
A Tale of Two Cities is a historical novel published in 1859 by Charles Dickens, set in London and Paris before and during the French Revolution. The novel tells the story of the French Doctor Manette, his 18-year-long imprisonment in the Bastille in Paris, and his release to live in London with his daughter Lucie whom he had never met. The story is set against the conditions that led up to the French Revolution and the Reign of Terror. In the Introduction to the Encyclopedia of Adventure Fiction, critic Don D'Ammassa argues that it is an adventure novel because the protagonists are in constant danger of being imprisoned or killed. As Dickens's best-known work of historical fiction, A Tale of Two Cities is said to be one of the best-selling novels of all time. In 2003, the novel was ranked 63rd on the BBC's The Big Read poll. The novel has been adapted for film, television, radio, and the stage, and has continued to influence popular culture.
The concept of DNF (“did not finish”) is pretty familiar to people who read regularly, but three pages seems far too early to make that call. The general rule of thumb I’ve encountered is closer to 100 - 150 pages.
Some of the most memorable works of literature I’ve read are books I didn’t particularly enjoy for the first hundred pages or more. I stuck with them mostly because I deliberately give books time to develop before deciding whether they’re for me.
My favorite example is A Tale of Two Cities. I didn’t enjoy it all that much until Book Three, Chapter 12. From there, it was smooth sailing. It’s now one of my favorite stories I’ve ever read, and I still think about it often, especially that entire final book.
That doesn’t mean every book takes that long for me. There are plenty I enjoy from the very beginning, particularly stories retold from a character’s perspective, adventure stories like Watership Down, and pretty much any Sherlock Holmes novel.
I understand the idea of putting a book down after a few pages if you don’t connect with it, and ultimately everyone should read however they want. But I do think that, by doing so, you risk missing out on some genuinely great books simply because they needed more time to become what made them worth reading.
Side note: My actual criteria for dropping a book are a little different. I tend to stop when reading it gives me a kind of vertigo or that strange feeling where your throat tightens and you start to feel sick.
“Kafka on The Shore”, “Norwegian Wood” - Haruki Murakami
“A Tale of Two Cities” - Dickens
“Count of Monte Cristo” - Alexandre Dumas
LotR, “Hobbit” - Tolkien
“World Atlas of Coffee” - James Hoffmann
“Anathem”, “Diamond Age”, “Termination Shock” - Neal Stephenson
“A Timeless Way of Building” - Christopher Alexander
“Where The Wizards Stay Up Late” - Lyon
“Fahrenheit 451” - Ray Bradbury
“Slaughterhouse V” - Kurt Vonnegut
“Neuromancer”/Sprawl trilogy - William Gibson
Plus an assortment of business, systems thinking, and tech related books that were “fine”, but none that really left me with much to chew on afterwards.
I didn't read it on my own personally, rather, it was read in my eighth grade class from beginning to end. Lots of discussion was had about the foreshadowing and meaning behind Dickens' words. At the time I really didn't appreciate it as much as I should have, but I'm incredibly grateful that my teacher made us read through that.
The Things They Carried by Tim O'Brian was another one read in class that I think helped shape my perspective on the world for the better.
