Beware of Pickpockets
Neither did Bleibtreu approve of Dickens'
style as a whole. He could explain the
enormous initial success of Pickwick only
by arguing that the reading public must ha
ve been singularly uncritical to take plea
sure in the 'obvious, slapstick humour
which makes no intellectual claims on the
reader'.
Bleibtreu's criticism of Dickens' sentimen
tality is far less surprising, for the emotio
nal response of mid-nineteenth-century
readers is still puzzling. It is therefore
easy to understand Bleibtreu's irritation
over Dickens' 'dangerous habit of turning
on the tap, usually so clumsily that one
can see the stage props being moved'.
Summing up Bleibtreu thought that Dic
kens, owing to his 'subjective, lyrical
nature' 'conjured up a spurious romanti
cism from the appearances of life'. Fur
thermore, the critic accuses Dickens of
deliberate calculation: 'He mingled hu
mour and sentimentality with one eye al
ways on business.'
Bleibtreu, unable to deny Dickens' obvious
popularity, sought to explain it in terms of
public stupidity: 'He could not be anything
but successful with a public so unencumbe
red by any intellectual gifts.' The critic
found it galling that 'even today they
worship him as a man of the people and
praise his unreadable, old-fashioned style'.
In fact, according to Bleibtreu, Dickens'
worldwide fame was 'already showing
signs of ebbing': 'The true English intel
lectual has long since given up reading his
books.' With obvious satisfaction Bleibtreu
speaks of a similar development in Germa
ny: 'Of late Dickens' popularity has wa
ned, and his works are gathering dust in
old lending libraries.'
Bleibtreu flatly refused to believe that
Dickens had 'any permanent claim to
fame'; his works are unacceptable to those
of finer tastes'. Compared with the 'artisti
cally well-rounded works of Zola and the
15
