Percy Fitzgerald

“ The curious thing is that hardly a single face of Mr. Pickwick’s corresponds with its fellows, yet all are sufficiently like and recognizable. In the first picture of the club he is a cantankerous, sour, old fellow, but the artist presently mellowed him. The bald, benevolent forehead, the portly little figure, the gaiters, eye-glass and ribbon always put on expressively, seem his likeness. ”

“ Pickwick’s figure as he rises in astonishment. It may be noted what a graceful type of womanhood then prevailed, the face being thrown out by “bands” of hair and ringlets, the large spreading bonnets and white veils. Mary wears an enormous bonnet or hat like her mistress.
“Mr. Sawyer’s Mode of Travelling.” The amazing spirit and movement of this picture cannot be too much praised. The chaise seems whirling along, so that the coach, meeting it, seems embarrassed and striving to get out of the way. The Irish family, struggling to keep up with the chaise, is inimitable. ”

“ There was a new town rising up round the dockyard, as a rival to the old one, and knowing from the sagacity and just observation of human nature, that it is certain if a man hates at all, he will hate his next neighbour, he concluded that this new and rising town could but excite the envy and jealousy of the old. ”

“ Skimpin is the alert, unscrupulous, wide-awake practitioner who “made such a hare” of Mr. Winkle. The composition of this picture is indeed a work of high art.
In “Mr. Pickwick sliding,” how admirably caught is the tone of a genial, frosty day at a country-house, with the animation of the spectators—the charming landscape. In the scene of “Under the Mistletoe” at Manor Farm, the Fat Boy, by some mistake of size, cannot be more than five or six years old, and Tupman is shown on one knee “making up” to one of the young ladies. ”

“ Mr. Pickwick and his friends are stout Germans, dressed in German garments, sitting in German restaurants with long tankards with lids before them. The incidents are made as literal and historical as possible. The difficulty, of course, was that none of their adventures could have occurred in a country like Germany, or if they did, would have become an affair of police. No German could see humour in that. Notwithstanding all this, the true Pickwickian will welcome them as a pleasant contribution to the Pickwickian humour, and no one would have laughed so loudly at them as Boz himself. ”

“ The reign of Pickwick, like that of the sovereign, began some sixty years ago. Let us recall some of these changes.
To begin: We have now no arrest for debt, with the attendant sponging-houses, Cursitor Street, sheriffs’ officers, and bailiffs; and no great Fleet Prison, Marshalsea, or King’s Bench for imprisoning debtors. There are no polling days and hustings, with riotous proceedings, or “hocussing” of voters; and no bribery on a splendid scale.
Drinking and drunkenness in society have quite gone out of fashion. ”

“ A young fellow of four-and-twenty throws off, or rather “rattles off,” in the exuberance of his spirits, a never-flagging series of incidents and characters. The story is read, devoured, absorbed, all over the world, and now, sixty years after its appearance, new and yet newer editions are being issued. All the places alluded to and described in the book have in their turn been lifted into fame, and there are constantly appearing in magazines illustrated articles on “Rochester and Dickens,” “Dickens Land,” “Dickens’ London,” and the rest. ”

“ Why is there no “Pickwick Club” in London? It might be worth trying, and would be more successful than even the Johnson Club. There is surely genuine “stuff” to work on. Our friends in America, who are Pickwickian quand même, have established the “All-Around Dickens Club.” The members seem to be ladies, though there are a number of honorary members of the other sex, which include members p. 86of “Boz’s” own family, with Mr. Kitton, Mr. W. Hughes, Mr. Charles Kent, myself, and some more. The device of the club is “Boz’s” own book-plate, and the “flower” of the club is his favourite geranium. ”

“ Who were Serjeant Snubbin, Skimpin, and Phunkey? No traditions have come to us as to these gentlemen. Skimpin may have been Wilkins, and Snubbin a Serjeant Arabin, a contemporary of Buzfuz. But we are altogether in the dark.
We should have liked also to have some “prehistoric peeps” at the previous biography of Mr. Pickwick before the story began. We have but a couple of indications of his calling: the allusion by Perker at the close of the story—“The agent at Liverpool said he had been obliged to you many times when you were in business.” He was therefore a merchant or in trade. ”

“ The amorous Tupman had scarcely entered the hall of a strange house when he began osculatory attempts on the lips of one of the maids; and when Mr. Pickwick and his friends called on Mr. Winkle, sen., at Birmingham, Bob Sawyer made similar playful efforts—being called an “odous creetur” by the lady. In fact, the custom seemed to be to kiss when and wherever you could conveniently. Getting drunk after any drinking, and at any time of the day, seemed to be common enough. There was a vast amount of open fields, &c., about London which engendered the “Cockney sportsman.” ”

“ The three figures, Pickwick, Wardle, and the postillion, are all altered for the better. In b Mr. Pickwick’s nervousness, as he is extricated from the chaise, is well shown. The postillion becomes a round spirited figure, instead of a mere sketch; Wardle, as in the text, instead of stooping down and merely showing his back, is tramping about gesticulating. A very spirited white horse is introduced with a postillion as spirited; the single chaise in the distance, the horses drawn back, and Jingle stretching out, is admirable. ”

“ He had Perker sitting on the rail, but substituted a standing-up figure, talking—presumably Perker, but taller than that gentleman. In b, Mr. Pickwick’s face expresses astonishment at the disorder; in a he is mildly placid. In b the figure behind Mr. Pickwick is turned into Sam by placing a cockade on his hat. Next to Fizkin is a new portly figure introduced. The figures in the crowd are changed in wholesale fashion, and yet the “root idea” in both is the same. An artist, we fancy, would learn much from these contrasts, seeing how strikingly “Phiz” could shift his characters. ”

“ There is action in all, and each picture tells its own story. To see the merit of this system, we have only to contrast with it such attempts as we find in modern productions, where the artist’s method is to present to us figures grouped together, apparently talking but not acting—such things as we have week by week in Punch. ”

“ As at this time “Boz” drew the essential elements of character instead of the more superficial ones—his later practice—there is not much change to be noted. We have the medical life exhibited by Bob Sawyer and his friends; the legal world in Court and chambers—judges, counsel, and solicitors—are all much as they are now. Sir Frank Lockwood has found this subject large enough for treatment in his little volume, “The Law and Lawyers of Pickwick.” ”

“ I have always fancied that Dowler in “Pickwick” was founded—after this composite principle—on his true-hearted but imperious friend, Forster. Forster was indeed also a perfect reproduction of Dr. Johnson and had the despotic intolerance—in conversation certainly—of that great man. Like him “if his pistol missed fire, he knocked you down with the p. 75butt end of it.” He could be as amiable and tender-hearted as “old Sam” himself. Listening to Dowler at the coach office in Piccadilly we—who knew Forster well—seemed to hear his very voice. ”

“ Now when an illustrator like the late Frederick Barnard came, he drew his Jingle, his Pickwick, Weller, and Winkle, with all their features, in quite a literal and particular fashion—the features were minutely and carefully brought out, with the result that they seem almost strange to us. Nor do they express p. 100the characters. There is an expression, but it seems not the one to which we are accustomed. Mr. Pickwick is generally shown as a rather “cranky” and testy old gentleman in his expressions, whereas the note of all “Phiz’s” faces is a good softness and unctuousness even. ”

“ Sam’s face in b is made much more like the ideal Sam; that in a is grotesque. Perker’s face and attitude are altered in b, where he is made more interrogative. Mr. Pickwick in b is p. 110much more placid and bland than in a, and he carries his hat more jauntily. Top-boots in b are introduced among those which Sam is cleaning. He, oddly, seems to be cleaning a white boot. A capital dog in b is sniffing at Mr. Pickwick’s leg; in a there is a rather unmeaning skulking animal. All the smaller figures are altered. ”

“ In a the signature “Phiz,” “fct.” or “fecit” is on the left, in b it is divided half on each side. The harlequin painting has a full face in a, a side face in b. The face at the apex of the picture has a mouth closed in b, and open in a. There are variations in nearly all the grotesque faces; and in b the faces of Mr. Pickwick and Sam are fuller and more animated. In b the general treatment of the whole is richer.
2. “The Title-page.” In a the sign has Veller, in b Weller. Old Weller’s face in b is more resolved and animated; in a water is flowing from the pail. ”

“ Another startling change is in the matter of duels. The duels in Pickwick come about quite as a matter of course, and as a common social incident. In the “forties” I recall a p. 19military uncle of my own—a gentleman, like uncle Toby—handing his card to some one in a billiard room, with a view to “a meeting.” Dickens’ friend Forster was at one time “going out” with another gentleman. Mr. Lang thinks that duelling was prohibited about 1844, and “Courts of Honour” substituted. ”

“ As all papers connected with the Pickwick era are scarce and meagre—for the reason that no one was then thinking of “Boz”; any that have come down to us are specially interesting. Here are a few “pieces,” which will be welcomed by all Pickwickians. The first is a letter of our author to his publishers.
“Furnival’s Inn,
“Friday Morning.
“Dear Sir,—I am very glad to find I shall have the pleasure of celebrating Mr. Pickwick’s p. 88success with you on Sunday. When you have sufficiently recovered from the fatigues of publication, will you just let me know from your books how we stand. ”

“ Charles Dickens, the younger, got two, I think; Messrs. Agnew the others.
p. 91CONCERNING THE PLATES AND EXTRA PLATES AND “STATES” OF PICKWICK.
It is an interesting question what should be the relation of illustration to the story, and of the artist to the story-teller; and what are the limitations of their respective provinces. Both should work independently of each other; that is, the artist should tell the story from his own point of view—he is not merely to servilely translate the situations into “black and white.” He should be, in fact, what the actor is to a drama. ”

“ Now this somewhat philosophical analysis points to a principle in art illustration which accounts in a great measure for the unsatisfactory results where it is attempted to illustrate familiar works—such as those of Tennyson, Shakespeare, etc. The reader has a fixed idea before him, which he has formed for himself—an indistinct, shapeless one it might be, but still of sufficient outline to be disturbed. ”

“ Very little difference between the plates, save in the spectacles lying on the ground. These are trivialities.
5. “The Sagacious Dog.” b is more heavily shaded, but a is much superior in the dog and face of the sportsman. Trees in b more elaborate.
6. “Dr. Slammer’s Defiance.” The figures on the top of the stairs are much darker and bolder in b. Jingle’s and Tupman’s faces are better in b than in a, and Jingle’s legs are better drawn in b.
7. “The Dying Clown.” A most dramatic and tragic conception, which shows that Seymour would have been invaluable later on for Dickens’ more serious work. ”

“ The figures of both are worth comparing.
“The Double-bedded Room.” In b the lady’s face is refined, and made less of the “nut-cracker” type. The comb is removed, her feet are separated, and the figure becomes not ungraceful. A white night-gown in b is introduced; in a it is her day-gown, and dark; the back of the chair in b is treated more ornamentally; in a a plain frilled nightcap is hung on the chair, changed in b to a more grotesque and “Gamp-like” headgear. Nothing can be better in a than the effect of light from the rushlight on the floor. ”