Fiction about a great fictionalist

Dickens is a literary great, there is no denying that. He also happens to be a favorite of mine. For my birthday this year, my husband got me all of his works in a matching set and, dork that I am, I am itching to start reading/re-reading them all. Great writer, excellent philanthropist and public moralist, however as a husband it appears he was a real dud. My final read of 2010 presents his marriage wrapped in fiction.

Title: Girl in a Blue Dress
Author: Gaynor Arnold
My start date: 12/27/10
My finish date: 1/1/11
Book count: 82

While it is currently known and excepted that Dickens ditched his wife for an affair with an actress, at the time it was much hidden to prevent scandal. Arnold tells the story of Dicken's previously voiceless wife in this novel, which is set during the week of the great author's death. However, technically, this story is a work of fiction and rather than calling her characters by their real names, Arnold has created pseudonyms for them. So, this is really a story of Alfred and Dorothea Gibson. But don't be fooled, it is really Dickens and his wife under scrutiny here. And Arnold stays pretty darn close to the truth. While the use of pseudonyms allows her a greater degree of artistic liberty, most of the major details seemed easily enough confirmable on wikipedia.

Arnold's narrative flips between the events in the week following the author's death and the wife's flashbacks and memories of their past together. The time flips are all very digestable, as they are almost, if not entirely chronological within their timelines.

The story itself is great. It is Dickens after all. What's not to love? Arnold clearly put a ton of research into her work and her attention to detail and obvious love of her characters is very transparent. This novel is a diamond mine of information for the Dickens-lover. Further, Arnold manages to very cleverly work in some very Dickens-esque aspects to her story, making the great author's life read very much like one of his own stories.

That being said, the prose was a little stiff in areas. Perhaps there was simply too much information being presented, but a lot of the conversations were too contrived, as if they were nothing more than pretty showboxes for the information which needed to be presented at that juncture. People don't really converse in that way. Similarly, the way the events flowed from one moment to another simply didn't feel right and often the required literary tension seemed to be missing. I couldn't quite put my finger on the problem. The material was all there and Arnold has a lot of talent, but it needs a little more development perhaps.

I did like the ending though. I won't spoil it, but the ending was right. Dickens would approve.

On that note, perhaps I will start the new year with a Dickens.

Ok folks, that is it for 2010! Check back for the year wrap up!

Keep reading!
Sarah