Oliver Twist

By Charles Dickens

Dickens's classic morality tale of a starving orphan caught between opposing forces of good and evil is a powerful indictment of Victorian England's Poor Laws. Filled with dark humor and an unforgettable cast of characters Oliver Twist, Fagin, Nancy, Bill Sykes, and the Artful Dodger, to name a few Dickens's second novel is a compelling social satire that has remained popular since it was first serialized in 1837-39.

The text for this Modern Library Paperback Classic is taken from the 1846 New Edition, revised and corrected by the author. It includes new explanatory notes and an appendix, A Brief History of the English Poor Laws.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Random House Publishing Group
• Release date: Jan 17, 2012
• ISBN: 9780307950567

Charles Dickens

Charles Dickens (1812-1870) was an English writer and social critic. Regarded as the greatest novelist of the Victorian era, Dickens had a prolific collection of works including fifteen novels, five novellas, and hundreds of short stories and articles. The term “cliffhanger endings” was created because of his practice of ending his serial short stories with drama and suspense. Dickens’ political and social beliefs heavily shaped his literary work. He argued against capitalist beliefs, and advocated for children’s rights, education, and other social reforms. Dickens advocacy for such causes is apparent in his empathetic portrayal of lower classes in his famous works, such as The Christmas Carol and Hard Times.

Reviews for Oliver Twist

[velvetsnape · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Great classic.

[therebelprince · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Written in 1837, during Dickens' astronomical rise to success, Oliver Twist is his third major work, second novel, and the negative counterpart to its exact contemporary, The Pickwick Papers. One could argue it's still the work that has had the greatest impact on the public psyche: Dodger, Fagin, Nancy, and Bill loom large in the collective cultural consciousness, don't they? Who can forget Oliver asking for more, or the climactic tightrope walk? In truth, this is not a brilliant work. Only Fagin has any sparks of internal life, and he's an unfortunate anti-Semitic caricature common to the era. Oliver Twist, carrying the torch from some of Dickens' sentimental Sketches is a rather lifeless little twig. What works in the story is the vividness of "low" culture, and Dickens' already fierce moral stance on the inhumanity of much of 19th century English culture. Certainly a worthwhile read, but possibly the least of Dickens' "Big Fifteen". The relatively straightforward Twist will give way to the diffuse, picaresque Nicholas Nickleby, and then the real Dickens will be formed.

[margaretfield · Rating: 1 out of 5 stars]

seemed really predictable, hackneyed, lacking dimension. Oddly, the movie is so much better.

[csdaley-1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Still one of my favorite books. I loved rereading it. I read it the first time in Jr. High. The power of the words is even greater today.

[msaucier818 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

It had been many years since I read Charles Dickens, but this is pretty much exactly what I remember of him. This was a classic story where the good guys end up being good, and the bad guys end up being bad. The writing style and the atmosphere are where Dickens makes his money, and I loved being transported back to 19th century London. The story itself was not really a page-turner for me, but I did enjoy the characters enough to have no trouble getting through the novel. I will certainly be reading more of Dickens.

[regoodrich · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

A classic.
A tragedy.
A horror.
A love story.
A fairytale.
'Oliver Twist' is the bleakest and brightest of tales. Charles Dickens weaves all of the elements for a gripping story into his book. What I love most, however, is Mr. Dickens' ability to paint a world, a character, a situation, a single sentiment with nothing but words. It was a treat and an education reading this book. The characters are vivid. They are awful and delightful. Throughout the reading are included words of wisdom--quotes which I paused to highlight. I will reread them time and again. I highly recommend this book to all story lovers. It is a masterpiece.

[imperfectcj · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

There were parts of this book that I really enjoyed. In the latter chapters, the action picked up and Dickens did a great job of keeping the intensity up and leading the reader along, something I imagine would be especially important for a book published in episodes.

I also liked how innocent Oliver was, always trying to do the right thing despite the circumstances. He seemed a little too good to be true, but I liked him so much, I didn't mind that he was a bit unbelievable. He just had so much spirit.

One thing I don't quite understand in a lot of these 19th-century books is how easily people fall ill. Emotional strain or just a walk in the cold can put them into fits or lay them low with a life-threatening fever. Were people back then really that delicate, or were the pathogens present in 19th-century London just so dangerous and ready to pounce that people were always a head cold away from death? What were these mysterious fevers people were always getting?

The most unpleasant part about the book is Dickens's insistence on referring to Fagin primarily as "The Jew". According to the notes at the end of my version, Dickens responded to critics who claimed his portrayal of Fagin was anti-Semitic by saying that at the time the story took place, most of those in Fagin's line of work were Jews. I don't know if this is true or not, but the way that he calls him "The Jew" at least as often as he calls him by name suggests that he's actually saying he's in that line of work because he's Jewish, which is a very different thing than just saying he's in that line of work and happens to be Jewish.

In addition, there's a scene in which Oliver sees Fagin and shouts, "The Jew! The Jew!" It seemed strange to me that Oliver would have referred to him like that because I thought other characters generally referred to Fagin by name, and Oliver would have done the same.

And then there's the way that Dickens time and again describes Fagin in ways that suggest he's less than human, like in chapter 47 when Dickens says that Fagin "disclosed among his toothless gums a few such fangs as should have been a dog's or rat's." I don't recall Dickens comparing other non-Jewish characters to animals in this way.

I also considered the possibility that Dickens was just writing about Fagin as the culture at the time would have seen him, but I could buy this notion a lot better if these nasty things were said only by other characters in the story, but by and large, it's not other characters who are saying these things; it's our narrator (whom I read as Dickens). All of this suggests to me that Dickens's portrayal of Fagin wasn't merely a reflection of the demographics of a particular type of criminal in London at that time but truly was (and is) anti-Semitic.

But aside from this admittedly very large part of the book, I enjoyed the story. I nearly always enjoy Dickens's dark storytelling and psychologically tormented characters, and I find the female characters in his book refreshingly strong-willed (refreshing because not every strong-willed woman is punished for it (though most of them are)).

[fluffyblue_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

My third Dickens novel, and although I initally struggled a bit I ended up enjoying it very much. Dickens has such a way with words and you feel like you are living in his era when you read his books. So far, they have all made me want to wallow in history (in a good way!).

[jennysbookbag.com · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Not my favorite Dickens novel, but still worth reading.

[jguidry-1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Well, I finally finished re-reading Oliver Twist. Also known as, how much bad stuff can happen to one poor orphan boy? It took me a while to finish reading, not because of the story itself, but simply because of other time issues. I enjoyed the story and the ideas. I love Dickens' writing style, I just wish I'd been able to read more of it at a time during one sitting. Now that I've re-read this one, I'd like to re-read more of his work.

[mamashepp · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I first read this after seeing the 1960's film musical. Loved it then. When I reread it as an adult, I was a little less more impartial. But I still enjoyed the imagery, the characters and the commentary on society.

[booksfordinner · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Outside of a failed attempt at the Pickwick Papers a decade or so ago, I believe this is the first Dickens I have read as an adult. Is that possible? I should be sent to the workhouse myself for that.

[marinty · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

"Please, sir, may I have some more (porridge)?"

[ab4books · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

This book is about a hard-working orphan in New England named Oliver Twist. In the story, he travels from workhouse to workhouse, and finally he escapes to London. Later, he kidnapped by a group of bad guys who try to steal handkerchiefs from rich people. One day, Oliver goes with the bad guys, and finds out that they are trying to steal things. Then, Oliver ends up with a man who is very nice to him and takes care of him. But later on, they spilt up again and find each other and capture the bad guys.I like this book because it is about an orphan who takes a risk to explore the world beyond him to seek for a place to belong with.

[meredy_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Six-word review: Deservedly classic tale of orphan's survival.Extended review:Despite its verbosity, sentimentality, and exaggerated characterizations, how can you not love this book? Like a dog at your feet, it's there to be loved. What else are you going to do with it?It also turns out to be much more satirical than I ever realized. Social commentary, yes, expected; but satire? I didn't know. For example:Mr. Bumble...had a decided propensity for bullying: derived no inconsiderable pleasure from the exercise of petty cruelty; and, consequently, was (it is needless to say) a coward. This is by no means a disparagement to his character; for many official personages, who are held in high respect and admiration, are the victims of similar infirmities. The remark is made, indeed, rather in his favour than otherwise, and with a view of impressing the reader with a just sense of his qualifications for office.Dickens misses no opportunity to underscore the social ills of his time and place and to distribute ample helpings of blame freely up and down the social scale. He also holds us captive with a story that keeps us reading and soaking up his message.So here they all are, the characters we know so well in so many incarnations, embedded as they are in the cultures of the English-speaking world and probably well beyond: the ever-so-good good guys: tender, mistreated Oliver; kindly, open-hearted Mr. Brownlow; sweet, sweet Rose, so impossibly angelic that it's a wonder she doesn't suffocate of her own virtue; and poor brave, doomed Nancy, without whom nothing could have turned out right; and the bad guys, not one of whom is without at least some small spark of sympathetic humanity to argue for redemption: sadistic Mr. Bumble; cocky Artful Dodger; unregenerate, duplicitous Fagin; mysterious, menacing Monks; and cruel, brutal Bill Sikes, a monster who comes to a fitting end that yet inspires horror.Of the rambling story with its odd, protracted word-count-stretching digressions and amazing coincidences I have no comment to add to the immense body of commentary on the literature of Dickens: but to say that the story is brightest in single scenes and episodes, with the long arc serving mainly to string those together. It's in those vignettes that the brilliance of Dickens' characterization is displayed, and that, indeed, is why we fall in love.

[nosajeel · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

I am hard pressed to think of what you find in later Dickens that you don't find in this, his first complete novel. That is not to say a lot isn't much better (the imagery of London, the complexity of the characters, and the even more sprawling multiple plots come to mind) -- and that some of the worst of this novel (of which the absurd and unnecessary coincidence of Rose Maylie being related to Oliver is just about the worst). But Dickens already had the combination of comic, tragic, melodramatic, moralizing, satirical, and several other ingredients that he successfully mined in different proportions in all his future books. Although none of them top the stark brutality of Oliver Twist, and especially Fagin and Sikes.

[f2lopez · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

When reading this book I found that it was quite a good read. It had humor, was descriptive, and entertaining. It was interesting because it had many characters of many backgrounds coming together in some way or another. When it came to describing simple things such as the morning air, Charles Dickens showed to describe in a detailed manner that was not boring. One could also find themselves cheering along Oliver to get out of harms way and everyone else who was trying to help him. There was a lot of treachery unkindness and dishonesty around Oliver as he was growing up but in the end he finally finds the family he needed while other characters don't have the same happy ending. All in all I think that I would choose to read it again sometime in the future...it was that good!

[quaintlittlehead · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

I heard it said somewhere once that a first novel is always the author's most personal. Not so with Dickens, who had to let his thoughts churn over the concept behind "Oliver Twist" while experimenting with the earlier "Sketches by Boz" and "Pickwick Papers." It can definitely be said, though, that "Oliver Twist" is the first novel that Dickens gets right. Instead of feeling like you're reading chapters in isolation that stretch the story for the sake of getting paid for additional instalments, everything fits together beautifully. The plot is by turns tragic, comical, philosophical, romantic, and suspenseful. Dickens manages to follow different characters on their own particular arcs rather than just presenting everything through Oliver's point of view, but there are very few sections that feel like they are dragging the reader away from the main story. The message reflects the developing sensibilities of the new Victorian era while addressing concerns about poverty, morality, and charity that remain relevant to this day. In spite of its time period, however, it shows progressive tendencies, most notably in the excellent characterisation of Nancy, a vast improvement over all the simpering and fainting women of "Pickwick Papers." And while the story is very likely familiar from a number of different adaptations, I found that the author was still able to pull me out of the cynicism of saying "yes, I know what's going to happen" and to surprise me, both in terms of plot details and style. This is a book that stands in conversation with the author's later works and with the other great works of literature that take on the moral questions of their time. It has, as Calvino said, never finished saying what it has to say.

[aprille_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I reread this recently for the first time since I was a teenager and found (not surprisingly) that I was interested in very different parts of the story than I was when I was younger. I was much more interested in the character of Bill Sykes, and his haunted guilt, fleeing the law. There is a fabulous scene that I had not remembered where he heroically lends a hand during a fire in a desperate effort to rejoin humanity after murdering a friend. Hellfire and damnation mixed in with attempted atonement. It was really quite mesmerizing.

[mikebridge_1 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

I agree with john257hopper; this is not a great book. The social criticism behind it is real, but this doesn't work as a novel. Oliver himself is unbelievable (and dull), and the plot feels artificial. Dickens went on to do better things.

[cynfrank · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Martin Jarvis is the best reader of Dickens I have come across. I resently downloaded "A Tale of Two Cities," think I'd read before only to find I hadn't. I had gotten it for free from audible.com. I got a copy of it, but like Jarvis's reading of it so much that I found myself following along with the book. I can't listen to books I've not read. When I saw the unabridged version of Oliver Twist was available read by Mr. Jarvis, I immediately downloaded it and am very much enjoy Oliver's journey once again brought to vivid life by Martin Jarvis. I think this would easily keep kids of all ages entertained as well as adults.

[penguinasana · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

The first Dickens' I've "read" and I'll be back for more. Dickens is masterful at painting a picture of the time and his dialogue and narration is fully of biting social satire. It's great to check out the audio version. Dickens' novel was originally serialized (and one might assume, often read out loud from the paper) and thus, it translates well into audio format.

[boredness-1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

There were certain points in the story where I found it hard to follow what was going on. I found the ending especially confusing. But other than that, I enjoyed the story. I plan on watching a couple movie renditions to see if I can better understand what was going on.

[pjulian-1 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Language was awesome. The story was not connected enough and the point that the author intended to place, that morality in not class dependent was not fulfilled.

[saigonstar · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

A must read for Saigon Star readers keen to have a taste of Dickens

[mercmuscle73 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

As much as I loved watching the movie, I loved the book just as much. Reading this book is almost like getting to sit on Oliver's shoulder and watch over him as he goes through each journey. Unparalleled, I've never read a book like this before.

[pilgrimjess · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Like an awful lot of people I have seen the film version of this story numerous times and even the stage version once as well but had never got around to actually reading the original. To mark Dicken's 200 birthday I felt that it was time to put things right just to see how much of the story had been altered.Dicken's was obviously a great wordsmith and this could be seen in his depiction of the conditions in the workhouse which were so vivid it was frightening but in truth I found this portion a little dull and just wanted to race through this part to get to when Oliver goes to London and meets Fagin and the gang. For it is there that the story really begins for me. Can a sweet natured boy who has had a very rough upbringing, where he was shown little affection and no little brutality, remain honest and upstanding or would he turn out a wrong 'un like the rest of them. A question of nurture or nature.The book holds some great characters who are given such a three dimensional feel by the great writing ( anyone who can get away with a character called Master Bates must be good). I did feel a little uncomfortable with Fagin constantly refered to as the Jew, although I realise that it is hard to expect the same standards of today 150+ years ago.On the whole I really enjoyed the book although it could be argued that this was not one of Dicken's best and am glad that I finally got around to reading it. Some parts I found a little slow but once it really got going I felt that the story raced along nicely. If I could have given it 4.5 stars I would have but finally came down on the side of a 4 but in the end as far as Dicken's himself is involved 'Can I have some more?'

[read4to4live · Rating: 1 out of 5 stars]

If this had been my first Dickens novel, I never would have read another. The protagonist, for the most part, is acted upon instead of acting. His great heroic moment takes place when he runs away from home and walks 70 miles to London (a moment he remembers in great excitement at the end of the book). But for the remainder of the story, he merely suffers, miserably and passively, as he is humiliated, degraded, hunted, starved, sickened, and beaten. As a reader it is too much to bear, because Oliver has no way to fight back. If he only had an internal monologue that kept him strong, mentally, that might have been enough to maintain my empathy; but when he is just a simple, blank slate of a suffering child, his misery does not make a satisfactory read. Even in the chapters of the happy ending, he sits passively as adults explain his (convoluted) history. Fair disclosure. I did not manage to finish the book. I got up to the point where Oliver has to relinquish his clean, new suit of clothes for the rags he had thought were gone forever; and I just couldn't bear his suffering anymore and had to stop. I read the rest of the plot on wikipedia; and then read the last few chapters, to decide whether the ending was brilliant enough to justify trudging through the novel. When I discovered, instead, that the ending was just long passages of exposition regarding missing members of Oliver's family, I felt satisfied with the decision not to continue. Normally, I don't post a review when I haven't finished the book; but this time I decided to go ahead just to encourage anyone who agrees with me about this book not to give up on Dickens altogether: I can recommend Hard Times and Great Expectations, and will give the remainder of the oeuvre a try.Side note: Perhaps if I had read this with my eyeballs, instead of by audiobook, I would have been able to finish it; since I could have read it very quickly. But by audiobook, you are forced to completely digest each sentence.

[bookwyrmm_1 · Rating: 2 out of 5 stars]

I am not a big fan of Dickens, and Oliver Twist did nothing to persuade me. After the first third, the story began winding here and there (it was a serial after all), and I just lost the plot, especially as more and more characters were introduced.

[jerhogan · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Not one of Dicken's stronger novels in my opinion. The ending is pat. However its a pleasant enough light read despite the poverty portrayed.