第一篇：雙城記英語讀后感A Tale of Two City

A TALE OF TWO CITIES

A Tale Of Two Cities is written by the famous British writter Charles Dickens.And the one I read was interpreted by Qu Li and published in March 2006 by Zhuihai Publisher.DIGEST:It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope…

I see a beautiful city and a brilliant people' rising from this abyss, and, in their struggles to be truly free, in their triumphs and defeats, through long long years to come, I see the evil of this time and of the previous time of which this is the natural birth, gradually making expiation for itself and wearing out.I see that child who lay upon her bosom and who bore my name, a man winning his way up in that path of life which once was mine.I see him winning it so well, that my name is made illustrious there by the light of his.It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done;it is a far, far better rest that I go to than I have ever known.The major conflict in this novel is that Madame Dearge seeks revenge against Darmay for his relation to the odious Marquis Evremonde.While Carton, Manette, Lucie and Jarvis Lory strive to

protect Darnary from bloodthirsty revolutionaries guillotine.I was very impressed by Sydney Carton and he proves the most dynamic character in the novel.He first appears as a lazy, alcoholic lawyer who has no real prospect in life and seems there is no pursuit of things But I can sense, even in the initial chapter of the novel, Carton in fact feels something that he perhaps cannot articulate.In his conversation with the recently acquitted Charles Darnay, Carton’s comments about Lucie Manette is bitter and sardonic but may betray his willing.And that also shows his love feeling for the gentle girl.Eventually, Carton reaches a point where he can admit his feeling to Lucie himself.Before Lucie marries Darnay, Carton professes his love to her, though he still persists in seeing himself as essentially worthless.This scene marks a vital transition for Carton and lays the fundation for surpreme sacrifice.As Carton goes to the guillotine, the author tells us that he envisions a beatiful, idyllic Paris “rising from the abyss” and “the evil of this time and of the previous time of which this is the natural, birth, gradually marking expiation for itself and wearing out” Just as the apocalypic violence of revolution precedes a new society’s birth, perhaps it is only in the sacrifice of his life that Carton can establish his life’s great worth..Another one left a deep impression on me is a cruel revolutionist Madame Defarge.Because of hatring of Evremondes, she spends a good deal knitting a register of everyone who must die for the revolutionary

cause.And she is so cruel and bloodthirsty, she lust for vengeance.What makes her to become that? In my view, she has suffered at the hands of aristocracy led her tragedy.Though the novel, I can futher understand of the terrible time –French Revolution.And I also learn one of the novel’s simple philosophies that love conquers all.

第二篇：《雙城記》英語讀后感

A Tale of Two cities

“A Tale of Two cities” is one of the most important works of Dickens.The tale was based on the French Revolution in 1789, it described the story about Manette’s family and Defarge’s family.At the beginning of reading this book, I found it horrible and boring.But gradually, I couldn’t put down the book.In the end , I was moved by the book.Of all the characters in the story, my favourite is Sydney Carton.Sydney Carton, who was a lazy man and didn’t care for others.Really? In fact, he was an excellent and hard-working lawyer.He loved Lucie Manette all the time.But she hadn’t ever taken to him.When Carton heard the news that Lucie’s husband Charles Darnay would be killed in prison, he made a great decision: replace Darnay with himself.Sydney Carton, who sacrifice himself, for what? A person he loved and her happiness? That is —— “love”.I understand something from Carton: Love maybe a kind of power and dependence in our heart.Most importantly, after helping people we love, we will be very satisfied and feel very happy.I believe one thing: Carton’s world will come true in the future.After reading this book, I have new recognition of love.Trust me,you will learn something important in this book.Why not open “A Tale ofTwo cities” now?

第三篇：雙城記英語讀后感

雙城記英語讀后感-雙城記讀后感-英語論文

Love and Hate in A Tale of Two Cities

“A tale of two cities” is one of Dickens's most important representative works．The novel profoundly exposed the society contradiction before the French Revolution，intensely attacks the aristocratic social class is dissolute and cruel，and sincerely sympathizes with the depressed classes．The novel also described many magnificent scenes like the revolt people attacked Bastille and so on，which displayed people's great strength．

The novel has portrayed many different people． Doctor Manette is honest and kind but suffers the persecution actually，Lucie is beautiful and gentle，Charles is graceful and noble，Lorry is upright and honest，Sydney is semblance of indifferent，innermost feelings of warm，unconventional but also selfless and lofty，Miss Pross is straightforward and loyal，Evremonde brothers are cruel and sinister．．．．．．The complex hatred is hard to solve，the cruel revenge has made more hatreds，loves rebirth in the hell edge，but take the life as the price．

Many have grown fond of the tale involving the noble, former French aristocrat, who had virtually unmatched(except maybe in books)good fortune.First, his life was saved by the pitiful testimony of a beautiful young woman.Anyone would gladly have married this beautiful too-good-to-be-true-woman he wedded.It is later seen, however, that this man should have married her even if she were ugly as sin.This was not the case though, and he married a beautiful woman, who had an admirer who was a dead ringer for her husband, was a loser, and would give his life to keep her from pain, all of which really comes in handy when her hubby is on his way to the guillotine.This is not the story of a man with multiple guardian angels, but rather that of a character in Charles Dickens' novel A Tale of Two Cities.A skeptic could easily see this as an unbelievable, idealistic and overrated novel that is too far-fetched.An unbiased reader, however, can see that this is a story of love and hate, each making up the bare-bones of the novel so that one must look closely to see Dickens' biases, attempts at persuasion, and unbelievable plot-lines, some of which are spawned from Dickens' love and hate, and some of which love and hate are used to develop.The more lifeless of the characters we are supposed to like--the Manettes, Darnay, Lorry--play their parts in the idyllic fashion Dickens and like-minded readers want, a fashion made inflexible by circumstances and purposes.“Circumstances and purposes” refers in large part to Dickens' state of mind and objective.Dickens' intrusive, unusually editorial point of view, with references to “I” and deviations from narration for monologue, reveals the novel's slavery to the teachings of his morals--or perhaps his own slavery to the morals of his time and Protestantism.Therefore, can Lucie be any different from the supportive, wholly feminine wife and mother she is? Not if Dickens' is to stick to his obligation, or perhaps obstinate purpose, of moral teachings.With that aside, what is to be said of Dickens' teaching, his presentation of love and hate? They both have one thing in common: the characters representing each are unmistakable at a mile away.The moment Lucie Manette is put before the reader's eyes, her tumbling blond locks, her bright blue eyes, her seventeen-year-old, slight, pretty(but not sexy!)figure and all, he knows that, not only will she not be a villainous, unlikable character, but she will be the epitome of the good, beautiful woman(and later housewife), the one Dickens thought every women should be.At this young woman's introduction with Mr.Lorry, she curtseys to him, and Dickens wastes no time in pointing out that “young ladies made curtseys in those days”.The introductory scene climaxes at fair Lucie's fainting, one that, to some, puts her unflawed position into question, although to Dickens, it reinforces it.At the other side of this moral lecture are the Defarges.Call Dickens a master for embodying qualities, but here are another flawless pair--flawlessly evil, and sentenced to evil from the moment we see Madame Defarge's “watchful eye that seldom seemed to look at anything, a large hand heavily ringed, a steady face, strong features, and great composure of manner”, a stark contrast to the slight, fainting figure of Mada--or rather, Miss Manette.To further turn us against good old Madame Defarge, Dickens has her using a toothpick publicly in her opening scene, an activity dainty Miss Manette wouldn't dream of.Finally, we mustn't forget the setting.Lucie may have been born in France, but she defected to England, and traveled from London to meet Mr.Lorry.Madame Defarge was a Frenchwoman, born and living amongst peasants who drank wine scooped off of mud.She probably was not taught Dickens'(and his primary English audience's)Protestant morals in her Catholic nation, and certainly did not manifest them.In arguably the book's first touching scene(some say it's the one where Carton is on his way to the guillotine), Lucie goes through much trouble to coax her father from his insanity, laying her head on his shoulder, and trusting a man she had never met.When Madame Defarge sought vengeance for the cruel injustice committed against her kin, she looked to

destroy not only the innocent descendent of the culprit, but his family--an old man, a young woman, and a little girl.These two characters' love and hate are unconditional and total.Did this have to be so? Could not Madame Defarge have showed one bit of femininity, of human kindness? Could Lucie not have stolen a contemptuous glance at her persecutors? Not with Dickens at the helm.Lucie and Defarge are created with a conviction, and once Dickens' plot was laid, the blinders he put on his characters allowed only one route.Perhaps it was a primitive style, but modern characters are painted more realistically, with human weaknesses and more variability.Did it have to be so? Could Dickens have captured more readers, especially in the long run, if he had pursued more varying actions in his characters, as well as more humanness and believability? Does this point to Dickens as a flawed writer, with little imagination and ability?

Another factor that must be considered is our inability to criticize an English--or English-living--character, or to find a modicum of respectability in a French one, with two exceptions.One is the young woman who is beheaded just before Sydney Carton.She is the enemy of an enemy, she is going to be killed, and she allows Dickens to teach another moral using Sydney Carton.Why not have her happy to die for the benefit of her countrymen, while not trembling as she ascends to her death, thereby depriving the common enemy of a small victory? With the modern trend of political correctness and anti-racism, a Tale of Two Cities written today would never leave the word processor.Jerry Cruncher is about the most sinful of the English(aside from a spy but, remember, he defected to France), and he repents by the end, which counts for another moral from Dickens.In Dickens' time, racism was not regarded as it is today, and so if he wanted to use the French Revolution to send a message to the population, it was his right, but he may have taken this too far for some.Today, Lucie Manette would by no means be taken seriously as a believable, even likable character.She persists in fainting at particularly stressful moments, but when her husband is before a heartless, bloodthirsty jury, she looks brave and strong just for him.In context, this was a screaming contradiction, but one that Dickens required to portray his Eve.It is much easier to believe Madame Defarge's hate than her opposition's love.Defarge's sister was raped and murdered mercilessly and her brother was killed by a pair heartless “noblemen”.It is much easier to understand Defarge's taste for blood than the condition of Manette, who, after practicing as a competent doctor and acting normally for years, experiences a recurrence of his mental condition simply because his wonderful daughter has left for two weeks, although he has two dear friends nearby.Charles Dickens has built an enduring story enjoyed by millions, which is loved by experts and critics today although it would be immediately butchered if written by a modern author.It is a love story loved by its creator, but wholly unbelievable.It is actually doomed by its own idealism and unrealistic characters.As a hate story, it is much more competent, although also using this for its own purposes.One can draw one's own conclusions and ideas from such a book, but facts are facts.

第四篇：雙城記英語讀后感-雙城記讀后感

A Love and Hate in A Tale of Two Cities

Many have grown fond of the tale involving the noble, former French aristocrat, who had virtually unmatched(except maybe in books)good fortune.First, his life was saved by the pitiful testimony of a beautiful young woman.Anyone would gladly have married this beautiful too-good-to-be-true-woman he wedded.It is later seen, however, that this man should have married her even if she were ugly as sin.This was not the case though, and he married a beautiful woman, who had an admirer who was a dead ringer for her husband, was a loser, and would give his life to keep her from pain, all of which really comes in handy when her hubby is on his way to the guillotine.This is not the story of a man with multiple guardian angels, but rather that of a character in Charles Dickens' novel A Tale of Two Cities.A skeptic could easily see this as an unbelievable, idealistic and overrated novel that is too far-fetched.An unbiased reader, however, can see that this is a story of love and hate, each making up the bare-bones of the novel so that one must look closely to see Dickens' biases, attempts at persuasion, and unbelievable plot-lines, some of which are spawned from Dickens' love and hate, and some of which love and hate are used to develop.The more lifeless of the characters we are supposed to like--the Manettes, Darnay, Lorry--play their parts in the idyllic fashion Dickens and like-minded readers want, a fashion made inflexible by circumstances and purposes.“Circumstances and purposes” refers in large part to Dickens' state of mind and objective.Dickens' intrusive, unusually editorial point of view, with references to “I” and deviations from narration for monologue, reveals the novel's slavery to the teachings of his morals--or perhaps his own slavery to the morals of his time and Protestantism.Therefore, can Lucie be any different from the supportive, wholly feminine wife and mother she is? Not if Dickens' is to stick to his obligation, or perhaps obstinate purpose, of moral teachings.With that aside, what is to be said of Dickens' teaching, his presentation of love and hate? They both have one thing in common: the characters representing each are unmistakable at a mile away.The moment Lucie Manette is put before the reader's eyes, her tumbling blond locks, her bright blue eyes, her seventeen-year-old, slight, pretty(but not sexy!)figure and all, he knows that, not only will she not be a villainous, unlikable character, but she will be the epitome of the good, beautiful woman(and later housewife), the one Dickens thought every women should be.At this young woman's introduction with Mr.Lorry, she curtseys to him, and Dickens wastes no time in pointing out that “young ladies made curtseys in those days”.The introductory scene climaxes at fair Lucie's fainting, one that, to some, puts her unflawed position into question, although to Dickens, it reinforces it.At the other side of this moral lecture are the Defarges.Call Dickens a master for embodying qualities, but here are another flawless pair--flawlessly evil, and sentenced to evil from the moment we see Madame Defarge's “watchful eye that seldom seemed to look at anything, a large hand heavily ringed, a steady face, strong features, and great composure of manner”, a stark contrast to the slight, fainting figure of Mada--or rather, Miss Manette.To further turn us against good old Madame Defarge, Dickens has her using a toothpick publicly in her opening scene, an activity dainty Miss Manette wouldn't dream of.Finally, we mustn't forget the setting.Lucie may have been born in France, but she defected to England, and traveled from London to meet Mr.Lorry.Madame Defarge was a Frenchwoman, born and living amongst peasants who drank wine scooped off of mud.She probably was not taught Dickens'(and his primary English audience's)Protestant morals in her Catholic nation, and certainly did not manifest them.In arguably the book's first touching scene(some say it's the one where Carton is on his way to the guillotine), Lucie goes through much trouble to coax her father from his insanity, laying her head on his shoulder, and trusting a man she had never met.When Madame Defarge sought vengeance for the cruel injustice committed against her kin, she looked to destroy not only the innocent descendent of the culprit, but his family--an old man, a young woman, and a little girl.These two characters' love and hate are unconditional and total.Did this have to be so? Could not Madame Defarge have showed one bit of femininity, of human kindness? Could Lucie not have stolen a contemptuous glance at her persecutors? Not with Dickens at the helm.Lucie and Defarge are created with a conviction, and once Dickens' plot was laid, the blinders he put on his characters allowed only one route.Perhaps it was a primitive style, but modern characters are painted more realistically, with human weaknesses and more variability.Did it have to be so? Could Dickens have captured more readers, especially in the long run, if he had pursued more varying actions in his characters, as well as more humanness and believability? Does this point to Dickens as a flawed writer, with little imagination and ability?

Another factor that must be considered is our inability to criticize an English--or English-living--character, or to find a modicum of respectability in a French one, with two exceptions.One is the young woman who is beheaded just before Sydney Carton.She is the enemy of an enemy, she is going to be killed, and she allows Dickens to teach another moral using Sydney Carton.Why not have her happy to die for the benefit of her countrymen, while not trembling as she ascends to her death, thereby depriving the common enemy of a small victory? With the modern trend of political correctness and anti-racism, a Tale of Two Cities written today would never leave the word processor.Jerry Cruncher is about the most sinful of the English(aside from a spy but, remember, he defected to France), and he repents by the end, which counts for another moral from Dickens.In Dickens' time, racism was not regarded as it is today, and so if he wanted to use the French Revolution to send a message to the population, it was his right, but he may have taken this too far for some.Today, Lucie Manette would by no means be taken seriously as a believable, even likable character.She persists in fainting at particularly stressful moments, but when her husband is before a heartless, bloodthirsty jury, she looks brave and strong just for him.In context, this was a screaming contradiction, but one that Dickens required to portray his Eve.It is much easier to believe Madame Defarge's hate than her opposition's love.Defarge's sister was raped and murdered mercilessly and her brother was killed by a pair heartless “noblemen”.It is much easier to understand Defarge's taste for blood than the condition of Manette, who, after practicing as a competent doctor and acting normally for years, experiences a recurrence of his mental condition simply because his wonderful daughter has left for two weeks, although he has two dear friends nearby.Charles Dickens has built an enduring story enjoyed by millions, which is loved by experts and critics today although it would be immediately butchered if written by a modern author.It is a love story loved by its creator, but wholly unbelievable.It is actually doomed by its own idealism and unrealistic characters.As a hate story, it is much more competent, although also using this for its own purposes.One can draw one's own conclusions and ideas from such a book, but facts are facts

第五篇：雙城記英語讀后感-雙城記讀后感

A Love and Hate in A Tale of Two Cities

Many have grown fond of the tale involving the noble, former French aristocrat, who had virtually unmatched(except maybe in books)good fortune.First, his life was saved by the pitiful testimony of a beautiful young woman.Anyone would gladly have married this beautiful too-good-to-be-true-woman he wedded.It is later seen, however, that this man should have married her even if she were ugly as sin.This was not the case though, and he married a beautiful woman, who had an admirer who was a dead ringer for her husband, was a loser, and would give his life to keep her from pain, all of which really comes in handy when her hubby is on his way to the guillotine.This is not the story of a man with multiple guardian angels, but rather that of a character in Charles Dickens' novel A Tale of Two Cities.A skeptic could easily see this as an unbelievable, idealistic and overrated novel that is too far-fetched.An unbiased reader, however, can see that this is a story of love and hate, each making up the bare-bones of the novel so that one must look closely to see Dickens' biases, attempts at persuasion, and unbelievable plot-lines, some of which are spawned from Dickens' love and hate, and some of which love and hate are used to develop.The more lifeless of the characters we are supposed to like--the Manettes, Darnay, Lorry--play their parts in the idyllic fashion Dickens and like-minded readers want, a fashion made inflexible by circumstances and purposes.“Circumstances and purposes” refers in large part to Dickens' state of mind and objective.Dickens' intrusive, unusually editorial point of view, with references to “I” and deviations from narration for monologue, reveals the novel's slavery to the teachings of his morals--or perhaps his own slavery to the morals of his time and Protestantism.Therefore, can Lucie be any different from the supportive, wholly feminine wife and mother she is? Not if Dickens' is to stick to his obligation, or perhaps obstinate purpose, of moral teachings.With that aside, what is to be said of Dickens' teaching, his presentation of love and hate? They both have one thing in common: the characters representing each are unmistakable at a mile away.The moment Lucie Manette is put before the reader's eyes, her tumbling blond locks, her bright blue eyes, her seventeen-year-old, slight, pretty(but not sexy!)figure and all, he knows that, not only will she not be a villainous, unlikable character, but she will be the epitome of the good, beautiful woman(and later housewife), the one Dickens thought every women should be.At this young woman's introduction with Mr.Lorry, she curtseys to him, and Dickens wastes

no time in pointing out that “young ladies made curtseys in those days”.The introductory scene climaxes at fair Lucie's fainting, one that, to some, puts her unflawed position into question, although to Dickens, it reinforces it.At the other side of this moral lecture are the Defarges.Call Dickens a master for embodying qualities, but here are another flawless pair--flawlessly evil, and sentenced to evil from the moment we see Madame Defarge's “watchful eye that seldom seemed to look at anything, a large hand heavily ringed, a steady face, strong features, and great composure of manner”, a stark contrast to the slight, fainting figure of Mada--or rather, Miss Manette.To further turn us against good old Madame Defarge, Dickens has her using a toothpick publicly in her opening scene, an activity dainty Miss Manette wouldn't dream of.Finally, we mustn't forget the setting.Lucie may have been born in France, but she defected to England, and traveled from London to meet Mr.Lorry.Madame Defarge was a Frenchwoman, born and living amongst peasants who drank wine scooped off of mud.She probably was not taught Dickens'(and his primary English audience's)Protestant morals in her Catholic nation, and certainly did not manifest them.In arguably the book's first touching scene(some say it's the one where Carton is on his way to the guillotine), Lucie goes through much trouble to coax her father from his insanity, laying her head on his shoulder, and trusting a man she had never met.When Madame Defarge sought vengeance for the cruel injustice committed against her kin, she looked to destroy not only the innocent descendent of the culprit, but his family--an old man, a young woman, and a little girl.These two characters' love and hate are unconditional and total.Did this have to be so? Could not Madame Defarge have showed one bit of femininity, of human kindness? Could Lucie not have stolen a contemptuous glance at her persecutors? Not with Dickens at the helm.Lucie and Defarge are created with a conviction, and once Dickens' plot was laid, the blinders he put on his characters allowed only one route.Perhaps it was a primitive style, but modern characters are painted more realistically, with human weaknesses and more variability.Did it have to be so? Could Dickens have captured more readers, especially in the long run, if he had pursued more varying actions in his characters, as well as more humanness and believability? Does this point to Dickens as a flawed writer, with little imagination and ability?

Another factor that must be considered is our inability to criticize an English--or English-living--character, or to find a modicum of res

pectability in a French one, with two exceptions.One is the young woman who is beheaded just before Sydney Carton.She is the enemy of an enemy, she is going to be killed, and she allows Dickens to teach another moral using Sydney Carton.Why not have her happy to die for the benefit of her countrymen, while not trembling as she ascends to her death, thereby depriving the common enemy of a small victory? With the modern trend of political correctness and anti-racism, a Tale of Two Cities written today would never leave the word processor.Jerry Cruncher is about the most sinful of the English(aside from a spy but, remember, he defected to France), and he repents by the end, which counts for another moral from Dickens.In Dickens' time, racism was not regarded as it is today, and so if he wanted to use the French Revolution to send a message to the population, it was his right, but he may have taken this too far for some.Today, Lucie Manette would by no means be taken seriously as a believable, even likable character.She persists in fainting at particularly stressful moments, but when her husband is before a heartless, bloodthirsty jury, she looks brave and strong just for him.In context, this was a screaming contradiction, but one that Dickens required to portray his Eve.It is much easier to believe Madame Defarge's hate than her opposition's love.Defarge's sister was raped and

murdered mercilessly and her brother was killed by a pair heartless “noblemen”.It is much easier to understand Defarge's taste for blood than the condition of Manette, who, after practicing as a competent doctor and acting normally for years, experiences a recurrence of his mental condition simply because his wonderful daughter has left for two weeks, although he has two dear friends nearby.Charles Dickens has built an enduring story enjoyed by millions, which is loved by experts and critics today although it would be immediately butchered if written by a modern author.It is a love story loved by its creator, but wholly unbelievable.It is actually doomed by its own idealism and unrealistic characters.As a hate story, it is much more competent, although also using this for its own purposes.One can draw one's own conclusions and ideas from such a book, but facts are facts