I have a love/hate relationship with this book. I loved some of the characters, others I hated.

One thing that stands out to me is that Dickens lets his characters grow. And he paints them in such a detailed way that I can completely see them. Their failings, virtues and idiosyncrasies.

My Favorite characters are Mercy, Chummy and Tom Pinch. I also like old Martin Chuzzlewit along with his granddaughter. (I think she was his granddaughter). I detested young Martin Chuzzlewit, he was so bitter! he was nothing like his friend Tom Pinch.

If I could have my way I would have matched everyone up differently, but I didn't. So for me this isn't a satisfying read.

Charity (cherry), is slightly irritating, that could just be me though. Mercy (cherry's sister), is spoilt and foolish. She gets into trouble because of that. I hate to make it sound like she deserved what she got because no one deserves to be treated as she was. But the fact remains that she did grow into a better person. Martin, (young) was as I said bitter. He also appeared selfish.

This was my first book by Charles Dickens. It covers many topics; in a way it showcases his work. Yet, in my opinion it is not his best.

I will reread it and rewatch it as I have some favorite characters here. I think it's a good one to start with. And so this book has a special place in my heart.

Well, it took me over seven months, but I'm finally done with you, Martin.
Charles Dickens is one of my favorite authors. I've read and loved many of his novels, most recently A Tale of Two Cities. For me, then, a "bad" Dickens novel is still a good book. My two biggest problems with this one in particular are the length and the abundance of deplorable characters. David Copperfield and Little Dorrit are both 1,000-page novels, yet neither of them felt it to me. This book felt every one of its eight hundred and seventy-four pages. It is way too long for the plot--I kept asking myself what the point was. It came together in the last two hundred or so pages, but by then, I'd already spent seven months reading the book. So, yes, the last couple hundred pages were very interesting, and I read them quickly (partly out of interest, partly out of determination), but that doesn't change the time I spent (I'm tempted to, but won't, say "wasted") on the first six hundred or so pages.
The second problem I had with this book concerns the characters. Some of them are very sympathetic and fairly well-drawn (Victorian sentimentality a given), but so many of them are contemptible and horrible and just annoying. Now, I know that Dickens is making a point with these characters; I get it. But so much of the book centers around people that I don't like or care about. If he had interspersed the narrative a little bit more, as he does at the end, I would have found more pleasure reading it all along because the time spent away from my favorite characters would have been less. And if the book were shorter overall, then it would have been even less.
I think that Dickens tells better stories in other novels. The main point of this book is that you can't be so selfish that you protect yourself worrying about others' selfishness and contradict your very aims. You can't value money more than all else; greed does ugly things to people. You can't be hypocritically deceptive. If you value family and friendship, if you act in truth and from a good heart, you'll get what you wait patiently for. Yes, those are worthwhile lessons, but what's the takeaway for the adult that already knows these things? The American section shows a little more dexterity. Here, you have an upstart country claiming to be the best and criticizing every other country when, really, it's housing millions of hypocrites and people who rave about liberty while enslaving half the population... Yeah, not much has changed since Dickens satirized the United States. Dickens' Americans are always eating (and much too quickly), always introducing some great man who is only great in his propensities for chewing tobacco, criticizing other countries, and bragging about America's progress, they are always writing treatises to the leaders of other countries to lambaste their political choices...in short, they are terribly annoying.
There is value here, and I'm not claiming that I didn't like it or that, because it took me so long to read, I wouldn't recommend it to someone else. I can say that Jonas Chuzzlewit is a good villain, that I didn't mind the ending fitting of a Shakespearean comedy (you know what that means), and that I did get some laughs from some scenes throughout. And that at least part of why it took me so long is that my copy from 18-something literally fell apart as I was reading it. Once I tore out the remaining 200 or so pages, I had a much easier reading time.

This is the one where Dickens saw that the monthly sales figures were on the slide (it was published in parts, as all his novels were) and so he scrapped the entire plot he was intending to use for the rest of it and packed the hero off to America, because in 1843 America was the sexy hot topic of the day. If CD was around now, and saw the same disappointing sales figures, you'd have seen young Chuzzlewit in a gangnam style youtube video quicker than you could say "But Charles, you're supposed to be writing literature!"

After Martin gets to America Dickens had to improvise like the very Devil because he now had no plot at all. None. So this is well worth reading to see how he copes with the dire situation he got himself into.

Three stars compared with CD's other novels because in truth this is quite an unconvincing mess. But don't let that put you off. You get Seth Pecksniff and Sarah Gamp. Brilliant.

Reread May 2015. Always in need of a little jollity from Mark Tapley, goodness from Thomas Pinch, and a little of the willingness to change for the better from the Martins, young and old.

---
Rereading December 2012. In need of some Mark Tapley-type inspiration.

---

Martin the Elder. I love you for your change of heart and the ability to still SEE despite your age and your proclivities.

Martin the Younger. I honor you also for being perceptive enough to SEE worth and CHANGE.

John Westlock. You are adorable and you and Ruth deserve each other. Thanks for being such a good friend.

Tom Pinch. You are a glorious and humble man who deserves to find more happiness than you have, although you seem to think it enough (which is truly your most winning point).

Mark Tapley, I strongly suspect that you are reincarnated and that you now reside as my helpmeet and fellow-laborer in the Lord and that you think you have found the jolliest situation yet as you try to remain cheerful whilst attached forever to me, who, I fear, often bears a strong resemblance to Martin the Younger BEFORE the voyage to the promised land. You are my ideal man and I nearly worship you.

---

Mr Dickens, you grow ever more ripe for me as I age. Truly. Your vintage grows sweeter and more rich each time I partake. I don't drink so this is likely the wrong analogy, nevertheless, you are heady and leave me not a little intoxicated...in all the positive ways. Weepy from heart-fullness, cheerful from pure spiritual and physical joy, relaxed by being in wonderful company, satisfied with the world and God's children. You have enriched my life more than I have words for. I'd write you a poem if I were of that turn. May my thanks float up to where you are surely entertaining some fortunate heavenly beings.

I think I was about two-thirds of the way into this book before it really became interesting. There were lots of characters and false starts towards a plot. Normally Dickens is a bit of a genius at pulling together disparate characters and plots but Martin Chuzzlewit was just to long and rambling. I am still trying to figure out what the point was of sending Martin Jr. off to America.
That said, there were a couple characters that I really came to love and are now two of my favorite of Dickens characters. Namely, Mark Tapley and John Westlock.

Dickens scrisse a Forster che questo era senz’altro il miglior romanzo che avesse mai scritto. E forse è vero, o comunque rimane nel novero di quelli meglio riuscitigli. Fin dall’inizio i suoi personaggi principali ci vengono presentati con ricchissima ironia, taluni con pieno sarcasmo, scoprendo apertamente il tono ferocemente satirico della storia che non è solo un feroce attacco alla società vittoriana, che Dickens sa destinato a scomparire, ma soprattutto a quello di un mondo in rapida trasformazione che sta sovvertendo i valori di umanità, di rispetto e di pietà per i propri simili che ancora riuscivano a sopravvivere, sempre più violentemente travolti dai nuovi idoli imposti dal nascente capitalismo: il culto del denaro, del suo accumulo, della cupidigia che sta conquistando una borghesia in rapida ascesa nella scala sociale e del potere.
Ma in questo enorme romanzo corale di quasi 1300 pagine la satira si avventura anche oltreoceano investendo l’America, cercando di smascherare quel falso ideale di libertà sul quale un popolo di fuggiaschi pretende di avere costituito la prima repubblica fondata su di esso per rendere possibile a chiunque la propria felicità realizzando la propria ricchezza. Una libertà che si rivela abusata dai più prepotenti e dai più furbi, quelli più scevri da ogni freno morale, a danno dei più deboli che vengono truffati, gabbati, sfruttati, e senza alcuna tutela.
Una libertà priva di apparenti confini, perché non limitata da alcun rispetto per gli altri, una libertà propalata da una stampa libera di diffondere la verità come la menzogna, e in continua ricerca di incrementare le tirature per il puro profitto, incurante di ogni rispetto, e di cui si serve una politica che già allora assume il valore di spettacolo riempendosi la bocca con parole (libertà, democrazia, ricchezza per tutti, democrazia) che già allora sembrano svuotarsi del loro profondo e vero significato per assumerne uno che sia comprensibile a tutti, ma così ampiamente comprensibile da sembrare la pelle dello scroto, che la si può tirare dove e fin che vuoi, per accaparrarsi i voti di chiunque.
Il buon vecchio Charles dimostra ancora una volta, con ampia preveggenza, che sapesse vedere ben più lontano del proprio naso o di quello dei suoi contemporanei!
E con splendida efficacia sono ritratti i personaggi, tipicamente dickensiani, più o meno caricaturali a seconda che giochino il ruolo di cattivo o o anche semplicemente di debole che si adatta al sistema, qualunque esso sia, per trovarvi anche un misero tornaconto, oppure dei buoni, addirittura angelicati come sempre in Dickens nel trattare i protagonisti femminili, e in questo caso anche di un uomo, quel Tom Pinch che giocherà un ruolo decisivo nello svolgimento della storia sentimentale del protagonista del titolo (ma poi in fondo solo di quello e tutt’al più dell’intermezzo “americano” del romanzo nel quale gioca il ruolo dell’illuso e poi disilluso dopo venire truffato) e della storia sentimentale fra lui e Mary, assistente e figlia adottiva dell’omonimo nonno (i Martin Chuzzlewit infatti sono due), ricchissimo e apparentemente arido, che appare costruito quasi sul modello del vecchio Scroodge.
Ma sono i veri cattivi, come al solito, tutt'altro che comprimari, a riuscire indimenticabili: l’ipocrita, tronfio e mellifluo Pecksniff (vero co-protagonista del romanzo nel suo insieme), il perfido Jonas Chuzzlewit, l’opportunista Signora Gamp, lo scaltro Tiff Montague (o Montague Tiff), che troveranno alla fine la giusta punizione per i loro misfatti permettendo all’amore e,o al ravvedimento, e alla felicità di tutti i meritevoli, di trionfare.
Un lieto fine come sempre in Dickens, ma che qui assume un tono talmente lieve da sembrare quasi “mozartiano” nell’equilibrio felicemente raggiunto dalla commedia e dalle mille peripezie, a volte dai tragici risvolti, attraversate, stimolando i sentimenti più elementari di qualsiasi lettore, con il quale l’autore talvolta si estranea dalla storia per dialogare direttamente con lui. Perché i romanzi di Dickens sono aperta finzione letteraria, puro teatro, e l’autore vuole che ce possiamo rendere conto in ogni momento prendendone ogni tanto le distanze, anche se assomiglia tanto alle nostre vite e al mondo che sempre ci circonda.
Capolavoro.

This is the novel otherwise known as the book in which Dickens mercilessly skewers Americans and American culture. In a story centering on the inherent destructiveness of selfishness, the middle third of the book attacks (mostly fairly) the self-obsessed egomania of American press and finance, which is hardly indistinguishable from the same issues still so prevalent today. There really is no such thing as a bad Dickens, but this one left me oddly cold. There are very memorable characters and caricatures (Pecksniff, Pinch, and Gamp primarily) as well as the American cousins. Nonetheless, the central characters that we should be rooting for emotionally are not as well defined as they are in other books by Dickens, and therefore we find it more difficult to urge them to their happy ending. This type of bildungsroman is much more successfully executed in previous efforts such as Nicholas Nickleby and Oliver Twist, and two novels later with David Copperfield. In fact, it is probably best to see this book as a necessary step towards the grand triumph of Copperfield. Certainly worth the time, but not before most of the others in Dickens's oeuvre or only if you are a completist reading them chronologically. It should be noted that Dickens continues to allow more darkness to creep into his plots, as it does here with the neurotic Jonas Chuzzlewit.

Giving ‘star ratings”’to dickens is such silliness! But okay, 4.5 stars, but many separate adoring stars entirely for the character Mark Tapley, who seeks out the lowest and most dire situations in order to prove that he can be ‘jolly’ no matter how bad the circumstances (“there’s no credit in being jolly where I’m so comfortable!”) He may be a bit of a clown when first introduced, though charismatic from the start, but as the tale evolves, it is the strength, humour and and valour of Mark Tapley that gives Martin Chuzzlewit its soul.

To me, this is the soft spot of Dickens's writing. It is sprawling, which is fine, but it is messy. It has some interesting characters, but too often they serve little purpose or function. The one character exception is Pecksniff who creates both humour and ire in the reader, but his presence becomes annoying and I did not beg Dickens for more. The American adventures of Martin junior and Mark Tapley were painful to read. When Dickens titles a book after a character such as David Copperfield or Oliver Twist that character is rightfully front and centre in the storyline. In the novel Martin Chuzzlewit there are two Martin Chuzzlewits, and neither one has an effective or overly interesting prominence in place. The younger goes to America more as a plot device to remove him from the main action of the story's arc and the senior is ailing and basically stays close to his room. Indeed, the front illustration of the novel has another character centre and prominent.

I am a great fan of Dickens, and have read each of his books on more than one occasion. I do not come to bury him, but in this specific novel I cannot praise him. When I think of this novel I cannot think of any single character, situation, setting or event that stands out or even stands with his other works. Every author, indeed every reviewer will stumble once in awhile, and it may be that others think I do with this review, but for me Martin Chuzzlewit is Dickens' single and only novel that I would not recommend to a new reader of Dickens.

The book tells the world how selfish people are in the author's opinion and by consequence society is dominated by greed in the novel. All else is of no importance to anyone of prominence there. Martin Chuzzlewit has a problem with his kind grandfather of the same name who raised the orphan now strangely despises him, why? Lost, the poor grandson is without hope and needs to get out of England and seeks his fortune in America with a former servant now friend Mark Tapley. So after an endless voyage at sea in steerage mostly seasick they are landlubbers for sure, the filth you will not want to imagine. Surprisingly the lowly Mark Tapley becomes the instigator by aiding the suffering passengers during the frightening storms, inside the hole he becomes much loved. I will skip the floating details , arriving in New York during the 1840s and immediately dislikes Americans and their gross behavior, spittoons everywhere. Gentlemen not gentlemen though the saliva mostly hits their mark, proud of the skill, money talk dominates the conversations, nevertheless time to travel, the frontier is the land of opportunity though uncivilized, primitive, lawless...Eden maybe a misnomer, its a small settlement full of disease, uncouth pioneers with rough edges, the swamp water unhealthy , the crude citizens fall like flies but the swindlers are happy selling worthless land, well some underwater, mistakes happen. Leaving quickly borrowing money from a new friend , a need to get home Mr. Chuzzlewit has a sweetheart, Mary, in a sophisticated country with only a few murders, little Martin will discover many more crooks and shady business practices, still young Martin always thinks of relatives not quite friendly undoubtedly a fact in hostile Britain , Jonas Chuzzlewit a cousin and crook, Tom Pecksniff distant relation and a totally sleazy human, the father of two daughters Cherry and Merry likewise seemingly, yet Tom Pinch a servant in the house, a good person though, the survivors whom young Martin finds in his native land , they're for themselves too. We are but shadows on the wall twinkling a bit until night falls and are no more. A novel admittedly not Dickens best however always entertains the reader. While this isn't Charles Dickens most popular or greatest novel this constantly entertains and for those his loyal fans will of course be enchanted. Long piece of literature not for first time readers of the writer's produce.

This book has been a journey, not all of it easy. There were times when the road was smooth, and times when it was full of potholes. Happily there were many instances that produced tears of laughter - Mark Tapley on being jolly (pp60-63); Mr. Tigg's pocket-handkerchief (p97); Truth in the throat of Mr. Scadder (P303); Moddle on the charmed life of some men (p599) - this was inspired by his engagement to the lovely Charity Pecksniff, the ''sweet child'' was overawed by his singular good fortune; and Mrs. Gamp's method for reviving someone who has fainted - ''Bite a person's thumbs, or turn their fingers the wrong way...and they comes to, wonderful'' (p605).
The story is brilliant - well it is Dickens, how can it not! At the heart is the theme of Selfishness and he uses many characters to display all the forms that trait can manifest itself in. From old Martin who looks for it in others but fails to spot it in himself, to Pecksniff who doesn't care which of his daughters a rich man marries - the fact that said rich man is thoroughly bad does not matter to him either; to said rich bad man Jonas Chuzzlewit who cannot wait to inherit his father's money. Of course there are some wonderful bonkers names, my favourite being 'Sweedlepipe'.
One fault is the fact that Dickens overdoes the moralising and he rambles. There are whole passages that could well have been left out as they do not advance the story and are difficult to fully understand, for example, a lot of Sarah Gamp's ramblings.
But in amongst the incomprehensibility there are some wonderful descriptions that border on the poetic - ''The distant noises in the street were gradually hushed, the house was quiet as a sepulchre; the dead of night was confined in the silent city'' (356); ''The coach was none of your steady-going yokel coaches, but a swaggering, rakish, dissipated London coach; up all night and lying by all day, and leading a devil of a life'' (p479); ''The thunder rolled, the lightning flashed, the rain poured down like Heaven's wrath'' (p551) ; ''But what of that, when the solemn night was watching, when it never winked, when its darkness watched no less than its light'' (p614).
I recommend this book.

In my life I've read the book 2 times. And there have been 2 more times when I had to refrain from completely reading it due to not being prepared for it. Although I give the book 4 stars, it remains one of the best books I've ever read.

Consider two albums by Radiohead. The Bends and say, Hail to the Thief. The Bends has fewer radio friendly songs, but when the songs hit a high note, boy do they hit it. Conversely, Hail to the Thief was nice, not great. The band is more consistent, but they never threaten to achieve the level of superlative form as in The Bends. Martin Chuzzlewit is like the Bends. Phew.

When Dickens plots, he plots like nobody else. He excels at creating characters that move on the board as set pieces. Some characters bide their time. Others burn bright then sober up. It's a vast canvas here and I retained a powerful extolment during the American episode. But Dickens never knows the term writing block.

Dickens turns on the faucet of words at will and can go on, sometimes being unfunny, other times being even less funny. His sense of humor has aged like a Chaplin film. But he can write at will, like I said. Martin Chuzzlewit's villains and victims were memorable, and their tragedies and rewards were what I take away from this latest read.