Having the names changed seemed unnecessary. Sure she changed things, but it is historical FICTION, not history. She changed the names because she didn't want to attribute things to Charles Dickens he didn't say, but didn't have that problem with Queen Victoria.

Love at 1st sight ok, but love at 1st sound? Dodo hears his laugh and unseen everything changes. Good grief, that was a bit much.

She changed the funeral into a public spectral.. But Dickens funeral was small and private - so his mistress could attend.

I enjoyed it when she brought in other characters and we saw the view points of the children and mistress.

The ending kind of left things hanging. ( )

As I progressed with my reading the feeling that overtook me is a feeling I seldom am in contact with - so seldom it took awhile to recognize it: I was bored. That took me by surprise. How could a book about Charles Dickens be boring?

Girl in a blue dress is fictionalization of Charles Dickens life, the story mostly told as seen through his wife´s eyes. Where did I get bored? Did I ever believe in Gaynor´s melodrama? I did not. Too much 21th century context, and too little 19th century, it is so easy to get angry on behalf of the women´situation, in any era, even today most places in the world. But any man has the right to be judged by his peers; Dickens´ lived from 1812 to 1870, his peers where 19th century. I do not even think you can read Dickens´behavior towards his wife as his attitude towards womens´ rights - in the end of the day, he chose a woman as executor of his will. I believe I come closer to his dilemma by asking myself how long I would stay with a drug-abusing spouse, or whether I would remove my children from a drug abusing (how much laudanum did she take?) co-parent? And whether at the time I could not be present I would find it responsible to leave the care-taking to a sober capable aunt the children know?

How a minor author (Dickens will still be a name when Gaynor is all but forgotten) dears doing the moral laundering on behalf of a great writer is beyond me. But I gained one important thing from reading this book; what it made me realize, is that when melodrama turns in on itself, does not carry a greater issue than laundering your underwear in public, it does not stir neither the greater feelings, nor engage intellectually. An insight that puts Dickens´ books in perspective: Their most important trait is not the melodrama; Dickens chose the most difficult form of melodrama as carrier for serious social critic - and succeeded (when I grew up loving Dickens´ books, they were dismissed by literary critics as nothing more than reader friendly melodramas.) Dickens could read his fellow beings and paint their characters precisely in a few strokes, in words that would be read with joy, relished and remembered. He created some of the world's best-known fictional characters and is regarded as the greatest novelist of the Victorian era. His works enjoyed unprecedented popularity during his lifetime, but it is only in the 20th century that scholars and critics have recognized him as the literary genius he is. By contrast, Gaynor chooses the form of melodrama as carrier of a portrait of a great author - making his most striking feature abusiveness. Do I believe she has captured his portrait through this dull repetitive story that "girl in a blue dress" is? The only thing I believe in is the vantage point; the story as seen through the eyes of a woman we know next to nothing about. What we see is not Mrs. Dickens, it is an opportunistic Gaynor who is longlisted for the Booker prize - by a book that will be forgotten - because neither opportunistic borrowing of a great name, being politically correct in the 21th century, being bound to your own prejudices, or to what is "in" in any century, is enough for a book to survive their time. ( )

I will be completely honest and admit I knew next to nothing about Charles Dickens' private life prior to this novel and now I find myself intrigued by the relationship between him and his wife. This novel re-imagines Dickens and his wife as Alfred and Dorothea Gibson and focuses on Dorothea's remembrances of her husband as she recounts their story in the wake of his death. Well-written and very human, I would recommend this novel to anyone who enjoys Dickens' novels or historical fiction. ( )

fictional novel based on the life and marraige of Charles Dickens. Interesting read, but did drag on in some places and was left a bit unsatisfied with the ending. ( )

fictional novel based on the life and marraige of Charles Dickens. Interesting read, but did drag on in some places and was left a bit unsatisfied with the ending. ( )