Next Sunday, March 29th, The Tales of Charles Dickens continue as Masterpiece Classic broadcasts a new adaptation of Charles Dickens novel Little Dorrit on PBS. This new 5 part BBC/PBS miniseries premiered in the UK last fall to much acclaim. It was adapted by veteran classic bonnet drama screenwriter Andrew Davies who has been very generous to Jane Austen fans with his versions of Pride and Prejudice (1995), Emma (1996), Northanger Abbey (2007) and Sense and Sensibility (2008). Little Dorrit is a monumental work by Dickens, and I admire Davies ability to weed through the elaborate plot and whittle it down for a seven and a half hour production.
The large cast of British actors is quite amazing, many of which have stared in previous Jane Austen adaptations; most notably Judy Parfitt as Mrs. Clennam (Lady Catherine de Bourgh in Pride and Prejudice 1980), James Fleet as Frederick Dorrit (John Dashwood in Sense and Sensibility 1995), Ruth Jones as Flora Finching (Bates’ maid in Emma 1996), Jason Watkins (Rev. Clarke in Miss Austen Regrets 2008), Robert Hardy as Tite Barnacle (Sir John Middleton in Sense and Sensibility 1995), Harriet Walter as Mrs. Gowan (Fanny Dashwood in Sense and Sensibility 1995) and last, but not least, Matthew Macfadyen as Arthur Clennam (Fitzwilliam Darcy in Pride and Prejudice 2005). The rest of the British cast has been plucked from costume drama heaven. You will recognize many, but one deserves further acknowledgement for a very minor role that left a lasting impression. Annette Crosbie as Mr. F’s aunt is priceless. She steals every scene.
Dickens dark tale of financial woes in 1820’s England will hit a timely mark as comparisons to our current financial crisis will seem like déjà vu. Sadly, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Written one hundred and fifty years ago, this gripping tale of the evils of temptation and avarice, incarceration and the misery of debt, is also an intimate look at the effects of imprisonment of the soul, and self and social renewal under extreme adversity. As Dickens pen dwells on guilt and misery like no other can, he also offers a thread of humanity and hope which simmers slowing through the romance of the dashing hero Arthur Clennam, sensitively portrayed by Macfadyen, and innocent Amy ‘Little Dorrit’, played by newcomer Claire Foy.
Since Austen’s plots are also all wrapped up in money, or the lack of it, I thought it quite appropriate to gently remind readers that she gave some excellent financial advice in her novels long before Dickens felt compelled to step up onto his social improvement soap box and write this tale in the 1850’s. It appears that we are doomed to repeat ourselves, as well as Dickens society. Here are a few of my favorites.
“Business, you know, may bring money, but friendship hardly ever does.” Mr. John Knightley, Emma
“An annuity is a very serious business; it comes over and over every year, there is no getting rid of it.” Mrs. John Dashwood, Sense and Sensibility
“A large income is the best recipe for happiness I ever heard of.” Mary Crawford, Mansfield Park
“A single woman, with a very narrow income, must be a ridiculous, disagreeable, old maid! The proper sport of boys and girls; but a single woman, of good fortune, is always respectable, and may be as sensible and pleasant as anybody else. Emma Woodhouse, Emma
“But there certainly are not so many men of large fortune in the world as there are pretty women to deserve them.” The Narrator, Mansfield Park
“If this man had not twelve thousand a year, he would be a very stupid fellow.” Edmund Bertram on Mr. Rushworth, Mansfield Park
“There are some circumstances which even women cannot control. Female economy will do a great deal…but it cannot turn a small income into a large one.” Emma Watson, The Watsons
“Money can only give happiness where there is nothing else to give it.” Marianne Dashwood, Sense and Sensibility
Little Dorrit begins with episode one on Sunday, March 29th at 9:00 pm and runs for the next four consecutive Sundays through April 26th (check your local listings). I have the honor of writing about it on the PBS blog Remotely Connected. It’s definitely the costume drama event of the season.
Visit the official PBS Little Dorrit website
Very witty post–loved every bit!
Having seen LD already via the Fangirl Underground *cough*, I will say that it feels like a Law and Order “ripped from the headlines” kind of thing in many ways. I don’t want to give away too much, but it will feel familiar in the light of recent events. Not planned, of course, as it was adapted and filmed prior to these events, but it’s kind of eerie how it all played out.
I will also add that Andy Serkis absolutely steals the show as the oh-so-evil Rigaud. No scenery is left unchewed. He was having way too much fun.
Since Dickens is primarily and comprehensively moral in his larger approach to the writing of his books, financial lessons only come in a subtle fashion in terms of consequences of immoral financial irresponsibility. Advice here is that there is “nothing new under the sun” in the sense that man is always suffering from love of money. However, what you are overlooking, sadly enough, is what Dickens is suggesting here be the response to love of money, which is to NOT love money. That is your financial advise.
The production, cast and acting, as you say, are of great quality. However, the power of the book lies in the moral paradox that Dickens saw in society among the two moral authorities in the book, represented by Mrs. Clemens and Amy. Of course, Mrs. Clemens represents the majority of what is wrong with morality at the time (and now) while Amy Dorrit represents what is right. Dickens rightly divides all characters in the book into two categories along these lines. One represents the wicked Pharisees and all their hypocrisy with their wicked villainous critics. The other represents the New Testament, as mentioned by Amy directly–Jesus, Master teacher, healer, savior from whom she draws all her strength and being for her actions and reactions to her circumstances. It is too bad the the adaption left out the most powerful and moving catalyst of life–God Himself. Maybe Dickens had a revelation of his own that the person who did this adaptation missed. It was clear to me when I read it (page 817 of the 1937 edition).
Hello there!
I can see where you’re coming from about Austen knowing about money. But you should not say that Dickens needs to learn things from Austen, especially when it comes to money!
Dickens comes from a later time period than Austen does, and they were brought up in completely different circumstances. Austen lived somewhat comfortably, while Dickens lived in a Debtor’s Prison for some time! He had to work in a Blacking Factory to gain money! He probably “saw the inside of a pawnbroker’s shop” a few times! Austen did nothing of that. She knew nothing of debtor’s prisons or factories, and God forbid she ever even looked at a pawnbroker shop!!
Do not judge one author’s writing by another. They wrote about what they knew and where they grew up and what they experienced while growing up. Dickens lived in London and around it. Jane Austen elsewhere. (I’m a bit more up to date on Dickens’ history, not Austen’s, so sorry. I can’t remember where she grew up) as well as Bath. Both in somewhat comfort, if I may say so (at least, compared to Dickens’ early life).
Another thing, Dickens was writing about what money does to people, more than about money itself. Have you read the book? What happens to Merdle is all about money! True, he doesn’t go into details about the money Dorrit owes and how much he inherits and everything in between, but it’s not about that. It’s about how the characters deal with their financial problems and the hypocrisy of some compared to the goodness of others.
I love Jane Austen dearly, but when it comes to poverty and money, and the depth of human character, sometimes Dickens tops her. True, he idealized a lot of his characters (aka Amy Dorrit) but sometimes we like to have faith in characters who love goodness and strive to do the right thing.
So, I beseech you, do not compare the two. They both have their own type of writing, and they both are wonderful in their own ways.
Hi K.L.S, , thank you for your thoughtful comments in Dickens’ defense. I agree with everything you say. One should not compare Austen’s life experience with Dickens.
As the title of this post states, “What Little Dorrit Should Have Learned from Jane Austen About Money,” I was inferring that the characters in Little Dorrit could learn something from Jane Austen about finance, not the novels author Charles Dickens.
I appreciate your concern, but I have every respect for Mr. Dickens and his personal family financial struggles as a child and adult. Both Austen and Dickens were troubled by money concerns – but in entirely different ways. I aplogize if you misinterpreted my meaning. It was not meant as a sight to either author.
Cheers, Laurel Ann