Dickensblog

The Australian statue of Dickens isn't the only one that's been in the news. (Don't miss this headline, by the way. People who write about Dickens statues seem to have a genius for writing great headlines.) There's a kerfuffle going on in England over plans to build a new statue in Portsmouth in honor of the bicentennial. You'd think it would be a no-brainer . . . except that he didn't want one.

In his will, Dickens wrote: "I conjure to my friends on no account to make me the subject of any monument, memorial or testimonial whatsoever." His son Sir Henry Dickens went so far as to pack up and return a statue sent from Philadelphia (and that's why there's a Dickens statue in Philadelphia! I had no idea that was the reason!).

But today, though some fans think the author's wishes should continue to be respected, Gerald Dickens and other relatives are fine with the idea of building one. Gerald Dickens believes that the stipulation in the will refers to "the immediate aftermath of his death," and he and other Dickens descendants are fully on board with the plan.

And meanwhile, Southwark is moving right along with plans for a Dickens monument of its own, "between the old Marshalsea Prison site and the Little Dorrit church."

What do you think? Should there be statues and monuments or not?