Charles Dickens Version
Charles Dickens is the author of the book "A tale of two cities". This book is set during the French Revolution and it
speaks about two different countries: France and England.
speaks about two different countries: France and England.In his story the storming of the Bastille is described as a really violent action. He talks about a mob of people that attacked the Bastille and in his ve
rsion there are lots of prisoners and lots of victims. This version isn't necessarily wrong, even lots of people that lived in those times didn't know at all how it went and they had to rely on what they heard.
rsion there are lots of prisoners and lots of victims. This version isn't necessarily wrong, even lots of people that lived in those times didn't know at all how it went and they had to rely on what they heard. The story that Charles Dickens narrates is partly true but it's a bit different from the truth because it's a historical romance and these types of books always change slightly history to make the story more drammatic.
Charles Dickens knew very well the streets of Paris, infact in his book there are very detailed descriptions of the city. His version of the story is a bit violent because even his father was trapped in prison for many years, for this reason Charles Dickens wanted to show his disappointment in his book.
In his opinion t
he french people that participated to the storming of the Bastille were all heroes. He thought that having the courage to stand up against the french crown even by risking their own lifes made them all heroes.
he french people that participated to the storming of the Bastille were all heroes. He thought that having the courage to stand up against the french crown even by risking their own lifes made them all heroes.Many other people that looked back at the Storming of the Bastille have said that under this point of view Dickens was completely wrong because it was a massacre without anything of heroic.
Mainly this is Charles Dickens version of the Storming of the Bastille and his reasons for writing it like this. He wasn't completely wrong but he didn't have the knowledge of the historians of today and for this reason his version is different from what we study nowadays in schools.
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento