Reading roundup: Peter Grant, Dickens pact, etc.
11. Ben Aaronovitch, Moon Over Soho
13. Ben Aaronovitch, Whispers Under Ground -- I continue to really love this series, and am sad to have now run out of it (book 4 is coming out in July, and I'm buying it right away, which is not something that happens a lot). Spoilers for both books
I love Nightingale, and basically everything about him: that he took out a Tiger tank (two, actually) with a fireball; that he says, "This may be somewhat unpleasant" before disarming the demon trap in a way that nearly makes Peter and Lesley pass out; that he learned woodcarving at the hospital to carve the names of the WWII fallen wizards himself, and didn't tell anyone why he was learning it because they already thought he was morbid; that he goes exploring in the sewers in a white Burbury coat; that he sneaks into Peter's crib to watch rugby and cleans up; that he corrects Peter's grammar (and Peter continues to speak incorrects on purpose -- doing it even more, from what I sawy); that his signare is "that economy of style and the abrupt twist of strength"; that he gets as angry as Peter has ever seen him at the thought that the Faceless Man had tortured dogs to create the demon trap. And this uote: "Actually I'd always thought he sat in the library wiht a slim volume of metaphysical poetry until the commisioner called him on the bat phone and summoned him into action."
And I love his relationship with Peter, which is almost certainly my favorite wizard-apprentice relationship EVER. That he tries to protect Peter from seeing what's in the Strip Club of Dr Moreau but realizes he can't really protect him from reality. That Peter points out to him that "black magician" is an inadvisable term and Nightingale is actually willing to learn new trick. That Nightingale is frustrated with Peter's lack of focus when it comes to magic but willing to accommodate his interests and studies while illustrating his point with things like the little cloud spell. That Peter keeps making references to modern media, like Hogwarts, and explaining them to Nightingale (who likes the idea of Quidditch). And I was very touched by the Christmas gifts scene in "Whispers", with Nightingale giving Peter a classy, expensive, timeless watch and Peter gives him a cell phone he's jury-rigged to be magic resistant in a way Peter discovered. It's both a great symbolic moment and yet completely something I can see these characters doing. There is so much respect and willingness to meet each other halfway, and a refreshing lack of mentor angst -- even when serious ethical disagreements come up, as with what to do with the jazz vampires, I thought they were handled believably and with nuance ("If they were ugly, Peter, would you care half so much?" "Maybe not. But that just makes me shallow, it doesn't make me wrong.")
I'm impressed that Lesley is neither "fixed" by magic nor sidelined despite her injuries (I missed her in book 2, but even then she pitched in remotely with the computer resarch work), and that Peter's adjustment to her disfigurement is not easy (nor is hers), and that the effect of her injuries isn't swept under the rug. Her situation is obviously tragic, but she never feels like an object of pity, Peter's or the reader's, which I really respect. She is still the really promising cop she was, and Peter still defers to her (as well he should), and she brings the same competence and focus that made her a great cop to the study of magic, and is now also a promising apprentice. And I especially like that Lesley and Peter are still the buddy cop duo they started out as, bantering and watching each other's backs. A scene that stood out for me was Lesley taking Peter's hand to comfort him when the darkness triggers a panic reaction after his burial alive; I haven't quite figured out why, but I think because it's nice to see her offer emotional support to him after the last book and a half have focused on him emotionally supporting her (or trying his best to) through her trauma. Peter and Lesley, and his crush on her, make me think of Harry and Murphy, not because they are really similar but in comparison. And the comparison was definitely on my mind during the scene where Lesley drunkenly gropes Peter and offers to sleep with him. It made a lot of difference to me that Lesley is drunk of her own volition (though for a good reason) rather than magicked/mind-whammied into the action, and the scene is profoundly uncomfortable rather than titillating, and I don't get the sense that I'm supposed to feel like Peter deserves a gold star for not taking advantage, the way I did, e.g. in that awful short story with the ale or that other one with the Tunnel of Love or whatever.
And I'm liking Peter more and more, as a character and as a protagonist. His strengths and his flaws make perfect sense -- he is a quick thinker who makes unusual connections (thus a couple of eureka moments) and thinks well on his feet, but his far-out ideas don't always have the intended effect (like trying to claim that Ash is wired to a bomb as a reason not to take him to the hospital, leading to him having to hijack the ambulance). And he is just such a nerd! I love that he keeps trying to explain science to people and having to look up most of it, and gets lectured by Dr Walid about "using biological classifications when I didn't know what the terms actually meant", and that he never stops making nerdy references (more on which later). He is just really a person I feel would be fun to hang out with, which I would not say about many/most protagonists.
The supporting cast is continuing to be built out. I liked Stephanopoulis in the first book and was happy to see that she and Peter are establishing a decent working relationship. I liked her even more when she recognized the Unseen University allusion, because her partner reads PTerry excerpts out loud at the table, as one does. (Dr Walid is a fan too, apparently, though he says "an argument of wizards" rather than of witches.) I liked DC Guleed, the Somali ninja girl whom we meet in the second book (and who gets remembered as an exception when Peter talks about how to be police is to drink), and "Whispers" introduces a new character whom I like very much, Sgt Jaget Kumar of the British Transit Police, who studied engineering at uni but didn't have the patience for it and so went into policework, who goes spelunking for fun, volunteers to investigate weird stuff because he watched X Files, and quotes Tolkien lines (because Peter is not the only dork around), and I'm hoping will be at least as much of a secondary cast regular as DC Guleed and Frank Caffrey, because he is a lot of fun. Oh, and I like Abigail the magical girl scout, too -- she's sassy, and I was cheered to see her return in a bigger role after her initial appearance.
It was also nice to hear more about Peter's family in book 2. I have no strong feelings about his parents, except that it's neat and unusual to have a fantasy protagonist who has both parents alive and still together (including in the sense that Peter would really rather not thing about). And he has some interesting cousins, it sounds like; I'd like to meet the one who used to steal his Legos and is now studying engineering -- she sounds fun. I also liked the assorted Irregulars Peter meets in book 2, but I wonder if we're going to see them again, since they weren't even mentioned in the third one (though I assume his father is still playing with them). Oh, and another bit character, who I'm pretty sure we'll never see again but whom I really liked, was Mrs Bellrush, the widow of one of the jazz vampires' victims and ex spook of some sort.
The supernatural characters continue to be less vivid and interesting for me. The Rivers are OK, and Simone the jazz vampire was fun (I liked her style and her love of pastry), and, OK, mole people, but none of the supernatural characters (not counting the magical humans) really grab me.
Plots, too, continue to be not a strong point of the series. The plot of the second book never really felt like it came together for me -- the Pale Lady plot just ended abruptly (which I suppose was the point, but it felt... unfinished), and the jazz vampire thing was decently done (I liked the way Peter was clearly under the influence of something but the narrative just tripped along with him) and at least had some kind of decent closure, but it still wasn't a high point. I did think book 3 was a bit weaker, a bit "formula" but not sure if that's really the case or if reading all three in a row made it feel like that. The book didn't feel like it started dragging in the last third, the way the previous two had done, maybe because it was a more straightforward mystery, with the Faceless Man search strictly on the back burner, and maybe because I'd enjoyed the first two thirds less (though still a whole lot), so it was less of a step function. Ultimately, I think my problem with the third book is that it didn't do enough in terms of character development, and just kind of kept plodding pleasantly along, introducing new fun people and cracking jokes.
Still really loving the setting (the outing to Oxford was especially great, including the Bird and the Baby sighting <3), and the nerdy references. Peter, of course, is a giant dork, who in addition to teasing Nightingale about attending Hogwarts cannot resist saying things like "hobbitses" (during a suspect interview XP), "Mordor, where the shadows lie", and "Drums. Drums in the deep". But there are other dorky things, too, including the Elvish runes on the demon trap (which spell out "If you can read these words then you are not only a nerd but probably dead", as Peter learns with the help of Tolkien experts on the internet), and Lesley comparing assorted wizards' drinking prowess to Peter's, and both Kumar and Peter thinking about the mole wizard as an Earthbender, and quotes like "the clever people at CERN are smahsing particles together in the hope that Doctor Who will turn up and tell them to stop."
And there are some quotes that made me laugh out loud or otherwise pleased and/or amused me:
"But I'm back now so I hope we'll see a return to good old-fashioned evidence-based policing, and a marked reduction in the amount of weird bollocks."
"Zach looked at Carey in consternation, obviously wondering if we were using the rare good cop/loony cop interrogation techniue."
"[...] offered me a glass of wine and a welcoming smile. I took the wine but avoided the smile, what with me being on duty and everything.' [Hee, zeugma :D]
"'the look' -- the stare that policemen use to keep members of the public in a state of randomized guilt."
"'Comparative thaumaturgy is a discipline still in its infancy.' This was a familiar Nightingale joke -- meaning that I was the only one currently interested in it."
So, these books are a delight, and I'm very glad lodessa lending me the first two actually got me from talking about picking them up to swallowing the series-to-date.
12. Olga Gromyko, O bednom Koschee zamolvite slovo -- adorable Russian humorous fantasy that ikel89 recommended. Spoilers It was a bit different than I had imagined it to be, but not in any sort of bad way. I'd been expecting Vasilisa to be magical, and she wasn't, but she was boisterous and fond of sweets and cherries and bad at embroidery, and that was just as well. Koschej, too, was a bit less magical than I'd expected, but I liked him, and that made the fairly standard funny romance plot perfectly likeable. I also liked the cook who kept trying to feed up her charge and season the food with his arcane powders, and I liked the mirthful voevoda (and was relieved when it turned out that his betrayal was unwitting; also, totaly OT3 vibes, just sayin'), and I liked that Finist the falcon put in an appearance, and, of course, predictably, I liked the fire-rat, described in all his whiskery glory (not a surprise that Gromyko keeps pet rats). So, yeah, very cute, and I'm looking forward to reading more of this author.
14. Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities -- the pact is fulfilled. Major spoilers -- like, MAJOR Still not king, but I did think the book picked up in the last part, when Sydney Carton showed up again. Overall, I wish there had been more of him, and also more of him before he turned into a Christ figure, because this book did not want for people suffering in saintly fashion. What there was a dearth of was actual complex and interesting characters, and Sydney started out as one, and continued as one (for me anyway) until the point where the little seamstress recognized him and then it was all patience and martyrdom from there. (I did actually feel moved by the little seamstress, by her willingness to die for the cause of the Revolution if it were to further the cause but being unable to see how it possibly could, and being worried that her time in Heaven owuld feel long because the Revolution would promote the cause of the poor would mean her cousin could live to be old.) Anyway, Sydney was a really interesting character to meet, and I would be glad to have read the book just for him.
But I also really liked Mr Lorry, the sweetest bachelor and man of business, and the way the Manettes took the place of his family, and Miss Pross, with her forceful nature and her approach to French shopping (which is very like some older relatives of mine upon emigrating to this country (and Miss Pross and Mr Lorry together as a comedy duo). Doctor Manette didn't do much for me (though the description of his trauma and recovery and relapses was very well done, and I found fascinating the scene where Mr Lorry brings his own condition to him for consultation, and the subsequent murder of the shoemaking bench), except in the flashback in his letter, as a young physician who refuses Evremonde's money with "Pray excuse me. Under the circumstances, no." Even more, Charles Darnay never felt like much of a character to me, or someone I should care about; the only scene where I felt any sympathy for or interest in him was the one after he resigns himself to death but wonders about the details and mechanics of the experience, "the strange besetting desire to know what to do when the time came." And Lucie just never gelled into a character at all, merely a symbol of filial and marital love and devotion and Sydney's muse, nothing to her individually that I could actually discern.
The most striking thing about the book for me (and not just me, I wager) was Madame Defarge, but I don't list her among the characters, because she never really felt like one. With her knitting, she appears as a spectre at first (and Dickens explicitly evokes imagery of the Fates), and she is a force of nature ("It does not take a long time to strike a man with Lightning." "How long does it take to make and store the lightning?" and, of course, "Then tell Wind and Fire where to stop, but don't tell me.") Her death disappointed me (though I knew it was coming) -- it just didn't seem to fit the scope of her character, though possibly that's the point. I did like the confrontation between her and Miss Pross, where they could fully understand each other in their separate languages -- and find it interesting the one actual moment of open resistance and struggle (as opposed to Sydney's covert self-sacrifice) is a stand-off between two women.
In general, I must say I was surprised by how the revolution was portrayed, but pleasantly so. I'm used to Dickens going on about the plight of the poor and the orphans and so on, so the early sections, detailing the depredations of French nobility, didn't have much of an effect. The streets running red with blood also went on too long, of course, or Dickens wouldn't be Dickens, but the clear and stark portrait of the oppressed turned oppressors, just as callous and lacking in sympathy and empathy as the nobility had been (though with more reason) was still striking. And I didn't need him to belabor the point that it was the behavior of the nobility that had engendred the crazed violence and anarchy and terror of the revolutionaries' behaviour, especially the "Physical diseases, engendered in the vices and neglects of men, will seize on victims of all degrees, and the frightful moral disorder, born of unspeakable suffering, intolerable oppression, and heartless indifference, smote equally without distinction." and "Guillotine. And yet there is not in France [...] a blade, a leaf, a root, a sprig, a peppercorn which will grow to maturity under conditions more certain than those that have produced this horror".
Dickens's style does not work for me on the whole. Well, some funny bits do, like those featuring Miss Pross, and some choice phrases, but for the most part it's all too much, too over the top. The only scene that, as a whole, really worked for me stylistically was the one that slips into the odd first person plural, the carriage ride of Mr Lorry, Lucie, the daughter, the regressed Doctor Manette and insensible Charles-as-Sydney escaping from Paris. That was the only place where the verboseness felt like it was doing something legitimate (other than earning Mr Dickens his royalties), because I think it contributed to the crowded, rushed, persecuted feel, and the first person plural added a sense of immediacy.
In conclusion: still not king, but glad I read it, and open to further Dickens pact-ness in future.
13. Ben Aaronovitch, Whispers Under Ground -- I continue to really love this series, and am sad to have now run out of it (book 4 is coming out in July, and I'm buying it right away, which is not something that happens a lot). Spoilers for both books
I love Nightingale, and basically everything about him: that he took out a Tiger tank (two, actually) with a fireball; that he says, "This may be somewhat unpleasant" before disarming the demon trap in a way that nearly makes Peter and Lesley pass out; that he learned woodcarving at the hospital to carve the names of the WWII fallen wizards himself, and didn't tell anyone why he was learning it because they already thought he was morbid; that he goes exploring in the sewers in a white Burbury coat; that he sneaks into Peter's crib to watch rugby and cleans up; that he corrects Peter's grammar (and Peter continues to speak incorrects on purpose -- doing it even more, from what I sawy); that his signare is "that economy of style and the abrupt twist of strength"; that he gets as angry as Peter has ever seen him at the thought that the Faceless Man had tortured dogs to create the demon trap. And this uote: "Actually I'd always thought he sat in the library wiht a slim volume of metaphysical poetry until the commisioner called him on the bat phone and summoned him into action."
And I love his relationship with Peter, which is almost certainly my favorite wizard-apprentice relationship EVER. That he tries to protect Peter from seeing what's in the Strip Club of Dr Moreau but realizes he can't really protect him from reality. That Peter points out to him that "black magician" is an inadvisable term and Nightingale is actually willing to learn new trick. That Nightingale is frustrated with Peter's lack of focus when it comes to magic but willing to accommodate his interests and studies while illustrating his point with things like the little cloud spell. That Peter keeps making references to modern media, like Hogwarts, and explaining them to Nightingale (who likes the idea of Quidditch). And I was very touched by the Christmas gifts scene in "Whispers", with Nightingale giving Peter a classy, expensive, timeless watch and Peter gives him a cell phone he's jury-rigged to be magic resistant in a way Peter discovered. It's both a great symbolic moment and yet completely something I can see these characters doing. There is so much respect and willingness to meet each other halfway, and a refreshing lack of mentor angst -- even when serious ethical disagreements come up, as with what to do with the jazz vampires, I thought they were handled believably and with nuance ("If they were ugly, Peter, would you care half so much?" "Maybe not. But that just makes me shallow, it doesn't make me wrong.")
I'm impressed that Lesley is neither "fixed" by magic nor sidelined despite her injuries (I missed her in book 2, but even then she pitched in remotely with the computer resarch work), and that Peter's adjustment to her disfigurement is not easy (nor is hers), and that the effect of her injuries isn't swept under the rug. Her situation is obviously tragic, but she never feels like an object of pity, Peter's or the reader's, which I really respect. She is still the really promising cop she was, and Peter still defers to her (as well he should), and she brings the same competence and focus that made her a great cop to the study of magic, and is now also a promising apprentice. And I especially like that Lesley and Peter are still the buddy cop duo they started out as, bantering and watching each other's backs. A scene that stood out for me was Lesley taking Peter's hand to comfort him when the darkness triggers a panic reaction after his burial alive; I haven't quite figured out why, but I think because it's nice to see her offer emotional support to him after the last book and a half have focused on him emotionally supporting her (or trying his best to) through her trauma. Peter and Lesley, and his crush on her, make me think of Harry and Murphy, not because they are really similar but in comparison. And the comparison was definitely on my mind during the scene where Lesley drunkenly gropes Peter and offers to sleep with him. It made a lot of difference to me that Lesley is drunk of her own volition (though for a good reason) rather than magicked/mind-whammied into the action, and the scene is profoundly uncomfortable rather than titillating, and I don't get the sense that I'm supposed to feel like Peter deserves a gold star for not taking advantage, the way I did, e.g. in that awful short story with the ale or that other one with the Tunnel of Love or whatever.
And I'm liking Peter more and more, as a character and as a protagonist. His strengths and his flaws make perfect sense -- he is a quick thinker who makes unusual connections (thus a couple of eureka moments) and thinks well on his feet, but his far-out ideas don't always have the intended effect (like trying to claim that Ash is wired to a bomb as a reason not to take him to the hospital, leading to him having to hijack the ambulance). And he is just such a nerd! I love that he keeps trying to explain science to people and having to look up most of it, and gets lectured by Dr Walid about "using biological classifications when I didn't know what the terms actually meant", and that he never stops making nerdy references (more on which later). He is just really a person I feel would be fun to hang out with, which I would not say about many/most protagonists.
The supporting cast is continuing to be built out. I liked Stephanopoulis in the first book and was happy to see that she and Peter are establishing a decent working relationship. I liked her even more when she recognized the Unseen University allusion, because her partner reads PTerry excerpts out loud at the table, as one does. (Dr Walid is a fan too, apparently, though he says "an argument of wizards" rather than of witches.) I liked DC Guleed, the Somali ninja girl whom we meet in the second book (and who gets remembered as an exception when Peter talks about how to be police is to drink), and "Whispers" introduces a new character whom I like very much, Sgt Jaget Kumar of the British Transit Police, who studied engineering at uni but didn't have the patience for it and so went into policework, who goes spelunking for fun, volunteers to investigate weird stuff because he watched X Files, and quotes Tolkien lines (because Peter is not the only dork around), and I'm hoping will be at least as much of a secondary cast regular as DC Guleed and Frank Caffrey, because he is a lot of fun. Oh, and I like Abigail the magical girl scout, too -- she's sassy, and I was cheered to see her return in a bigger role after her initial appearance.
It was also nice to hear more about Peter's family in book 2. I have no strong feelings about his parents, except that it's neat and unusual to have a fantasy protagonist who has both parents alive and still together (including in the sense that Peter would really rather not thing about). And he has some interesting cousins, it sounds like; I'd like to meet the one who used to steal his Legos and is now studying engineering -- she sounds fun. I also liked the assorted Irregulars Peter meets in book 2, but I wonder if we're going to see them again, since they weren't even mentioned in the third one (though I assume his father is still playing with them). Oh, and another bit character, who I'm pretty sure we'll never see again but whom I really liked, was Mrs Bellrush, the widow of one of the jazz vampires' victims and ex spook of some sort.
The supernatural characters continue to be less vivid and interesting for me. The Rivers are OK, and Simone the jazz vampire was fun (I liked her style and her love of pastry), and, OK, mole people, but none of the supernatural characters (not counting the magical humans) really grab me.
Plots, too, continue to be not a strong point of the series. The plot of the second book never really felt like it came together for me -- the Pale Lady plot just ended abruptly (which I suppose was the point, but it felt... unfinished), and the jazz vampire thing was decently done (I liked the way Peter was clearly under the influence of something but the narrative just tripped along with him) and at least had some kind of decent closure, but it still wasn't a high point. I did think book 3 was a bit weaker, a bit "formula" but not sure if that's really the case or if reading all three in a row made it feel like that. The book didn't feel like it started dragging in the last third, the way the previous two had done, maybe because it was a more straightforward mystery, with the Faceless Man search strictly on the back burner, and maybe because I'd enjoyed the first two thirds less (though still a whole lot), so it was less of a step function. Ultimately, I think my problem with the third book is that it didn't do enough in terms of character development, and just kind of kept plodding pleasantly along, introducing new fun people and cracking jokes.
Still really loving the setting (the outing to Oxford was especially great, including the Bird and the Baby sighting <3), and the nerdy references. Peter, of course, is a giant dork, who in addition to teasing Nightingale about attending Hogwarts cannot resist saying things like "hobbitses" (during a suspect interview XP), "Mordor, where the shadows lie", and "Drums. Drums in the deep". But there are other dorky things, too, including the Elvish runes on the demon trap (which spell out "If you can read these words then you are not only a nerd but probably dead", as Peter learns with the help of Tolkien experts on the internet), and Lesley comparing assorted wizards' drinking prowess to Peter's, and both Kumar and Peter thinking about the mole wizard as an Earthbender, and quotes like "the clever people at CERN are smahsing particles together in the hope that Doctor Who will turn up and tell them to stop."
And there are some quotes that made me laugh out loud or otherwise pleased and/or amused me:
"But I'm back now so I hope we'll see a return to good old-fashioned evidence-based policing, and a marked reduction in the amount of weird bollocks."
"Zach looked at Carey in consternation, obviously wondering if we were using the rare good cop/loony cop interrogation techniue."
"[...] offered me a glass of wine and a welcoming smile. I took the wine but avoided the smile, what with me being on duty and everything.' [Hee, zeugma :D]
"'the look' -- the stare that policemen use to keep members of the public in a state of randomized guilt."
"'Comparative thaumaturgy is a discipline still in its infancy.' This was a familiar Nightingale joke -- meaning that I was the only one currently interested in it."
So, these books are a delight, and I'm very glad lodessa lending me the first two actually got me from talking about picking them up to swallowing the series-to-date.
12. Olga Gromyko, O bednom Koschee zamolvite slovo -- adorable Russian humorous fantasy that ikel89 recommended. Spoilers It was a bit different than I had imagined it to be, but not in any sort of bad way. I'd been expecting Vasilisa to be magical, and she wasn't, but she was boisterous and fond of sweets and cherries and bad at embroidery, and that was just as well. Koschej, too, was a bit less magical than I'd expected, but I liked him, and that made the fairly standard funny romance plot perfectly likeable. I also liked the cook who kept trying to feed up her charge and season the food with his arcane powders, and I liked the mirthful voevoda (and was relieved when it turned out that his betrayal was unwitting; also, totaly OT3 vibes, just sayin'), and I liked that Finist the falcon put in an appearance, and, of course, predictably, I liked the fire-rat, described in all his whiskery glory (not a surprise that Gromyko keeps pet rats). So, yeah, very cute, and I'm looking forward to reading more of this author.
14. Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities -- the pact is fulfilled. Major spoilers -- like, MAJOR Still not king, but I did think the book picked up in the last part, when Sydney Carton showed up again. Overall, I wish there had been more of him, and also more of him before he turned into a Christ figure, because this book did not want for people suffering in saintly fashion. What there was a dearth of was actual complex and interesting characters, and Sydney started out as one, and continued as one (for me anyway) until the point where the little seamstress recognized him and then it was all patience and martyrdom from there. (I did actually feel moved by the little seamstress, by her willingness to die for the cause of the Revolution if it were to further the cause but being unable to see how it possibly could, and being worried that her time in Heaven owuld feel long because the Revolution would promote the cause of the poor would mean her cousin could live to be old.) Anyway, Sydney was a really interesting character to meet, and I would be glad to have read the book just for him.
But I also really liked Mr Lorry, the sweetest bachelor and man of business, and the way the Manettes took the place of his family, and Miss Pross, with her forceful nature and her approach to French shopping (which is very like some older relatives of mine upon emigrating to this country (and Miss Pross and Mr Lorry together as a comedy duo). Doctor Manette didn't do much for me (though the description of his trauma and recovery and relapses was very well done, and I found fascinating the scene where Mr Lorry brings his own condition to him for consultation, and the subsequent murder of the shoemaking bench), except in the flashback in his letter, as a young physician who refuses Evremonde's money with "Pray excuse me. Under the circumstances, no." Even more, Charles Darnay never felt like much of a character to me, or someone I should care about; the only scene where I felt any sympathy for or interest in him was the one after he resigns himself to death but wonders about the details and mechanics of the experience, "the strange besetting desire to know what to do when the time came." And Lucie just never gelled into a character at all, merely a symbol of filial and marital love and devotion and Sydney's muse, nothing to her individually that I could actually discern.
The most striking thing about the book for me (and not just me, I wager) was Madame Defarge, but I don't list her among the characters, because she never really felt like one. With her knitting, she appears as a spectre at first (and Dickens explicitly evokes imagery of the Fates), and she is a force of nature ("It does not take a long time to strike a man with Lightning." "How long does it take to make and store the lightning?" and, of course, "Then tell Wind and Fire where to stop, but don't tell me.") Her death disappointed me (though I knew it was coming) -- it just didn't seem to fit the scope of her character, though possibly that's the point. I did like the confrontation between her and Miss Pross, where they could fully understand each other in their separate languages -- and find it interesting the one actual moment of open resistance and struggle (as opposed to Sydney's covert self-sacrifice) is a stand-off between two women.
In general, I must say I was surprised by how the revolution was portrayed, but pleasantly so. I'm used to Dickens going on about the plight of the poor and the orphans and so on, so the early sections, detailing the depredations of French nobility, didn't have much of an effect. The streets running red with blood also went on too long, of course, or Dickens wouldn't be Dickens, but the clear and stark portrait of the oppressed turned oppressors, just as callous and lacking in sympathy and empathy as the nobility had been (though with more reason) was still striking. And I didn't need him to belabor the point that it was the behavior of the nobility that had engendred the crazed violence and anarchy and terror of the revolutionaries' behaviour, especially the "Physical diseases, engendered in the vices and neglects of men, will seize on victims of all degrees, and the frightful moral disorder, born of unspeakable suffering, intolerable oppression, and heartless indifference, smote equally without distinction." and "Guillotine. And yet there is not in France [...] a blade, a leaf, a root, a sprig, a peppercorn which will grow to maturity under conditions more certain than those that have produced this horror".
Dickens's style does not work for me on the whole. Well, some funny bits do, like those featuring Miss Pross, and some choice phrases, but for the most part it's all too much, too over the top. The only scene that, as a whole, really worked for me stylistically was the one that slips into the odd first person plural, the carriage ride of Mr Lorry, Lucie, the daughter, the regressed Doctor Manette and insensible Charles-as-Sydney escaping from Paris. That was the only place where the verboseness felt like it was doing something legitimate (other than earning Mr Dickens his royalties), because I think it contributed to the crowded, rushed, persecuted feel, and the first person plural added a sense of immediacy.
In conclusion: still not king, but glad I read it, and open to further Dickens pact-ness in future.