:: to2c thoughts, from abroad ::

"Dickens clearly sees the Manette household, presided over by Lucie, as a repository of value, a private sanctuary from public spying, madness, and violence. To some readers, however, it has seemed frail, and in any case, more a product of the author's values than his observation of reality."
- discussion question excerpt from the back of kelsey's BN copy of a tale of two cities

when I'm at friends' houses, I always check out their reading material. my lovely friend kelsey (whom I've mentioned before) hosted me for a few days during this california trip and one evening I was sitting next to this, one of my all-time-favorite books, and I couldn't resist picking it up and reading the final paragraphs. gosh, it gets me every time.

this discussion question in the back caught my attention (I am a sucker for good discussion questions. I read the forewords, afterwords, prefaces, epilogues, introductions, and questions like they're dessert). read it again: dickens sees the manette household as a private sanctuary, but to some it has seemed frail, a product merely of the author's values.

absolutely yes.

this is striking. it might be why I have never really liked charles darnay, this aspect of him and of the manette household (that he really becomes one of, not vice versa). he's passive, and so naive. charles and lucie both are childlike in their trusting openness and it really bothers me. sydney carton, with all his cynical outlook, at least knows what he's getting into.

I definitely think that's what dickens valued -- he has so, so many stories with a fallen, weak, or struggling man who is loved and supported (or longs to be loved and supported) by a sweet, good woman despite that. I'm sure he wanted that himself.
   in a way, the darnays are doomed when carton dies: they will always need someone to get them out of their naive difficulties, and through the book they really rely on carton just to be there. now that he's gone, the hidden strength he provided in their relationship, or at least the promise of "anything I can do for you, ever" (lucie relied on him more than she realized, I think), is gone. and it's not that the darnays will fall apart, but they'll be battered.
   sydney + lucie would have been mismatched -- but she would've been taken better care of. charles + lucie are pure optimism (optoomuchstic, as maryrose wood puts it), and they won't get far with that. at least with sydney's pessimistic, cynical, worldly understanding they were sheltered (in a small way).
 
but then dickens apparently thinks they'll be okay, as he speaks through carton's prophetic 'vision' -- like louisa's gazing into the fire. "such things were to be." ...or maybe that's carton's wishful thinking: that his sacrifice will be worthwhile. it at least shows his own growth. growth? development. he's now putting her before himself. but also, he's leaving his first distrustful mindset.
   for better or worse.