, I wonder if she was Esther’s mother’s sister and if maybe there was an affair between Esther’s mother and a man that Esther’s aunt was in love with. It would make sense if Esther’s aunt felt an obligation towards Esther as her sister’s child and yet resented the person who resulted from a betrayal like that. Just a guess.
I don’t think we’ll ever find out the details of the Jarndyce case, because it’s a big mystery to the whole town. Everyone has forgotten what it’s about. I think that is actually the point Dickens is making, how ridiculous it is that people are deciding on guardianships and estates and committing suicide over this case that no one understands. The most important thing about the case is that we *don’t* know what it’s about.
I love this book so far, and I’m glad to be back to some 19th-century literature.
Oh, I want to share my favorite quote so far, regarding Sir Leicester Dedlock: “[His] family is as old as the hills, and infinitely more respectable. He has a general opinion that the world might get on without hills but would be done up without Dedlocks. He would on the whole admit nature to be a good idea (a little low, perhaps, when not enclosed with a park-fence), but an idea dependent for its execution on your great county families.”
I loved that quote, too, Erin!
LOVED that quote! I’m having to make sure I pay close attention while I read because Dickens includes some really funny statements that can be easy to miss!
I agree! His subtle humor is one of my favorite aspects of his writing.
I’m under the impression that we’ll never know what Jarndyce vs. Jarndyce is about because so much time has gone by the people originally involved are probably gone. The remaining family members just inherited the court battle. Reminds me of old feuds, like the Hatfields and McCoys. Family members continue to hate without really knowing the reason.
Good thoughts about why the aunt hated Esther — that would make some sense (if even still being horrible). I can’t wait to see what we find out!
Great quote — Dickens sure has a way with words… I can’t stop thinking that as I read his sentences.
I found the first chapters to be absolutely riveting, especially the first few paragraphs. I loved the description of the fog and how it set the scene for the demeanor of the courthouse. It definitely set the tone of the book and how the case of Jarndyce vs Jarndyce is going to overshadow the entire story. Along with that description, I felt that was able to get a pretty good idea of how Dickens may feel about the justice system during Victorian England. It would definitely merit additional research as to how the justice system operated during this period of time for England.
I too, enjoyed the detailed descriptive writing, it’s something that we don’t get an opportunity to see very much of anymore, especially with quite a few modern day writers that I’ve read.
I, too, was concerned with Esther as soon as her character was introduced. I was concerned that she was going to end up homeless without anyone to care for her. I was very pleased to see that someone, in the form of Mr. Jarndyce, took her in as a ward, and have her begin training as a caregiver/housekeeper. I have a strong feeling that she’s going to be one of the stronger characters in this book.
The Jellybys and their residence really hit me hard. It struck me that since she was so much more concerned with her efforts in Africa, she (Mrs. Jellyby) neglected her duties at home and as a result, that led to a very unkempt housing environment. I definitely understand the stereotypes that are present in this book from Victorian England, and it just hit home that those who weren’t as well off certainly didn’t live a lavish life.
Don’t get me started on Mr. Krook, it was very very creepy, and the way he was looking at both Ada and Esther’s hair really spooked me out. It’s really strange, it introduces a bit of a dark side to the story, so I’ll definitely be interested in seeing how that character is fleshed out.
I’ve definitely enjoyed these first few chapters, and I’m hoping that trend continues, as I have this love-hate relationship with Dickens. So far so good! You can read some additional thoughts I posted earlier today on my blog here
I have a love-hate relationship with Dickens, too, thanks to The Old Curiosity Shop. Hoping Bleak House will change that!
This is my first read-along and I am excited to participate!
I had a really difficult time getting through the first two chapters, for awhile I thought I might quickly give up. But things picked up for me once Esther took over the story telling. I think I need a character to care about in order to really enjoy a book.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Mrs. Jellyby had given all of her money away to foreign causes along with her time, giving the impression that her family is poor. I wanted Esther to take Peppy with her when she left, I felt so bad for that poor child.
I was surprised once I got into the book how quickly it went. I am looking forward to reading more!
I’m a few chapters behindI messed up on the start dates
What really stood out to me is how I have to change the way I read. I was really confused at first and realised I needed to slow down and relax into the narrative, then I found the Dickens I know and love, Ill be having a full post up this weekend 
YES… with these chunky classics I always want to hurdle through as well (or wait until bedtime to read), but realize that I need to take it slow and read while I still have my wits about me; it makes for an entirely different experience.
Bleak House is one of my favorite books (top 10). Mr. Dickens statement to his readers so many years ago is one I LOVE. ” In Bleak House, I have purposely dwelt upon the romantic side of familiar things. I believe I have never had so many readers as in this book. May we meet again!
. Is this contempt for lawyers?
I feel fog, rain, ice, snow, mud as I read. Entering the courtroom fog trails along side me. IMO Dickens sets the parellel in the courtroom with the weather outside. You feel the depth of despair from the lack of attention given by Jarndyce & Jarndyce. Chizzle, Mizzle & Drizzle (weather
Lady Dedlock leaving for Paris. Is her ‘fainting spell’ a false front for her secrets. She was boring thus far.
Ester I love her. Why is she treated so badly? Wallace I also wondered about the doll. Did she bury her feelings. The horror of her living conditions. When she left the ‘rooming house’ & did not understand why everyone was sorry to see her go I wanted to cry. When she enters the office of Kenge, I laughed when she implied she was not impressed with the books. Her delight in meeting Ada, who is so beautiful, shows the compassion for people.
Mrs. Jellyby, oh my what can you say about obsession with this woman? She neglects everything and EVERYONE in her home for a cause. I don’t care for her and I feel sorry for her very unhappy daughter. Ester’s care with little Peepy was heartbreaking – he was so neglected.
Wallace thank you again for hosting this. I hope I didn’t mess up my post. My computer keeps losing my connection.
Have a great week-end.
Chizzle, Mizzle & Drizzle!!! Love! Yes, I definitely think he is poking fun at lawyers here in the most clever way.
And isn’t he known for naming his characters based on their personalities as well? I thought I read that somewhere…
Finished the pages just today. Like others, I had a hard time beginning though I loved the descriptions. A few nights I read before bed, then had to re-read again in the morning, but didn’t begrudge it, because once the characters started trotting on and off stage, I was fully engaged. I found Mrs. Jellyby hilarious, and it made me feel much more confident about my own parenting and housekeeping.
Is anyone else strongly reminded of Jane Eyre, which was published a few years before Bleak House, what with the not-loved child who finds reward in caring for others and being competent? Esther is much kinder and less acerbic than Jane, but they share a good many characteristics.
I love that this edition has the Phiz illustrations, but don’t like the notes on the page–they tend to be for words or phrases I don’t need defined, and the asterisk makes me glance down anyway. The end notes are helpful.
Oops, forgot my link: http://www.girldetective.net/?p=4343
Definitely. I have in my side notes – Jane
. I actually put Jane back on my list to read.
Yes, I feel like Jane and Esther had the same family situation, but I’d never call Jane “too good” – she’s an angry one
Esther reminds me a little more of Caroline in Shirley. Sweet and an angel of the house. It’s really fantastic that you brought up Jane Eyre as a comparison. It has helped me think about Esther and the larger stereotypes of Victorian womanhood that I think are contained in much of Dickens, and sort of put it in its place.
It’s something I note, and may roll my eyes at, but it doesn’t affect my love of Dickens. His thing was talking about society and the British legal system and the poor etc etc in this book (and he does it soooo well
Charlotte Bronte’s thing was talking about Victorian stereotypes of women, and bursting out of them!
One more thing!! I read that Charlotte Bronte found Esther’s character “weak and twaddling.” (Dickens claims to have never read Jane Eyre. Do I believe him? NO!).
I find it interesting that I’ve heard so many people complain about Jane Eyre being much too complacent but I never thought of her that way. She definitely made decisions and stood up for herself. Esther does, so far anyway, kind of go along for the ride. Of course, after leaving her godmother’s, there hasn’t been much to complain about for a girl in her situation.
Yes!!!! On Jane Eyre. I felt that too. (I read that Dickens didn’t approve of Jane Eyre’s rebellious side.)
I posted my main readalong comments below, but it contained a couple links, which sent it to moderation. FYI!
If you can believe it, I haven’t read Jane Eyre (only seen the movie), but it is on my list. I’ll keep these ideas in my head when I read it though!
Jillian — got the comment, it’s approved now!
Hello everyone! I am new here and so excited to join in the discussion. This will be the third time I’ve read Bleak House and I can already tell I’m going to love it even more than the last two times. First, as has been mentioned several times in the comments, Dickens’ descriptions are so spot-on, so juicy with detail, that you feel like you are there in murky London. I have bad vertigo and a fear of falling and the description of the people slipping on the slushy, muddy streets made me anxious! I feel like this is the first reading where I’m living every part of the way things look. For instance, the state of the Jellyby household really got to me and I was so relieved when Esther bathed Peepy.
Speaking of Esther, I agree with some other participants that she is a troublesome character. I never know whether to love and adore her as the sweet thing she is or if I want to give her a smack to awaken her to reality a bit more. One would think her upbringing would have hardened her at least a little.
I guess this time around I am really stuck on the stay with the Jellybys and all that happens there…. the description of the door handle that just spins around to no effect, the children being so neglected and dirty, the general unhappiness. Did anyone think a little poorly of Ada when she laughed at Esther’s comment about the state of the children and house? It almost seemed like Ada was looking down her nose at Esther for taking such an interest in the housekeeping.
I’m going to leave my comments here for this round. I’m ready to dive into week two’s reading. Thank you, Wallace for hosting this and being so welcoming to a newcomer.
People often wonder why I re-read books but you’ve really made the point for the re-read here. The first time, you can really focus on the plot and start to get involved with the characters. The second time, you start to be able to really concentrate on the nuances of the writing and the details of the characters. With books like Bleak House, it really makes a difference.
I agree. Re-reading can definitely make a big difference in how you see the book.
I completely agree! I read an article not too long ago about the benefits of re-reading. It said people tend to get more out of a book when they re-read it because they can focus more on the emotion of it and less on the events/plot. I’d definitely say that’s true from my experience & I already look forward to re-reading this one day.
Oh my gosh — you’re third time! Wow, thanks for joining use then. This makes me even more excited as it’s good enough for you to want to read it for a third time!
This is my second time reading Bleak House and I am falling in love all over again. I thought it would take a while for me to get into the rhythm of reading a 19th century book after a heavy diet of YA and graphic novels, but there is something about Dickens that just immediately draws me in and I’m transported to the foggy streets of London.
I wish I had more to say this week, but my brain is fried. I’m thoroughly enjoying reading everyone’s comments and can’t wait to participate in the upcoming weeks!
Sorry!! The comment above is from Stephanie – not Len. I am using my husband’s computer and never thought to log out and log in as myself. I’ll get this down by next Friday!
No worries, thanks for letting me know it was you!
Hello everyone! I’m so happy to be participating in the Bleak House read a-long. I’ll have to admit though while reading the first two chapters I wondered what I got myself into. Then Esther’s story began and I felt a great sense of relief. If I can bear it, I think I will go back and read the first two chapters again—perhaps I’ll have a greater appreciation on the second go round.
Esther reminds me of Jane Eyre, also. So far Esther like Jane hasn’t let hatred and bitterness ruin her adult life—they both turned the bitterness into sweetness. I guess I’m a bit of a romantic and just love characters like them.
I’ve enjoyed reading everyone’s comments—very interesting and informative. This is my first read a-long and can’t wait t o get on with my reading. Thank you, Wallace.
Yes! I haven’t read Eyre, but there is a discussion above about it — apparently you are not alone in thinking this.
Oh man, I had forgotten just how “wordy” Dickens is. I usually like really crisp, simple prose with words that say a lot while taking up very little space. I feel like I need to really sift through some of Dickens’ descriptions to get to the real “meat” of the story. I have a feeling that this is going to be something that I really have to work on throughout this book. But hopefully I will eventually hit my stride and Dickens will become a little more friendly to me as I make my way through the book.
One thing that I do like about all of the descriptions is that I really do feel like you begin to get a good sense of the story and the characters early on in the story. I’ve read what others have said about Esther and I kind of feel like right now, I’m okay with her almost overwhelming sweetness but I think that it could eventually get overwhelming… we shall see!
I did find that I didn’t mind the long descriptions as much when reading at this pace. I got much more of an impression of the descriptions being poetic when reading at this pace.
I felt that way too for the first chapter… it was a bit jarring after coming from reading Hemingway, but now I am in the groove and loving it. I tend to be somewhere in the middle with what I prefer, but with read-a-longs I don’t mind the lengthy descriptions because they’re all about me taking my time and savoring the story. No worries if it gets to be too much… but hopefully not — maybe it will grow on you!
I agree that the burying of the doll is a symbolic burying of the past. I remember reading that in the book, but I can’t cite where. Also, I remember Ada discussing the way that the case was going to tear the family apart, if Ada and/or Richard won the suit, so I (assume) that the case is a dispute over who is going to get Thomas Jarndyce’s inheritance. It appears a lot of people are putting in bids to “win” (including the old woman, maybe?), and since Richard and Ada are cousins to John Jarndyce, they must be up for some of the money. (Only guessing.)
Did anyone notice how unreliable Esther is as a narrator? I mean, I like her, but she has other characters describe how good she is throughout, while pretending to not want them to say it. Yet, if this is being narrated by her, she could just cut out all their compliments. Makes her seem like she’s saying one thing and thinking another.
I posted on this week’s pages here:
http://jillianreadsbooks2.wordpress.com/2012/03/03/i-am-definitely-becoming-a-fan-of-dickens-reading-bleak-house/
(posted below for your convenience.)
So, I didn’t expect to like this book enough to already want to write about it. I’m participating in Wallace’s readalong of this giant novel through May, and this week felt the sparkling urge to pop on and say –
“Wow! This is nothing like the other works I have read by Dickens so far.”
I LOVE the sudden change in voice and tone, when in Chapter Three, self-effacing, unreliable narrator Esther Summerson, who strives to be good and proper and dislikes talking about herself and insists she’s unimportant in the tale, spends pages discussing just what a trial it is to be good as an orphan unwanted by her scowling aunt, and just how good and modest she really is. (Evidenced by how often she talks down about herself, this being the best proof that she’s not actually as self-focused as she is. Ha!)
The opening narration is masterful: the description of the fog (secrecy, delay, red tape!) covering a Chancery Court that tends to drag out its cases so long that people actually go into debt and then die by the dozens before they get around to making a decision, if they ever do. So far, I’ve gathered that the secret mystery that’s to “fog” the pages of Bleak House for the next several hundred pages has to do with a law suit.
Anyway, the first two chapters are all mystery and scene-setting, by an unidentified narrator in the third person. Then suddenly Esther pipes in in the first person, like Jane Eyre, and the story becomes much more personal. An orphan whose birthday is notoriously ignored, who has never heard her mother spoken about, is told by her own aunt that she is a shame and that her mother is a shame and that (by facial expression, at any rate), all the world would be better off if Esther had never been born. Then her aunt dies, and Esther is all alone, and she’s shipped away, and six years pass.
She’s twenty now, assigned to be a companion to bright and cheery young Ada Clare, who is a distant cousin to the youthful Richard Carstone, all three of whom are orphans (young adults) who have been taken in as wards by John Jarndyce of Bleak House, whose name is linked ominously with the Jarndyce & Jarndyce court case that has been apparently tied up at The Chancery Court forever, that nobody wants to talk about. I expected Bleak House to be bleak, but it isn’t, and neither is its owner. He’s actually very welcoming, though a bit foggy himself and quite worried about an impending doom he refers to as “the East wind.” (I LOVED the description of Bleak House when the wards arrive — both the ghostly exterior, and the intricate interior.)
Esther was a governess for a while whom every student loved, is unfailingly sweet to everyone (according to her! I notice that whenever she leaves a place, paragraphs are taken up telling us that everyone is sobbing to see her go, though she informs the reader that she can’t imagine why — ha! unreliable narrator!!!) She spent a lot of time being useful to the Jellyby children on the journey to Bleak House, which Esther as narrator doesn’t herself recount for Mr. Jarndyce upon meeting him, though Ada expends energy listing everything that is good about Esther for Mr. Jarndyce, which wouldn’t be remarkable, except that Esther is telling the story, so it’s really her revealing her good qualities to the reader. (If Esther has “Ada” tell it rather than herself, it isn’t her fault it’s being reported for the reader, and she can remain the self-effacing girl who doesn’t know why everyone likes her.) Ha! Ha!
Anyway, loving this book. A lot. And joking aside, I’m liking the friendship unfolding between Ada and Esther and Richard, and the way Esther behaves with the children of the Jellyby (I always read it as “Jellybelly”!) house. I can’t help liking Esther despite her endless confirmations of her own character for the reader (which makes her for this reader a flawed, tender, self-conscious, complicated narrator.) I don’t think she’s a bad person or purposely making herself appear better than she is. Rather, that she’s had a rotten childhood and desperately wants to be good and believes she isn’t, so, while she forces herself to be modest as a narrator, she feels she must show herself in a particularly good light for the reader (who actually has yet to be identified), so she slips in compliments through other characters while claiming not to want them to be spoken.
Mr. Skimpole, the guy who has been put on the world so that generous people have someone upon whom to bestow gifts? Makes me LAUGH. (I wonder if he was at all inspired by Dickens’s father?)
Mr. Jarndyce is dear — I love him.
Mr. Krook is odd — the little old man who wrote “Bleak House” on the wall one letter at a time (erasing after each letter and claiming he can’t read.)
So is the creepy old woman. I feel like she is a representative of the ancient nature of the court case they’re all awaiting. She sits in court every day thinking finally the case will be decided in her favor. I get the feeling she’s been waiting since she was very young and is hanging onto life by meager threads now, still waiting. The case, I think? Is about the suicide of Thomas Jarndyce and who is going to get his inheritance. Richard and Ada are possible inheritors. I like the suggestion that the case, and the prospect of money, could potentially tear the family apart. I feel like that money topic could be important later.
This book feels like a rich and Gothic mystery so far. It’s been very cheerful in the first six chapters. Not “bleak” at all yet.
– # –
Awesome description from Chapter Five:
Hilarious self-promoting of Esther through Ada’s lips in Chapter Four:
I’m so glad you pointed out that Esther is an unreliable narrator. It’s a really interesting thought! I hadn’t really picked up on that, but now I’ll be paying closer attention to see if that’s consistent throughout the rest of the novel.
And I’m so glad I’m not the only one who was reading “Jellyby” as “Jellybelly.” I was doing that every time they were mentioned
I was reading it as Jellybelly, too! I love the way Dickens’ names mirror the images of his characters. Jellyby seems to match the family–particularly the mother–so well.
I thought the same thing about Esther! She begins her chapter so self-deprecatingly, saying “I know I am not clever. I always knew that. I can remember, when I was a very little girl indeed, I used to say to my doll, when we were alone together, ‘Now Dolly, I am not clever, you know very well, and you must be patient with me, like a dear!’” She describes herself as feeling poor, trifling, timid, and retiring — all in the first two pages she narrates!
And yet, she is incredibly quick to note everyone’s praises of her. As you said, she expounds upon the tearful goodbyes everyone bids her as she leaves the place she spent the last six years. She claims to be so low, as low as to be nothing, and yet she seems quite vain! One bit that entertained me was at the very end of chapter five, after Peepy (oh gosh, what a wonderful, hilarious name!) is returned from Newgate market after going missing. As Esther is leaving (and Caddy is biting her pen and sobbing on the steps, woe, Esther is going away!), she reflects “Peepy, I am happy to say, was asleep, and spared the pain of separation (I was not without misgivings that he had gone to Newgate market in search of me).” I mean, come on! She knew the kid for a day and suspects she made such an impression on him that he ran away from home to find her when she went for a walk?! Sure, she was kind to him and gave him a desperately needed bath, but her interpretation of his disappearance seems a bit unrealistic.
This probably gives the impression that I dislike Esther, but I really am enjoying her! I’m glad she was able to overcome the loneliness of her upbringing and become a more fulfilled woman with friends and a kind manner. It’s quite a relief that her childhood didn’t make her bitter, but that it made her such a compassionate person. Also, her little inconsistencies really entertain me!
I’m not sure if this was made clear, but how or why was Esther chosen as a companion to Ada?
Leah, I had that same question. It is understandable that Ada and Richard, his cousins, are taken in, but why Esther? Also, if they were orphans, why are they taken in now, and not when they were younger? Or, like he did with Esther, did Jarndyce pay for their schooling/boarding before inviting them to live in his house?
Leah, I suppose that your last question will find an answer, further in the story… Remember that we know nothing about Esther’s origins. How Mr Jardnyce came to be interested in her education and life, for example ?
Is Esther an unreliable narrator or just a pseudo-modest one? Perhaps Dickens was making a satire of Victorian women who act so sweet and modest only to point out all of their good deeds and love from others?
Leah — Mr. Jarndyce chose Esther for Ada (and had sent her to be the governess/ teacher ahead of time to prepare her). We don’t know why he chose her, but in the upcoming week’s reading Esther has an opinion that she shares about why he chose her in particular.
(which, if it is true, will make for a very interesting plot turn).
I’m participating as well (listening to an audio and reading on my Kindle), and after that first chapter with all that fog, fog and more fog, I thought OMG….what lies ahead?? LOL I haven’t read all 6 chapters as I was sick last week, but will try and catch up this week.
Glad you are enjoying this. I was thinking the same thing that what I’ve read so far is so wordy and descriptive — very good though, but how did one manage to pull a book like this together back then, wring with their with their quill pens??
I may have to add the audio to my reading too. I think it would be interesting to listen to this and then read the chapter!!
Seriously! I thought of that too, Diane. I guess that’s what made writing it in serials a better deal for them.
Oh ohoooh
Oh my. I am using an iPad and I am old. I am sorry I read too far. aND I am sorry for the previous post.
I am using a regular computer, and I feel like the class troublemaker :/. Yep, I read including Chapter 6 and see that Wallace said to STOP before 6.
Still loving Mr. Jarydyce, and am find Ester a little overbearing. I have had to refer back several times–love your comments!
Hahahaha, I literally just laughed out loud at those three comments. No worries, Peggy Joan… it happens. I’ll try remember to remind people this week about how the schedule works.
This is my first read-along and I’m very late commenting. I finished the first six chapters in one gulp and then forgot about what day I was supposed to come and discuss! I read somewhere that this book was originally published in serial form in a newspaper. If so, I bet the discussion in the comments here is very like what people of the day were discussing at the water cooler (or whatever passed for that in those days). I am eager to read the next chapters. Don’t think anyone yet commented on Mr Jarndyce’s use of the weather to express his mood. If all is well in his life the weather is going to be sunny — when he is upset (ex. when the young people lend Skimpole money) then “it’ll blow a gale in the course of the night.”
Skimpole is the creepiest character to me — I don’t believe he is really “childlike” in any way; I think he’s calculating. We will see.
Hi all,
I’m a bit late to the discussion, I hope I’ll be more timely in the upcoming weeks.
(I’d better mention right from the start that like Flo I’m not English mother tongue, I’m Italian and reading this in English — so please don’t hesitate to correct me or ask me to clarify if I’m not clear.)
It’s been a while since my last 19th-century read, and it does feel good (ah, the words, the descriptions, the detail of 19th-century lit!) but it is also taking some time to pick up the rhythm. Like many of you, I had to get to chapter 3 before things started to make sense, and I am sure I missed many details in chapters 1 & 2, because they seemed like general issues that had nothing to do with the story, but in retrospect they probably aren’t (things like Tom Jarndyce killing himself — from chapter 5 I had gathered the idea that he had tried to, yet unsuccessfully). And from chapter 3 onwards, I’m still having difficulties in understanding the passing of time. How old is Esther when her aunt dies? How old are Ada and Richard when they meet? And… when they get to Bleak House, does everything (including the scene with Mr Skimpole asking for money) happen on the same night?
I am considering rereading the first chapters to get those details and to savor them better. The descriptions, oh my, and they’re full of that satire, as in:
“Sir Leicester has no objection to an interminable Chancery suit. It is a slow, expensive, British, constitutional kind of thing.” Uh-oh. You already mentioned several other examples, so I won’t repeat.
I don’t think I have much more to add to the discussion at this point, but I’ll go back over your comments now and reply to a few things. And then I’ll dive in again, so I can re-read the first chapters without falling behind!
Wallace, thank you for hosting this readalong!
Esther’s aunt died when Esther was 14, and then Esther spent 6 years working as a governess. That would make her 20 now.
Although we don’t know their exact ages, Esther says Richard “was very young; not more than nineteen then, if quite so much, but nearly more than two years older than she [Ada] was.” They have just met each other for the first time.
I can’t answer your other questions because I think you read through ch. 6, but I stopped at the end of ch. 5.
I was very surprised by Esther’s comment because, in fact, they’re about the same age !… unless she’s considering that her education as a governor and her painful childhood make her more aware of the reality and then more adult than the two others.
I have a feeling that we don’t need to understand the beginning very well. I think that the farther along in the story we get, the more the beginning will make sense. So glad you’re joining! I am in awe of you and Flo tackling this in another language! Let us know whenever (if ever) you need help.
Like a few others, I’m arriving somewhat late to this discussion. This is the first Charles Dickens novel I’ve read, and I confess it’s turned out to be a more difficult read than I’d anticipated, at least in the first few chapters.
Consequently, I feel like it’s all I could do to get this far along much less contribute anything worth reading to the discussion. Hopefully that will change in the coming weeks!
No worries — usually we just comment on other comments and thoughts anyway, so feel free to look through them and jump into conversations along the way… that’s the best part anyway (no need to summarize the reading or anything like that). Glad you joined!
Most of the bases have been covered already, as far as my own notes go, but there are two things that I’d like to contribute.
First–I can’t stand Mr. Skimpole. I hate when people aren’t accountable for their own actions and he doesn’t seem to be accountable for anything in his life. He also talks about himself in the third person, which is a huge pet peeve of mine.
Second–the scene where the children (They seem so childlike, don’t they? But I guess they really aren’t) visit Miss Flite’s apartment is pretty intense. I can’t help but wonder if her relationship with her birds is foreshadowing the storyline. She keeps these birds with the intention of passing judgment on them and setting them free, but she never gets around to it before they die (much, it seems, like the Jarndyce case). The part where she talks about the cat waiting to kill the birds is the most troublesome. Also worrisome is the way that the birds (perhaps a metaphor for those involved in the case) are dehumanized, for lack of a better term. They are objects to her, which she has taken control of. This is a pretty disturbing idea and her “playing God,” to use a popular phrase, with these birds may reflect Dickens’ opinion of the Court of Chancery. Either in the endnotes or the appendix I read that he had a court case go through there and was not at all happy with the outcome.
Ashley, I am with you one hundred percent on Mr. Skimpole. The character is insufferable, and I truly hope that some of the other characters will figure this out, too. I’d hate to think that Dickens intended for him to be lovable.
I am also arriving late to the discussion, but only because my comments got lost every time I posted. Let’s see if erasing all my internet cookies will help. Most of what I would have said has already been said except that it looks like I am one of the few people who doesn’t like Esther and who loves Krook. He is mysterious and she seems like a Goody Two-Shoes. For my full review on chapters 1-5 see my blog post:
http://ocanadayall.blogspot.com/2012/03/bleak-house.html
I would type more, but my hands hurt from a golf lesson yesterday and shoveling out of 6 inches of snow this morning. Thankfully it is all light and fluffy!
I am almost caught up with the section; should have it completed by sometime Wednesday (today)
@ Flo: now I feel like a fool. Can you point me to where the the “last chapter to read” rule is stated? Sorry for being so dense!
but I don’t like Krook either. Miss Flite was probably the most interesting character for me at the moment, but she too is somewhat spooky (like Ashley so perfectly pointed out).
@ Leah: thank you for your answer. I still don’t think they *feel* like the age they’re supposed to be, but maybe that’s just me.
@ Patricia: I’m on the anti-Esther side for now too
You don’t have to
It’s the way I have understood the reading schedule set in the sign ups & starting post :
“Week #/ dates :: Place in which to STOP
Week One/ February 24- March 1 :: Chapter 6″
According to me, it meant that we had to stop at the end of chapter 5.
Plus, Wallace indicates, just above, in the same post : “Please note, we will be reading roughly 63 pages per week “, which could be a mean to verify you understood well.
As it was my first read-a-long, I was so willing to do well, that I’ve tried to be sure I was ok with the schedule.
For this week discussion, I’ve stopped reading at the end of chapter 9.
Flo,thanks for the reminder to stop at Chapter 9! I have read ahead and am determined not to do it again.
Your comments encourage me to go back and re-read. I am seeing Esther in a not very becoming light beacause of your insight.
And I too am a huge fan of Great Expectations!
I apologize for being so late to the discussion. The first couple of chapters, for me, were dull and confusing. I didn’t start becoming interested until Dickens introduced little Esther. I’m still keeping an open mind as I push through this week’s assignment.
I think this is one of those books that we can let our minds relax for the first several chapters while the story gets set up (because it won’t all make sense anyway) and then when the plot starts churning, we will understand the beginning a bit better. That’s my sense, anyway. Keep pushing, you can do it!!
Wow! What an amazing opening section. While it was a little confusing as to what is going on in the book, I imagine it will all become easier to understand later on in the book. The reason for the lateness of my thoughts is due to the fact that I was trying to finish other books and reading on my e-reader isn’t exactly easy.
Anyways, I am starting to love the book and am amazed at the detail in the book. I have read a couple other of Dicken’s work (A Tale of Two Cities and A Christmas Carol) and knew of his attention to detail, but the detail and the depth of the first six chapters is just amazing, despite some of the first section being a little dull at times.
I am certainly looking forward to seeing where Dickens takes us in this story and am trying not to read any sort of synopsis while I am reading the book.
I should have the second section done by sometime this weekend, but I won’t guarantee to have anything up by the end of the weekend, but I’ll see what the weekend holds for me.
I’m behind as usual, so I will be posting about week one and week two on my blog tomorrow. However, I will share a few brief thoughts from the first section here.
In response to what you said about Dickens and Hemingway, yes, Dickens is such a colorful and rich storyteller. His characters are so interesting and original.
Regarding Esther, all I could think about was how could people treat a child like that. Even if she did come from a scandalous ‘whatever it was’, a child is a child and they need love and care above all else. How horrible!
I was so aggravated by Mrs. Jellyby, I think if I would have been there, I would have had to slap her face. What an ignorant woman. Thinking she is is doing so much good in Africa while neglecting her own children. Disgraceful!
I totally missed the Jarndyce suicide. Where was I while I was reading? *L*
I’m a bit confused by the stopping point as well. I took it that we were to stop at the end of Chapter 6, which is what I did. But others are saying Chapter 5. Oy vey!
Thanks, Wallace!
No worries, I don’t check the blogs anyway (so you can post there whenever is convenient for you, or not at all if you don’t want to) — I just check to make sure you’ve been part of the discussion here.
I think they mean stop when you are finished with chapter 5 (i.e. when you get to chapter 6 don’t read anymore). So, I think you’re on the right track.