Dickens Sets

Basically, Dickens I, II & III are comprised of 16 volumes - the 15 novels plus 'Christmas Books'.

However, The Dickens Encyclopedia by Arthur L. Hayward was published as an afterthought to complete Dickens I (i.e., a seventeenth volume in the green spined binding) in 1989. Dickens I contains illustrations by Charles Keeping, billed as the first artist ever to have illustrated all the novels. This is just about true, although Harry Furniss illustrated all of them except Hard Times and the unfinished Edwin Drood in the Charles Dickens Library Edition of 1910 (not Folio, of course).

Dickens II reprints all of Dickens I, except the Encyclopedia, in the cream binding. The title pages were apparently reset, but with the same wording. The Encyclopedia seems never to have been reprinted. Five novels from Dickens II were also issued together as a slipcased set in 1994: Bleak House, Hard Times, Martin Chuzzlewit, Nicholas Nickleby, and The Old Curiosity Shop.

Dickens III, which began publication in 2004, has the original illustrations, as per the Nonesuch Edition it's based on which used the respective plates (bought from Chapman and Hall).

As far as I know (I don't have any of them myself), Dickens IV (not yet complete - maybe not intended to be) is a reprint of Dickens III in new bindings.

>3 boldface:. You are correct boldface, Dickens IV is a reprint of III but with new bindings. I contacted FS whether they plan on publishing all 16 vols, and they replied yes.

I've the 17 volumes of the Dickens I and I can heartily recommend them, for their handy reading size but especially for the appealing aesthetic of different colour boards for each volume (bright red of course for the Christmas Books volume!) and copious beautiful line illustrations by Keeping. The original Folio Jane Austen complete set of seven volumes was similarly bound with different colour boards but later sets sadly gave over to a uniform colour, presumably an austerity measure!

> 3
"Harry Furniss illustrated all of them except Hard Times in the Charles Dickens Library Edition of 1910"

How odd - and how infuriating for completists! He lived into the 1920s so it can't have been Death who tapped him on the shoulder and said "Empty your drawers, sonny, you're being let go."

He's one of my favourite illustrators/caricaturists: all that Irish exuberance and a wonderful control of line:


Having said that, the only examples of his Dickens work I've found on the net are disappointing - uncharacteristically skimpy.

>7 featherwate: Wonderful illustration!

>8 cronshaw: And timeless. Today it might be captioned:

Parcelling up a Folio Society LE, the online bookseller wonders what he can do to improve his feedback ratings.

> 7

I've just checked, and I see that Furniss did actually supply a frontispiece (of Gradgrind) to Hard Times, but that's all for that novel. So, technically, he did illustrate all the novels before Keeping, but not quite as extensively. However, he did around 30 on average for each of the other novels and also did illustrations for Sketches by Boz, Christmas Books, Christmas Stories, etc. which are all included in the 18-volume set. He contributed 500 plates in all. Volume 17 is a survey of all the original illustrators with 600 examples and volume 18 is a Companion with synopses, character resumes, etc. I just picked up a set for the bargain price of £35!

Is that the drawing that got him sacked from Punch? The potted biography I read online says he sold a drawing to Pear's Soap for advertising purposes while still contracted to Punch.

>5 EclecticIndulgence: "Is the original illustrator George Cruikshank or Phiz?"

There are actually far more than those two. See the following for an overview:

http://charlesdickenspage.com/illustrations.html

10 > There seem to be two versions of the break: the other is that they sold the copyright and he walked out. In one way this seems more plausible: he had drawn the cartoon in 1884, four years after joining Punch. If he was on the staff, rather than submitting from outside, wouldn't the copyright have been theirs to sell? His wallking out may have been understandable pique at not being offered any share in the sale.
His original cartoon had underlined that it was a parody of the Pears campaign by surrounding the tramp with pin-up pictures of celebrities like Langtry and Patti who were already endorsing the soap; these were edited out of the final poster, which was also had colour added.
Using the cartoon was a brilliant stroke on the part of the Pears chairman, Thomas J Barratt, but then he was an advertising genius, probably unmatched until Bewitched's Darrin Stephens burst on the scene (with a little help from his wife). (A dated reference, I know, but I'm too old to have caught up with Mad Men.)

> 12

Thanks for the info. Your scenario, I agree, sounds plausible.

>9 featherwate: lol!

>4 brother_salvatore:
Thanks for the confirmation about a complete "Dickens IV".

>3 boldface:

Folio 60 notes that all 15 of the Dickens were published in five three-volume sets in the Dickens II binding. I have only ever seen the one with David Copperfield/ Pickwick Papers/ Great Expectations/ Oliver Twist/ A Tale of Two Cities (FS 60 771). Have you actually seen/got a copy of the second set Bleak House/ Hard Times/ Martin Chuzzlewit/ Nicholas Nickleby/ The Old Curiosity Shop (FS60 799). I am trying to find someone who can confirm that this set or the third one (FS60 808) actually exists.

Regards

>4 brother_salvatore: and 15
Visited the members room earlier this week. I was told that it was highly unlikely that they would complete "Dickens IV". Have to say that, having examined a couple of volumes, I didn't like the typeface or spacing used - the former was too bold/black for my taste and the spacing too cramped. I remain an aficionado of Dickens II. (It was a very useful visit, resolving a number of questions for me as to what I want to buy and what I do not).

>17 Willoyd: I got a different answer when I visited the members room a couple of weeks ago. They said that there were no plans to add further volumes in the coming membership year, but it is possible they would publish more after that. Bucking the trend, I prefer Dickens IV to Dickens II and on the strength of the possibility of the set being completed, I bought all seven current volumes. Much as I really like the Keeping illustrations, I want a set with the originals, and Dickens III is just too expensive on the secondary market.

>17 Willoyd:. Well, that just sucks rocks! I only decided to buy the current editions with the expectation of a complete set. I held off, until they told me they were planning on it. Guess minds got changed.

>17 Willoyd: Any other interesting news from the members' room? Any sign of the renewal volume for the upcoming membership year?

>18 Conte_Mosca: Glad to hear another answer. Sounds like FS quirkiness is afoot on who knows what and when. I'm more than willing to wait if they complete the set.

>20 brother_salvatore: It took 4-5 years to publish Dickens III so I can wait. Originally Dickens IV was only planned as a selection of 5, and subsequently 2 were added (after I had been told there were no plans to publish any more). I suspect they will publish more, and if they do a few more, they may as well complete the set. But I also suspect that FS's plans will ultimately be determine by the demand for those volumes already out there. So in that respect, you and I at least are encouraging them to press on with the full set :-)

>20 brother_salvatore: Sorry, not a lot otherwise. Partly my fault - I was too interested in getting a look at current publications, and which ones I was interested in for the sale (and beyond), as quite a few depended for me on what the internals looked like, and only had a limited time before train needed catching. (Saw enough to convince me to buy the Katherine Briggs sets though!).

It only seems sensible to publish the rest of Dickens IV due the 200th anniversary this year. Dickens III aren't available and it would be unwise not to have any Dickens' volume available. And the binding is really beautiful. I would appreciate some pictures if any member here has the time and I'm not overly bothering his or her reading :-)

>20 brother_salvatore:, I am going to the members room on Tuesday to pick up a few sale items I ordered. I will see what news I can pick up, but if experience is anything to go by, they will keep the new publications close to their chests except for what has already been publicly released via the newsletter.

Well it looks as though I can have my cake and eat it after all. Having started collecting Dickens IV for the original illustrations over Keeping's, I have just picked up an almost full set of Dickens I (13 volumes) for £67 at a secondhand bookshop this lunchtime. And as luck would have it, of the three missing novels, two are ones I have in my Dickens IV collection, which will keep me happy until I can find the final three volumes to complete the set!

With all that Dickens talk I just wanted to share this with you by Tom Gauld:

>26 ironjaw: Sign Tom up to illustrate an updated "Readings from Dickens"! They can be the new chapter headings. Easy to fill each chapter except perhaps for Steampunk Dickens. That one might be a challenge!

>29 EclecticIndulgence:

No, I'm afraid it isn't. You can find it in the Oxford Illustrated Dickens series and in some older collected editions. Often, you can get hold of very nice odd volumes of collected editions quite cheaply. Sometimes it's bound up with one or other of the novels.

RE 16 I have the II set bought at the time they were published. They are all in individual slipcases except the 5 you mention.

Regarding the differences between the two Folio Nonesuch productions (Eclectic's Dickens III and IV above), in addition to the binding materials and paper, I discovered today that D.III are actually 3/4" taller than D.IV - so Dickens IV is the slightly 'handier' version!

>1 EclecticIndulgence: Incidentally Eclectic, the dates for Dickens III are 2004-2007.

>34 EclecticIndulgence: "In addition, the cream is easy to dirty so Dickens III is probably not the most resilient collection"

I think you mean Dickens II! It's all very confusing, I know! You're quite right, though, the cream covers are susceptible to soiling and the red labels scratch easily. In fact, it's not easy to find second-hand copies in pristine condition.

>36 EclecticIndulgence: Dickens III-and-a-I/II, perhaps? Which Dickens have you enjoyed most so far, Chris? I've read Dombey & Son and Pickwick Papers this past year (I enjoyed both, preferred D&S) and am soon to embark upon either Oliver Twist or Chuzzlewit.

>37 cronshaw:

Oliver Twist is very good; I'm currently reading my copy from Dickens II.

>37 cronshaw: I find Oliver Twist good, but not great. You can tell it's his first book.

Oliver is his first book? I thought Sketches then Pickwick, could be wrong.

>41 BINDINGSTHATLAST:

You're quite right. Oliver is second, my mistake. Point stands, though. I don't think it's as well done as much of his later work. (Though, it's still good. "Bad" Dickens, in my experience, is still better than most other things.)

The chronological order of Dickens' novels (gratefully lifted from www.victorianweb.org):

(1) Pickwick Papers — Monthly numbers, April 1836 to November 1837

(2) Oliver Twist — Monthly serial in Bentley's Miscellany February 1837 to April 1839 (twenty-four instalments)

(3) Nicholas Nickleby — Monthly numbers, April 1838 to October 1839

(4) The Old Curiosity Shop — Weekly serial in Master Humphrey's Clock, 25th April 1840, to 6th February 6 1841

(5) Barnaby Rudge — Weekly serial in Master Humphrey's Clock, 13th February 1841, to 27th November 1841

(6) Martin Chuzzlewit — Monthly numbers, January 1843 to July 1844

(7) Dombey and Son — Monthly numbers, October 1846 to April 1848

(8) David Copperfield — Monthly numbers, May 1849 to November 1850

(9) Bleak House — Monthly numbers, March 1852 to September 1853

(10) Hard Times — Weekly serial in Household Words, 1st April 1854 to 12th August 1854

(11) Little Dorrit — Monthly numbers, December 1855 to June I857

(12) A Tale of Two Cities — Weekly serial in All the Year Round, April 30, 1859, to November 26, 1859

(13) Great Expectations — Weekly serial in All the Year Round, 1st December 1860 to 3rd August 1861

(14) Our Mutual Friend — Monthly numbers, May 1864 to November 1865

(15) The Mystery of Edwin Drood — Monthly numbers, April 1870 to September 1870 (six of twelve numbers completed)

Has any Devotee read the last, incomplete novel? Is it a satisfying read though only half-completed?

>43 cronshaw: Drood is indeed a satisfying read - fascinating plot/characters, Dickens at the height of his powers in the descriptive passages - but it is also frustrating when it ends with so many threads up in the air.

In his biography of Dickens, John Forster says that Dickens told him how the book ends, but some people choose not to believe Forster's explanation (too obvious), or believe that Dickens might have changed his mind while writing, for example. There have been a few attempts to complete the book - I can recommend Leon Garfield's enjoyable attempt (faithful to the Forster version of events), though I think it is out of print.

Interesting that you preferred Dombey and Son to Pickwick. I think Pickwick is one of Dickens' best - full of joy, light and laughter compared to the later, much darker novels. I find Dombey is Dickens' weakest novel (though the great man regarded it highly himself) - too much melodrama, and the change in Paul Dombey at the end of the novel is unbelievable!

>44 Rembetis: Thanks, I look forward now to reading Drood some day!

I agree that the ending of D&S is disappointing, with Dombey's rehabilitation requiring some considerable suspension of disbelief. As the contemporary critic Hippolyte Taine noted, the ending 'spoils a fine novel'. Nonetheless, I thoroughly enjoyed Dickens' rich description of industrialization and urban change, particularly the development and impact of the Railway.

I very much enjoyed the light-hearted adventures of Pickwick Papers, particularly after wonderful Sam Weller joined the fray, I simply enjoyed the language, imagery and characters of Dombey even more. Who could not love reading about the deliciously devious and decrepit Mrs Skewson, the sycophantic feline Carker, and the continually confused yet cheerful Captain Cuttle! Dickens' use of the river and sea as symbols of life and death I found beautifully evocative, as was his empathetic child's point of view narration for Little Paul's decline. The Thunderbolt chapter is I think the most climactic chapter of any novel I've ever read, with the atmospheric tension building imperceptibly from the specific opposition of Mr and Mrs Dombey to generalize into a stunning denunciation of society as a whole, with explosive apocalyptic tone and sustained metaphor warning contemporary readers of the moral hazard of ignoring those in want - I loved it, so forgive him the weak ending!

Dombey repented. Even real, live people sometimes repent.

>46 cpg: Point taken! But, for me, whilst, for example, Scrooge's total change in character in 'A Christmas Carol' is totally believable, perhaps because Dickens describes so powerfully why Scrooge changed his mind, I don't think Dickens adequately explained or prepared the ground for Paul Dombey's volte face. The novel also suffers from poor characterisation of Edith Dombey, Mrs Brown and Alice. However, I am with 'Jason461' (post 42 above) that ' "Bad" Dickens, in my experience, is still better than most other things '! I didn't mean to denigrate Dickens, I am a huge admirer of his work.

>45 cronshaw: Totally agree with what you eloquently say about the positive aspects of Dombey. I also thought that Miss Tox and Mr Toots were great fun.

>48 EclecticIndulgence:

Just one correction to your original post: Dickens III is quarter leather with cloth sides, not full leather.

And the race is on for the new set after the publication of Great Expectations

>50 ironjaw:

I'm sure this is unnecessary, so soon after the last edition. So much more to publish than another Dickens set. (For the record, I love Dickens)

I haven't liked ANY of the FS Dickens sets. The only design that is not plain ugly is the Nonesuch style - and if I want that style surely I should go Nonesuch.

>53 InVitrio:

If you mean the 1930s originals, that's fine if you can afford them. There are seven sets currently available on Abe, ranging in asking price from (in round figures) £5750 ($7500) to £11500 ($15000).

A set is available at PBA galleries for the 6/14 auction. Current absentee bid is $2250 for 25 volumes plus some extras.

I have alotta fun looking through, and very occasionally bidding, on books at PBA. The Dickens can be viewed in the 'fine press' category, where other quite wonderful books are pictured and described. I imagine it might be fantastic to live near San Francisco and be able to personally handle the books, if that is allowed.

There was a Nonesuch reprint about ten years ago. Can't remember if they did the lot.

This one?

Oh, the welcome I would give those babies...

>58 St._Troy: Which one? The original Nonesuch or the leather-bound FS facsimiles?

If you’re asking me, I was thinking of the FS burgundy ones, but would gladly provide a home for the originals.

>60 St._Troy: Yes, I was, thanks.

Do any here own a set of the original Nonesuch Dickens? I am highly unlikely to ever own such a set, but I did come across one at a book fair 3 1/2 years ago. I didn't really know what I was looking at (learned much online in the following weeks) but could still tell it was special.

I've been to several book fairs since then, hoping to see another, but no dice.

>61 ultrarightist: I do not. I hope to, one day. I do own the leather-bound FS facsimile, and think very highly of it.

Apologies for reviving a somewhat older thread, but it’s my reference for understanding the various editions.

Someone reached out to me with a full set of what I believe are called Dickens II, a full set of 16 books in the cream binding.

Note, I don’t own the set, and I’m not interested in purchasing it, only giving a fair estimate to someone who inherited some books.

>64 U_238:
The FS has produced the following Dickens sets:-

Three incomplete sets 1952-7, 1970, 2015-17.
Comprehensive sets 1981-89, 1994, 2003-7

>64 U_238: If you are looking to evaluate the costs, this is the set I currently completed collecting after spending most of 2019 purchasing them piecemeal online and locally (after initially getting the box set of 5). The box set was $40 and I averaged $18/book for the other 11.