Complete Works of Wilkie Collins (2329 page)

To the sittings at Ary Scheffer’s some troubles as well as many pleasures were incident, and both had mention in his letters. “You may faintly imagine what I have suffered from sitting to Scheffer every day since I came back. He is a most noble fellow, and I have the greatest pleasure in his society, and have made all sorts of acquaintances at his house; but I can scarcely express how uneasy and unsettled it makes me to have to sit, sit, sit, with
Little Dorrit
on my mind, and the Christmas business too — though that is now happily dismissed. On Monday afternoon,
and all day on Wednesday
, I am going to sit again. And the crowning feature is, that I do not discern the slightest resemblance, either in his portrait or his brother’s! They both peg away at me at the same time.” The sittings were varied by a special entertainment, when Scheffer received some sixty people in his “long atelier” — ”including a lot of French who
say
(but I don’t believe it) that they know English” — to whom Dickens, by special entreaty, read his
Cricket on the Hearth
.

That was at the close of November. January came, and the end of the sittings was supposed to be at hand. “The nightmare portrait is nearly done; and Scheffer promises that an interminable sitting next Saturday, beginning at 10 o’clock in the morning, shall finish it. It is a fine spirited head, painted at his very best, and with a very easy and natural appearance in it. But it does not look to me at all like, nor does it strike me that if I saw it in a gallery I should suppose myself to be the original. It is always possible that I don’t know my own face. It is going to be engraved here, in two sizes and ways — the mere head and the whole thing.” A fortnight later, the interminable sitting came. “Imagine me if you please with No. 5 on my head and hands, sitting to Scheffer yesterday four hours! At this stage of a story, no one can conceive how it distresses me.” Still this was not the last. March had come before the portrait was done. “Scheffer finished yesterday; and Collins, who has a good eye for pictures, says that there is no man living who could do the painting about the eyes. As a work of art I see in it spirit combined with perfect ease, and yet I don’t see myself. So I come to the conclusion that I never
do
see myself. I shall be very curious to know the effect of it upon you.” March had then begun; and at its close Dickens, who had meanwhile been in England, thus wrote: “I have not seen Scheffer since I came back, but he told Catherine a few days ago that he was not satisfied with the likeness after all, and thought he must do more to it. My own impression of it, you remember?” In these few words he anticipated the impression made upon myself. I was not satisfied with it. The picture had much merit, but not as a portrait. From its very resemblance in the eyes and mouth one derived the sense of a general unlikeness. But the work of the artist’s brother, Henri Scheffer, painted from the same sittings, was in all ways greatly inferior.

Before Dickens left Paris in May he had sent over two descriptions that the reader most anxious to follow him to a new scene would perhaps be sorry to lose. A Duchess was murdered in the Champs Elysées. “The murder over the way (the third or fourth event of that nature in the Champs Elysées since we have been here) seems to disclose the strangest state of things. The Duchess who is murdered lived alone in a great house which was always shut up, and passed her time entirely in the dark. In a little lodge outside lived a coachman (the murderer), and there had been a long succession of coachmen who had been unable to stay there, and upon whom, whenever they asked for their wages, she plunged out with an immense knife, by way of an immediate settlement. The coachman never had anything to do, for the coach hadn’t been driven out for years; neither would she ever allow the horses to be taken out for exercise. Between the lodge and the house, is a miserable bit of garden, all overgrown with long rank grass, weeds, and nettles; and in this, the horses used to be taken out to swim — in a dead green vegetable sea, up to their haunches. On the day of the murder, there was a great crowd, of course; and in the midst of it up comes the Duke her husband (from whom she was separated), and rings at the gate. The police open the grate. ‘C’est vrai donc,’ says the Duke, ‘que Madame la Duchesse n’est plus?’ — ’C’est trop vrai, Monseigneur.’ — ’Tant mieux,’ says the Duke, and walks off deliberately, to the great satisfaction of the assemblage.”

The second description relates an occurrence in England of only three years previous date, belonging to that wildly improbable class of realities which Dickens always held, with Fielding, to be (properly) closed to fiction. Only, he would add, critics should not be so eager to assume that what had never happened to themselves could not, by any human possibility, ever be supposed to have happened to anybody else. “B. was with me the other day, and, among other things that he told me, described an extraordinary adventure in his life, at a place not a thousand miles from my ‘property’ at Gadshill, three years ago. He lived at the tavern and was sketching one day when an open carriage came by with a gentleman and lady in it. He was sitting in the same place working at the same sketch, next day, when it came by again. So, another day, when the gentleman got out and introduced himself. Fond of art; lived at the great house yonder, which perhaps he knew; was an Oxford man and a Devonshire squire, but not resident on his estate, for domestic reasons; would be glad to see him to dinner to-morrow. He went, and found among other things a very fine library. ‘At your disposition,’ said the Squire, to whom he had now described himself and his pursuits. ‘Use it for your writing and drawing. Nobody else uses it.’ He stayed in the house
six months
. The lady was a mistress, aged five-and-twenty, and very beautiful, drinking her life away. The Squire was drunken, and utterly depraved and wicked; but an excellent scholar, an admirable linguist, and a great theologian. Two other mad visitors stayed the six months. One, a man well known in Paris here, who goes about the world with a crimson silk stocking in his breast pocket, containing a tooth-brush and an immense quantity of ready money. The other, a college chum of the Squire’s, now ruined; with an insatiate thirst for drink; who constantly got up in the middle of the night, crept down to the dining-room, and emptied all the decanters. . . . B. stayed on in the place, under a sort of devilish fascination to discover what might come of it. . . . Tea or coffee never seen in the house, and very seldom water. Beer, champagne, and brandy, were the three drinkables. Breakfast: leg of mutton, champagne, beer, and brandy. Lunch: shoulder of mutton, champagne, beer, and brandy. Dinner: every conceivable dish (Squire’s income, £7,000 a-year), champagne, beer, and brandy. The Squire had married a woman of the town from whom he was now separated, but by whom he had a daughter. The mother, to spite the father, had bred the daughter in every conceivable vice. Daughter, then 13, came from school once a month. Intensely coarse in talk, and always drunk. As they drove about the country in two open carriages, the drunken mistress would be perpetually tumbling out of one, and the drunken daughter perpetually tumbling out of the other. At last the drunken mistress drank her stomach away, and began to die on the sofa. Got worse and worse, and was always raving about Somebody’s where she had once been a lodger, and perpetually shrieking that she would cut somebody else’s heart out. At last she died on the sofa, and, after the funeral, the party broke up. A few months ago, B. met the man with the crimson silk stocking at Brighton, who told him that the Squire was dead ‘of a broken heart’; that the chum was dead of delirium tremens; and that the daughter was heiress to the fortune. He told me all this, which I fully believe to be true, without any embellishment — just in the off-hand way in which I have told it to you.”

Dickens left Paris at the end of April, and, after the summer in Boulogne which has been described, passed the winter in London, giving to his theatrical enterprise nearly all the time that
Little Dorrit
did not claim from him. His book was finished in the following spring; was inscribed to Clarkson Stanfield; and now claims to have something said about it.

CHAPTER VI.

LITTLE DORRIT, AND A LAZY TOUR.

1855-1857.

Little Dorrit — A Proposed Opening — How the Story grew — Sale of the Book — Circumlocution Office — Flora and her Surroundings — Weak Points in the Book — Remains of Marshalsea visited — Reception of the Novel — Christmas Theatricals — Theatre-making — At Gadshill — Last Meeting of Jerrold and Dickens — Proposed Memorial Tribute — At the Zoological Gardens — Lazy Tour projected — Visit to Cumberland — Accident to Wilkie Collins — At Allonby — At Doncaster — Racing Prophecy — A Performance of
Money
.

Between
Hard Times
and
Little Dorrit
, Dickens’s principal literary work had been the contribution to
Household Words
of two tales for Christmas (1854 and 1855) which his readings afterwards made widely popular, the Story of Richard Doubledick,
and Boots at the Holly-Tree Inn. In the latter was related, with a charming naturalness and spirit, the elopement, to get married at Gretna Green, of two little children of the mature respective ages of eight and seven. At Christmas 1855 came out the first number of
Little Dorrit
, and in April 1857 the last.

The book took its origin from the notion he had of a leading man for a story who should bring about all the mischief in it, lay it all on Providence, and say at every fresh calamity, “Well it’s a mercy, however, nobody was to blame you know!” The title first chosen, out of many suggested, was
Nobody’s Fault;
and four numbers had been written, of which the first was on the eve of appearance, before this was changed. When about to fall to work he excused himself from an engagement he should have kept because “the story is breaking out all round me, and I am going off down the railroad to humour it.” The humouring was a little difficult, however; and such indications of a droop in his invention as presented themselves in portions of
Bleak House
, were noticeable again. “As to the story I am in the second number, and last night and this morning had half a mind to begin again, and work in what I have done, afterwards.” It had occurred to him, that, by making the fellow-travellers at once known to each other, as the opening of the story stands, he had missed an effect. “It struck me that it would be a new thing to show people coming together, in a chance way, as fellow-travellers, and being in the same place, ignorant of one another, as happens in life; and to connect them afterwards, and to make the waiting for that connection a part of the interest.” The change was not made; but the mention of it was one of several intimations to me of the altered conditions under which he was writing, and that the old, unstinted, irrepressible flow of fancy had received temporary check. In this view I have found it very interesting to compare the original notes, which as usual he prepared for each number of the tale, and which with the rest are in my possession, with those of
Chuzzlewit
or
Copperfield;
observing in the former the labour and pains, and in the latter the lightness and confidence of handling.
“I am just now getting to work on number three: sometimes enthusiastic, more often dull enough. There is an enormous outlay in the Father of the Marshalsea chapter, in the way of getting a great lot of matter into a small space. I am not quite resolved, but I have a great idea of overwhelming that family with wealth. Their condition would be very curious. I can make Dorrit very strong in the story, I hope.” The Marshalsea part of the tale undoubtedly was excellent, and there was masterly treatment of character in the contrasts of the brothers Dorrit; but of the family generally it may be said that its least important members had most of his genius in them. The younger of the brothers, the scapegrace son, and “Fanny dear,” are perfectly real people in what makes them unattractive; but what is meant for attractiveness in the heroine becomes often tiresome by want of reality.