DICKNS-L Archives

Charles Dickens Forum


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Patrick McCarthy <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Charles Dickens Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Sat, 6 Feb 2016 15:45:25 -0800
text/plain (47 lines)
Friends of the Dickens Forum,

     Over the years of Dickens Forum, we have been almost studiously 
neglectful of the many reworkings of
Dickens material as they appear in versions modest or grand.  In recent 
months we have heard much of a
twenty-part television series called "Dickensian" still currently 
viewable on BBC 1.  A team of writers, headed by
Tony Jordan, has hit upon the idea of creating a new plot in which the 
roles are played by famed Dickens characters
who remain as Dickens personalities as we know them but now act in a 
linked story and so to speak, bounce off
one another.  We have not seen the series ourselves, but the website 
following it is readily available.

     Now Lucinda Hawksley, Dickens's great-great-great granddaughter, 
recognizes the soap-stlyle aspects
of  the show but argues that Dickens himself "would have been thrilled 
that someone would have cared so
much about his work as to make such a drama so many years on." She notes 
too that many at the Dickens House
Museum people are also enjoying the show despite its soap drama style.

     But why do some of us shrink from watching such entertainments? The 
corpus of writing left to us by
the super-master Dickens most assuredly is so rich and complex and sui 
generis that we have quite
enough to do in studying and interpreting and thinking about it that we 
fear that we may muddy our
personal readings and understanding.  What, then, of seeing the great 
film versions, David Lean's  OT or GE,
and what they do to Dickens's texts?  Surely, willy-nilly, they affect 
our readings but as a separate genre which
the verbal texts are continually compared against.    Nothing like a 
lesser version, cobbled together with
no expectation of mirroring or reproducing the original in another 
medium, is aimed for.

     The distinction may be argued over.  But for us nothing approaches 
the value of a reading than another reading.
And, of course, of course the latest reading will itself differ from the 
first or the first several readings.

Patrick McCarthy
Editor, Dickns-L