WeBuzz
Reader discussion: A Tale of Two Cities
Public reader discussion about A Tale of Two Cities in the WeRead Catalog by Charles Dickens.
Which author's work align with this quote? : "The price of loving someone very much is to never love again"
By scenevelvet
I keep seeing that quote credited to Dostoevsky, but I’m not sure it’s really him. I haven’t read enough of his stuff to verify, and from what people discuss, it doesn’t seem to match his beliefs.
If it’s not him, do we know which writer it actually fits best? Honestly, from my limited reading, it kinda gives Emily Brontë vibes, like something she’d write—though we really can’t say for sure since she only published that one novel and we don’t know exactly how she felt about love.
A Tale of Two Cities: Book the Third Chapter One
By BisonPaper5
Okay, Book Three already, but of course it’s gotta be all “in secret” or whatever. 😅
Voting for the next read is open, too.
A few things I’m curious about:
- Charles trudging his way toward Paris—what’s your most annoying travel story?
- Did anyone else get this uneasy feeling while reading? Like, were you worried Charles wouldn’t make it?
- And then Defarge shows back up! I guess he’s really loyal to the people. But still, marrying Lucie Manette and looking after M. Manette doesn’t seem to be enough for him, apparently?
- Anything else you all want to bring up?
Also, that final line… “…in the swell that rose above them.” I’m still trying to picture what they’re even seeing there.
A tale of 2 citys adaptation
By poppy
Since we’re basically at the end of the book, I’ve been thinking about watching the movie version after I read it. I’ve done this with a bunch of the classics and it’s actually been pretty fun. If anyone has recommendations for the best movie adaptations, I’d really appreciate it. Thanks!
A Tale of Two Cities
By tealPath
I just finished *A Tale of Two Cities* and I’m honestly still reeling. The writing is so good it feels unreal, and I did NOT expect to cry that much—like, I rarely cry when I’m reading, but the last few pages absolutely wrecked me. Was anyone else a mess too, or was it just me?
What stuck with me most is the whole idea of sacrifice and what comes after, and especially that ending moment between the two. The way it’s described feels so tender and final at the same time.
I usually pick up Dickens for the really vivid descriptions and the funny bits, but this one had him going way deeper than I expected. Maybe the best thing I’ve ever read? I want to reread it someday, even though it took me a little to really get into it at the start. Still, I’m really glad I pushed through—his writing genuinely feels like art.
Random thoughts about Dickens "A Tale of Two Cities".
By HiddenSeal
Why in the world would Manette and Lucie Darnay take little Lucie along to Paris with them? Don’t they realize France is a pretty dangerous place, and that Revolutionary justice was kind of random anyway? Manette might have thought he was okay there, which makes sense, but Lucie and the child couldn’t really count on being safe with those furious Revolutionaries in charge and the laws changing all over the place. Lucie could maybe want to speak up for Charles too, but what does little Lucie even add? It just seems like putting the kid at needless risk. For me, the child’s safety should come first! Don’t drag her into some unstable country in the middle of a violent uprising. Leave her in good old England, where she’d actually be safe!
And then the ending: yeah, everyone knows Sidney Carton’s famous “It is a far, far better thing that I do…” speech. But before that, it’s a little unclear to me whether, if he could see ahead, he was really thinking the Defarges, John Barsad, the knitting women, and all those “new tyrants” would get what was coming to them at the guillotine. He also seems to imagine the Darnays having a son named after him who’d end up becoming a great lawyer someday. But I’m not totally sure if Dickens is just letting Carton hope that, or if he’s actually confirming those things will happen. Since Dickens wrote it, he could’ve made it go either way.
Is Dickens basically pushing anti-Revolution stuff and pro-British stuff? The book definitely gives off the feeling that England is the better country than France. Like, hey, look at us, we’ve had a constitutional monarchy since 1700! We’re not that unfair old French society where the King could do whatever he wanted and the common people were so miserable they finally snapped. Our King has limits, and Parliament keeps him in line. If the government is bad, we vote them out, so there’s no guillotine and no reason for the poor to butcher the rich in the streets. We even give shelter to French nobles who ran away! That whole French Revolution situation is awful. People of England, don’t copy that. There’s no need to violently smash everything and then try to build a society from nothing. Change things from inside the system for everyone’s good. Rich people aren’t always evil.
I’m also noticing some cool parallels and differences between A Tale of Two Cities and The Count of Monte Cristo. Both have a prisoner, or two, with important papers hidden in their cells that change someone else’s life. Both are set on or around the French Revolution. And both books have someone who is basically consumed by REVENGE.
A Tale of Two Cities absolutely devastated me.
By hidden-goose
The only Dickens I had read before this was Great Expectations, which I liked a lot too, but honestly nothing really got me ready for how amazing A Tale of Two Cities is. I thought the first two-thirds were pretty engaging, even if the slow pace bugged me sometimes — but wow, the last third totally knocked me over. I don’t think an ending has ever hit me that hard before.
Yeah, he can go on a bit, but Dickens is so good at showing emotion. The characters feel really fleshed out, the plot is ridiculously layered, and he makes the pain and brutality of revolution feel so clear. I was honestly tense while reading the climax — the ending of this book is one of the most beautiful, sad, and moving things I’ve ever read, and I really don’t want to forget it.
I’m way too attached to Sydney Carton. I love him so much it’s hard to even put into words. He kind of grabs your heart and then destroys it.
"a tale of two cities" by Charles dickens
By cold_plate33
I read this a little while ago and I really liked it—like, the pacing was great and the whole character growth and arcs just worked really well. The only thing that threw me off was the whole plot with the boss character of Sydney Carton, the big lawyer guy—I can’t even remember his name. At one point he’s basically talking about wanting to marry Lucie Manette and there’s this whole back-and-forth with Sydney about how that would happen. But then Lucie ends up marrying Charles Darnay, and I guess it could have been fine to just sideline him… except he doesn’t come off like the kind of person who would drop it that easily. And it bothered me that we never really see him try anything or even push back. It just felt kinda out of character for him, and it honestly bummed me out. What did you think about that?
How many books do you read at the same time?
By Electric-Clock1998
I usually end up reading a few books at the same time, and I’m honestly terrible at sticking with one until it’s done before I start another. Does anyone else feel that way?
I’m also wondering how everyone keeps track of what they’re reading. Do you ever get stressed out by how many books you still want to get to (and all the authors you haven’t discovered yet), even though time is basically always limited?
I’ve thought about picking a short “main” list for the month—like setting aside the ones I really want to focus on first—to see if that helps.
Right now I’m juggling:
- East of Eden
- Agua Vie
- Deep Work (yeah… definitely not making this easier, ha)
- The Anthropologists
A Tale of Two Cities: Book the Second Chapter Ten
By Soft_Panda6255
Okay, so we’ve jumped ahead and it’s basically right back in England—Charles is tutoring French, everyone seems to respect him, and he’s all caught up with Lucie. I don’t know… it feels a little old-fashioned, but also kind of sweet.
Dr. Manette is doing way better now too, and he still plays that whole “I’m fine, but I’m still dealing with things” vibe really well with Charles.
I’m also side-eyeing the whole set-up where these two men are talking about how to steer and shape a young woman’s feelings. I get it was the time period, but it still doesn’t sit totally right with me.
Charles seems ready to finally come clean about his past, and then Dr. Manette stops him—so what’s the reason there?
And then Charles is back to shoemaking (maybe?), and I’m not sure what we’re supposed to take from that—like a sign of healing, or just more symbolism that I’m not reading quite right?
That last line about him sleeping and the tools being “as usual” kind of sums up the whole calm-but-not-really feeling.
A Tale of Two Cities Final Wrap-Up Discussion
By RainyDelta5
Congrats on getting through the book! Another classic done and dusted. I’ll see you all soon for The Sun Also Rises, starting Monday, 17 June.
Discussion prompts:
- First off, did you like the book? Why or why not?
- Who was your favorite character, and who stood out the most?
- What do you think the main themes were?
- What is Dickens trying to say about revolution, in your opinion?
- Do you enjoy Dickens’s writing? What really stands out to you?
- Would you want to read more Dickens later on?
- Anything else to talk about? Rants welcome!
I’ve never read Dickens before should I start with A Tale of Two Cities or Oliver Twist?
By Early_Plate5379
With everything going on politically right now, I’m finding A Tale of Two Cities really good.
What's a book you had to read in school that you hated? If you have one, what's one you actually liked?
By readernarrow
I’m Gen Z (class of 2021). In middle/high school we did a lot of “modern” reading—stuff like The Hunger Games, Unwind, The Giver, and this random book called Tangerine. We also had some classics in there like Of Mice and Men, A Tale of Two Cities, The Diary of Anne Frank, some Shakespeare, all that. I’m kind of a book nerd already, so most of it was enjoyable, but a few books were honestly a slog.
I’ve been wondering what the usual reading list looked like back in the 80s. I asked my parents what they remember reading, but neither of them really could recall. So I thought I’d ask here and see what everyone else’s school books were like.
And if you didn’t like what you had to read, what would you have picked instead?
Edit: this blew up—thanks to everyone who replied! I haven’t been responding much, but I’m going through a ton of the comments and it’s been interesting hearing everyone’s takes.
A Tale of Two Cities: Book the Third Chapter Fifteen Discussion -
By RapidCrown91
Nice job getting through another big classic! I’ll definitely come back tomorrow for the final wrap-up post and see what everyone thinks.
A couple things I keep going back to: I’m not totally sure how I feel about how it ends with Carton heading toward the guillotine. And that scene with the women knitting and counting heads… it’s honestly chilling, even if it’s part of the “custom” in the moment. Also, the way Carton and the young woman manage to comfort each other right before everything happens felt really heavy—like, in a good way, but still heartbreaking.
And that line about her thinking it might be a long time before she can see her cousin in heaven… I don’t know, I was really wrecked by that. Plus, did anyone else feel good about the little extra details we get about what happens to the characters afterward? And what did you all think about Carton’s final thoughts (and Dickens’ too)?
A tale of two cities. (By Charles Dickens)
By icy_juniper8
My dad got me this when I was like ten, and I really hated it back then. I’m not a native English speaker, so it felt way too confusing to figure out what was even happening.
Then about five years later I tried again and… wow, I’m actually really glad I did. I honestly think it’s one of the best English novels I’ve read.
Spoilers ahead, by the way.
The part that stayed with me most is Sydney Carton. The ending is super tragic, but that’s also why I love it so much. It just feels real—like in real life, you rarely get a happy ending where everyone wins.
I’ve always been stuck on one question: why did Carton step in for Darney? Was it love for Lucie? Maybe. Was he trying to show her he loved her by giving his life? Could be. Or maybe he just loved her so much he couldn’t stand the idea of her being unhappy forever. But then I also wonder if it was partly because he kind of didn’t have much purpose left, and when Lucie married Darney, that last bit of drive just went with it. Like his sacrifice was the only thing he could do to make his life matter, somehow.
The only clear moment where he talks about it is right before he’s executed. A woman prisoner recognizes him and asks if he’s basically giving up his life for Darney, and Carton says something like “and for his wife and his daughter.”
So yeah, I’m curious what other people think about Carton’s motivation for doing all that.
It’s kind of a shame this novel hasn’t been adapted really well on screen. There’s one movie that’s decent, but after that it’s mostly nothing, at least from what I’ve seen. I’m really hoping we get a proper, high-quality movie or even a full TV series version someday.
A Tale of Two Cities, Charles Dickens
By jartiny2002
It just feels like I’m looking at some gorgeous future city and decent people coming up out of the worst of it. Even though there’s fighting and setbacks for a long time, I can almost see the badness of this period—and the one right before it—slowly paying itself off, kind of wearing down as time goes on.
And then there are these pictures in my head of the people I’m giving my life for back in England, the ones I’ll never get to see again. I imagine her with a child on her chest, with my name, and her father older but finally well again, doing his work and at peace. I picture the old friend too, years down the line, managing to leave them better off, then passing quietly.
I also feel like I’ll always have a kind of safe place in their hearts, and even in the hearts of their kids and grandkids. I see her grown old, crying for me on the anniversary. And I see her and her husband, both finished with their lives, laid side by side, and honestly I believe I was just as honored in their souls as they were in mine.
There’s even this vision of the child I’m leaving behind growing into someone who follows the road I once walked, doing it well enough that my name ends up respected again because of him. The ugly stuff from that day disappears, and later he brings his own son here—a kid with my child’s same face I recognize, golden hair—and tells him what happened, kind of tender but shaky.
I don’t know, it feels like the best thing I’m doing is still something I couldn’t even fully see before, and that whatever comes next is going to be a better kind of rest than anything I’ve had.
Is A Tale of Two Cities as hard of a read as the first 30 pages makes it seem?
By brisk-paper2
For some reason I’ve always had a hard time with British stuff. I can do classics just fine usually, and I don’t really struggle with Russians either. Even the heavy, steady accents in *The Grapes of Wrath* went down pretty easily.
But with British writing, the syntax just trips me up. Dickens especially feels like he uses commas nonstop, like he’s trying to confuse you on purpose. Half the time each sentence feels way longer than it should, like it’s carrying an entire paragraph of stuff. On top of that, there are a bunch of words and meanings I don’t know or I just don’t fully get. That’s not something that happens much to me with other classics.
Is this one supposed to be particularly tough? Because right now it’s the first time in a while I’ve actually felt kind of dumb while reading. Still, I’m willing to try more, hoping I’ll eventually adjust to the British sentence style and the extra wordiness.
Am I missing something or is A Tale of Two Cities way overrated?
By cosmos_lantern23956
My dad and brother have been going on about this book for years. I really like Great Expectations and A Christmas Carol, but I’ve tried three times now and just can’t get into it. I’m about 110 pages in, so around 40%, and the writing feels kind of self-indulgent and wandering to me. I can’t really find a plot thread, and the character stuff doesn’t seem to go anywhere because it keeps tossing in new, unrelated people. Am I missing something big here, or have I read enough to know it’s just not for me?
What was the first Charles Dickens book you read? Mine was "A Tale of Two Cities". What did you like about it and what did you dislike about your first Dickens book.
By red1983
What I really liked about *A Tale of Two Cities* was the characters. The DeFarges especially felt super interesting to me. I also liked how it still feels relevant, especially the part where people get punished for crimes they didn’t even do.
I’ve read *A Tale of Two Cities* and *David Copperfield*, and I personally liked *A Tale of Two Cities* way more, but *David Copperfield* was still a good story. Now I’m reading *The Pickwick Papers*—it might be too soon to say if I’m going to enjoy it.
A Tale of Two Cities, Bk. 2, Ch. 3
By noisydog
I’ve got a question I can’t quite figure out. Darnay gets cleared just because he looks too much like Carton—so why wouldn’t that mess things up for Carton as a spy? Is it because Darnay was an expat or something? Also, I’m still trying to get my head around Dickens’ writing style.
A Tale of Two Cities - Renewed Appreciation of a Book I Have a Deep Love/Hate Relationship With
By libraryDragon
I first ran into *A Tale of Two Cities* when I was about 12, but it was the Penguin abridged “junior readers” version, around 400 pages with pictures. I remember the sentences feeling like they just kept going forever and then sort of… ended? Stuff would happen in one paragraph and then get mentioned again later like it wasn’t a big deal, and I’d keep flipping back to double-check I didn’t miss anything.
The descriptions were honestly kind of wild—super detailed, almost like vines. At the time I didn’t really get that those details are doing actual work in the story.
Still, I was hooked by the French parts, especially Madam and Monsieur Defarge and what the poor were dealing with (and all that brutality). That was the part I could understand right away. And maybe that’s even part of why I ended up mixing fiber art and books later when I studied at uni. So yeah, the details annoyed me, but they didn’t stop me.
When I got to the English side, though… Lucie and her whole sickly-sweet vibe with her dad made me want to toss the book. Sydney Carton was more my thing—broody, gloomy, kind of a mess in a way that I actually liked. But what I couldn’t stand was how every guy is basically obsessed with Lucie. Like, come on.
I didn’t finish it back then, and I hit the same frustrations again in AP Lit when we used the old abridged copy.
Now I’m 32 and I’ve been way more into the French Revolution, so I gave it another try. I get it better now—the details don’t annoy me as much anymore. I still like the Defarges more. Lucie still makes me want to throw something at the wall though. She’s just too “perfect,” and yeah, the simp parade is still annoying. Darnay feels like the cool guy and Carton is the other one.
Also, Lucie seems like a contrast to Madame Defarge, but Madame Defarge is way more interesting.
I’ve been reading it a few chapters a day, switching back and forth between the French and English sections, and it’s helped a lot to remember it was published serially (monthly). Every day I find myself actually excited to see what happens next.
Anyway, feel free to talk about anything in *AToTC* here.