Oliver Twist Readalong October to December. Everyone Welcome

[DesdamonasHandkerchief]

For the Dickens aficionados and the Dickens curious alike. We’re going to attempt a three month readalong of Dickens second published full length novel Oliver Twist.
As it was published in three volumes we will be tackling a volume a month:

October Volume 1
22 Chapters

November Volume 2
14 Chapters

December Volume 3
15 Chapters.

We’ll discuss each volume on the last day of the month (so volume one on 31st October) and have a check in mid month for those who want it.

Good point @TimeforaGandT - not the best role models for Oliver!

I’ve just finished Volume 1. What an epic cliff-hanger! Imagine not knowing when the next episode would come out (if reading as the original instalments came out) or having to go back to the lending library (if reading the first three volume edition) - frustrating!

I have finished my chapters and resisting reading further!

Found this for a couple of pounds. It's a 1948 film tie-in edition of the book. Somehow I thought the concept was newer, but a quick search tells me that it goes back to silent days, so film tie-ins it turns out are as old as cinema itself.

I'm not sure anything like this is made today. Modern tie-ins tend to be just about the production; or the "tie-in edition" of the book which is the regular paperback with a cover showing a still from the film. This is both combined: a full text edition, with added film details.

Fun fact - angelic little John Howard Davies, who played Oliver in the film, went on to become Head of Comedy at the BBC and produced Monty Python's Flying Circus, The Goodies, The Good Life and Fawlty Towers.

That’s so cool @Waawo , and also that information @Terpsichore !

Looking forward to the end-of-month discussion - I’ll have to refresh my memory on the chapters! And looking forward to reading the next chunk too.

I’m in!

I've finished my chapters but I am out all day tomorrow, so will probably miss all the chat. Will check in and catch up on Sunday.
I have really enjoyed it so far, unexpectedly funny in places and I am very invested in Oliver

The chapter summary and analysis of chapters 15 to 22 from Gradesaver:

Oliver Twist Summary Chapters 15-22

Fagin goes to see Bill Sikes, who is busy beating his dog, at a pub, to give him his cut of some profits. Sikes learns that Nancy is in the pub too, and sends for her. She starts to tell him about Oliver, but Fagin cuts her off, and soon she leaves with Sikes.
At the same time, Oliver has gotten a little lost on his way to the book-stall, and Nancy comes upon him. Nancy makes a big scene, and tells those watching that Oliver had run away from his respectable parents to join a gang of thieves, so when Oliver shouts that they are taking him against his will no be believes him. Nancy and Sikes drag him away.
Sikes and Nancy take Oliver to a house, where the artful Dodger lets them in, and where they also find Charley Bates and Fagin. They take Oliver’s new belongings, and Fagin and Sikes fight over the five pound note that Mr. Brownlow gave Oliver.
Oliver begs them to send the books and the note back to Mr. Brownlow so that he won’t think that Oliver stole them, but this only makes Fagin and Sikes happier, because it means that Mr. Brownlow won’t go looking for Oliver. Oliver tries to make his escape but Fagin and the boys catch him before he gets far.
Fagin starts to beat Oliver with a staff, Nancy runs over and grabs the staff throwing it in the fire. She implores them to leave Oliver alone - haven't they already done enough to hurt him? She says she wishes that she had never helped them to kidnap him. In fighting off Fagin and Sikes, she eventually faints, and Oliver is sent to bed.

Mr. Bumble goes to Mrs. Mann’s orphanage to tell her that he is going to London to deal with a legal matter, as appointed by the board. Mrs. Mann tells Mr. Bumble that Dick is still very ill, and Mr. Bumble asks to see him. Dick asks if they could write down and keep a message to give to Oliver Twist after he has died, which disgusts Mr. Bumble and Mrs. Mann.
While in London, Mr. Bumble sees an advertisement in the paper offering an award for information about Oliver Twist, put out by Mr. Brownlow. Mr. Bumble goes immediately to Mr. Brownlow’s house, where he is taken to see Mr. Brownlow and Mr. Grimwig. Mr. Bumble tells the men everything he knows of Oliver, and Mr. Brownlow pays him. Mr. Brownlow is quite vexed by Mr. Bumble’s perspective of Oliver, but Mrs. Bedwin refuses to believe it. Mr. Brownlow orders, however, that Oliver’s name is never to be spoken in his presence again.

Fagin gives Oliver a long lecture on loyalty, and tells him the story of a boy like him who ended up hanged for betraying them. For many days, Oliver is locked in his room, but then even when he is allowed to wonder the house, he can’t leave. One evening, the Dodger has Oliver come and clean his boots, and tries to convince him to become a thief, using twisted moral arguments. Oliver is not convinced, but is afraid to say too much. He then meets Tom Chitling, who is an older one of Fagin’s boys and has just come back from prison. From this evening on, they rarely leave Oliver alone, constantly trying to convince and train him to be a thief.

Late one night, Fagin leaves the house and goes to see Sikes. He finds Nancy there, who he hasn’t seen since their argument, but she is friendly to him. Fagin and Sikes plan a robbery together, one that requires a small boy to unlock a window for them, and Fagin recommends they use Oliver, since he is the smallest. Sikes agrees, and they finalize the plans.
When Oliver gets up in the morning, Fagin tells him that he is going to be taken to Bill Sikes that night. Fagin sets Oliver up with a candle and a book while he waits for Nancy to come and fetch him, and right before he leaves, he warns him to do just as Sikes says, otherwise he might kill him. While waiting, Oliver reads the book, which is a terrifying account of many crimes and criminals. Nancy arrives, and seems quite ill and distraught, but she gathers herself together.
Nancy tells Oliver that if he tries to escape from her as she takes him to Sikes, she will probably be killed. When they arrive at Sikes’s place, Sikes makes Oliver watch as he loads his gun, then holds it to his head as he tells Oliver that he will shoot him if he says a word while they are out. Sikes and Oliver go to bed while Nancy watches over and is ready to wake them at five. They get ready to go, and Sikes leads Oliver out.
Sikes leads Oliver through the crowded streets until they find an empty cart and manage to get a ride. They spend awhile at a pub, where they find another ride to take them further on. Late at night, they finally arrive at a dilapidated shack next to the water. Barney lets Sikes and Oliver into the house, where Toby Crackit is waiting for them. Crackit serves Sikes some food, and they both make Oliver drink a glass of wine. Oliver sits on a stool by the fire and dozes off while Sikes and Crackit take a nap.
They wake up, and get everything they need together, including more pistols. Crackit and Sikes each take one of Oliver’s hands and lead him out. They arrive at a house and climb over the wall surrounding it, and Oliver finally realizes that the aim of the night is to rob a house, and even possibly murder the occupants.
Oliver collapses in fear, and begs not to have to help them. Sikes almost shoots him, but Crackit stops him and drags Oliver to the house. They break into a very small window and put Oliver through, telling him to open the front door for them. Oliver plans to raise the alarm for those in the house, but suddenly a dog starts barking, and two men appear and shoot Oliver. Sikes drags him back and runs away with him.

Analysis

This section reiterates and reinforces the theme of the powerlessness of children, while also emphasizing the powerlessness of women. Oliver is kidnapped in broad daylight, in the middle of the street, and the witnesses to the kidnapping only encourage it, because no one bothers to listen to or accept as truth what Oliver says, so his physical and legal weakness is only compounded by his inability to be heard.
The misperceptions of Oliver that come with this inability are emphasized in this section. Mr. Bumble is horrified that Dick would want to leave a last letter to such an awful child; he goes to Mr. Brownlow and tells him what he believes to be Oliver’s true character, but is anything but. This inability to affect the judgments passed on him is reflected throughout the rest of this section—Oliver never again has agency, being locked up, pushed around and forced to participate in a robbery.
Nancy’s powerlessness for the first time becomes clear, too. Even though it is she who originally overpowers Oliver in this section, we soon learn that she is not a pure villain when she defends Oliver against Fagin. She is successful, momentarily, more because Fagin is shocked that she would speak out against him than because she has any meaningful power over him. And although she stands up for Oliver, her stand does not last long — she faints and Oliver must still go with Sikes.
In Fagin, the Dodger and Charley Bates’s interactions with Oliver in this section, we see that things generally to be considered virtues can be warped in the wrong context. For example, the Dodger and Bates try to convince Oliver that it is unfair for him not to work for his keep at Fagin’s—this generally would be considered a virtuous stance, but in this case, that work is crime, and so Oliver’s refusal to do it becomes the moral choice.
Similarly, Fagin gives Oliver a long lecture on loyalty, often deemed a virtue, but here it means loyalty to this thieving gang who keep him against his will. Dickens is not one-sided on the issue of loyalty, however. Oliver is certainly not blamed by the text for feeling no loyalty towards Fagin or his boys, but Nancy’s inability to betray them completely is presented as fairly virtuous. Loyalty is thus presented as something not inherently good or bad, something that can be moral, but something that can also at times be amoral, if not immoral.

Ohh, fun! I just saw this so am too late, but hope to join in with the next book.

@CrazyMidget We’ve just finished the first volume of the book (Chapters 1 to 22) and will be reading the second volume in November (14 chapters) so perfectly possible to catch up if you want to join the discussion on the last day of November.

Rest of the original illustrations from this volume:

And the final three:

Hi everyone. I think the consensus of opinion is that everyone is enjoying this so far?
It certainly rattles along at a fair old rate. I’ve never read the book from start to finish only heard excerpts from an abridged version in a classroom setting and obviously I’m very familiar with the musical. (When is jolly old Fagin going to sing ‘You Got To Pick a Pocket or Two’ and the cheeky Artful Dodger launch into ‘Consider Yourself At Home’? Both characters far more likeable and cuddly in Lionel Barts musical than the source material! Although Oliver Reed’s Bill Sykes is almost as terrifying as the Dickens version.)

In my head the introduction of Mr Brownlow and the robbery at Chertsey were further along in the plot than is actually the case so I’m interested to see what happens in the next volume.

Nancy is referred to as ‘a girl’ throughout the text. Are we ever told her age? I always think of her as mid 30’s and pretty. (Maybe thanks to Shani Wallis, who I’ve just looked up and she was 35 when she played her in the musical.)
Certainly the original illustrations that I’ve posted don’t do Nancy any favours, she doesn’t look like a girl, in fact she looks like a grotesque in the scene where she and Sykes recapture Oliver.

The descriptions of Fagin are hard to stomach. The fact that he as likely to be referred to as ‘the Jew’ as he is by his name highlight Dickens’ antisemitism. God forbid anyone should forget this hideous, avaricious, old creature is Jewish.

Oliver is a bit too good to be true though isn’t he? As TimeforaGandT pointed out he has an innate strong moral compass despite his complete lack of role models. Not only that but he has perfect manners, a strong grasp of grammar and etiquette and is able to read and write. Quite a miracle when you consider he was brought (dragged) up on a baby farm and in a workhouse with no formal teaching, surrounded by other unfortunates and half starved to boot.
I suppose Dickens needed his readers to sympathise with, and like, Oliver in order to get his message across and middle class readers were unlikely to warm to the sort of boy the workhouses actually turned out. Oliver is very much in the mould of many of Dickens other saintly child protagonists (Little Dorrit, Little Nell, Paul Dombey - off the top of my head) and to modern sensibilities ever so slightly drippy. Or am I being harsh?

@DesdamonasHandkerchief - thank you! I don't think you’re being harsh at all. The role models in Oliver's life have not had any moral compass or exhibited good manners. I expect Oliver and the other orphans were told to be grateful for what they were given and to say please/thank you etc but it's not the same as having it modelled to you. I agree that Dickens wants us to root for Oliver and therefore made him a sympathetic character but may have gone too far. However, I am enjoying it enormously (with the added bonus that I don't know the plot!).

Thank you @DesdamonasHandkerchief !

I think of Nancy as young and pretty, though hardened by her life on the streets. In fact the girl who played her in our school version was perfectly cast as she had a slightly brassy, chavvy character (heart of gold though)! She’ll be late 40s now though 😄 I agree that Fagin is much less sympathetic in the book than the musical, there’s no cosiness at all. The depiction and description of Fagin is very uncomfortable indeed.

Bill Sikes is rightly terrifying - I think Oliver Reed was perfectly cast in the film.

Oliver is a bit too perfect (and, yes, drippy) - I think that’s partly due to it being one of Dickens’ first books, I’m sure his character would have been much more nuanced and affected by his upbringing if the book had been written later. However, I’m quite happy to believe in his purity and goodness for the purposes of the book! Makes it a bit fairytale-ish.

Thanks for doing so much great work on pulling this all together @DesdamonasHandkerchief. I'm enjoying revisiting a book I haven’t read since schooldays (ahem, a very long time ago). I'm probably most familiar with the David Lean film version, which is truly great and incredibly evocative of early Victorian London, although Alec Guinness's no-holds-barred performance as Fagin was seen as problematic not just later, but at the time - the film came out in 1948 so the Holocaust was still very raw.
I used to regularly walk past the old Strand Union Workhouse in Cleveland Street, which Dickens used as a model for the workhouse in the book - here’s the link I mentioned, which has some good background and photos. It was due to be torn down by developers when the historian Ruth Richardson proved that Dickens had lived just a bit further down Cleveland St, not just for one period of his life but two (it was called Norfolk St at that time). The association meant that campaigners won their fight and the building had to be preserved instead of destroyed, and it's now being converted (slowly) into apartments.
I'll add an interesting little article by Ruth Richardson about Dickens's time there - the house still exists. Both these sites are just round the corner from the new Persephone shop in Scala Street, if anyone's planning a visit and wants to take a peek!

https://landmarksinlondonhistory.wordpress.com/2017/12/05/the-cleveland-street-workhouse/

https://www.charlesdickenspage.com/ruth-richardson-cleveland-street-workhouse.html

I think Oliver’s saintliness is also explained if you see Dickens writing in the tradition of Fielding. In Tom Jones, Tom (despite his womanising) is essentially good-hearted and is contrasted with another character (Blifil) who
is the opposite yet they have both been brought up in the same household. I think that there’s a tradition of seeing characters being inherently pure / noble / good of heart that Dickens is following.

I also wonder if Dickens had read Candide, as his narration has echoes of Voltaire’s style in that book, particulary when Dickens describes characters as the innocent Oliver sees them, but the reader can see what Oliver misses - eg Nancy & Bet
”Being remarkably free and innocent in their manners, Oliver thought them very nice girls indeed. As there is no doubt they were.”
Candide is also a story of an innocent who falls in with various villains on his travels.

I see Nancy as about 19 as she is a “young lady” - too old to be one of Fagin’s pickpockets but young enough to be still in his orbit and to be impressed by Bill.

There is much more about Bill than I remember from my last reading & he is terrifying. I particularly enjoyed his journey with Oliver to the burglary (that was the bit I was following on the map).

I agree that the depiction of Fagin is problematic for the reasons @DesdamonasHandkerchiefsets out & it’s a major flaw in the novel. There’s a real contrast with characters like Mr Bumble & the other Christian characters who Dickens criticises, as with those Dickens uses their religion as a way of taking measure if their characters: they are all criticised for being vain, greedy, hypocritical, mean etc which the reader knows are all classed as sins, so they are judged for not living upto the standards of their religion, whereas with Fagin that subtlety is completely lacking.

The notes in my edition say Nancy is 17. She says she has been working for Fagin for 12 years, since she was half Oliver’s age (i.e. from age 5).

I think we get the impression she’s older from the musical, where she has a mature low mezzo/alto voice type. This is to do with musical/operatic conventions where innocents are piping sopranos, fallen women have deeper voices.

Wow 17! That really is young.

@TimeforaGandT I’m jealous that you don’t know the plot. We’ll all have to be careful not to give away spoilers!
There is definitely an assumption that everyone knows what happens in the Dickens classics. I read an interesting article that another mumsnetter had linked to in a previous readalong - Dickens ten greatest novels ranked in order - or some such thing and it gave away the pivotal plot point of A Tale Of Two Cities. I was gutted, particularly as it was next on my Dickens hit list.

Thank you for avoiding spoilers! I hate when articles, or worse - forewords, reveal pivotal plot details. I have stopped reading forewords for that reason.

Thanks for that link to details of the original workhouse @Terpsichore, very interesting. I’m glad it was saved from demolition.
Not sure how I’d feel about living in a former Workhouse though, that had been the site of such misery, although certainly it would be a bit more quirky, historic and hopefully better built than modern apartments.

I’ve never read Candide @Benvenuto but that’s an interesting point about Dickens using the same narration style as Voltaire. It’s true that when we see things through Oliver’s eyes the reader is more clued up to what’s actually happening than Oliver is, it’s a clever device.

I'm going to be late joining in, but I'll get on board eventually!