Shall we read "Great Expectations"?

[Holbytla]

No Dora type women in it either.

Blasphemers !!!

If you look upon Dora as a one dimensional dumb blond type, then you have missed the entire purpose and depth of that character.

She was what she was and to try and change what she was would only suffice in breaking her. I.E. Davy's mother.

You leave sweet little Dora alone.

Back to trollopes and whatevers.

[Impenitent]

So we're going to do it?! The Warden?! If that's the case, I'll go get it straight after work (or order it, if it's not on the shelves).

Yes? Yes?!

(I feel like an over-eager puppy being offered a walk...)

[Cerin]

Yes, Yes, The Warden!

But you must wait for me to finish this book first!



It's nice to see you, Holby! I'm sure you would be defending Dora even if she weren't blonde.

[Primula Baggins]

I always thought of Dora as brunette. . . . "Oh, Doady!" <lays flowers against little dimpled chin>

[Cerin]

Well.

The identity of the benefactor has been revealed.

I feel rather stunned by the turn of events.

It was so easy to assume it was Miss Havisham, that I never even questioned the obvious. Even though it never really made sense that an apparent act of generosity would proceed from such a dark and twisted heart. Unless, of course, one had assumed that Miss Havisham was certain of the ill effects such a change of fortune would produce in Pip's life, in which case it would have been considered an act of malice, and so, in character.

What an odd thing -- the eager affections of the convict next to Pip's revulsion. The naive hope that Pip might have guessed the truth, oblivious of the looming shadow of the counterfeit that so completely held all his thought and attention (and mine). There is something heartbreaking here, but what? That one simple expression of innocent kindness should have had such an effect on a life? That the affection born of that kindness, set beside the affection born of hateful manipulation leaves the wrong one despised?

I'm not sure I'm understanding this correctly:

But sharpest and deepest pain of all -- it was for the convict, guilty of I knew not what crimes, and liable to be taken out of those rooms where I sat thinking, and hanged at the Old Baley door, that I had deserted Joe.

I would not have gone back to Joe now, I would not have gone back to Biddy now, for any consideration: simply, I suppose, because my sense of my own worthless conduct to them was greater than every consideration. No wisdom on earth could have given me the comfort that I should have derived from their simplicity and fidelity; but I could never, never undo what I had done.

Why should it make such a difference to a self-assessment of Pip's conduct, to know where the money came from?

Is Pip saying that his desertion of Joe was bad not because it was a desertion of Joe, but because the money was from the convict? Is he saying that had the money come from Miss Havisham as he supposed, then his (Pip's) conduct would not be at fault? That's how I read it -- that Pip thinks it was ok to desert Joe for Miss Havisham (and Estella), but not for the convict. If so, it seems to me to be an expression of the same poisonous thinking inspired by Estella and cultivated by the money.

Other developments in this section were the terrible scene at Satis between Miss Havisham and Estella, where Miss Havisham sees a demonstration of the quality of her handiwork. It was the first time I wondered about Estella's parentage, and how such an inappropriate guardian could have gotten her hands on a child. But I imagine there were not such protections as there are today of the welfare of children.

There was also clarification for me of Estella's feelings for Pip, when she said that he was the only one she did not manipulate. So she evidently values or regards him in a way in which she does not value or regard other men.

And finally I must quote this for sheer delight, from the tea at the Wemmick domicile:

We ate the whole of the toast, and drank tea in proportion, and it was delightful to see how warm and greasy we all got after it. The Aged, especially, might have passed for some clean old chief of a savage tribe, just oiled.

edit for numerous grammatical errors

[vison]

Oh, how I love the Aged. I love Mr. Wemmick, too! What a great character he is. And there is more good stuff to come, je vous assure.

Pip despises himself very much. But part of the problem is that we, with our modern minds, have a hard time wrapping our thoughts around the veneration of "ladies and gentlemen" of those days. Pip is as 'guilty' of it as anyone of that era. Dickens was too, although he would deny it.

At any rate, you are right about Pip, to a degree. But don't forget, he's not done yet.

[Cerin]

I'm to the point where Pip's 'uncle' has been relocated after Wemmick's hints of danger.

- Estella has chosen to marry a stupid oaf because, knowing she cannot love, she thinks that would be less hurtful to a stupid oaf than to someone of more sincere sensibilities. That seems rather, well, loving to me.

- Miss Havisham seems to be genuinely remorseful about Pip loving Estella.

- It hadn't occurred to me that Miss Havisham was willfully playing Pip along in his thinking she was his benefactor, but I see she did so to gall those parasitic relatives of hers.

- In a peculiar twist of fate, it seems Miss Havisham's jilter was the former partner of Pip's convict's former partner, the man Magwitch now regards with such enmity! So Pip is tied to Miss Havisham in another roundabout way, besides through his own history. And by coincidence, Jaggers is attorney to both Miss Havisham and Magwitch.

- I still can't relate to the love of Pip for Estella; Wemmick's tender care of the Aged P., Joe's tender affection for Pip, and Herbert and Pip's friendship are more familiar versions of love to me (and so perhaps that is why they seem more genuine).

- I thought Pip demonstrated excellent character in his first meeting with Jaggers after learning the truth.

- Pip feels a heightened sense of revulsion whenever Magwitch displays affection for him; I feel I'm not quite understanding this dynamic.

- Pip had no problem accepting largess when he thought it came from Miss Havisham, but he feels he can't accept it from the convict. Is this because he mistakenly thinks the gains are ill gotten? Or because the convict is such a lowly person with a dishonorable past? I suppose the latter. I notice Magwitch has several times made a point of saying he paid his debt (did the time for his crime), and the money seems to have been made legitimately.

[truehobbit]

Cerin, I was very interested to read you didn't realise who the benefactor was before it was revealed.

I'd seen the movie a very long time ago, so I've known since then.

So, it's interesting to see just how well Dickens twists his plots. I would have expected readers would guess as much, but when you already know the plot before you read the book, there's no telling what you might have noticed at what point. I wonder whether a reader who's familiar with other Dickens novels would have guessed, though, as it's a rather typical turn of plot.

Why should it make such a difference to a self-assessment of Pip's conduct, to know where the money came from?

I think up to now, Pip had been able to tell himself that leaving Joe was following a path in life that would lead him to great things. Up till now he thought he had great expectations. He thought he was on the way to becoming a gentleman.
All this would seem to him at this point to justify leaving his old life behind.

But finding it's 'dirty' money, he believes he's not on the way to greatness. He had become ashamed of Joe, but being linked to the convict is even greater shame for him. So, his path, he now finds, has not only not led up, but even led downwards.

[Túrin Turambar]

Estella has chosen to marry a stupid oaf because, knowing she cannot love, she thinks that would be less hurtful to a stupid oaf than to someone of more sincere sensibilities. That seems rather, well, loving to me.

I never really understood why Estella married what’s his name (Bentley? It’s been a while). Why put yourself through being married to a stupid and abusive husband? It was obviously part of Miss Havisham’s plan (break all the other young suitors’ hearts) but it seems weird that Estella went along with it. Was she that well conditioned?

Miss Havisham seems to be genuinely remorseful about Pip loving Estella.

Yes, I found that to be an excellent twist. Miss Havisham finally realizes at the end that she’s achieved nothing.

I still can't relate to the love of Pip for Estella

Interesting! I’ve actually found it to be the single most powerful thing in Great Expectations, and possibly the most intense plot Dickens ever wrote. I can almost feel Pip’s years of pain myself.

Pip feels a heightened sense of revulsion whenever Magwitch displays affection for him; I feel I'm not quite understanding this dynamic.

It’s curious, isn’t it? Might be related to Pip’s first impressions of the convict (which couldn’t have been good). I think that it has something to do with simple fear, as well – Magwitch is a hunted man (?), and being with him can’t be good.

[Cerin]

But finding it's 'dirty' money, he believes he's not on the way to greatness. He had become ashamed of Joe, but being linked to the convict is even greater shame for him. So, his path, he now finds, has not only not led up, but even led downwards.

Thanks, hobby!

I think I'd not been viewing the story at all from Pip's perspective, but with a rather simplistic idealism. I think of the convict as reformed by love, that is, the kindness shown by Pip, and haven't been thinking of the money as 'dirty', since he seems to have come by it honestly (inspired all the while by thoughts of Pip to heights he mightn't have reached otherwise). I'm finding the convict's affection for Pip ('dear boy') to be very touching, while it's a source of revulsion to Pip. It's not a realistic view at all, I realize. Added to that, I thought of all the manipulative cruelty and meanness of Miss Havisham, and thought that that would have been the really tainted money, there being no love motivating the bestowing of it.

Yes, Pip was ashamed of his association with good, honest Joe. I can certainly see how being linked to a convict, someone with a dishonorable background, would be seen as a step down from that.

It was obviously part of Miss Havisham’s plan (break all the other young suitors’ hearts) but it seems weird that Estella went along with it. Was she that well conditioned?

Hi, LordM!

Estella insisted to Pip at their last meeting that marrying Drummle was her idea, not Miss Havisham's. I suppose remaining single wasn't really an option for women in those days(?), so she thought she might as well marry someone rich, who did not have the capacity to be hurt by her inability to love. She certainly is an odd case.

Yes, I found that to be an excellent twist. Miss Havisham finally realizes at the end that she’s achieved nothing.

I guess I thought more ill of her than was warranted, because I thought that end (a man made miserable through unrequited love) would have been her great triumph. But it seems that witnessing Pip's emotional declaration of despairing love awoke an empathy within her. She saw him (I conjecture) as another person hurt as she'd been hurt, rather than as representing the jilted lover upon whom she had finally wrought revenge.

Interesting! I’ve actually found it to be the single most powerful thing in Great Expectations, and possibly the most intense plot Dickens ever wrote. I can almost feel Pip’s years of pain myself.

I guess I have a suspicion of this kind of extravagant, romantic love, especially when it seems so baseless. I mean, what was it based on in Pip's case? Simply appearance? What was it in Estella that he was loving all those years? Wasn't it actually more an idea she represented to him that he was in love with -- beauty, refinement, highness as opposed to his coarseness and simplicity?

Don't get me wrong, I understand infatuation; I understand falling in love with someone because they're beautiful. But I don't trust that as a basis for lasting love. Particularly when never fed by reciprocated feeling, or kindness, or meaningful interaction? This is why I said earlier that it seems more like an obsession to me. Especially when compared to what seem like the genuine loves in this book. Why, one scene with Wemmick and the Aged P. contains more love for me, than all of Pip's years of longing. Perhaps it comes down to not having enough words in this language to denote the various kinds of love?

Also, I noted two seemingly contradictory declarations in this section. The first is a narrative statement made as Pip approached Satis for the meeting with Estella and Miss Havisham. These have had an air of the retrospective, and so seem to reflect the wisdom of hindsight, and I did think this a correct statement. And if it were really love, how could it have been better never to have known it? (bold added):

Too heavily out of sorts to care much at the time whether it were he or no, or after all to touch the breakfast, I washed the weather and the journey from my face and hands, and went out to the memorable old house that it would have been so much the better for me never to have entered, never to have seen.

The second is the last part of Pip's passionate declaration of love to Estella, which I thought incorrect, i.e., she surely has not done him more good than harm. In fact, what good has she ever done the poor chump?

Estella, to the last hour of my life, you cannot choose but remain part of my character, part of the little good in me, part of the evil. But, in this separation I associate you only with the good, and I will faithfully hold you to that always, for you must have done me far more good than harm, let me feel now what sharp distress I may.

Can genuine love be born of cruelty, scorn, disdain and shame? Because that seems to be what Pip's 'love' sprang from.

Might be related to Pip’s first impressions of the convict (which couldn’t have been good).

Yes, I was thinking of this as well. How awful and scary the convict was, how he threatened a little boy with such dreadful things, scared him right into pilfering from another pretty scary person, putting him in such an awful position for which he felt guilty years afterward because he didn't dare confide the truth to Joe, for yet more fear of being thought less of. So he actually had/has alot to be angry with the convict for; although at the time, in the innocence of his youth, the sweetness of his character came through in spite of all that.

[Túrin Turambar]

Yes, Pip was ashamed of his association with good, honest Joe. I can certainly see how being linked to a convict, someone with a dishonorable background, would be seen as a step down from that.

It’s a character failing of Pip’s at that point to get a bit snobbish about his success. Part of it is insecurity, I think – he is a gentleman, but he is and will always be a blacksmith’s adopted son from a poor rural village.

Yes, I found that to be an excellent twist. Miss Havisham finally realizes at the end that she’s achieved nothing.

I guess I thought more ill of her than was warranted, because I thought that end (a man made miserable through unrequited love) would have been her great triumph. But it seems that witnessing Pip's emotional declaration of despairing love awoke an empathy within her. She saw him (I conjecture) as another person hurt as she'd been hurt, rather than as representing the jilted lover upon whom she had finally wrought revenge.

I’d say that’s an accurate reading.

Interesting! I’ve actually found it to be the single most powerful thing in Great Expectations, and possibly the most intense plot Dickens ever wrote. I can almost feel Pip’s years of pain myself.

I guess I have a suspicion of this kind of extravagant, romantic love, especially when it seems so baseless. I mean, what was it based on in Pip's case? Simply appearance? What was it in Estella that he was loving all those years? Wasn't it actually more an idea she represented to him that he was in love with -- beauty, refinement, highness as opposed to his coarseness and simplicity?

Don't get me wrong, I understand infatuation; I understand falling in love with someone because they're beautiful. But I don't trust that as a basis for lasting love. Particularly when never fed by reciprocated feeling, or kindness, or meaningful interaction? This is why I said earlier that it seems more like an obsession to me.

I’d say that Pip’s feelings for Estella are obsessive, but I’d also say that he does love her.

I think a key point here is that an emotionally healthy person in Pip’s position would not have fallen so hard for Estella. Someone in Pip’s case, who has had a troubled and unstable background combined with a reserved and somewhat intense character, would find it very difficult not to. It seems fairly common, both in literature and real life, for a not openly emotional person who doesn’t have much experience with mutual loving relationships to strongly project all their feelings on someone else, regardless of how much sense it makes.

Also, I noted two seemingly contradictory declarations in this section. The first is a narrative statement made as Pip approached Satis for the meeting with Estella and Miss Havisham. These have had an air of the retrospective, and so seem to reflect the wisdom of hindsight, and I did think this a correct statement. And if it were really love, how could it have been better never to have known it? (bold added):

Too heavily out of sorts to care much at the time whether it were he or no, or after all to touch the breakfast, I washed the weather and the journey from my face and hands, and went out to the memorable old house that it would have been so much the better for me never to have entered, never to have seen.

The second is the last part of Pip's passionate declaration of love to Estella, which I thought incorrect, i.e., she surely has not done him more good than harm. In fact, what good has she ever done the poor chump?

Estella, to the last hour of my life, you cannot choose but remain part of my character, part of the little good in me, part of the evil. But, in this separation I associate you only with the good, and I will faithfully hold you to that always, for you must have done me far more good than harm, let me feel now what sharp distress I may.

Can genuine love be born of cruelty, scorn, disdain and shame? Because that seems to be what Pip's 'love' sprang from.

There’s a strong element of the attraction of the unavailable there. It’s a general human failing.

As to the quotes, I think Pip rationally acknowledges that he’s been deeply hurt by his association with Estella (“the memorable old house that it would have been so much the better for me never to have entered”) but he refuses to see Estella as anything but good (“for you must have done me far more good than harm”). Maybe he is conflicted – his reason can see what his feelings cannot?

[truehobbit]

I’d say that Pip’s feelings for Estella are obsessive, but I’d also say that he does love her.
I think a key point here is that an emotionally healthy person in Pip’s position would not have fallen so hard for Estella. Someone in Pip’s case, who has had a troubled and unstable background combined with a reserved and somewhat intense character, would find it very difficult not to. It seems fairly common, both in literature and real life, for a not openly emotional person who doesn’t have much experience with mutual loving relationships to strongly project all their feelings on someone else, regardless of how much sense it makes.

There’s a strong element of the attraction of the unavailable there. It’s a general human failing.

I think those are excellent points. I have trouble understanding how Pip's love can be so strong, the same way Cerin has, but this makes good sense.

As to the two quotes, I didn't think they were all that contradictory. (Although, again, I think that LordM has some good points.)
I hadn't seen them side by side that way, because they seem to be different thoughts. In the first he is making a general observation on this moment of his past - it would indeed have been better if he'd never entered Satis house, because then he would have continued to live contentedly as a blacksmith.
But in the next he's thinking about Estella's influence on his life. Given that he has entered the house, and that his contentment with Joe has been ruined, maybe you could say that Estella has opened a new world of feeling for him. Sure, she has treated him cruelly, but without her he would not have known all the violent devotion he felt for her. He did learn a few things about human nature from her that he would not have learnt from Joe or Biddy.

And, as LordM said, he still loves her, he wouldn't take the news of her marrying Drummle to dissociate himself from her. I think it's the very realisation of her becoming definitely unattainable for him now that blurs all the pain she caused.

[Cerin]

Good grief! Not only is Jaggers' maid Estella's mother, but Magwitch is her father?!



It's a small world after all .....

[Cerin]

I was staggered into a brief hiatus by the startling revelations of Estella's parentage, but I have now finished the book!

My copy did not contain an appendix with the original ending, so I'm wondering if someone can fill me in on the details of that?

I definitely felt the falseness of Pip's short-lived illusion about marrying Biddy. I think that would have been a disaster.

I thought the important things were satisfyingly resolved, that is, Pip and Magwitch's relationship and Pip and Joe/Biddy's relationship. And Pip seemed to find a more suitable station in life than the forge would have afforded him.

I still don't know quite what to think about Pip's feelings for Estella and vice versa. Perhaps knowing the original ending will help me there. This one seemed a bit too facile. I suppose we can assume that she made her own similarly character-refining life journey; the ending indicated that she had regained some capacity to respond emotionally, and I'm wondering if the original ending contained any similar indication?

I thought the death of Magwitch was very moving.

Well, well. *sigh*



Netflix lists four versions of Great Expectations:

- 1946 version by David Lean
- 1981 BBC miniseries
- 1998 modernized set in New York with Gwyneth Paltrow and Ethan Hawke
- 1998 Masterpiece Theatre with Ioan Gruffudd as Pip

Does anyone know if any of these are faithful/worth seeing?




Onward! I'm going to start a thread for Trollope's The Warden. I found I had a copy of it in the house!

[Holbytla]

I saw the first two on your list and I liked both of them. I can't really say how faithful they were because that is too subjective.
Obviously the mini-series is far more in depth, but there is a sort of quality about the '46 movie that I like. Just keep in mind that it being a '46 movie, the style of the film is similar to that of other movies made in that era.

You say you only have one ending to your copy and you are assuming it is the altered version. I tend to agree with you, but I will refrain from answering until I know for sure which ending you have. There are books published with one or the other or both.

I'll just say the original ending was less of a fairytale ending.

[truehobbit]

There are books published with one or the other or both.

In my appendix (Penguin Classics) it says:

The cancelled ending has only once been prefered to its successor by the editor of a printed text. George Bernard Shaw, with his familiear iconoclasm, used it in a limited edition of thenovel, published in 1937...

Some more from the Penguin appendix (book quotes in italics, Dickens quotes from the book in 'quotes', normal font: my paraphrase):

Dickens changed his original ending on the entreating and reasoning of his friend Bulwer Lytton, who pleaded to unite Pip and Estella.

Some notes of his, planning the plot, survive, which end:

So goes abroad to Herbert (happily married to Clara Barley), and becomes his clerk.
The one good thing he did in his prosperity, the only thing that endures and bears good fruit.

It appears, therefore, that the rewritten ending muffles the moral lesson whcih Dickens wished to draw most forcibly from the tale - that Pip's one unselfish use of his good fortune is the ony source of future lessing to him. As it is, he is now conspicuously rewarded, as well, for his infatuated folly in worshipping Estella.

"The original ending was as follows. There was no Chapter 59. The passage which opens it followed immediately upon Pip's encomium on Herbert at the end of Chapter 58. When Biddy asked him, 'You are sure you don't fret for her?' Pip's original reply was, 'I am sure and certain, Biddy.'"

In the original final paragraph, Pip sees Estella two years later. She is separated from her cruel husband, and after his death married a doctor who had saved her from her husband on one occasion. The doctor has no fortune, so they lived on her fortune. She sees him from her coach, walking with little Pip, and hails him to say hello.

"I was very glad afterwards to have had the interview; for, in her face and in her voice, and in her touch, she gave me the assurance, that suffering had been stronger than Miss Havisham's teaching, and had given her a heart to understand what my heart used to be."

(original end of book)

This is moving in its sobriety...Yet, ..., the present ending is...harmonious with the tone of the rest of the book in its restraint and beauty. Shaw [says]...Chapter 59, ...'though psychologically wrong, is artistically much more congruous than the original. The scene, the hour, the atmosphere, are beautifully touching and exactly right.'

So, your guesses about the original ending were pretty good.

I think the old movie is really good - Alec Guinness plays Herbert. Don't remember how faithful to the book it is, but it's a really good movie.
I'd also recommend the Ethan Hawke version, if only to see how the story is changed - I wouldn't watch it as a film version of the book. It has about as much to do with Dickens's original as "Bridget Jones" with Pride and Prejudice - it's the same story in one way, but a completely different one in another.
Don't know any other version.

Soooo...you promised to discuss my earlier response to the ending.

[Pearly Di]

Netflix lists four versions of Great Expectations:

- 1946 version by David Lean
- 1981 BBC miniseries
- 1998 modernized set in New York with Gwyneth Paltrow and Ethan Hawke
- 1998 Masterpiece Theatre with Ioan Gruffudd as Pip

Does anyone know if any of these are faithful/worth seeing?

Definitely the 1998 version with Ioan Gruffudd.

Ioan is gorgeous.

And it's great casting all round: Bernard Hill (Théoden) plays Magwitch and he is BRILLIANT. Bernard Hill is a fantastic actor. And Charlotte Rampling is excellent as Miss Havisham, as is Justine Waddell as Estella.

It's a very, VERY atmospheric production, all dark and brooding. I liked it a lot. There's one plot change, in the final ep, but I don't think it hurt the story.

Unfortunately, I've never seen the 1946 Lean movie, which is regarded as a classic.

[Cerin]

Thanks, Holby! Yes, I ought to have specified what the ending was!


hobby, thanks for that info!

I was pleased to read this part:

As it is, he is now conspicuously rewarded, as well, for his infatuated folly in worshipping Estella.

It's nice to know I wasn't the only one who has a hard time regarding Pip's feelings and that quasi-relationship as love. It isn't so much that I object to the idea of Pip being rewarded for it, as that it never rang true to me as love, that is, as the basis for a true relationship. So that the altered ending also doesn't ring true for me. The altered ending does admit their relationship as love, which can finally now proceed without the impediments of internal confusion and external circumstance that previously limited it. So I'd say the original ending is much more satisfying to me because of being psychologically correct. Though I'll also agree that the altered ending is very nicely composed in its other aspects.


I'll copy your comments about the book in their entirety from the other page for reference, and then I'll respond to some of your points:

Well, I made it!

I finished Great Expectations, and really enjoyed the story, although I thought the writing was exceedingly clumsy at times. (Maybe I'm just spoiled by the excellent German translations that are around - most of my reading of Dickens has been in German.)

I stand by my view that Dickens is amazingly hard on his hero. I find this quite unusual, compared to all other Dickens novels I've read (ok, that's only around half a dozen, so not all that much to compare to, I guess, but still...). GE presents us with a hero who is flawed to a degree that is rarely found in what I remember of other Dickens stories.
I would venture to say that the fact that other readers here don't find this noticeable may have to do with our being used to finding flawed (and even severely crooked) characters as heroes of modern books.
Some evidence for this interpretation can in my opinion be found in the ending of the story. (Which, btw, contrary to other parts of the story, I found excellently written.)


SPOILER WARNING!



One of the features Dickens is most reputed for is the "poetic justice" of his endings. His characters get "what they deserve", according to Dickens's own and the Victorian ethics of his time. Thus, the convict cannot outlive the end of the story, but is granted a peaceful death as a sign that his "sins" are forgiven (though not forgotten enough to grant him surviving the story).

Pip (and I claim that this is as a result of his failings) has to serve 11 years in solitary exile (so to speak - mitigated however by the presence of friends, who are good people and a good influence on him) to atone for his ingratitude and arrogance, even though he has changed from this by the end of the story and his friends have forgiven him, before he can find his own happy ending.

Joe gets Biddy and Biddy gets Joe - I remember when I saw the movie that I was disappointed with the ending, and in the middle of the book I was again hoping that Pip might wake up and love Biddy and have a happy ending. But getting towards the end of the book, it was clear that Pip's dreams of life with Biddy were delusional - he would not have been able to be happy with her. I was very pleased to see my two favourite characters of the book, Biddy and Joe, united in marriage at the end.
(Yeah, I'm a sucker for the good guys. )

There is, however, one truly amazing end for a character here: Estella.
Are there any other instances in Dickens where a previously married female character gets a second chance at happiness?
I thought it was amazing that her former cruelty is forgiven not only as having been induced by Miss Havisham in the first place, but also as atoned for by her suffering from a brutal husband.
But she is still 'tainted' (in the Victorian view) - and so we don't actually see the happy end. We are only led to expect it by Pip, and are informed that for Estella it will be quite the surprise, too (as we, Victorian readers that we are in Dickens's mind, would find it a bit too much if we heard such a woman actually expected any happiness).

This is an odd story, and there's one more oddity (to me) in the resolution: Herbert getting his living "in the East". Often, emigrating is as much a punishment as a reward in Dickens. Characters who have failed but are forgiven may get a new start abroad (think of Steerpike's victim from David Copperfield - can't remember her name right now - Emily? and her father). Living in hot climes, away from England, is not really the fulfillment of all dreams for a Dickensian hero, I think? So, why does Herbert get sent away?
Sure, we hear he's successful, he lives there (wherever it is) with his wife, he's happy enough (why don't we hear whether he's got kids?) - but still... I liked Herbert, and I find the resolution of this part of the plot, well, not unsatisfactory, but inexplicable.

Some final thoughts to be drawn from these combinations, before I'll leave it at that: Pip and Biddy vs Pip and Estella
Even if Pip had developed a sincere love for Biddy instead of just a desire for ease to fuel his dream of life with her - would she have been suitable?
Had Pip not risen too high in society, so that Dickens was forced to deny any real feelings in him for her?
And that even though he had of course not really risen - all his status, his "expectations" had been void. He had been raised above his station (as contemporary texts would say), but it's no fault of his that it was void. So, how apt that his designated partner should be a woman of no family at all, but genteelly raised - exactly like him, really.

I thought this was an amazing story, much different from other Dickens novels, but the more fascinating for that. And I wonder whether this was a particular phase of Dickens's development as an author or just one tale that is somewhat odder that others.

I stand by my view that Dickens is amazingly hard on his hero. I find this quite unusual, compared to all other Dickens novels I've read (ok, that's only around half a dozen, so not all that much to compare to, I guess, but still...).

This was my first Dickens (yes, it is shocking) so I didn't have any preconceptions. I didn't find the author being so hard on his hero; that is, I thought all that happened could be seen as proceeding naturally from the circumstances and Pip's reactions, which to me were understandably human. I mean, there he was, addled by Estella at a very early age, and he needed some extreme circumstances to free him from the web of those wretched ideas and feelings. He then went on to a satisfactorily prosperous life; and knowing Pip's interactions with the good people he encountered in London, it was easy for me to imagine him in similarly pleasant and sound relationships wherever he went. In fact, I view Pip as having a very good life, given the amount of love, in family and friendships, that he was privileged to experience.

GE presents us with a hero who is flawed to a degree that is rarely found in what I remember of other Dickens stories.

I would venture to say that the fact that other readers here don't find this noticeable may have to do with our being used to finding flawed (and even severely crooked) characters as heroes of modern books.
Some evidence for this interpretation can in my opinion be found in the ending of the story. (Which, btw, contrary to other parts of the story, I found excellently written.)

We really differ in our perspective on Pip. I find Pip to be an uncommonly excellent person, excepting that one huge blindspot that was caused by the infatuation with Estella and which manifested in the snobbery aspects towards his former life. But otherwise -- in those aspects of his character not warped by that desire and Estella's poisoned posture toward the world -- he was a generous and loving person with a great capacity for frank self-examination. I'd say his most serious character flaw was revealed in the readiness and completeness with which he accepted Estella's assessment of him; but that may have had more to do with the timing of their meeting than anything else. I recall from early in the book, how lovely so many of his childhood observances were. They showed a very tender heart, and it was probably that same tenderness that left him so vulnerable to Estella's scorn.

There is, however, one truly amazing end for a character here: Estella.
Are there any other instances in Dickens where a previously married female character gets a second chance at happiness?

Regarding Estella, again I couldn't compare her fate to Dickens' other female characters, so didn't know that she was exceptional in being given a second chance at happiness. But reverting to the original ending (which I can't help regarding as more indicative of the author's true intent and more consistent with the characters as written), she isn't given a second chance at happiness. She never realistically had any chance at happiness, given her upbringing.

I thought it was amazing that her former cruelty is forgiven not only as having been induced by Miss Havisham in the first place, but also as atoned for by her suffering from a brutal husband.
But she is still 'tainted' (in the Victorian view) - and so we don't actually see the happy end. We are only led to expect it by Pip, and are informed that for Estella it will be quite the surprise, too (as we, Victorian readers that we are in Dickens's mind, would find it a bit too much if we heard such a woman actually expected any happiness).

I seem to have a much less harsh view of Estella as well. She was purely a victim in the story, in my view. How could she have been other than she was, given her upbringing? I think only a transcendentally good person could have survived that bizarre upbringing with a whole heart, and in that case, I think she would have had to be the protagonist of the story. Which wouldn't have suited.

So I think her final outcome (speaking of the original ending) is a very good one for her, given the limits the trauma of her upbringing imposed.

Some final thoughts to be drawn from these combinations, before I'll leave it at that: Pip and Biddy vs Pip and Estella
Even if Pip had developed a sincere love for Biddy instead of just a desire for ease to fuel his dream of life with her - would she have been suitable?
Had Pip not risen too high in society, so that Dickens was forced to deny any real feelings in him for her?
And that even though he had of course not really risen - all his status, his "expectations" had been void. He had been raised above his station (as contemporary texts would say), but it's no fault of his that it was void. So, how apt that his designated partner should be a woman of no family at all, but genteelly raised - exactly like him, really.

I think it was Biddy who was too good for Pip, and not vice versa. It seemed to me that Biddy and Joe, from the time of Pip's removal to London, represented a sort of pastoral idylle in contrast to the muck and mire (both physical and of the soul) of the ruined world that London represents. I have no idea if I'm perceiving something the author intended or if this is a recurrent theme in Dickens' writing.

So I'd say, no, Biddy was never suitable as a mate for Pip given her less alloyed, shall we say, character. Though perhaps there were all sorts of class issues insinuated, of which I'm simply oblivious. I think Biddy and Pip were intellectually compatible (which I think is a more important consideration than class), but he just never loved her that way. I was a bit troubled initially by the idea of the intellectual variance between Biddy and Joe (that is, wondering how fulfilling the relationship could be for her), but I managed to just brush those thoughts aside.

And it's great casting all round: Bernard Hill (Théoden) plays Magwitch and he is BRILLIANT. Bernard Hill is a fantastic actor.

BERNARD HILL! Say no more!

[Túrin Turambar]

Quick question –

I picked Great Expectations up again today, and noticed that the characters at the start all speak with ‘w’s instead of ‘v’s (‘conwict’, ‘wittles’, ect). I’m assuming that this is some sort of regional dialect of English? Off the top of my head, Pip grows up in northern Kent or Medway – is that a characteristic of the speech of those parts? (One of my grandfathers was born in Kent and the other in Medway, so it’s a point of interest to me, even outside my general interest in language).

[vison]

I don't know. It might have been an idea of Dickens.