The central paradox of A Tale of Two Cities is that its action involves one of the most important political events of modern European history—and perhaps of its entire history—the French Revolution, while the values of the novel are ultimately antipolitical. Politics and history, neither of which Charles Dickens renders with great faithfulness, loom as a necessity from which his characters must flee to save their souls. Throughout the novel, Dickens reminds his readers that all acts, whether magnanimous or petty, shrink to nothing when viewed in a cosmic context. Indeed, for him, the goal of politics—the finding of a just community—is an absurd one in this world. To paraphrase Sydney Carton’s famous last speech: It is a far better thing to die and join such a community in heaven—the existence of which Dickens cannot with certainty assert—than to engage with society. A Tale of Two Cities demonstrates that Dickens’s political will, wan in his previous novels, is finally exhausted.
In this regard and in one of the first substantial essays dealing with Dickens’s art and thought, published a year before A Tale of Two Cities was completed, Walter Bagehot said, Mr. Dickens has not infrequently spoken, and what is worse, he has taught a great number of parrot-like imitators to speak, in what really is, if they knew it, a tone of objection to the necessary constitution of human society.
(The entire section is 850 words.)
Want to Read More?
Subscribe now to read the rest of A Tale of Two Cities Critical Essays. Plus get complete access to 30,000+ study guides!