«داستان دو شهر» را می‌توان یک رمان تاریخی دانست. داستانی که در واقع درباره‌ی دو کشور است: فرانسه و انگلستان، و تفاوت‌های اجتماعی و سیاسی آن‌ها. داستان یک جامعه‌ی محافظه‌کار با تغییرات سیاسی تدریجی (انگلستان)، و یک جامعه‌ی انقلابی و طغیان‌گر در برابر ظلم و ستم(فرانسه). البته شاید بهتر باشد بگوییم نقش فرانسه و انقلاب آن در کتاب پررنگ‌تر است، و به عبارتی بخش بزرگی از کتاب نگاه «چارلز دیکنز» و نقد او به عنوان یک نویسنده‌ی انگلیسی به انقلاب فرانسه است.
اما دیکنز حقه‌های دیگری نیز در آستین دارد.
فقر، اشرافی‌گری و بی‌عدالتی
دیکنز درک عمیقی از مسئله‌ی فقر دارد، شاید به این خاطر که در کودکی طعم فقر را چشیده است. فقر از درون‌مایه‌های بیشتر آثار دیکنز (از جمله این کتاب) است.
دیکنز فقر را با طنزی تلخ و هنرمندانه پیش چشم خواننده به نمایش در می‌آورد. این طنزِ تلخ و کنایی در مورد اشرافی‌گری نیز به چشم می‌خورد.
اشرافی که دیکنز از آن‌ها سخن می‌گوید فقط از نظر ثروت با هم‌نوعان خود اختلاف ندارند، آن‌ها «حضرت اشرف‌»هایی هستند که ستم کرده‌اند، ولی نه تنها از چنگ عدالت گریخته‌اند، بلکه بی‌گناهان را به جای خود مجازات کرده‌اند. چون از نظر نظام قضایی نیز برتر از دیگر انسان‌ها هستند. آن‌ها گرفتار غرور و خودبرتربینی هستند، چنان که توده‌ی مردم را به چشم «موش‌هایی کثیف» می‌بینند.
چنین وضعیتی در جامعه‌ی فرانسه زمینه‌ساز انقلاب فرانسه، یا به تعبیر دیکنز، انقلاب خونین فرانسه، با همه‌ی اعدام‌ها، انتقام‌جویی‌ها و خونریزی‌هایش می‌شود. انقلابی که دیکنز علت وقوع آن را با توجه به ظلمی که بر جامعه رفته درک می‌کند، ولی روش وقوع آن را تأیید نمی‌کند. روشی که اگرچه با شعار برابری و برادری و آزادی و به نام جمهوری صورت می‌گیرد، ولی آلوده به خشونت بی‌حد و حصر و قتل و خونریزی و محاکمه‌های پوشالی و اعدام از طریق طنابِ دار، گیوتین و ... است.
باید گفت دیکنز به راستی استاد تصویرسازی‌های کنایی است، مثلا به نظر من یکی از هنری‌ترین بخش‌های کتاب فصل «میخانه» است. فصلی که در آن بشکه‌ای از شراب در محله‌ای از پاریس شکسته و شراب سرخ(در اینجا در مفهوم کنایی خون) بر زمین پخش شده و مردم جمع شده‌اند تا با خوشحالی آن را از روی زمین بنوشند. تصویری که دیکنز در این فصل از مردم پیشاانقلابی فرانسه رسم می‌کند و توصیف شخصیت دلقکی که روی دیوار کلمه‌ی خون را می‌نویسد به راستی زیباست.
عشق
داستان دو شهر در عین حال در بخش‌هایی از کتاب یک داستان عاشقانه هم هست که از نظر من متأسفانه جزو نقاط ضعف داستان است. داستان عاشقانه‌ی کتاب به خوبی پرداخت نشده و شخصیت‌پردازی بعضی از شخصیت‌ها مثل لوسی و چارلز دارنِی ضعیف‌تر از چیزی است که باید باشد. به طور مثال برداشت خواننده از شخصیت لوسی، یک دختر زیبا و احساساتی است و نه بیشتر، شبیه به چیزی که سیدنی کارتِن(از شخصیت‌های کتاب) او را یک «عروسک موطلایی» می‌نامد، در حالی که نویسنده می‌توانست ابعاد عمیق‌تری از شخصیت او را به ما نشان دهد.
داستان به خصوص در دو سوم ابتدایی، تا حدی درگیر نوعی سانتیمانتالیسم است. دیالوگ‌هایی با تعارف‌ها و احساسات اغراق شده و شخصیت‌هایی که مدام با شنیدن این دیالوگ‌ها اشک می‌ریزند.

درباره‌ی ترجمه
به ترجمه‌ی جناب ابراهیم یونسی، که احتمالا مشهورترین ترجمه‌ی بازار هم هست، میتوان نمره‌ی «قابل قبول» داد. ابراهیم یونسی توانسته به خوبی لحن دیکنز را به فارسی برگرداند، اما متأسفانه ترجمه در بعضی بخش‌ها دچار اشکالاتی است که اگر از فیلتر یک ویراستار توانا می‌گذشت می‌توانست به یک ترجمه‌ی عالی تبدیل شود. متأسفانه فرصت نشد سایر ترجمه‌ها را بررسی کنم.(احتمالا ترجمه‌ی مهرداد نبیلی نیز از ترجمه‌های قابل توجه باشد)

پی‌نوشت: جذاب‌ترین قسمت کتاب، یک سومِ پایانی آن است، پس اگر در آغاز، کتاب را خسته‌کننده یافتید، صبور باشید و به خواندن ادامه دهید :)

Sentimental and predictable, in how everyone knows each other and how constructed the story works to a neat conclusion and contrast at the end, but the author his sarcastic wit helped me appreciate the book nonetheless!

Charles Dickens has a sarcastic wit in this novel and doesn’t hold back in anyway in scathing the French bourgeois and nobility, you can viscerally imagine the poverty and wretchedness based on the vivid descriptions provided. However the bourgeois English fear for a rising of the mobs is very clear as well. At its heart A Tale of Two Cities in my view is less about the French Revolution (if that interest you primarily I'd recommend A Place of Greater Safety by Hilary Mantel) perse and more about morality and how people carry themselves under extreme circumstances.

Some characters revert to an “it’s all business” sentiment and quite breezingly make it through. Other characters turn saint like and faint multiple times (looking at you Lucy). We have someone turning full on ninja assassin at a chateau, and a madam who is constantly knitting while the guillotine (almost a character in itself) "shaves off" a new pattern in the tapestry of society.

The courtroom scene, the discovery of the father in Paris, overdone love declarations and schemes reminded me a lot to a more quick (and in my opinion better executed) versions of what Victor Hugo did in The Hunchback of Notre-Dame.
There is a death speech (and a letter) of a chapter long at the end of the book which is probably the most over the top melodramatic writing I’ve read.
Everyone is acquainted or full on related to each other in the two metropoles London and Paris, and the overarching plot and desired symmetries completely supersede any sense of reality in the story.

Still the biting humor, and the idiosyncratic characters made this quite an enjoyable read for a book of its age. A solid three stars overall!

About 30 pages into this book, I was struck with a moment of panic:

WHAT'S GOING ON HERE? WHERE THE HELL IS GARFIELD?!?

Had the lasagna-loving feline been uncerimoniously behead on the guillotine before the happenings of page 1? Without my favorite cartoon cat's wry, laid-back sense of wit these are surely THE WORST OF TIMES!

That is when I realized I was reading the classic text A Tale of Two CITIES, by Charles Dickens and not watching the 2006 cinematic masterpiece Garfield: A TAIL of Two KITTIES!

Holy crap! How embarrassing!

Against my better judgement, I decided to keep reading, hoping that at some point Garfield would pop up and say something hilarious about hating Mondays. Well, fellow readers, he doesn't. I repeat: GARFIELD IS NOT IN THIS BOOK! AT ALL!

Instead, Dickens (is that his real name? LOL!) crafts a tale of sacrifice and redemption set against the bleak background of the French Revolution.

Overall, I guess it's an okay book, if you're into the "classics" sort-of thing, but I believe in my heart of hearts that this novel really could've benefitted by AT LEAST a cameo from Jon Arbuckle or something.

A far, far better historical thriller...


Dirk Bogarde as Sydney Carton in the 1958 film version.

‘It was the best of times, it was the worst of times...’ begins Charles Dickens’ thrilling novel set in England and France during the turbulent years of the French Revolution. It tells the story of the return from London to Paris in 1792 of Charles Darnay, the Marquis of Evremonde, an aristocrat who had renounced his title and privileges, to help a forlorn servant in his former household. The lives of all those around Darnay - his wife Lucie, her father Doctor Manette, the lawyer Sydney Carton and spy Barsad - become bound into the ensuing intrigue and danger.

Dickens describes so well the wild, fickleness of the mob gathered for Darnay’s trial at the Conciergerie, and the sense of evil abroad in Paris at night as the people sharpen their weapons on a bloody grindstone in the St Germain courtyard of Tellson’s Bank. The callousness of the aristocracy is accounted for too, as a relative of Darnay’s ploughs over a child in his carriage and horses and tosses a few coins out of the window in ‘compensation’.

The book details how social injustice and the abuse of power led to a merciless vengeance on the aristocratic class. Personifying it is the Republican ringleader, Madame Defarge, who knits, mechanically adding the names to the register for vengeance at her wine shop with other revolutionaries: they who refer to each other in code as ‘Jaques’. “Then tell Wind and Fire where to stop, but don't tell me,” she says, as the ‘Reign of Terror’ rises to its excesses.

Whilst reading the novel on a recent trip to Paris, I felt able to enter through its pages into the city’s history. The dark iron keys from the Bastille fortress lay in a glass cabinet at the Carnavalet Museum, and the paintings there depict scenes from the period vividly in oil. At the Conciergerie were the straw-floored cells where suspects were kept before being brought for trial at the Revolutionary Tribunal upstairs. Queen Marie Antionette’s cell is left as it is thought to have been. At the ‘corner of last goodbyes’ in the women’s courtyard, the condemned waited for the tumbrils to take them to the Place de la Concorde - the losers in the ‘lottery of Sainte Guillotine’.

‘A Tale of Two Cities’, a reference point for my own novel ‘The Silencer’, sweeps towards a tense climax and the central act of Sydney Carton’s self-sacrifice for the good of Lucie Manette and her family. As Carton walks through the streets of Paris and lingers by the River Seine contemplating all the faults and mistakes in his own life, the words of Christ rise within him, ‘I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, even though he is dead, he shall live. And whoever lives and believes in me shall never die’. And so the famous words ascribed to Sydney Carton as he ascends the scaffold in his final moments are: “It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to than I have ever known.” Ce est un livre superbe!

By the reviewer:
n  n

I'm so glad to see Dickens and I are friends again. From being my biggest disappointment of 2021, to being a great, pleasant experience after finishing A Tale of Two Cities, Dickens has caught my attention again, though he is far from being my favorite Victorian author, I'm really interested in reading some of his other novels from now on.
A Tale of Two Cities was not the book I was expecting at all; actually, I wasn't expecting to find anything so good as what I read here since my previous experience reading the author had ended up being really disappointing, however, now I can tell I probably made a mistake picking up Our Mutual Friend as my first Dickens, or perhaps this book wasn't for me at all. Either way, this compelling, sometimes intriguing historical novel, A Tale of Two Cities, published in 1859 and set before and during the French Revolution, that depicts directly and vividly the life of a group of characters who end up being involved in the social problems that they are living as a society, has been an impressive journey as a reader.

Now, I must confess I found both the characters main plot and subplots poorly developed and superficial. Don't get me wrong, in my view this was not a mistake at all. The characters are following one, and only one direction from beginning to end: one of them is kind and sympathetic towards everyone at the begging, in the middle and at the end of the book; another one is wicked, super evil, again, throughout the whole novel; the third one is just the voice of wisdom, and so on and so forth. Theirs personalities are basically the same, perhaps—and just in a few cases—changing slightly towards the last one third of the book (for the record, if you are a character reader, this book might not be for you).
Is this a problem? Absolutely not! Because Dickens doesn't seem to be interested in developing his characters, but interested in the background, in developing the historical context. And it's just there, in those descriptions, passages of the French Revolution where the soul of this novel is. The first lines of the novel are so memorable, and so are the last chapters; I'm certainly not exaggerating when I say I got the goosebumps reading those final chapters, overall the whole part 3, whose descriptions are still stuck in my head; it is here where also the pace of the novel is going really fast and eventually the ending turns into the most remarkable and even heartbreaking part of the book.
The middle of the novel, nonetheless, is kind of disappointing. At times confusing, other times slow and repetitive; fortunately, Dickens knows what the reader wants—I'm just assuming this based on my own experience—and suddenly is back to those important events that took place during the French Revolution. By the way, I'd highly recommend an edition with explanatory notes, or al least footnotes in order for you to understand those events that are implicit in the narrative. For instance, this edition of Penguin Classics is indeed a great option to get a great, historical experience.

Finally, if you are interested in listening to the audiobook for this novel, considering there are about ten audiobooks available right now, I encourage you to pick up the Martin Jarvis' one; he was perfect in this narration, one of the best audiobooks ever. It was not only the tone of his voice as well as his pace what amazed me so much, but also the fact that you can feel every dialogue, every scene, every characters' thought so vividly and so profoundly. In my opinion, a wonderful job by this narrator.

Favorite quotes:

“The wind is rushing after us, and the clouds are flying after us, and the moon is plunging after us, and the whole wild night is in pursuit of us; but, so far we are pursued by nothing else.”

“I am not afraid to die, ... but I have done nothing. I am not unwilling to die, if the Republic which is to do so much good to us poor, will profit by my death; but I do not know how that can be, Citizen Evrémonde. Such a poor weak little creature!”

“But, the glorious sun, rising, seemed to strike those words, that burden of the night, straight and warm to his heart in its long bright rays.”

“If you could say, with truth, to your own solitary heart, to-night, ‘I have secured to myself the love and attachment, the gratitude or respect, of no human creature; I have won myself a tender place in no regard; I have done nothing good or service-able to be remembered by!’ your seventy-eight years would be seventy-eight heavy curses; would they not?”

“Above all, one hideous figure grew as familiar as if it had been before the general gaze from the foundations of the world—the figure of the sharp female called La Guillotine.”

“Ghosts all! The ghost of beauty, the ghost of stateliness, the ghost of elegance, the ghost of pride, the ghost of frivolity, the ghost of wit, the ghost of youth, the ghost of age, all waiting their dismissal from the desolate shore, all turning on him eyes that were changed by the death they had died in coming there.”

«Ήταν οι καλύτερες μέρες, ήταν οι χειρότερες μέρες, ήταν τα χρόνια της σοφίας, ήταν τα χρόνια της άνοιας, ήταν η εποχή της πίστης, ήταν η εποχή της ολιγοπιστίας, η εποχή του Φωτός και η εποχή του Σκότους, ήταν η άνοιξη της ελπίδας κι ο χειμώνας της απελπισιάς, είχαμε μπρος μας τα πάντα, είχαμε μπρος μας το τίποτε…»

Είναι ένα αριστουργηματικό μανιφέστο για τη δύναμη της αγάπης, της λύτρωσης και το μεγαλείο του ανθρώπινου πνεύματος.
Δεν είναι ένα απλό μυθιστόρημα.
Μέσα σε αυτό το έργο ζωής και τέχνης κάθε λέξη, κάθε ενέργεια, έχει νόημα και αξία.
Κάθε σκέψη του Ντίκενς αποτυπωμένη αριστοτεχνικά περνάει σαν ουσία ζωής και φθάνει μέχρι το μυελό των οστών του αναγνώστη.
Ειναι τρομακτικό πως καταφέρνει να απεικονίζει τα γεγονότα της Γαλλικής επανάστασης και κάθε επανάστασης, δίνοντας σου τη δυνατότητα να μυρίζεις, να αισθάνεσαι, να βιώνεις,τα ένστικτα των ανθρώπων που ουρλιάζουν σιωπηλά.
Τις καταπιεσμένες λαϊκές μάζες που βουλιάζουν στην ανέχεια, την αμάθεια, το κρύο, την πείνα, τις άρρωστιες, τη βρομιά, την καταπίεση, το φόβο και το θάνατο.

Παράλληλα γράφει μια τρυφερή και βαθιά ανθρώπινη ιστορία αγάπης.
Μια αγάπη που ειναι καταδικασμένη να στολίζεται απο σταθερότητα αισθημάτων και θυσιών.
Εδώ, μέσα στο βούρκο και τη λάσπη, μέσα στο σκοτάδι που νικάει πάντα το φως των λιωμένων κεριών, μέσα σε σπίτια αθλιότητας και δυστυχίας σε κάθε μορφή, στην κακουχία, το έγκλημα, τη βασανιστική ανάγκη επιβίωσης απο ψίχουλα θανάτου, εδώ, σ αυτά τα ίδια μέρη, στις ίδιες πόλεις γίνονται οι απαλλαγές απο κοσμικές και θεϊκές εξουσίες.

Εδώ, ιστορία δυο πόλεων, ιστορία όλων των πόλεων του κόσμου. Οι καλύτερες ανθρώπινες ενέργειες ανθίζουν απο την επαναστατική πένα του οράματος και αναπτύσσονται παράλληλα και σε αντίθεση με την απόγνωση, την αγωνία, την τρομοκρατία και την φρικτή εκδικητική φύση που προκαλείται απ’την αντίθεση της ίδιας ανθρώπινης καλοσύνης.

Ο Ντίκενς απίθανα και απίστευτα καταφέρνει να γράψει στην γλώσσα όλων των εποχών, ενεργοποιεί αυτομάτως τους μηχανισμούς της παγκόσμιας ιστορίας.

Συσσωρεύει πνευματικότητα και σοφία σε μεγάλες λογοτεχνικές σκέψεις.
Μεταμορφώνει τα μυαλά που τον δέχονται ώστε να λαχταράνε ιστορίες πόλεων ...για την προώθηση της κοινωνικής επανάστασης όπως μόνο οι μεγάλοι δάσκαλοι μπορούν να πουν.
Να πουν για αυτή την αιματοβαμμένη ιστορία του Λονδίνου και του Παρισιού το έτος 1793 , αλλά να καλύπτουν και τις προσπάθειες έμπνευσης για κακομεταχείριση του εκάστοτε βίαιου επαναστάτη.

Κάπου διάβασα πως ο Ντίκενς είναι υπερβολικός σε ιδέες και αξιακές διαδρομές. Δεν ειναι υπερβολικός, ειναι αληθινός και δυνατός, είναι προφήτης της επαναστατικής κατήχησης για κοινωνικές αλλαγές με ειρηνικά μέσα.
Για αλλαγές που δεν ειναι ουτοπικές και θεωρητικές εάν ξεκινούν απο την ατομική θυσία, απο την προσωπική ιδεολογική μεταστροφή, και την πνευματική αναγέννηση.

Πόσο πιο ξεκάθαρα να το προβλέψει μέσα απο τους χαρακτήρες του βιβλίου του με πολιτικό περιεχόμενο πως ναι, είμαστε όλοι χειραγωγημένοι, ήμασταν και θα είμαστε.
Ο Ντίκενς γράφει για έναν φρικτό κόσμο. Δεν υπάρχει δικαιοσύνη για τους φτωχούς. Οι αδύναμοι κακοποιούνται και κακομεταχειρίζονται απο την άρχουσα τάξη και όταν τελικά εκδικούνται επικρατεί ο νόμος της ζούγκλας, τα άγρια ζώα που πεινάνε για όλα και καταναλώνονται εντελώς με την επιθυμία τους για αίμα.
Μετά χάος, νοοτροπία μάζας, αγριότητα, καταστροφή, φρενίτιδα, βία.

Δεν ειναι αυτός ο κόσμος του Ντίκενς. Η δύναμη των δικών του δυο πόλεων διερευνά τις προσωπικές πτυχές της εθνικής ταυτότητας με λίγο περισσότερη αγάπη και λίγο λιγότερη βία.
Κάνει έκκληση μέσα απο τα γραπτά του και ελπίζει πως η ανθρώπινη ακεραιότητα θα μπορέσει να ξεπεράσει την εθνική μικρότητα και το ατομικό κακό.
Πάντα σε σχέση με την ανθρώπινη καρδιά που μπορεί να νιώσει.
Πόσο αξεπέραστα και αξιόπιστα έργα μπορεί να καταφέρει αυτή η σπουδαία λογοτεχνία.

Υπάρχουν τόσα πολλά που μπορούν να μάθουν τα έθνη του κόσμου απο αυτό το βιβλίο.

Μα δυστυχώς μέχρι σήμερα εκατοντάδες χρόνια μετά οι λαοί εξακολουθούν να πιστεύουν και να ακολουθούν αυτούς που φωνάζουν : ΑΥΡΙΟ ΚΑΤΑΣΤΡΕΦΕΤΑΙ Ο ΚΟΣΜΟΣ (πως θα τον σώσουμε;;)
ΣΥΓΚΕΝΤΡΩΣΗ ΚΑΙ ΠΟΡΕΙΑ ΤΗΝ ΑΛΛΗ ΔΕΥΤΕΡΑ...ΓΙΑ ΟΛΑ ΦΤΑΙΝΕ ΤΑ ΞΕΝΑ ΚΑΙ ΤΑ ΝΤΟΠΙΑ ΜΟΝΟΠΩΛΕΙΑ.


Καλή ανάγνωση.
Πολλούς ασπασμούς.

“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair,”

With the iconic opening lines in “The Tale of Two Cities” we begin a story of love, sacrifice, and honour set against a period in French history that brought with it so much change and uncertainty in a revolution that raged for almost 10 years.

A true classic, a masterpiece in storytelling and a novel that was so perfectly balanced in all its themes that I had to sit back and admire the sheer genius of the author and this work of art. One of my favourites classics.

The Plot

The book begins with the release of the French Doctor Manette, who was imprisoned in the Bastille in Paris, and after 18 years is released to live in London with his daughter Lucie who he has never met. The book then alternates between two cities; Paris and London, and between two men, Charles Dranay and Sydney Carton and their love Lucie.

1780. Charles Darnay stands accused of treason against the English crown and is acquitted by the argument presented by Carton that he himself bears an uncanny resemblance to the defendant, and therefore we can not be sure of the identity of the culprit. Darnay on his acquittal returns to Paris to live with his uncle but after seeing the treatment of his country people, returns to England and asks, Manette, for permission to marry Lucie.

Meanwhile, Carton also pledges his love to Lucie, admitting that, though his life is worthless, she has helped him dream of a better, more valuable existence. Remembering that “this is a desperate time, when desperate games are played for desperate stakes”, we continue through a web of deceit, honour, and love as one “… man who would give his life, to keep a life you love beside you.” And this is an important line but to reveal more would spoil the element of surprise as identities remain hidden.

Review and Comments

A Tale of Two Cities written in 1858, was believed to have propelled Dickens into the high ranks of great Romance novelists of the period, combine that with a book that is described as his best work of historical fiction, and we have a true classic. However, for me it was neither, but what it did bring was a beautiful and perfectly balanced story that weaves the threads of romance, revolution, tragedy, sacrifice, love, and honour so well that not one thread is allowed to dominate, unlike many of his other works and therefore one of my favourites. That said don’t pick up a Charles Dickens novel if you do not want your heart broken by something in the story, because where we have Dickens, tragedy is sure to follow and lurk somewhere in the coming pages.

A Tale of Two Cities is not a slumber read and a level of concentration is needed. The language does not roll off the tongue, although grammatically perfect and underlying themes and vital pieces in the story are often subtly nuanced so can be easily overlooked. If I can offer this, I read a number of books by Charles Dickens in the last 6 months, and I have to confess connecting with the earlier books and style took effort, however, by the time I read this novel I was more accustomed to the style and knew the subtleties to watch for, and what a difference it made because I loved it. What do they say about practice!!!

Another brilliant story with excellent characterisation and poignant themes that draws on the historical background of the period to create the perfect atmosphere for a towering classic like this. Stunning, dramatic, captivating and mesmerising, and now I will end with a favourite quote from
a book that offers so many!!!

“A wonderful fact to reflect upon, that every human creature is constituted to be that profound secret and mystery to every other.”

Dacă aș fi citit mai devreme acest roman, probabil că mi-ar fi plăcut. Și mi-ar fi plăcut să-mi placă măcar lectura asta tîrzie. Din păcate, romanul nu mi-a stîrnit entuziasmul. Să vă spun și de ce. Iată, în opinia mea, trei mari defecte:

1. Verbiajul, retorica: Dickens ține morțiș să scrie „frumos”, să provoace cititorului o exclamație de uimire, un spasm; și chiar scrie frumos. Folosește figuri de stil în exces. Repetiția și enumerarea, de pildă. Aș fi preferat să fi scris mai simplu și mai firesc, pentru că simplitatea e cea mai persuasivă retorică.

2. Naratorul își judecă personajele. Îi mustră pe vinovați, îi laudă pe inocenți. Intervenția lui e inoportună.

3. Maniheismul: personajele cărții se împart în două categorii antinomice: cei buni și cei răi. Nu există personaje neutre. Nu există cenușiu. Cei buni sînt foarte buni, extraordinar de buni, sublimi în bunătatea lor (avocatul Sydney Carton, de pildă, care alege să moară ghilotinat în locul lui Charles Darnay, e doar un exemplu), în timp ce oamenii răi sînt foarte răi, înfiorător de răi, răi la extrem (marchizul St. Evrémonde, unchiul lui Charles Darnay, un individ apăsat sinistru, ar fi exemplul direct opus). Dar omul însuși, omul real, e mult mai ambiguu decît îl prezintă Dickens. Nu poate fi doar bun sau doar rău. E un amestec.

Ca toate cărțile lui Charles Dickens și acest roman istoric (acțiunea lui se petrece între 1775 și 1792-1793) a fost scris anume pentru cei umili și obidiți. Probabil că nenumărații cititori ai acestei cărți priveau cu îngăduință și plăcere (pe care eu, unul, sărac fiind totuși, nu le mai simt astăzi) astfel de construcții literare baroce:

Începutul cărții (pasajul cel mai citat de exegeți): „Era cea mai bună dintre vremi, era cea mai năpăstuită dintre vremi, era epoca înţelepciunii, epoca neroziei, veacul credinţei, veacul necredinţei, răstimpul Luminii, răstimpul întunecimii, primăvara nădejdii, iarna deznădejdii, aveam totul în faţă, aveam doar nimicul în faţă, ne înălţăm cu toţii de-a dreptul la ceruri, ne cufundam cu toţii de-a dreptul în iad - pe scurt, epoca aceea era atit de asemănătoare cu cea de acum, încît unele dintre autorităţile cele mai proeminente au stăruit să fie prezentată, în tot ce avea ea bun sau rău, numai la gradul superlativ”.

O repetiție de mare efect la mijlocul secolului al XIX-lea: „Foamea e gonită afară din casele înalte, oploşită în veşmintele flenduroase care spînzură de ţăruşi sau pe fringhii; Foamea se tupilează în încăperile astupate cu paie şi cîrpe, şipci de lemn şi ghemotoace de hîrtie; Foamea se iveşte în fiecare surcea din puţinul lemnelor de foc pe care le despică bărbatul; Foamea se zgîieşte prin coşurile fără de fum şi se iscă din străzile puturoase printre ale căror gunoaie nu se rătăceşte nimic bun de mîncat. Foamea şi-a săpat numele pe tejgheaua brutarului, şi l-a înscris pe fiecare bucată din sărăcăciosul morman de pîine rea; şi l-a semnat şi la cîrnăţărie, în fiecare tocătură de cîine mort care se vinde acolo. Foamea îşi pîrîie oasele uscate printre castanele care se coc pe frigarea rotitoare; Foamea se fărîmiţează în atomi...”.

Încă un pasaj întemeiat pe figura repetiției și enumerării: „Satul avea o singură uliţă amărîtă, cu o berărie amărîtă, o tăbăcărie amărîtă, o crîşmă amărîtă, un grajd amărît pentru schimbul cailor de poştă, o fîntină amărîtă, şi toate obişnuitele instituţii amărite. Avea şi oamenii săi amărîți”.

În sfîrșit: „Castelul domnului marchiz era o clădire masivă, greoaie… Un mare conglomerat de piatră, cu balustrade grele de piatră, urne de piatră, flori de piatră, chipuri omeneşti de piatră şi capete de animale din piatră în toate colţurile”.

În încheiere, repet că-mi pare rău că n-am citit acest roman la timpul lui. L-aș fi judecat, cu siguranță, cu mai multă simpatie.

One of the greatest novels ever written. I've never seen a ranking that didn't include this novel. If you have ever wondered what it was like to live through the French Revolution, then read this novel. Through Dickens' words you feel the anger, the hopelessness, the insecurity, and most of all the fear that enveloped everyone. It was a pleasure and a privilege to read this masterpiece.

Most satisfying ending in the English language.

Yes, the last line is a classic ("It is a far, far better thing ..."), concluding, in astonishingly concise language (for Dickens), the peace and redemption of the story's most poignant romantic hero. But this novel delivers such a gratifying experience because there are, in fact, many characters who cover significant emotional ground in their journey to love one woman as best they can.

Lucie's father battles his way back from madness under the gentle protection of his daughter. Lucie's childhood nursemaid evolves from a comical stereotype to an embattled force to be reckoned with. Lucie's husband's well-meaning (if bland) n  noblesse obligen culminates in -- not his hoped-for heroic moment, but a moment of quiet dignity that is most moving for its humility. Even Lucie's banker reaches dizzying heights of heroic accomplishment when Dickens appoints the quiet businessman the vehicle for an entire family's escape from the guillotine.

It is true that Lucie herself engages the reader less than her brutal counterpart -- the broken but terrifying Madame Defarge -- is able to, as modern readers are less moved by the swooning heroines who populate the period's "literature of sensibility." But we can certainly respond to Dickens' powerful and vivid claim: love is not only what makes us human, it is what allows us to be, at times, superhuman.

And when Sydney Carton, in equal parts love and despair, tells Lucie that "there is a man who would give his life to keep a life you love beside you" ... ?

I go to pieces. Every damn time.

به نام او

اولین اثری که از دیکنز خواندم (هرچند دیر) مرا شیفته این نویسنده انگلیسی کرد، در مجموع با ادبیات کلاسیک انگلستان میانه چندانی ندارم، نه اینکه بدم بیاید در واقع چندان مورد پسندم نیست، ولی انگار دنیای دیکنز چیز دیگری‌ست و از آن رمانتیسیم مرسوم در آثار او خبری نیست، داستان دو شهر که چنین بود. داستانی درباره دو شهر لندن و پاریس در بحبوحه وقوع انقلاب کبیر فرانسه و استقرار دولت انقلابی پس از آن، تسلط دیکنز بر داستان، تالستوی را فرایاد من می‌آورد (گویا خود تالستوی هم دیکنز را بسیار می‌پسندیده است)، تسلط از این جهت که نویسنده به معنای تام و تمام دانای کل است و محیط بر داستان، او خیر و صلاح شخصیتها و درستی و نادرستی وقایع را بیش از دیگران می‌داند و به همین جهت به خود حق قضاوت می‌دهد. شاید خوانندگان امروزی از این وجه چندان خوششان نیاید و دنباله‌رو نویسنده‌ای باشند که با امور به صورت نسبی برخورد می‌کند و حتی اجازه کوچکترین قضاوتی به خود و مخاطب نمی‌دهد، ولی چه کنم که طبع من چنین است و این سنخ نویسندگان را بسیار دوست دارم و بسیار می‌ستایم.
دیکنز در این رمان بیشتر به علل وقوع انقلاب (ظلمهای اشراف به مردمان فرودست) و افراطها و ظلمهایی که نتیجه هر انقلابی‌ست و به سرعت مظلومان دیروز را به ظالمان امروز تبدیل می‌،کند می‌پردازد و با قلمی قوی و طنزی تند و تیز همه را یکسر از تیغ انتقاد خود می‌گذراند و آنگاه فضای روشنی برای قضاوت پیش روی خواننده قرار می‌دهد
نکته حائز اهمیت دیگری که در اینجا باید بگویم طنز بی‌نظیر دیکنز است، طنزی که من در کمتر نویسنده ای سراغ دارم، طنزی هوشمندانه و بسیار کارا که مهمترین ابزار نویسنده برای انتقاد از همه‌چیز و همه کس است که در ادامه سه بخش کوتاه از این نوع طنز را می‌آورم.
و در آخر اینکه مطالعه کامل این رمان خوب را به دوستان توصیه می‌کنم نه خلاصه‌هایی که بی جهت در رده رمان‌های نوجوان قرار گرفته است و حتی رنگ و بویی هم از شاهکار دیکنز ندارد. و از میان ترجمه ها، ترجمه بسیار خوب و نسبتا مهجور مرحوم مهرداد نبیلی را پیشنهاد می‌کنم که توسط نشر فرزان روز منتشر شده و از ترجمه آقای یونسی به مراتب بهتر، سبک دیکنز، خصوصا طنز منحصر به فرد او، را منعکس کرده است.

و اما بخشهایی از رمان:

«عالیجناب، پس از آنکه چهار خدمتکار خویش را از بار مسئولیت آزاد کرده کاکائویی مبارک را میل فرمود، فرمان داد تا دروازه‌های قدس الاقداس را بگشایند، و قدم بیرون گذاشت. و آن گاه چه خضوع، چه کرنش و چرب‌زبانی، چه اظهار بندگی، و چه مایه خاکساری که بر او ایثار نشد! ابراز بندگی جسمی و روحی چنان بود که سهمی برای خداوند باقی نمی‌گذاشت، و چه بسا این هم دلیلی بود که پرستندگان عالیجناب از این نظر ناراحتی و ترسی به خود راه نمی‌دادند.»

●
«در دهکده شایعه‌ای جان گرفته بود، یا بهتر بگوییم همانند اهالی دهکده نیمه‌جانی داشت.»

●
«گیوتین در میان همگان موضوع رایجی برای مزاح بود، می‌گفتند بهترین داروی سردرد است، بی‌برو برگرد از سفید شدن موی سر پیشگیری می‌کند، پوست را لطافت خاص می‌بخشد، تیغی ملی است که از بیخ می‌تراشد، و کسی که او را می‌بوسد از پنجره کوچکی به بیرون نظر می‌افکند و در سبدی عطسه می‌کند. گیوتین رفته‌رفته نشانه تجدید حیات بشر شده نزد بسیاری جای صلیب را گرفته بود، زیرا اینان صلیب معمول خویش را به کناری گذارده و به جای آن مدل‌هایی از گیوتین بر سینه حمل می‌کردند و به جای صلیب به این مدل اعتقاد داشتند و نسبت به آن مراسم احترام به جای می‌آوردند.»

At long last I have finished the Tale. Events piled up in the third book, so I could barely put it aside. As a trained reader of mystery stories, though, I had suspected the end already several chapter before. The plot is well laid out with a constant increase of suspense, but it is not the main atout of this novel. The lively description of some of the events (e.g. the broken barrel of wine in the streets of Sainte Antoine) show, where Dickens is at his best. Like a screenplay I could see them happen in front of my inner eye. And this is what will make me read more of his novels – the Tale has been my first – in particular those, that are located in the lower classes like Oliver Twist, David Copperfield and Great Expectations. Dickens has an attentive ear and eye to the misery and sensibility, but also brutality of simple people. Apparently, the Tale is his most sold novel, but I expect his narrative strength to surface much more in his contemporary stories.

I am taken by his description of the contempt and neglect of the noble classes towards the broader population The leprosy of unreality disfigured every human creature in attendance upon Monseigneur. What a sentence! At the same time Dickens shows that the lawless brutality of a revolution, when the mop rules the streets and courts (!) is not the solution. All too often it is the last feature of the motto Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, or Death what people experience. Innocence is no longer a reason for not being punished if you have the wrong parentage. Not only social classes are turned upside down, but also reason (prisoners are incarcerated with the words For the love of Liberty) and social habit like singing and dancing, that, once innocent … a healthy pastime changed into a means of angering the blood and bewildering the senses like the Carmagnole. Although there are also some funny situations, like Cruncher’s pretended education (Anno Dominoes) or Mrs Pross’s asperity, it is the injustice, violence and brutality of people in feudal or revolutionary regimes that will stay with me as main impression from this book.