Dickens drew everything out forever because he was getting paid by the word! In high school English, the teacher wanted us to take turns reading Great Expectations aloud, and by halfway through the first day I was dying from listening to everyone else's slow painful reading, and when someone refused their turn and asked if I could read instead, I said yes, and after that? I read the whole gorram book to my ninth grade English class. Although it was probably the only classic any of them ever got all the way through, I never want to read Dickens ever again.

YDickensMV.

Dickens drew everything out forever because he was getting paid by the word!

Not true, actually. He published serially, and pretty much perfected the economic model (which made it possible for people to make a living as writers after the end of patronage and before the advent of advances, incidentally) - but the number and length of parts was contracted in advance. Like, say, a season of TV. Anyway, his novels are no longer than most others of the period: it's just what the publishing market of the time went for. But it's a big ol' urban myth that it was sloppy editing or just dragging things out indefinitely.

(Plus, Dickens was also a magazine publisher, so he was paying by the installment as well as being paid -- hardly an incentive to abuse the system.)

t /cranky ex-victorianist

"To his credit, Tim Minear is the Rocky Balboa of Fox show producers"

Oh the fun to be had with this.

But it's a big ol' urban myth that it was sloppy editing or just dragging things out indefinitely.

Charlotte Bronte was paid by the word, though, right? That's why Jane Eyre is about a hundred pages too long.

Maybe there will be a bronze statue of Tim smoking a cigarette outside the office.

Amych is in my brain! I'm not a victorianist by any stretch of the imagination (more of an early modern kind of girl, but please don't ask me why). But last semester in one of my grad classes I found myself defending Dickens's penchant for wrapping up each loose end with an analogy to tv serials that have both a season long arc and episodic narratives within that long arc.

I'd never ever call myself the Dickens of anything, but I've used that same analogy -- that at it's best serial TV stories are us trying to do what Dickens did.

In reality, I'm not a huge Dickens fan, outside of Hard Times, Tale of Two Cities and A Christmas Carol, all of which I adore.

But recently in "reading" (and I use the term VERY LOOSELY as I only read the first 82 pages then I scanned 4 other disconnected chapters looking for the mention of the most minor character for my final) Bleak House, I encountered some of Dickens's notes for the story. I was amazed at how he had a grasp of each character and where they were headed, at least from a character perspective. And how he was able to hold it all together for months on end. Amazing, really. Even if I think of Bleak House as interminably boggy, I have great admiration for it.

What I am interested in, then is the victroian readers' experiences of Dickens. Since it was serialized, did they read it the way I watch TV in the first run? And does my modern reading of it as a novel in one go, not drawn out over months most closely line up with a watching an entire season of TV on DVD?

And as I think these things, I begin to realize I have Way Too Much I'm procrastinating from.

These thoughts brought to you by the part of my brain that is already tired of my thesis.

What I am interested in, then is the readers' experience of Dickens. Since it was serialized, did they read it the way I watch TV in the first run? And does my modern reading of it as a novel in one go, not drawn out over months most closely line up with a watching an entire season of TV on DVD?

I always find that I prefer TV Dickens adaptations to reading the novels, and I think it has a lot to do with his plots being originally written for serialization.

That makes so much sense to me! Some crazy ass rich person should republish Dickens but as serials. Or you know, I could read them only a little at a time, then wait a month and read more.

Jesus. I'm a total fucking nerd. Aren't I?

I encountered some of Dickens's notes for the story. I was amazed at how he had a grasp of each character and where they were headed, at least from a character perspective. And how he was able to hold it all together for months on end. Amazing, really.[...]What I am interested in, then is the readers' experience of Dickens. Since it was serialized, did they read it the way I watch TV in the first run?

Most people read Dickens' installments the way people used to watch TV: one episode at a time. What I think is really fascinating is that the era of DVD and Tivo parallels the publication of Dickens' episodic stories as a complete book. Sometimes even the best TV show gets to be a little too much upon watching an entire season at one time, and I imagine that is why many people now find Dickens so tedious.

I completely agree with you: Dickens really had an amazing grasp on his characters and on the arc of his "season," regardless of some questionable choices along the way. I may never forgive him for changing the end of Great Expectations, but then again, that experience seems awfully similar to the way writers now often have to bend to pressure from their higher-ups.

What I found really cool was that Dickens was, in many ways, the first celebrity author. People would flock to his readings. Apparently he was an extremely talented and charismatic performer with unique voices for his characters, and he was mobbed with fans. I can't even tell you what I would give to go back in time and hear him read in a Miss Havisham persona.

If anyone is interested, btw, PBS ran a great series on him: [link]

(If Dickens were around today, I think he'd be a TV writer with a fan base and a MySpace page.)

He was also an actor, so it makes sense how much people loved his readings.

Sometimes even the best TV show gets to be a little too much upon watching an entire season at one time, and I imagine that is why many people now find Dickens so tedious.

And some shows, like Alias, are actually so much improved by DVDs. Whcih is odd in its own way.

I'd say J. J. Abrams is the anti-Dickens in that he seems to have no plan at all.