Review: A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens

Two men who bear a startling resemblance to one another — Charles Darnay, a frenchman, and Sydney Carton, an English lawyer — have their lives collide and intertwine between their two countries in the years before and during the French Revolution. 

The two meet by chance during Darnay’s treason trial in England, and both fall in love with the same woman — Lucie Manette, the daughter of a French doctor called to witness at the trial. Years later, the chaos of the French Revolution threatens their doorstep, and they each make a difficult decision that sets them on the path to their ultimate fate. 

This book has made me tear up every time I’ve read it — which is about five times at this point — and it remains one of the most beautiful and touching stories I’ve read, which has lost none of its power over the many years since it was written.

My first experience with this novel was as an eleven year old who was unnaturally obsessed with the French Revolution and Marie Antoinette; I have read it several more times since then, only to discover to my horror that the version I was reading was an abridged one. I wasted no time in getting my hands on an unabridged copy, and have recently read the full version for the first time. Contrary to my experience with other classics such as Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea, I did not find the unabridged version more tedious than the abridged (despite being a Dickens novel). It remains one of my favourite classics, even in its full-length form. 

Dickens isn’t particularly what I would recommend for a beginner to the classics — his language can be somewhat convoluted and confusing in some places, and he goes off on tangents relatively often, sometimes about historical events the reader has no context on and cannot quite understand. 

However, I enjoyed A Tale of Two Cities much more than the several other Dickens novels I have slogged my way through. It was far less drawn-out and tedious; it also has less of the particular brand of mockery, satire and caricatured characters that has always missed the mark with me in the reading of his other works. The storyline itself is also different from the subject matter of his other books, with themes of tragedy and love, sacrifice and family ties, and ultimately of redemption. 

The book is populated with wonderful characters; the troubled Doctor Manette and his sweet daughter Lucie, the dissipated and rough but good-hearted Sydney Carton, the business-minded but soft hearted Mr. Lorrie, the cold, sinister and vengeful Madame Defarge, and more.  It even has its funny moments, with amusing characters such as Miss Manette’s nurse, and Jerry Cruncher with his questionable escapades as an “honest tradesman”.

This is the only Dickens novel I’ve read where I have felt attached to the characters and absorbed in the story — where with his others I have felt mostly bored and uninvested. 

That said, there are still one or two moments I found a little confusing or didn’t understand with Dickens’ language and terminology. 

Overall I would recommend getting a version with really good notes, such as I had; I read the Penguin Clothbound Classics edition, and I enjoyed the commentary in the notes (especially those regarding some of Dickens’ mistakes and misconceptions, and other historical contexts). Without the notes, I would have been much more confused and run into several more unintelligible moments. 

There is not much in this novel that I can find to dislike, but one thing that did peeve me slightly is that there is something mildly irritating about Lucie Manette; the fact that she is some golden-haired angel, who can do no wrong and is everything to everyone around her without ever being tired or losing her temper — one feels it is one of those instances of the idealisation of a female character that detracts from her portrayal as a whole. 

In addition, the novel does miss some of the nuances and greater contexts of the French Revolution in its portrayal (although I don’t think accurate historical narrating is the point of the story as a whole).

Other than this, there isn’t anything I didn’t enjoy about the novel, though I would freely say that I don’t think it’s a book for everybody, and it depends heavily on your reading taste as to whether you will like it or not — as past reviews have proven. 

As for content, there is relatively constant representation of violence and bloodshed, murder and mobs, as is usual for a book set during the French Revolution. There are also mild depictions of drinking and smoking, as well as a veiled allusion to sexual assault. Overall, however, I think it is appropriate for most readers, though the language and style of the book would probably be better suited to older audiences.

This novel is iconic, from its famous opening lines to its beautiful closing lines and everything in between. I easily give it four and a half stars, though as I mentioned before, I think it is highly dependent on taste as to whether a reader will enjoy it or not.

If you are widely read in the classics and you enjoy them, and if you have read other Dickens works and liked those, and if you don’t mind a bit of a slow buildup to the action, I think it is highly likely that you will love this book. However, if you have little experience or no patience with classics novels, you probably won’t,  and the same if you are expecting a highly detailed and accurate account of lives during this portion of history.