David Copperfield Dickensalong

Yes, Heathcliff works as a BAME character - it's plausible given his origins, and it adds an extra dimension to the theme's of belonging and alienation, possession and dispossession.

My discomfort with the colour-blind version of David Copperfield is that it effectively denies that people were ever treated differently due to their ethnicity - it completely erases those experiences. Ironically enough, it's a way of whitewashing the past.

Great casting imo. But sorry I've further derailed... As you were!

Make that 9 years ago!

There is a black Heathcliff in a recentish Wuthering Heights I'm sure. It was a very nitty gritty version, I went to see it at a local arty cinema a few years ago.

I'm a bit at Dev Patel as DC, I'm sure he's excellent in the role, but surely being black in Dicken's era would have completely changed his journey.
Or have I missed the point? Does colour blind casting assuming that we are in a parallel (preferable) universe were there is no racial prejudice and people can be any colour irrespective of their parents colour of skin? Maybe this is the case. Actually maybe that makes more sense, I'm pretty old so not being goady just trying to understand the reasoning.

Enjoyed the film this weekend. I have been hemming and hawing about the colour-blind casting - not due to Dev Patel, who brought a lovely sense of buoyancy to the lead, but more with the crowd scenes. I know everyone wasn't white back in The Past (a film like Belle is a good corrective) but the overall effect felt a bit anachronistic. But call me a hypocrite, because two minor characters became Irish, and I really liked it and felt cheered at the inclusive vision. So on balance, I feel I should applaud the diversity.

Sorry for derail - I know this thread is for the book and not the film....

Can I join? I've just bought a copy of the book on the way to the cinema to see the film. I had no idea it was so thick a book, I'm a bit intimidated.
I have never read a book by Dickens in my life but I'm hoping that if I've seen the film I might find it a bit easier going, if i roughly know the story.
I'd better get reading this evening to catch up with you all

Looking forward to it Desdemona

Scribbly I listened to it and loved Richard A's narration. Particularly loved his take on Rosa Dartle when you get to that point.

Richard and Charles are with me on the daily trudge through the mud on the dog walk. They make it better.

Late to finish my chapters (as per normal) I am really enjoying this. Think I prefer it all being from one perspective as opposed to the Esther/Narrator one used in Bleak House.

Oh goodness Mr Mell, that scene made me feel very sad. I hope we meet him again. He was crap at the flute wasn’t he? So many characters already. I like that Dickens made him crap at the flute, being good at the flute would’ve been naff.

Richard Armitage doing a sterling job. Am I the only listener? He is most skilled at accents, as well as his general Davey voice being HOT and silky which is giving me conflicting emotions as he is a child currently.

Just that Sheffield would have been associated with cutlery-making in general, I suppose.

Thanks @bibliomania. Interesting that CD said the cutlery firm connection was a fluke! And that Sheffield didn't mean anything...

Ha - a bit of googling later, here we go.

Ma I don't know for sure, but I assumed that Brookes was a cutlery maker and it was something to do with being as sharp as a knife - following on from "Somebody’s sharp.”

Like others, I am finding it surprisingly easy to read. And very funny. I do occasionally feel I'm missing some references though. Almost like when you come across unfamiliar colloquialisms in a translation.

Can anyone remember and explain the "Brooks of Sheffield" joke in Chapter 2? I know Mr M is referring to Davy and he doesn't realise etc. But what does the name mean?

I've found some articles that suggest that "Brooks" was probably a play on the verb to brook (meaning to put up with) and I like that explanation. Even this early on in the book it gives a good indication of Mr M's character and adds some foreboding: he's only putting up with Davy to get to his mother. But why Sheffield? They can't have lived there if they rode to Lowestoft and back in a day!

Sorry if you can't remember that far back, but it's been puzzling me!

I also found an interesting Guardian article on the subject: www.theguardian.com/childrens-books-site/2016/feb/23/why-charles-dickenss-best-character-is-non-existent I hadn't thought about the idea of Davy being an adult (and presumably understanding the joke) writing about his youthful naivety retrospectively... I am supposing Dickens wanted us to not think of him (dickens) writing the novel (hence the use of first person), but then I can't quite get my head around being able to write about my early life with the clarity yet lack of adult comprehension that we are supposed to believe is happening. Not sure I explained that very well...!

I agree with you bibliomania - one thing that surprised me (it's been years since I last read Dickens) is how plausible Davey, and lots of the other characters, feel. I think I was expecting the kind of overdrawn cartoons you often get in Dickens (or mock-Dickens) dramatisations. There are just the right amount of 'glimpses' of David's father's character which, along with what we see of his mother and of his childhood with Pegotty, convince me of his naivety. And of course he read storybooks, which at that time, would have offered children a very idealised, morally straightforward view of the world. So I can see why he would trust people rather than assuming adults to be manipulative or evil.

I love the character indications through description too - Jane Murdstone's handbag snapping like a jail and Pegotty's emotionally popping buttons lol

On Davey's naivety, I find it convincing - his first experiences were being loved and taken care of by his mother and the wonderful Peggotty, and for his first time away from home, he was well-treated, so he approaches the world from a position of trust, and Dickens portrays very well how that trust is repeatedly taken advantage of. There's a clever juxtaposition between the perceptions of Davey the child and the adult narrator, particularly with characters such as Steerforth. The thing about Barkis, even though he's a benign character, he is also making use of Davey's naivety by getting him to send a message to Peggoty that he, Davey, doesn't understand.

I didn't find his mother's death mawkish - I think Dickens is very good at the jarring moments in bereavement - Davey thinking about how the other boys will be impressed by him, and planning about thinking sad thoughts as he approaches home so he will look bereft, and the inappropriate cheeriness of the family who make his funeral clothes and the coffin.

The way his mother is portrayed is quite clever - on the one hand, you can see how she is a victim of the Murdstones, but you can also see how her own vanity has made her vulnerable to them (she likes being described as a pretty, silly, girlish little thing). While she had few choices by modern standards, the contrasting presences of Betsey Trotter and even Peggoty hint that a different woman could have made different choices.

I finished the chapters a couple of weeks ago and have now forgotten what I wanted to say! Next time around, I'll try to leave the chapters until later in the month and maybe jot down a few notes...