The Mystery of Charles Dickens

Tim O'Neil

Veteran actor Simon Callow gives life to Ackroyd's demanding script, which weaves historical and personal anecdotes in and out of dramatizations from Dickens' oeuvre.

The Mystery of Charles Dickens

Cast: Simon Callow
Network: Kultur
First date: 2005
US Release Date: 2003-11-11
Amazon affiliate

Charles Dickens remains a perennial source of fascination for scholars and layman alike. He is one of the few great authors of the English canon, alongside Jane Austen and second only to Shakespeare, whose oeuvre is widely revisited and enjoyed outside of the context of higher education (my apologies to Messrs. Milton and Chaucer). He also remains one of the few members of said canon whose work retains its value in terms of cultural currency. Many people are familiar with, at least, Great Expectations and A Christmas Carol, which is more than one can say, regardless of any qualitative judgment, for the works of Thackeray or George Elliot.

Dickens was a uniquely significant figure in his own time, a masterful writer whose sphere of influence extended into the broad worlds of politics and theater, as well as the then-nascent field of progressivism. Peter Ackroyd's The Mystery of Charles Dickens, here recorded from a 2000 performance at the Albery Theater in London, touches on all these elements of Dickens' life and art, from his public triumphs (worldwide success and acclaim) to his very private tragedies (a loveless marriage and various infidelities).

Veteran actor Simon Callow gives life to Ackroyd's demanding script, which weaves historical and personal anecdotes in and out of extended dramatizations from Dickens' oeuvre. Ultimately, the production's title is misleading: the combination of Ackroyd's show and Callow's emotive solo performance effectively presents Dickens in as close to a full-blooded representation as is possible for someone almost 150 years dead. The "mystery" of Dickens -- the ineffable, irreducible fabric of his character -- is brought into vivid clarity.

It's a truism that great writers write from experience, and this is especially true for Charles Dickens. The show begins with a look at the author's early life -- his father's imprisonment for penury, along with his subsequent grim labor and hardscrabble youth -- and makes plain the connections an older Dickens would eventually draw between his experiences on the cusp of ruin and creations such as Oliver Twist and Great Expectations. Dickens was a singularly pointed observer, and the show takes pains to illustrate how his variety of experiences, from the slightest prosaic observation to the most profound tragedy, informed his work from the beginning. (This is no exaggeration: his first novel, The Pickwick Papers, was culled almost wholly from his work as a law clerk, just as the Oliver Twist was extensively crafted from his early memories of childhood anguish.)

If Callow's highly charged expressiveness, especially with regard to said childhood anguish, may strike modern viewers as theatrical, it remains true to the spirit of Dickens' own times. Dickens felt a great affinity for the stage, and his work was rife not only with melodrama but also recurring theatrical metaphors. Callow, assuming for a time the spirit of Dickens, presents the spirit of a man who quite literally killed himself for the theater: Dickens' premature death was brought on by an unforgiving schedule of enervating recitals of his own work. Dickens performed the great scenes from his own books just as Callow does here, not with the stoic detachment of a writer speaking his own prose but with an actor's passion for the character's living reality.

In the spirit of Dickens' own theatrical spirit, The Mystery of Charles Dickens is a wonderful performance. It's something of a missed opportunity that the DVD presents nothing in the way of extras, considering the possibilities for educational supplements (the disc doesn't even come with Closed Captioning, which might significantly limit its efficacy as a classroom tool). Regardless of this bare-bones presentation, the disc presents a faithful reproduction of a gratifying theatrical event.

So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.