大家好！今天我给大家介绍的书是《雾都孤儿》。这是由英国作家狄更斯写的一部长篇小说，以“雾都”伦敦为背景，讲述了一个孤儿悲惨的身世及遭遇。主人公奥利弗在孤儿院长大，经历学徒生涯，艰苦逃难，误入贼窝，又被迫与狠毒的凶徒为伍，历尽无数辛酸，最后在善良人的帮助下，查明身世并获得了幸福。其中一个小偷的老大，犹太人费金最让我深刻，他被描绘成典型的坏人形像，想要把手下的孩子培养成出色的小偷，他用幽闭和孤独抑郁去熏陶一个个天真的心灵，他的行径是肮脏罪恶的，狄更斯描写他从外貌到内心，从居住环境到生存方式，刻画了贪婪的守财奴，阴险狡诈的无耻小人。可是即便是这样一个坏人，在孩子们的眼里，他却是和蔼可亲的老翁，照顾着这些流浪儿的生活起居，贼窝里甚至因为他的出现而充满欢笑声，所以可以说费金是既可恶但又带点温情的人。这本书写出当时资本主义社会存在的一些关于社会统治，各阶层人民区别待遇等负面问题，揭露了那时的虚荣和黑暗，以奥利弗为代表，描写了这种社会下穷苦儿童的悲惨生活。主要反映刚刚通过济贫法的英国社会最底层生活，也同时赞扬了人们天性中的正直和善良，谢谢大家！
小说描写了善与恶、美与丑、正义与邪恶的斗争，赞扬了人们天性中的正直和善良，也揭露抨击了当时英国慈善机构的虚伪和治安警察的专横。同时，作品又带有浓厚的浪漫主义情调，充满着人道主义情怀。
在这个一直下雨的城市不就代表了主人公的内心的绝望与忧郁,而大雨过后阳光必定会出来.也许就像题目说的雾都,人们与人们之间永远看不清对方,在这个社会和这个人群中大家都是模模糊糊的.这部影片让我看到了社会的现实与残酷，也让我看到了虽然在这样的社会中，还是会有好人的.要热爱生活,让我们珍惜现在的生活行吗？
作者抱着一个崇高的道德意图：抗议社会的不公，并唤起社会舆论，推行改革，使处于水深火热中的贫民得到救助，真实地表现当时伦敦贫民窟的悲惨生活。
你怎么研究电影而不是小说啊？强烈建议你把电影去掉，（也许就思想主题而言，电影和小说是一回事）开题报告如何写？①：在百度搜索：开题报告 范文②：去学校图书馆的期刊论文数据库搜索：雾都孤儿英文的搜索：Oliver Twist
实再现经典名著 在原创能力普遍衰竭的今天，无数电影人将目光投向经典名著，拙劣的改编者往往对原著伤筋动骨，既伤害了先人又贻误了后代，更有不少投机取巧者只把名著的架子拿来，装的是自己的货色，这样的改编实际上是移植和借用。在过去20多个《雾都孤儿》电影版本中，童党头目“费金”均被描绘成一个十恶不赦的大 ... 据悉，为还原19世纪30年代英国伦敦的风貌，主创人员研究了大量当时伦敦的地图和 ...雾都孤儿》. 以电影绘制动态油画 由大师解读名著经典.
Oliver Twist Oliver Twist, one of the most famous works of Charles Dickens’, is a novel reflecting the tragic fact of the life in Britain in 18th century. The author who himself was born in a poor family wrote this novel in his twenties with a view to reveal the ugly masks of those cruel criminals and to expose the horror and violence hidden underneath the narrow and dirty streets in London. The hero of this novel was Oliver Twist, an orphan, who was thrown into a world full of poverty and crime. He suffered enormous pain, such as hunger, thirst, beating and abuse. While reading the tragic experiences of the little Oliver, I was shocked by his sufferings. I felt for the poor boy, but at the same time I detested the evil Fagin and the brutal Bill. To my relief, as was written in all the best stories, the goodness eventually conquered devil and Oliver lived a happy life in the end. One of the plots that attracted me most is that after the theft, little Oliver was allowed to recover in the kind care of Mrs. Maylie and Rose and began a new life. He went for walks with them, or Rose read to him, and he worked hard at his lessons. He felt as if he had left behind forever the world of crime and hardship and poverty. How can such a little boy who had already suffered oppressive affliction remain pure in body and mind? The reason is the nature of goodness. I think it is the most important information implied in the novel by Dickens-he believed that goodness could conquer every difficulty. Although I don’t think goodness is omnipotent, yet I do believe that those who are kind-hearted live more happily than those who are evil-minded. For me, the nature of goodness is one of the most necessary character for a person. Goodness is to humans what water is to fish. He who is without goodness is an utterly worthless person. On the contrary, as the famous saying goes, ‘The fragrance always stays in the hand that gives the rose’, he who is with goodness undoubtedly is a happy and useful person. People receiving his help are grateful to him and he also gets gratified from what he has done, and thus he can do good to both the people he has helped and himself. To my disappointment, nowadays some people seem to doubt the existence of the goodness in humanity. They look down on people’s honesty and kindness, thinking it foolish of people to be warm-hearted. As a result, they show no sympathy to those who are in trouble and seldom offer to help others. On the other hand, they attach importance to money and benefit. In their opinion, money is the only real object while emotions and morality are nihility. If they cannot get profit from showing their ‘kindness’, they draw back when others are faced with trouble and even hit a man when he is down. They are one of the sorts that I really detest. Francis Bacon said in his essay, ‘Goodness, of all virtues and dignities of the mind, is the greatest, being the character of the Deity, and without it, man is a busy, mischievous, wretched thing, no better than a kind of vermin.’ That is to say a person without goodness is destined to lose everything. Therefore, I, a kind person, want to tell those ‘vermin-to-be’ to learn from the kind Oliver and regain the nature of goodness. 雾都孤儿 雾都孤儿》,其中最著名的作品的查尔斯•狄更斯的《反映,是一种新型的悲惨的现实,在18世纪的英国的生活。 作者自己出生在一个贫穷的家庭写这本书在他二十几岁时为了揭示丑陋的面具的残酷的罪犯,让恐怖和暴力隐藏在狭窄的,肮脏的街道在伦敦。 这本小说是的英雄,《雾都孤儿孤儿,谁被投进了的世界充满着贫穷和犯罪。他遭受巨大的痛苦,如饥饿、干渴、殴打和虐待。在阅读《悲惨的经历的小奥利弗,我感到震惊的是他的痛苦经历。我觉得为了可怜的男孩子,但同时我厌恶邪恶和残酷Fagin帐单。使我松了口气,写在所有最好的故事,最终征服了魔鬼,奥利佛善过上了幸福美满的生活结束。一个最吸引我的计谋是盗窃,小奥利弗被允许这种康复照顾夫人Maylie和玫瑰开始了一种新的生活。他去散步,与他们,或玫瑰念给他听,他努力学习功课。他感到他先前留下的世界永远犯罪和困难和贫穷。 怎能一个小男孩已经遭受苦难保持纯洁的压迫身体和心灵吗?原因是处于善性品德之中。我认为这是最重要的信息的小说中隐含Dickens-he相信善良能战胜一切困难。虽然我并不认为善良是无所不能的,我却相信,那些都是善良的过的更幸福的人比那些是愚昧无知。 对我来说,处于善性的品德是其中一个最必要的个性的一个人。善良是给人类就像鱼儿离不开水一样。谁是没有良善是一个完全无用的人。相反,正如著名的老话所说:“香味的手总是待在给玫瑰”一样。给你推荐一个网站，超棒！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
人物形象分析，作者研究，写作风格，写作背景什么的都可以的
研究现状就是你要让人家了解，你研究的这个题目目前研究到哪了，研究了多少，你要在哪更加深入的去研究。但是研究现状并不等于罗列前人观点，你要把前人研究的结论整合成一篇完整的文章，写完之后写个类似提纲之类的提要，自己留着开题答辩看
大家好！今天我给大家介绍的书是《雾都孤儿》。这是由英国作家狄更斯写的一部长篇小说，以“雾都”伦敦为背景，讲述了一个孤儿悲惨的身世及遭遇。主人公奥利弗在孤儿院长大，经历学徒生涯，艰苦逃难，误入贼窝，又被迫与狠毒的凶徒为伍，历尽无数辛酸，最后在善良人的帮助下，查明身世并获得了幸福。其中一个小偷的老大，犹太人费金最让我深刻，他被描绘成典型的坏人形像，想要把手下的孩子培养成出色的小偷，他用幽闭和孤独抑郁去熏陶一个个天真的心灵，他的行径是肮脏罪恶的，狄更斯描写他从外貌到内心，从居住环境到生存方式，刻画了贪婪的守财奴，阴险狡诈的无耻小人。可是即便是这样一个坏人，在孩子们的眼里，他却是和蔼可亲的老翁，照顾着这些流浪儿的生活起居，贼窝里甚至因为他的出现而充满欢笑声，所以可以说费金是既可恶但又带点温情的人。这本书写出当时资本主义社会存在的一些关于社会统治，各阶层人民区别待遇等负面问题，揭露了那时的虚荣和黑暗，以奥利弗为代表，描写了这种社会下穷苦儿童的悲惨生活。主要反映刚刚通过济贫法的英国社会最底层生活，也同时赞扬了人们天性中的正直和善良，谢谢大家！
Oliver Twist Oliver Twist, one of the most famous works of Charles Dickens’, is a novel reflecting the tragic fact of the life in Britain in 18th century. The author who himself was born in a poor family wrote this novel in his twenties with a view to reveal the ugly masks of those cruel criminals and to expose the horror and violence hidden underneath the narrow and dirty streets in London. The hero of this novel was Oliver Twist, an orphan, who was thrown into a world full of poverty and crime. He suffered enormous pain, such as hunger, thirst, beating and abuse. While reading the tragic experiences of the little Oliver, I was shocked by his sufferings. I felt for the poor boy, but at the same time I detested the evil Fagin and the brutal Bill. To my relief, as was written in all the best stories, the goodness eventually conquered devil and Oliver lived a happy life in the end. One of the plots that attracted me most is that after the theft, little Oliver was allowed to recover in the kind care of Mrs. Maylie and Rose and began a new life. He went for walks with them, or Rose read to him, and he worked hard at his lessons. He felt as if he had left behind forever the world of crime and hardship and poverty. How can such a little boy who had already suffered oppressive affliction remain pure in body and mind? The reason is the nature of goodness. I think it is the most important information implied in the novel by Dickens-he believed that goodness could conquer every difficulty. Although I don’t think goodness is omnipotent, yet I do believe that those who are kind-hearted live more happily than those who are evil-minded. For me, the nature of goodness is one of the most necessary character for a person. Goodness is to humans what water is to fish. He who is without goodness is an utterly worthless person. On the contrary, as the famous saying goes, ‘The fragrance always stays in the hand that gives the rose’, he who is with goodness undoubtedly is a happy and useful person. People receiving his help are grateful to him and he also gets gratified from what he has done, and thus he can do good to both the people he has helped and himself. To my disappointment, nowadays some people seem to doubt the existence of the goodness in humanity. They look down on people’s honesty and kindness, thinking it foolish of people to be warm-hearted. As a result, they show no sympathy to those who are in trouble and seldom offer to help others. On the other hand, they attach importance to money and benefit. In their opinion, money is the only real object while emotions and morality are nihility. If they cannot get profit from showing their ‘kindness’, they draw back when others are faced with trouble and even hit a man when he is down. They are one of the sorts that I really detest. Francis Bacon said in his essay, ‘Goodness, of all virtues and dignities of the mind, is the greatest, being the character of the Deity, and without it, man is a busy, mischievous, wretched thing, no better than a kind of vermin.’ That is to say a person without goodness is destined to lose everything. Therefore, I, a kind person, want to tell those ‘vermin-to-be’ to learn from the kind Oliver and regain the nature of goodness. 雾都孤儿 雾都孤儿》,其中最著名的作品的查尔斯•狄更斯的《反映,是一种新型的悲惨的现实,在18世纪的英国的生活。 作者自己出生在一个贫穷的家庭写这本书在他二十几岁时为了揭示丑陋的面具的残酷的罪犯,让恐怖和暴力隐藏在狭窄的,肮脏的街道在伦敦。 这本小说是的英雄,《雾都孤儿孤儿,谁被投进了的世界充满着贫穷和犯罪。他遭受巨大的痛苦,如饥饿、干渴、殴打和虐待。在阅读《悲惨的经历的小奥利弗,我感到震惊的是他的痛苦经历。我觉得为了可怜的男孩子,但同时我厌恶邪恶和残酷Fagin帐单。使我松了口气,写在所有最好的故事,最终征服了魔鬼,奥利佛善过上了幸福美满的生活结束。一个最吸引我的计谋是盗窃,小奥利弗被允许这种康复照顾夫人Maylie和玫瑰开始了一种新的生活。他去散步,与他们,或玫瑰念给他听,他努力学习功课。他感到他先前留下的世界永远犯罪和困难和贫穷。 怎能一个小男孩已经遭受苦难保持纯洁的压迫身体和心灵吗?原因是处于善性品德之中。我认为这是最重要的信息的小说中隐含Dickens-he相信善良能战胜一切困难。虽然我并不认为善良是无所不能的,我却相信,那些都是善良的过的更幸福的人比那些是愚昧无知。 对我来说,处于善性的品德是其中一个最必要的个性的一个人。善良是给人类就像鱼儿离不开水一样。谁是没有良善是一个完全无用的人。相反,正如著名的老话所说:“香味的手总是待在给玫瑰”一样。给你推荐一个网站，超棒！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
先不说内容，首先格式要正确，一篇完整的毕业论文，题目，摘要（中英文），目录，正文（引言，正文，结语），致谢，参考文献。学校规定的格式，字体，段落，页眉页脚，开始写之前，都得清楚的，你的论文算是写好了五分之一。然后，选题，你的题目时间宽裕，那就好好考虑，选一个你思考最成熟的，可以比较多的阅读相关的参考文献，从里面获得思路，确定一个模板性质的东西，照着来，写出自己的东西。如果时间紧急，那就随便找一个参考文献，然后用和这个参考文献相关的文献，拼出一篇，再改改。正文，语言必须是学术的语言。一定先列好提纲，这就是框定每一部分些什么，保证内容不乱，将内容放进去，写好了就。参考文献去中国知网搜索，校园网免费下载。《雾都孤儿》中人物的创造性叛逆——重塑 《雾都孤儿》中的南希形象剖析 小说《雾都孤儿》中前景化特征的文体分析 污浊社会里的纯真——《雾都孤儿》中反映出的良知
品味完一本名著后，你心中有什么感想呢？记录下来很重要哦，一起来写一篇读后感吧。你想好怎么写读后感了吗？下面是我整理的《雾都孤儿》读后感范文精选，希望能够帮助到大家。
《雾都孤儿》这部长篇小说是英国作家狄更斯所著。故事的主人公奥利弗是个孤儿，他出生在一个济贫院里，他的母亲刚生下他就去世了。长大后的奥利弗因为受不了郊区干事邦布尔的折磨，逃到了伦敦。在哪里，奥利弗落到了坏人的手里。经过多次的磨难，善良的奥利弗得到了布朗罗的帮助，并帮奥利弗查明了他那段神秘的'身世。奥利弗的经历给了我很大的启示。他身处逆境，遭受了种种磨难，但他并不自暴自弃，仍对生活充满了向往。他勇敢的面对恶人给予的压力。
在他的人生字典里“善”和“恶”是分明的。每当想起奥利弗的精神时，我十分佩服，《雾都孤儿》中的奥利弗让我明白了人应该善恶分明，心里放着一把衡量道德的尺子。不能因为利益的诱惑放弃做个好人的原则，向隐藏于人内心深处的“恶”屈服。同学们，让我们都去做像奥利弗那样的人吧!将“善”永远放在自己的心中。
秋末冬初，儿子从学校图书馆借回《雾都孤儿》，是译林出版社1997年出版的何文安的译本。书薄而轻盈，书窄小巧，排版紧凑，字小无插图，封面色彩简单庄重，给人袖珍书在手，经典在握的厚重感，是那个年代最流行的书貌。不像现在的流行书式，书阔精致，排版松散，留白充足，包装精巧。有意思的是，这本书每章章首有本章故事概要，短短三四句，像现在时兴的微博，三言两语道明此章作者的思想轨迹，也如推荐时的编者按，直接向读者标明本章的闪光点——就我有限的阅读经历，这种书式不多见。
《雾都孤儿》是狄更斯25岁时写的一部长篇小说。他在这部小说里，着力刻画了当时伦敦贫民窟的悲惨生活，小说以生动的细节描写，妙趣横生的幽默和细致入微的心理分析抗议社会的不公。
我怀着好奇的心情，用空闲的时间迫不及待的看完狄更斯写的雾都孤儿看完后，我心潮澎湃，思绪万千。小说中的主人公奥利佛在济贫院出生，他的母亲生下他就死了，他却被当作一个礼物送来送去，虽然他几次企图想自杀，但他都凭着坚强的毅力存活了下来。故事讲述的是旧时伦敦的一个孤儿身上发生了传奇故事，他是一个被遗弃的孩子在孤儿院里的生活，和他之后被迫成为小偷奇遇都磨炼了他，使他成为一个善良，正直，勇敢，坚强的孩子，并最终找到亲人，故事在最后画上句号。从奥利佛身上我明白了，无论你遇到什么困难都要勇敢的去面对。
读了着本书我看到了当时社会的黑暗，邪恶，但最终善良总是战胜邪恶，社会上也有好心人，当奥利佛受害时，他们都会化险为夷。不管你身处何种境地，做人都应该使终要保持着一颗善良的心。
今天，我看了一本书，名字叫《雾都孤儿》。这本书讲述了：一个小男孩他是个孤儿，他的名字叫奥利弗，他的妈妈生完他之后就死了，他的父亲去意大利去钱财的时候，却突然病死了。奥利弗住在一家贫民救济院里，奥利弗在九岁的是活就被送去了棺材店工作。奥利弗在那里受尽了粤待，于是，奥利弗就走去了伦敦，在伦敦那里，奥利弗差一点就成了小偷。
奥利弗在那里受到了许多好心人的帮助，也受到了那些强盗的欺负，其中的一位塞克斯是奥利弗的哥哥，奥利弗并不知道这件事情。奥利弗在利太太小的帮助拿回了自己的财产。拿回自己的财产之后就和布朗洛先生、利太太生活在一个小村子了，他的哥哥塞克斯因为把钱花光的，去抢劫而入狱。
读了这本书之后，我很敬佩这里面的奥利弗，虽然他受尽了粤待但他并没有放弃自己的'生命，他身上的永不放弃的精神很值得我们学习。还有就是利太太很善良。
这是与苦儿流浪记相似的一本书，同样的出身，同样苦难的经历。但有一点不同的是，雾都孤儿过多的描写了那些坏人的奸诈、丑陋，所以它也是批判社会的一本书。这本书中，我比较喜欢的人是南希，她虽然出身下流、劣但他的天性里仍然保持着某种好的东西，那就是自尊。
她虽然一生都在最肮脏的藏污纳垢之地度过，但一切的罪恶、奸诈以及__都没有消磨掉她天性中的自尊，这真是非常的难能可贵啊! 《雾都孤儿》读后感而这本书的主角奥利弗，虽然被他的异母兄弟所害，却也保留这正直、勇敢这些美好品质。奥利弗是个好孩子——尽管费根他们想把奥利弗培养成一个无恶不作的人。
当品味完一本著作后，大家对人生或者事物一定产生了许多感想，何不静下心来写写读后感呢？到底应如何写读后感呢？下面是我整理的《雾都孤儿》的读后感范文，欢迎阅读与收藏。
《雾都孤儿》这本书由著名的英国小说家狄更斯所著，讲述了一个孤儿悲惨的人生。
一个在街道上晕倒的美丽女子被教区的济贫院收留了，第二天，她生下了小男孩奥利弗。体力不支的女子最后看了一眼自己的孩子，便离开了人世，可怜的奥利弗成了一个孤儿。
后来，奥利弗与饥饿做着抗争，活到他第9个生日时，实在饿得受不了的他在小伙伴们的怂恿下、在吃完了自己的饭菜后，并要求添粥。
济贫院一气之下把他关了起来，并在后来把她卖给了一个棺材铺子做学徒。他在铺子里受尽了欺负，最后偷偷地逃跑了。
幼小的奥利弗逃到了伦敦，认识了一个小男孩，男孩把他带回了他的贼窝。他在菲根等人的强迫下偷东西，帮他们一起犯罪。
最后，奥利弗被子弹打伤，一户善良的人收留了他，并帮助他找到亲人，过上了幸福的生活。
读完这一本世界名著，从“奥利弗要求添粥”这一节，让我深深地感受到了小奥利弗与他的伙伴们的饥饿。
小奥利弗对那个欺负自己而又比自己大得多的诺亚大打出手，以及他出逃这些事，无处不体现着他的勇气和对抗争命运的执着。
最后，能帮助他过上幸福生活，感受到温暖的人是布兰多先生。
他带上奥利弗，把他当自己亲儿子一样照顾，并带上管家搬到了新居。
奥利弗最后拿下了一半的遗产。他的同父异母的哥哥拿到另一半的钱，跑到了大陆另一个地方，但他很快把钱花光了，并再次做起坏事。不久后，他与菲根几个人陆续死在了狱中。
这本书让我感受到了世间的善与恶，快乐与悲伤。
一个人的生命如同那薄薄的蝉翼，经不起风吹雨打，它是脆弱的，却又坚强无比。造物主创造了人，充满活力地来到这个世界，我们难道不应该珍惜这次降世的机会吗？
我看过一本书——《雾都孤儿》：它讲述了孤儿奥利弗·特威斯特出生在一家济贫院里，并在那里孤独、艰难的生活了九年之久，之后又被带到棺材店做学徒，因身边的人几乎都极为不好，而且被人误解，便独自一人到伦敦去。途中他又被小偷所，越进了他同父异母的哥哥与小偷事先安排好的完美陷阱了。但是，小奥利弗是勇敢、正义、向往美好生活的孩子。他为自己的美好未来所作出了巨大的努力，逃离小偷的魔爪。最后，他遇上了好心的人，他们帮助他主持公道，拿回了属于他的财产，寻找到了幸福的生活。
奥利弗的生世如此曲折，可是他依旧坚强的生活，重来没有轻生的念头。那怕生活在水生火热中可世间却有许多有轻生念头的人。
最近，我在电脑上看见一则新闻：韩国女星因比赛遗憾失败而跳楼自杀。有人爆料，她曾经患过抑郁症。有些人一辈子都没活够，而有些人却认为世界上没有什么好留念的，起了轻生的念头，甚至去做了。每个人的生命都是父母给予我们的，我们没有权利选择出生，但生命只有一次，一个人不会有第二次生命，所以我们才应该倍加珍惜。像奥利弗那样，我们虽然没有权选择出生，但我们可以选择今后的路程。
人生只有昨天，今天和明天。生命的路程在慢慢逝去，生命的意义不在于长短，而在于它精彩与否，把握住每一个瞬间，让生命如同璀璨的星群，发光发亮保护自己的生命是每一个人的天职，唯有活着才谈得上如何让生命更精彩。
初次翻开《雾都孤儿》这本书，是在一个午后，阳光暖暖的射在我的脸。在此之前，我看过同名的电影，电影中小主人公清澈的眼睛给了我十分深刻的印象。但是电影毕竟是短短的一个多小时，很难讲述出那长长的人生，于是我翻开了这本书。看了几页后，小奥利弗的形象便跳进我的脑海中。于是读着这本书就不再是看着简单的文字了，仿佛真实的生活在我的脑海中演绎着。
书中的主人翁奥利弗·特威斯特是一个孤儿，他出生在济贫院，出生不久他的妈妈就死了。后来，他被当作一件物品被送来送去，受尽折磨，直到最后遇到一位善良的布朗洛老先生，这位好心的老先生收留了他，但是又被那一伙贼绑回贼窝。最后善良的女扒手南希为了营救奥利佛，不顾贼头的监视和威胁，向班布尔报信，说奥利佛就是他找寻已久的外孙儿。南希被贼窝头目杀害，警察随即围剿了贼窝。奥利佛终于得以与亲人团聚。
这本书给我的感触很深。看着这本书，好几次泪水打湿了我的眼睛。不仅是为了小奥利弗的悲惨遭遇，更是为他的善良，南希和其他小扒手的无奈，甚至是老犹太费根。书中每一个人都有这鲜明的性格。奥利弗虽是书中的主人公，但我觉得奥利弗不是他一个人，而是孤儿院里的所有孤儿甚至是所有的在苦难中的孩子，也许他们最后都没有奥利弗的幸运，但奥利弗的幸运也只是作者对于生活的美好希望。他们都要为了希望而努力。
合上这本书，我的感慨只有一个：人活着只要不断地向这梦想前进，不需要顾虑太多，命运永远在我们手中！
我们的世界上总是会存在许多不正义的，罪恶的事情。但在十九世纪的英国，无论是在狄更斯的笔下还是在现实中这种事都很普遍。
当时的英国政府对穷人实行假惺惺的救助——把贫民集中管理在监狱中，并美其名曰“贫民习艺所”。它与监狱唯一的区别是需要干的活更多，每餐吃的更少。
《雾都孤儿》中的主人公小奥利弗厌恶了这样的生活，竟以九岁的年龄，仅带着一个便士，一个面包，几件衣物，孤身一人前往七十英里外的伦敦。由此可见当时“社会上层的绅士们”对贫民，特别是小孩的剥削是多么的.残酷。
虽然小奥利弗在伦敦也遇到了老犹太人费根这样十恶不赦的坏蛋，但也受到了布朗先生，梅里太太等人无私的帮助。最终他了解了自己的身世，并过上了幸福的生活。讽刺的是当年帮助过小奥得弗的贫民习艺所所长，在失业后也被习艺所收容了。
在读到小奥利弗被人帮助时，我的脸刷的一下红了。平时我可以说是一个嫉恶如仇的人，每当见到电影中不正义的事发生，我总想跑到电影中去指责坏人。而每当电视中播出穷苦人们的生活时，我更是恨不得立刻去帮助他们。但是在现实生活中，面对一个在火车站，汽车站乞讨的老人，我却没有一点慈悲之心。这也许可以说是现代社会中的欺太多，使人们不得不加强防范，但我更觉得这是我的爱心不够。
学校中有时会发生打架或吵架事件，而我每次都只充当一个旁观者，甚至还会嘲笑其中一方，而很少去调解。现在，我才感到羞愧难当。
“我们无法改变这个世界，但我们可以改变自己。”这是一个小故事中说的，我觉得这也是我读了《雾都孤儿》后的感想。以后，我与其在家中发表激昂的讲话，还不如去社会中多做些好事。
奥利弗——一个孤儿，他被投入了一个充满贫困与犯罪的世界，忍饥挨饿，挨打挨骂，从来没有人关心他。邪恶的费金，残暴的比尔？赛克斯，以及一大群窃贼强盗。他们把奥利弗训练成一个神偷手，然后利用他去取钱财。可是奥利弗不愿去干这些事情，费金就对他，迫使奥利弗到处流浪。幸运的是，他遇到了一群善良的人，对他无微不至的关怀，让奥利弗感到非常温暖。
当我想到一个九岁的孩子，在伦敦被迫加入罪恶累累、堕落不堪的小偷、强盗、亡命之徒的行列之中。但他并未放弃，在他的心中仍向往着一个美好的生活，多次在好心人的帮助下，终于过上了自己所想往的生活。我真觉得奥利弗真勇敢、真坚强。而我们生活在蜜罐里，福窝里，却总是抱怨，总是不满足。但我们可曾想过，在世界上，还有许多孩子，正承受着巨大的痛苦；正和饥饿、寒冷、疾病作战；正面对着失去亲人，飘泊流浪的生活。他们需要别人的帮助，但更需要不屈的精神、勇敢的精神。我要学习奥利弗的坚强不屈的精神、勇敢的精神。我们也要学习善良的布朗洛，是他伸出了援助之手帮助奥利弗的。
看了《雾都孤儿》，让我受益非浅，让我懂得了社会的冷酷与人的性格的残暴。我们要行动，帮助他们，挽救他们。
我向大家推荐的书是这《雾都孤儿》，这里面突出了一个典型人物，可怜、凄惨、悲苦的南希，她生活在一个残忍的世界中，却挣扎着要忠实于她所爱的人。她为了帮助奥利弗，而背叛了她所爱的人，最后遭到了坏人的毒手……经过这一连串的事奥利弗却坚强不屈，勇于斗争，所以我向大家推荐这本书。
雾都孤儿这本世界名著讲述了一个动人的故事。书中主人翁是一位孤儿，他的名字叫奥利弗特威斯特。他出生于济贫院，出生不久妈妈就死了。他被当作一件物品送来送去，受尽折磨。他最后遇到了一位善良的老先生；布郎罗先生，这位先生好心收留了他，他过上了好的生活。可好景不长，奥利弗不幸在次身陷贼窟，赛克斯胁迫他参加一次远征行窃，最后失败了，挣扎在死亡线上，还是梅里夫人救了奥利弗并且好心收留了他。经过一段时间，奥利弗过上了幸福的生活。
书中的主人公奥立弗是个私生子，他妈妈刚生下他就死去了，可怜的奥立弗在济贫院里艰难地生活了9年，而后又被送到棺材铺里当学徒，晚上就睡在棺材堆里，每次吃饭时都把他打发到最冰冷的角落里吃那些发霉的食物。难以忍受的饥饿、贫困和侮辱，迫使奥立弗逃到伦敦，却误入贼窝。小偷费根想把奥立弗训练成扒手，奥立弗无论怎样都不肯屈服，他一次次地逃脱，又一次次被抓回来。读到这，我真的被奥立弗的善良、正直、勇敢深深地感动了，他向往美好的生活，虽然历尽艰辛，但他宁愿去流浪，也不愿意成为一个小偷，他才10岁呀！真不知道在他瘦弱的身躯下有着怎样顽强的毅力，书中我最喜欢的人物是两次帮助奥立弗的布朗娄先生，因为他的善良，奥立弗才得救，从此过上了幸福的生活。最痛恨的人是费根，他想把奥立弗训练成扒手，也就是说，他想让世界上多一个坏人，少一个好人，不过让我高兴的是，最后坏人都得到了应有的惩罚。
读了这本书，让我受益匪浅，我们的生活和奥立弗比起来，简直是一个天堂一个地狱，我会更加热爱这美好的生活，好好学习，同时在生活和学习中遇到困难也会永往直前，绝不退缩！
在这个寒假里，我读了一本令我思绪如海，感慨万千的书，名叫《雾都孤儿》。它的作者是英国著名小说家查尔斯·狄更斯，在这篇文章中，他运用幽默，夸张，讽刺的手法反映了刚刚通过济贫法的英国社会底层生活的黑暗，使文章有强烈的感染力，发人深省。
这本书是以有着‘雾都’美称的伦敦为背景，讲述了一个无依无靠的孤儿悲惨的身世及可怜的遭遇。主人公奥立弗出生在济贫院，刚出生不久，母亲就与世长辞，后来，他就在当时所谓的慈善机构———济贫院里过着地狱一般的生活，被当作一件物品一样被人们送来送去，受尽折磨，从未得到母爱和家庭的温暖的他，在9岁就被送进了一家棺材店，经历了学徒生涯，因不堪忍受非人的待遇，艰苦逃难，又不慎误入贼窝，被迫与狠毒的凶徒为伍，历尽了无数辛酸，但最后在善良人的帮助下，转危为安，化险为夷，查明了身世并获得了幸福。
读完这本书，我的心情久久不能平静。只要有光，就有阴影，《雾都孤儿》正好证明了这一点，奥立弗的勇敢，罗勃特的善良与贼窟首脑的凶残、孟斯的私刑形成了强烈的对比。但，如果没有布朗罗先生、露丝小姐、梅里夫人的善良和热心。只凭靠奥立弗的力量是远远不够的。
一架标准的钢琴有52个白键，36个黑键，其中的白键永远都是比黑键多的，就好比整个世界是一架标准的钢琴，善良纯洁的人都是白键，反之，丑恶歹毒的人都是黑键，无论何时何地，善良的人总比丑恶的人多，善有善报，恶有恶报。善良的人总会像荷花一样出淤泥而不染。自古以来邪不胜正，因为，内心充满罪恶的人，他已是一具没有思想，没有灵魂的行尸走肉，看似表面强壮的躯体，但他的灵魂却是瘦小不堪。一颗善良的心，种种磨难并不能使他们堕落，他们会为此更加努力的去拼搏，因为，他们的灵魂无比强壮。
合上这本书我只想说一句话：人活着只要不断地向着梦想前进，不需要顾虑太多，不要向命运低头，命运永远掌握在我们的手中。
最近，我读了一本书，它是英国著名作家查尔斯·狄更斯写的《雾都孤儿》，它使我受益匪浅，让我懂得做人要善良，要拥有“出淤泥而不染”的高贵品质。
这本书主要讲了一个孤儿悲惨的身世及遭遇。主人公奥利弗在孤儿院挣扎了九年，又被送到棺材店老板那儿做学徒。难以忍受的饥饿、贫穷和侮辱，迫使奥利弗逃到了雾都伦敦，却误入贼窟，被迫去当扒手。可是在这行为思想无比龌龊的社会底层里，在阴险狡诈、凶狠残暴的人群中，奥利弗并没有被他们所影响，仍然是那么纯洁善良。最后，在好心人南希的帮助下，他找到了自己的亲人，过上了幸福美满的生活。
奥利弗令我敬佩不已。他在这样恶劣的环境下，自始至终守护着自己的人格，不做可恶的交易与勾当，也不做鬼鬼祟祟的偷窃。他犹如一朵亭亭玉立的荷花一样纯洁，虽然生长在肮脏的河泥中，却洁身自好，不受半点玷污，仍然长得高贵动人。也许有人会为了求生放弃人格、放弃善良，更何况奥利弗只有九岁，这个容易放弃与动摇的年龄，他却能坚守自己的信念，不放弃、不动摇，种种磨难不能使他堕落，更加彰显出他出淤泥而不染的品质，这实在是非常可贵！最后，正所谓邪不压正，正义再次向世间证明一定可以战胜邪恶，扒手们都被捕入狱，奥利弗获得了幸福。
生活中也是如此，我们要学会控制自己，不被周围的不良环境所影响，要出淤泥而不染。比如，当其他人都沉迷于网络游戏不能自拔时，你要抵挡住这种诱惑，认真学习；当有人在讲那些刺耳的粗话脏话、污言秽语时，你要管住自己的嘴巴，不受他们的影响；当有人在做不文明的举动时，你要控制住自己的手脚，坚持文明行事……当你管不住自己，要做一些不正确的事情时，想想那个可怜的奥利弗吧，他在如此恶劣的环境下都能洁身自好，更何况我们呢？
周敦颐说得好：“出淤泥而不染，濯清涟而不妖。”让这句话在世间永存，让它永远铭刻在你我的心中。加油！
《雾都孤儿》读后感范文300字（通用16篇）
当看完一本著作后，大家心中一定有不少感悟，此时需要认真思考读后感如何写了哦。但是读后感有什么要求呢？下面是我为大家收集的《雾都孤儿》读后感范文（通用16篇），希望对大家有所帮助。
在一个悠闲宁静的下午，我读了一本叫做《雾都孤儿》的书。
在这本《雾都孤儿》里，主要讲了奥利弗为了找到亲人而经历了许多坎坷的事，最终找到自己的亲人的故事。
读完这本书以后，让我陷入了深深的沉思中。为什么奥利弗要当一名扒手?为什么他会要那么做?看到这里，我体会到了社会上的人们的无情。比如，我们整天说着要爱护动物，可又有多少人亦是这样?该丢的宠物狗继续丢，该虐待的流浪猫狗继续虐。
甚至有些人拿宠物来做衣服。有一条新闻是这样的：最近小区里业主们的猫总是失踪，弄的小区里的爱猫人士担惊受怕。后来有人在一家老奶奶家里找到了许多猫肉和用猫毛做的大衣，这时老奶奶才承认最近的猫都是她杀的，因为她觉得猫毛很适合做大衣。每当看到那篇新闻，我的心就久久不能平静。它们也是一条命啊!它们是活得啊，不是任你宰割的东西啊!
最后，我想告诉大家一句话：如果不爱，请别伤害!
在这本书中，奥利弗、南希都是善良的代表，他们都出生于苦难之中，在黑暗和充满罪恶的世界中成长，但在他们的心中始终保持着一偏纯洁的天地，一颗善良的心，种种磨难并不能使他们堕落或彻底堕落，发而更显示出他们出污泥而不染的光彩夺目的晶莹品质。
最后，邪不胜正，正义的力量战胜了邪恶，虽然南希最后遇难，但正是她的死所召唤出来的惊天动地的社会正义力量，正是她在冥冥中的在天之灵，注定了邪恶势力的代表——费金团伙的灭顶之灾。因此在小说中，南希的精神得到了升华，奥利弗则得到了典型意义上的善报。而恶人的代表——费金、蒙克斯、邦布尔、塞克斯无不一一落得个悲惨的下场。
这部名著在我心中留下了深刻的印象，使我懂得无论环境怎样恶劣，世界怎样复杂，我们都应该保持一份善良、博爱的的精神，这样于人于己都会带来快乐和幸福。
我怀着好奇的心情，用空闲的时间迫不及待的看完狄更斯写的雾都孤儿看完后，我心潮澎湃，思绪万千。小说中的主人公奥利佛在济贫院出生，他的母亲生下他就死了，他却被当作一个礼物送来送去，虽然他几次企图想自杀，但他都凭着坚强的毅力存活了下来。
故事讲述的是旧时伦敦的一个孤儿身上发生了传奇故事，他是一个被遗弃的孩子在孤儿院里的生活，和他之后被迫成为小偷奇遇都磨炼了他，使他成为一个善良，正直，勇敢，坚强的孩子，并最终找到亲人，故事在最后画上句号。从奥利佛身上我明白了，无论你遇到什么困难都要勇敢的去面对。读了着本书我看到了当时社会的黑暗，邪恶，但最终善良总是战胜邪恶，社会上也有好心人，当奥利佛受害时，他们都会化险为夷。不管你身处何种境地，做人都应该使终要保持着一颗善良的心。
寒假里，我读完了《雾都孤儿》，这本书内容很精彩。其中，我最喜欢的是第十四章。这一章讲的是：可怜的奥利弗被老先生带回家后，一直发高烧。老先生的太太对他很好，给他看病，把他照顾的无微不至。终于，奥利弗康复了，可以站起来走路了。老先生带着奥利弗参观了他的书房，书房里摆满了书，小奥利弗惊呆了。老先生教育他要做个文明人，要多读书
从这儿我感受到：当时的伦敦并不是所有的人都下流凶恶，也有善良的人。那位老先生就是其中的一个，我觉得他做奥利弗的老师是再合适不过了。奥利弗在老先生家的那段日子真是受到了很好的影响，这对他以后的成长很有利。虽然在伦敦凶多吉少，不过在好心人的帮助下，奥利弗的前途一定是光明的！
《雾都孤儿》给我带来了快乐，也带来了悲伤。在这本书中，我结识了许多新朋友！
这几天，我读完了一本书，名字叫《雾都孤儿》
《雾都孤儿》是英国最大的小说家——狄更斯在1838年创作的一部长篇小说，也是他的代表作之一。
这本书反映了19世纪初英国社会最底层的生活，主人公奥利弗尔悲惨遭遇让我非常同情。他才11岁，却过着非人的生活，每天吃不饱，穿不暖，并且几次误入贼窝，但他没有和他们一起犯罪，宁肯受尽折磨也不和他们同流合污，并且用坚强的意志抵制坏人的威逼和诱惑，后来梅里夫人救了奥利弗尔并且好心收留了他。经过一段时间，奥利弗过上了幸福的生活。
看完这本书后，我的心情久久不能平静，文中主人公的年龄和我一样大，可是，和他相比，我们的生活是多么的幸福，但是我们却还是不满足，遇到一点小小的'困难，就放弃，缺少意志力。我要学习奥利弗尔的坚强品质，克服一切艰难险阻，珍惜现在的一切，刻苦学习，成为一个对社会有用的人。
读完这本书后，我对这个孤儿很同情。他一生下来就是孤儿，他在人间也是饱受痛苦。那时的孤儿院就和地狱一样不错哦，9岁就被送到了棺材店当学徒，他因为吃不饱也睡不好还老是挨打就逃了出来。
可命运老和他开玩笑，他刚逃出来没多久就遇到了一伙盗贼，他费尽了千辛万苦终于逃了出来。可没多久有被抓了起来被迫和他们一起干，可在第一次抢东西时就被子弹打中了，在医院里挣扎在死亡线上，但又幸运的遇到了好心的露丝小姐和梅里夫人。她们用极大的爱心救活了他并收留了他。可在这时他同父异母的哥哥却和那些盗贼勾结上了……
最后他终于熬过了艰苦的日子和那些正直善良的人在一起。
全书反映了善于恶，美与丑的斗争。赞扬了人民的正直与善良。同时也揭露了英国的一些慈善机构的虚伪和的专横。
《雾都孤儿》是狄更斯的第二部长篇小说，这位年仅二十五岁的小说家真实的表现了当时伦敦贫民窟的悲惨。他抱着一个崇高的道德意图：抗议社会的不公，并唤起社会舆论，推行改革，使处于水深火热中的贫民得到救助，正因为如此，狄更斯历来被我国及前苏联学者界定为“英国文学上批判现实主义的创始人和最伟大的代表”。
当我想到一个九岁的孤儿——奥利弗，在伦敦被迫加入罪恶累累、堕落不堪的小偷、强盗、亡命之徒的行列之中，但他并未放弃，在他的心中仍向往这一个美好的生活，多次在好心人的帮助下，终于过上了自己所想过的生活，我觉得奥利弗很勇敢、很坚强。我们可曾想过，在世界上，还有许多孩子，正承受着巨大的痛苦，正和饥饿、寒冷、疾病作战；正面对失去亲人，漂泊流浪的生活。他们需要别人的帮助，但更需要不屈的精神，勇敢的精神。
如果让我来形容这样一部作品，那么我借用歌德的一句话：它比自然高了一层。
这本书中的故事描述了一个孤儿在外流浪的故事。他名叫：奥立费.特威斯特，他的妈妈刚让这个小生命来到人间时，就离开了这个小宝宝。
奥立费长大后在世间受尽了苦头，挨了无数的巴掌和拳头，后来还被象物品一样被人送来送去，受尽折磨，直到遇到好心的布朗洛老先生，才被收留，才过上好日子。
看完这本书，我的心情久久不能平静，奥立弗从小受尽了折磨，经历了很多苦痛，但他很坚强，一直向往着美好的生活。我觉得他很勇敢，想想我们自己，生活得多么美好，多么幸福，还不满足，还经常跟自己的父母发脾气，想想还真是不应该呀。
遇到一点小小的困难就想放弃，怕吃苦，贪图享受。我觉得我们要向他学习。还有就是，现在世上还有许多象奥立弗一样的孤儿，他们很可怜，需要大家的帮助，我们要珍惜现在的生活和学习条件，刻苦学习，让自己长大了成为一名对社会有用的人，这样我们才有能力去帮助他们，让他们的生活也一样充满阳光。
近几天我读了《雾都孤儿》这本书。
《雾都孤儿》这本书反映了十九世纪初英国的社会底层的生活。主人公奥利费儿悲惨遭遇让人们同情不已。整个故事告诉人们这样一个主题：善良可以克服一切艰难，最终战胜邪恶，给人们带来真正的快乐和幸福。
这本书主要讲了奥利费儿是个孤儿，在济贫院中长大，不幸误入了贼窟。有一天，奥利费尔在街上被警察误捕，好心的布朗洛绅士救了他。后来奥利尔又被盗匪劫去参加抢劫，好心的主人收留了它。原来，奥利费尔的同父异母兄长蒙克斯买通了贼中首领——老费金，企图把奥利费尔变成罪犯，自己霸占全部遗产。女贼南希找到说出了一切，结果被老费金的手下赛克斯所杀死。之后，老费金走上了绞架，好心的绅士布朗洛揭发了蒙克斯的罪恶，并收养了奥利费尔。从此，大家一起过上了幸福的生活。
这本书语句描写非常优美如：“夜色一片漆黑，大雾弥漫。店铺的灯光几乎不能穿过厚厚的浑浊雾气，街道和房屋都笼罩在朦胧的黑暗中。”书中的钢笔画插图也画的非常生动细致，让我陶醉其中。
第一次接触这本书是老师给我们推荐的，然后就抱着好奇的态度去了图书馆找来看，就当做是暑假看的课外书，当我翻进去，顿时就被里面的主人公奥利弗感动，现在自己的生活如此安定，父母工作稳定，身体也健康，而且还是如此的爱我，相比之下，我感觉这个世界好不公平。
从这本书我知道，查尔斯·狄更斯是英国的小说家。《雾都孤儿》是他著作之一。在这篇文章中，他运用幽默，夸张，讽刺的手法反映了刚刚通过济贫法的英国社会底层生活的黑暗，使文章有强烈的感染力，发人深省。
在刚看完《雾都孤儿》我觉得很乏味没有了解其蕴藏的内涵。然而，经过反复思考与细细品味，我终于有了更进一步的了解。他被送去上学，可在上学的途中又被那可恶的贼窝抓了回去。见奥立弗久久不回，罗勃特先生不愿相信他朋友的话，(说那小子穿着这么漂亮的衣服，背着这么好的书)不愿相信奥立弗会重回贼窝那。他一次又一次得叫仆人热菜，和爱他的人等待他回家……
最后奥立弗终于化险为夷，和爱他的亲人们团聚。当然，其中的过程也是历尽艰辛。
《雾都孤儿》正好证明了这一点，奥立弗的勇敢，罗勃特的善良与贼窟首脑的凶残、孟斯的私刑形成了强烈的对比。
在孤独中成长，在痛苦中挣扎，在尊严被摧残的情况下斗争，这就是狄更斯笔下的“雾都孤儿”——奥利弗·退斯特。小男孩儿奥利弗·退斯特在济贫院里艰难的长大，九岁的时候，他被送进棺材铺里做学徒，饥饿和侮辱迫使他逃了出来。在伦敦街头流浪的时候，他被小扒手发现，拉进了贼窝。
后来，再一次偷窃事件中，他又被善良的布朗罗先生收留，可是不幸又被扒手们拐了回去，还被迫参与打劫，事后，他被好心的梅莱太太一家收留，这家好心人找到布朗罗先生，通过同情奥利弗的女扒手南茜得知了她的身份，抓住了那伙强盗，并帮助奥利弗找到了亲人，最终获得了幸福！当我读完这个故事后，我想，作者一定是想通过小说传达正义必将战胜邪恶的信念，告诉我们要分清善恶，并且希望我们每个人都能够懂得爱，懂得去爱别人！怎么样？
你说我说的对吗？如果你也喜欢这本书，就赶快读读吧！让我们相信曹文轩所说的这句话：“一本好书，就是一轮太阳，灿烂千阳，照耀我们的成长！”愿这些灿烂的光芒，伴随我们一生！
《雾都孤儿》是英国作价狄更斯的长篇写实小说。小说年代设定在19世纪的雾都伦敦，讲述了孤儿奥利佛的身世与成长的故事。同时，作为社会小说的范例，揭露另外19世纪真实存在的社会问题，如雇佣童工、青少年犯罪等。
文中有一处情节让人感触颇深，奥利弗被带到小偷的聚集点，支配这群青少年的男子对着昂贵的手表和珠宝称赞死刑，看起来很难理解，违法者为什么不怕死刑，这与当时法律存在的缺陷有关，招供并不能改变遭受绞刑的命运，所以走上刑场的罪犯们不会选择让真相大白，这些奴役青少年的恶人们便因此逍遥法外。
小说中的主角奥利弗原本是一个单纯的少年，因为生存不得不与一群少年犯混在一起，抛开小说后来的转折不谈，如果奥利弗一直和这群人生活，学习他们“技术”，他的一生肯定会就此走向黑暗。虽然这些与十九世纪伦敦的复杂背景有关，但是我们仍要警惕，现在社会依然存在类似的现象。
关爱青少年身心健康需要我们所有社会公民共同努力，像小说里的老绅士一样，我们一次小小的帮助，一次简单的援手或许可以改变一个人的未来。
今天我在家没事，就拿出书柜里的《雾都孤儿》,我怀着好奇心一口气读完了这本书。
《雾都孤儿》是英国著名作家狄更斯创作初期的一部作品。作者当时处于朝气蓬勃的青年时代，因作品具有十足的生气和活力，这些写作特点都充分体现在作品中对人性思索的自然流露上。
乍一看上去，狄更斯在这部小说中并没有刻意去探究人性的深意，相反，我们看见的更多是冷酷和无情，但文中哪怕是费根和塞克斯这种罪恶之徒都能把那一丁点儿光明的追求在严酷的现实中表现出来，费根在死囚室中侍死与奥立费的最后一面时，作者用了象征的笔触，让一个纯真的的少年如天使般引导了那罪孽深重然而又可悲又可怜的老朽的罪犯。塞克斯杀了南茜出逃途中夜晚的那场冲天大火，塞克斯看到那简直是一种新生活，他在无所不在的的恐惧和惶恐的折磨下忙着扑火，要逃避记忆，逃避自己，他比原先更强烈的意识到自己犯下了可怕的罪行。作者对两人的这些安排可谓耐人思索。
这章中，作者表面看上去是在表现主人翁奥立费的生活，而实际上更多的在表现作者自己的生活。
读完这本书，让我十分震惊，我会认真的体会这本书中的含义。
《雾都孤儿》是英国作家狄更斯创作的13部长篇小说之一，讲述的是一个叫奥利弗的孤儿在伦敦发生的故事。
主人公奥利弗因受不了做棺材的工作而逃往伦敦，路上遇到一个扒手，把他带到了伦敦的扒手老巢，被迫成为扒手。但他不愿偷东西，却受到诬陷了，打入了监狱。被人证明了清白，一位好心人收留了他。之后他又被抓回了扒手窝，在坏人的挟持下去抢旅馆，没有成功，奥利弗这个可怜的孩子连中三枪，奄奄一息，被那家旅馆收留。他协助警方捣毁了扒手的老巢，又幸运地找到了失散多年的姐姐，并且继承了遗产，成为了一名高贵的绅士。
这本书让我懂得了许多做人的道理。首先不能得寸进尺，冤枉好人;不能够做、抢劫、偷盗等违法的事;不能随便怀疑别人，要有怜悯之心;更不能背信弃义，滥杀无辜，与警察作对。
不仅仅这些还要宽厚待人，互相友爱，真诚感激他人。没有强烈的爱，没有仁爱之心，没有对帮忙过自我的人的感恩之心是永远不会得到真正的幸福的。
是呀，正如书中写的“奥利弗永远不会忘记这个夜晚……”一样，我永远不会忘记《雾都孤儿》给予我的启示。
《雾都孤儿》这本书主要讲述的是一个感人的故事。
主人公奥立弗是一个孤儿，他出生在一个济贫院，奥立弗的妈妈生下他不久就死了，他就像礼物一样被人送来送去，最后还进入了贼窝，后来在许多朋友的帮助下，警察围剿了贼窝，查明了奥立弗的身世，帮他获得了遗产，回到了亲人的怀抱。
读完这本书，我的心情久久不能平静，可怜的奥立弗在过着地狱般的生活中，在饥饿、寒冷、孤独、悲伤中一步一步地前进。令我感动是奥立弗盗贼生涯那一章，虽然小偷们想把他培养成小偷，但无论怎么折磨他、他，他都毫不理睬，情愿在外流浪也不愿意与坏人为伍，最后乘机逃出了贼窝。想想奥立弗，在想想自己，虽然我比他幸福很多，但我有他那样坚强吗？虽然现在我不会流浪，但我却没有他那样机智、正义、勇敢。
书中另一位让我感动的人就是南希，尽管她是个贼，但为了帮助奥立弗，她宁愿背叛所爱的人，宁愿冒着被处死的危险，最后，惨死在拳头之下。南希所做的事情，让我感受到了她内心的矛盾、善良和公正。
读完这本书，我懂得了一个道理，每个人都有各自的经历，但不管遇到什么困难和挫折，都要有自信心，通过自身的努力，实现人生目标。
孤儿，是那些没有了父母的孩子，所以他们就住在了孤儿院。今天我们就来看看一本同样是关于孤儿的书——《雾都孤儿》。
这本书的主角是一个可怜的孤儿，他叫奥立费，他一出生母亲便死了，于是他就给带到了孤儿院。不过那个孤儿院却不是什么好地方，因为那里的主管对孤儿们很不好，孤儿们都很讨厌他。那个主管还把奥力费送到棺材店里做学徒。
在棺材铺里奥力费受尽了虐待，于是他就逃跑到了伦敦，结果被小偷“机灵鬼”带入了贼窝，被迫走上贼船。幸好有了布朗罗先生和露丝小姐等人的帮助，奥力费成功地逃出了费金等人的魔掌，并且让警察把那贼窝给翻了。蒙克斯也道出了奥力费的身世：蒙克斯和奥力费其实是同父异母的兄弟。不过奥力费的父亲已经去世了，他的财产就分给了他的两个儿子。从此，奥力费就和布朗罗先生生活在一起······
作者狄更斯把《雾都孤儿》写的很精彩，故事情节也很惊险，所以一下就把读者吸引住了，并且使读者的情绪随着故事的情节而改变。
生活中，总会有黑暗的一面。不过光明总会战胜黑暗的，会有无数个“布朗罗先生”和“露丝小姐”去帮助那些有困难了人。我也要向他们学习：尽自己所能地去帮助他人，并始终拥有一颗善良的心。
Oliver Twist is born in a workhouse in a provincial town. His mother has been found very sick in the street, and she gives birth to Oliver just before she dies. Oliver is raised un
Oliver Twist Oliver Twist, one of the most famous works of Charles Dickens’, is a novel reflecting the tragic fact of the life in Britain in 18th century. The author who himself was born in a poor family wrote this novel in his twenties with a view to reveal the ugly masks of those cruel criminals and to expose the horror and violence hidden underneath the narrow and dirty streets in London. The hero of this novel was Oliver Twist, an orphan, who was thrown into a world full of poverty and crime. He suffered enormous pain, such as hunger, thirst, beating and abuse. While reading the tragic experiences of the little Oliver, I was shocked by his sufferings. I felt for the poor boy, but at the same time I detested the evil Fagin and the brutal Bill. To my relief, as was written in all the best stories, the goodness eventually conquered devil and Oliver lived a happy life in the end. One of the plots that attracted me most is that after the theft, little Oliver was allowed to recover in the kind care of Mrs. Maylie and Rose and began a new life. He went for walks with them, or Rose read to him, and he worked hard at his lessons. He felt as if he had left behind forever the world of crime and hardship and poverty. How can such a little boy who had already suffered oppressive affliction remain pure in body and mind? The reason is the nature of goodness. I think it is the most important information implied in the novel by Dickens-he believed that goodness could conquer every difficulty. Although I don’t think goodness is omnipotent, yet I do believe that those who are kind-hearted live more happily than those who are evil-minded. For me, the nature of goodness is one of the most necessary character for a person. Goodness is to humans what water is to fish. He who is without goodness is an utterly worthless person. On the contrary, as the famous saying goes, ‘The fragrance always stays in the hand that gives the rose’, he who is with goodness undoubtedly is a happy and useful person. People receiving his help are grateful to him and he also gets gratified from what he has done, and thus he can do good to both the people he has helped and himself. To my disappointment, nowadays some people seem to doubt the existence of the goodness in humanity. They look down on people’s honesty and kindness, thinking it foolish of people to be warm-hearted. As a result, they show no sympathy to those who are in trouble and seldom offer to help others. On the other hand, they attach importance to money and benefit. In their opinion, money is the only real object while emotions and morality are nihility. If they cannot get profit from showing their ‘kindness’, they draw back when others are faced with trouble and even hit a man when he is down. They are one of the sorts that I really detest. Francis Bacon said in his essay, ‘Goodness, of all virtues and dignities of the mind, is the greatest, being the character of the Deity, and without it, man is a busy, mischievous, wretched thing, no better than a kind of vermin.’ That is to say a person without goodness is destined to lose everything. Therefore, I, a kind person, want to tell those ‘vermin-to-be’ to learn from the kind Oliver and regain the nature of goodness. 雾都孤儿 雾都孤儿》,其中最著名的作品的查尔斯•狄更斯的《反映,是一种新型的悲惨的现实,在18世纪的英国的生活。 作者自己出生在一个贫穷的家庭写这本书在他二十几岁时为了揭示丑陋的面具的残酷的罪犯,让恐怖和暴力隐藏在狭窄的,肮脏的街道在伦敦。 这本小说是的英雄,《雾都孤儿孤儿,谁被投进了的世界充满着贫穷和犯罪。他遭受巨大的痛苦,如饥饿、干渴、殴打和虐待。在阅读《悲惨的经历的小奥利弗,我感到震惊的是他的痛苦经历。我觉得为了可怜的男孩子,但同时我厌恶邪恶和残酷Fagin帐单。使我松了口气,写在所有最好的故事,最终征服了魔鬼,奥利佛善过上了幸福美满的生活结束。一个最吸引我的计谋是盗窃,小奥利弗被允许这种康复照顾夫人Maylie和玫瑰开始了一种新的生活。他去散步,与他们,或玫瑰念给他听,他努力学习功课。他感到他先前留下的世界永远犯罪和困难和贫穷。 怎能一个小男孩已经遭受苦难保持纯洁的压迫身体和心灵吗?原因是处于善性品德之中。我认为这是最重要的信息的小说中隐含Dickens-he相信善良能战胜一切困难。虽然我并不认为善良是无所不能的,我却相信,那些都是善良的过的更幸福的人比那些是愚昧无知。 对我来说,处于善性的品德是其中一个最必要的个性的一个人。善良是给人类就像鱼儿离不开水一样。谁是没有良善是一个完全无用的人。相反,正如著名的老话所说:“香味的手总是待在给玫瑰”一样。给你推荐一个网站，超棒！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
Oliver TwistSearch all of Oliver Twist: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------FROM: Appreciations and Criticisms of the Works of Charles DickensBY: Gilbert Keith ChestertonIn considering Dickens, as we almost always must consider him, as a man of rich originality, we may possibly miss the forces from which he drew even his original energy. It is not well for man to be alone. We, in the modern world, are ready enough to admit that when it is applied to some problem of monasticism or of an ecstatic life. But we will not admit that our modern artistic claim to absolute originality is really a claim to absolute unsociability; a claim to absolute loneliness. The anarchist is at least as solitary as the ascetic. And the men of very vivid vigour in literature, the men such as Dickens, have generally displayed a large sociability towards the society of letters, always expressed in the happy pursuit of pre-existent themes, sometimes expressed, as in the case of Moli鑢e or Sterne, in downright plagiarism. For even theft is a confession of our dependence on society. In Dickens, however, this element of the original foundations on which he worked is quite especially difficult to determine. This is partly due to the fact that for the present reading public he is practically the only one of his long line that is read at all. He sums up Smollett and Goldsmith, but he also destroys them. This one giant, being closest to us, cuts off from our view even the giants that begat him. But much more is this difficulty due to the fact that Dickens mixed up with the old material, materials so subtly modern, so made of the French Revolution, that the whole is transformed. If we want the best example of this, the best example is Oliver Twist. Relatively to the other works of Dickens Oliver Twist is not of great value, but it is of great importance. Some parts of it are so crude and of so clumsy a melodrama, that one is almost tempted to say that Dickens would have been greater without it. But even if be had been greater without it he would still have been incomplete without it. With the exception of some gorgeous passages, both of humour and horror, the interest of the book lies not so much in its revelation of Dickens's literary genius as in its revelation of those moral, personal, and political instincts which were the make-up of his character and the permanent support of that literary genius. It is by far the most depressing of all his books; it is in some ways the most irritating; yet its ugliness gives the last touch of honesty to all that spontaneous and splendid output. Without this one discordant note all his merriment might have seemed like levity. Dickens had just appeared upon the stage and set the whole world laughing with his first great story Pickwick. Oliver Twist was his encore. It was the second opportunity given to him by those who ha rolled about with laughter over Tupman and Jingle, Weller and Dowler. Under such circumstances a stagey reciter will sometimes take care to give a pathetic piece after his humorous one; and with all his many moral merits, there was much that was stagey about Dickens. But this explanation alone is altogether inadequate and unworthy. There was in Dickens this other kind of energy, horrible, uncanny, barbaric, capable in another age of coarseness, greedy for the emblems of established ugliness, the coffin, the gibbet, the bones, the bloody knife. Dickens liked these things and he was all the more of a man for liking them; especially he was all the more of a boy. We can all recall with pleasure the fact that Miss Petowker (afterwards Mrs. Lillyvick) was in the habit of reciting a poem called "The Blood Drinker's Burial." I cannot express my regret that the words of this poem are not given; for Dickens would have been quite as capable of writing "The Blood Drinker's Burial" as Miss Petowker was of reciting it. This strain existed in Dickens alongside of his happy laughter; both were allied to the same robust romance. Here as elsewhere Dickens is close to all the permanent human things. He is close to religion, which has never allowed the thousand devils on its churches to stop the dancing of its bells. He is allied to the people, to the real poor, who love nothing so much as to take a cheerful glass and to talk about funerals. The extremes of his gloom and gaiety are the mark of religion and democracy; they mark him off from the moderate happiness of philosophers, and from that stoicism which is the virtue and the creed of aristocrats. There is nothing odd in the fact that the same man who conceived the humane hospitalities of Pickwick should also have imagined the inhuman laughter of Fagin's den. They are both genuine and they are both exaggerated. And the whole human tradition has tied up together in a strange knot these strands of festivity and fear. It is over the cups of Christmas Eve that men have always competed in telling ghost stories. This first element was present in Dickens, and it is very powerfully present in Oliver Twist. It had not been present with sufficient consistency or continuity in Pickwick to make it remain on the reader's memory at all, for the tale of "Gabriel Grubb" is grotesque rather than horrible, and the two gloomy stories of the "Madman" and the "Queer Client" are so utterly irrelevant to the tale, that even if the reader remember them he probably does not remember that they occur in Pickwick. Critics have complained of Shakespeare and others for putting comic episodes into a tragedy. It required a man with the courage and coarseness of Dickens actually to put tragic episodes into a farce. But they are not caught up into the story at all. In Oliver Twist, however, the thing broke out with an almost brutal inspiration, and those who had fallen in love with Dickens for his generous buffoonery may very likely have been startled at receiving such very different fare at the next helping. When you have bought a man's book because you like his writing about Mr. Wardle's punch-bowl and Mr. Winkle's skates, it may very well be surprising to open it and read about the sickening thuds that beat out the life of Nancy, or that mysterious villain whose face was blasted with disease. As a nightmare, the work is really admirable. Characters which are not very clearly conceived as regards their own psychology are yet, at certain moments, managed so as to shake to its foundations our own psychology. Bill Sikes is not exactly a real man, but for all that he is a real murderer. Nancy is not really impressive as a living woman; but (as the phrase goes) she makes a lovely corpse. Something quite childish and eternal in us, something which is shocked with the mere simplicity of death, quivers when we read of those repeated blows or see Sikes cursing the tell-tale cur who will follow his bloody foot-prints. And this strange, sublime, vulgar melodrama, which is melodrama and yet is painfully real, reaches its hideous height in that fine scene of the death of Sikes, the besieged house, the boy screaming within, the crowd screaming without, the murderer turned almost a maniac and dragging his victim uselessly up and down the room, the escape over the roof, the rope swiftly running taut, and death sudden, startling and symbolic; a man hanged. There is in this and similar scenes something of the quality of Hogarth and many other English moralists of the early eighteenth century. It is not easy to define this Hogarthian quality in words, beyond saying that it is a sort of alphabetical realism, like the cruel candour of children. But it has about it these two special principles which separate it from all that we call realism in our time. First, that with us a moral story means a story about moral people; with them a moral story meant more often a story about immoral people. Second, that with us realism is always associated with some subtle view of morals; with them realism was always associated with some simple view of morals. The end of Bill Sikes exactly in the way that the law would have killed him -- this is a Hogarthian incident; it carries on that tradition of startling and shocking platitude. All this element in the book was a sincere thing in the author, but none the less it came from old soils, from the graveyard and the gallows, and the lane where the ghost walked. Dickens was always attracted to such things, and (as Forster says with inimitable simplicity) "but for his strong sense might have fallen into the follies of spiritualism." As a matter of fact, like most of the men of strong sense in his tradition, Dickens was left with a half belief in spirits which became in practice a belief in bad spirits. The great disadvantage of those who have too much strong sense to believe in supernaturalism is that they keep last the low and little forms of the supernatural, such as omens, curses, spectres, and retributions, but find a high and happy supernaturalism quite incredible. Thus the Puritans denied the sacraments, but went on burning witches. This shadow does rest, to some extent, upon the rational English writers like Dickens; supernaturalism was dying, but its ugliest roots died last. Dickens would have found it easier to believe in a ghost than in a vision of the Virgin with angels. There, for good or evil, however, was the root of the old diablerie in Dickens, and there it is in Oliver Twist. But this was only the first of the new Dickens elements, which must have surprised those Dickensians who eagerly bought his second book. The second of the new Dickens elements is equally indisputable and separate. It swelled afterwards to enormous proportions in Dickens's work; but it really has its rise here. Again, as in the case of the element of diablerie, it would be possible to make technical exceptions in favour of Pickwick. Just as there were quite inappropriate scraps of the gruesome element in Pickwick, so there are quite inappropriate allusions to this other topic in Pickwick. But nobody by merely reading Pickwick would even remember this topic; no one by merely reading Pickwick would know what this topic is; this third great subject of Dickens; this second great subject of the Dickens of Oliver Twist. This subject is social oppression. It is surely fair to say that no one could have gathered from Pickwick how this question boiled in the blood of the author of Pickwick. There are, indeed, passages, particularly in connection with Mr. Pickwick in the debtor's prison, which prove to us, looking back on a whole public career, that Dickens had been from the beginning bitter and inquisitive about the problem of our civilisation. No one could have imagined at the time that this bitterness ran in an unbroken river under all the surges of that superb gaiety and exuberance. With Oliver Twist this sterner side of Dickens was suddenly revealed. For the very first pages of Oliver Twist are stern even when they are funny. They amuse, but they cannot be enjoyed, as can the passages about the follies of Mr. Snodgrass or the humiliations of Mr. Winkle. The difference between the old easy humour and this new harsh humour is a difference not of degree but of kind. Dickens makes game of Mr. Bumble because he wants to kill Mr. Bumble; he made game of Mr. Winkle because he wanted him to live for ever. Dickens has taken the sword in hand; against what is he declaring war? It is just here that the greatness of Dickens comes in; it is just here that the difference lies between the pedant and the poet. Dickens enters the social and political war, and the first stroke he deals is not only significant but even startling. Fully to see this we must appreciate the national situation. It was an age of reform, and even of radical reform; the world was full of radicals and reformers; but only too many of them took the line of attacking everything and anything that was opposed to some particular theory among the many political theories that possessed the end of the eighteenth century. Some had so much perfected the perfect theory of republicanism that they almost lay awake at night because Queen Victoria had a crown on her head. Others were so certain that mankind had hitherto been merely strangled in the bonds of the State that they saw truth only in the destruction of tariffs or of by-laws. The greater part of that generation held that clearness, economy, and a hard common-sense, would soon destroy the errors that had been erected by the superstitions and sentimentalities of the past. In pursuance of this idea many of the new men of the new century, quite confident that they were invigorating the new age, sought to destroy the old entimental clericalism, the old sentimental feudalism, the old-world belief in priests, the old-world belief in patrons, and among other things the old-world belief in beggars. They sought among other things to clear away the old visionary kindliness on the subject of vagrants. Hence those reformers enacted not only a new reform bill but also a new poor law. In creating many other modern things they created the modern workhouse, and when Dickens came out to fight it was the first thing that he broke with his battle-axe. This is where Dickens's social revolt is of more value than mere politics and avoids the vulgarity of the novel with a purpose. His revolt is not a revolt of the commercialist against the feudalist, of the Nonconformist against the Churchman, of the Free-trader against the Protectionist, of the Liberal against the Tory. If he were among us now his revolt would not be the revolt of the Socialist against the Individualist, or of the Anarchist against the Socialist. His revolt was simply and solely the eternal revolt; it was the revolt of the weak against the strong. He did not dislike this or that argument for oppression; he disliked oppression. He disliked a certain look on the face of a man when he looks down on another man. And that look on the face is, indeed, the only thing in the world that we have really to fight between here and the fires of Hell. That which pedants of that time and this time would have called the sentimentalism of Dickens was really simply the detached sanity of Dickens. He cared nothing for the fugitive explanations of the Constitutional Conservatives; he cared nothing for the fugitive explanations of the Manchester School. He would have cared quite as little for the fugitive explanations of the Fabian Society or of the modern scientific Socialist. He saw that under many forms there was one fact, the tyranny of man over man; and he struck at it when he saw it, whether it was old or new. When he found that footmen and rustics were too much afraid of Sir Leicester Dedlock, he attacked Sir Leicester Dedlock; he did not care whether Sir Leicester Dedlock said he was attacking England or whether Mr. Rouncewell, the Ironmaster, said he was attacking an effete oligarchy. In that case he pleased Mr. Rouncewell, the Ironmaster, and displeased Sir Leicester Dedlock, the Aristocrat. But when he found that Mr. Rouncewell's workmen were much too frightened of Mr. Rouncewell, then he displeased Mr. Rouncewell in turn; he displeased Mr. Rouncewell very much by calling him Mr. Bounderby. When he imagined himself to be fighting old laws he gave a sort of vague and general approval to new laws. But when he came to the new laws they had a bad time. When Dickens found that after a hundred economic arguments and granting a hundred economic considerations, the fact remained that paupers in modern workhouses were much too afraid of the beadle, just as vassals in ancient castles were much too afraid of the Dedlocks, then he struck suddenly and at once. This is what makes the opening chapters of Oliver Twist so curious and important. The very fact of Dickens's distance from, and independence of, the elaborate financial arguments of his time, makes more definite and dazzling his sudden assertion that he sees the old human tyranny in front of him as plain as the sun at noon-day. Dickens attacks the modern workhouse with a sort of inspired simplicity as a boy in a fairy tale who had wandered about, sword in hand, looking for ogres and who had found an indisputable ogre. All the other people of his time are attacking things because they are bad economics or because they are bad politics, or because they are bad science; he alone is attacking things because they are bad. All the others are Radicals with a large R; he alone is radical with a small one. He encounters evil with that beautiful surprise which, as it is the beginning of all real pleasure, is also the beginning of all righteous indignation. He enters the workhouse just as Oliver Twist enters it, as a little child. This is the real power and pathos of that celebrated passage in the book which has passed into a proverb; but which has not lost its terrible humour even in being hackneyed. I mean, of course, the everlasting quotation about Oliver Twist asking for more. The real poignancy that there is in this idea is a very good study in that strong school of social criticism which Dickens represented. A modern realist describing the dreary workhouse would have made all the children utterly crushed, not daring to speak at all, not expecting anything, not hoping anything, past all possibility of affording even an ironical contrast or a protest of despair. A modern, in short, would have made all the boys in the workhouse pathetic by making them all pessimists. But Oliver Twist is not pathetic because he is a pessimist. Oliver Twist is pathetic because he is an optimist. The whole tragedy of that incident is in the fact that he does expect the universe to be kind to him, that he does believe that he is living in a just world. He comes before the Guardians as the ragged peasants of the French Revolution came before the Kings and Parliaments of Europe. That is to say, he comes, indeed, with gloomy experiences, but he comes with a happy philosophy. He knows that there are wrongs of man to be reviled; but he believes also that there are rights of man to be demanded. It has often been remarked as a singular fact that the French poor, who stand in historic tradition as typical of all the desperate men who have dragged down tyranny, were, as a matter of fact, by no means worse off than the poor of many other European countries before the Revolution. The truth is that the French were tragic because they were better off. The others had known the sorrowful experiences; but they alone had known the splendid expectation and the original claims. It was just here that Dickens was so true a child of them and of that happy theory so bitterly applied. They were the one oppressed people that simply asked for justice; they were the one Parish Boy who innocently asked for more.
Oliver Twist is born in a workhouse in a provincial town. His mother has been found very sick in the street, and she gives birth to Oliver just before she dies. Oliver is raised under the care of Mrs. Mann and the beadle Mr. Bumble in the workhouse. When it falls to Oliver’s lot to ask for more food on behalf of all the starving children in the workhouse, he is trashed, and then apprenticed to an undertaker, Mr. Sowerberry. Another apprentice of Mr. Sowerberry’s, Noah Claypole insults Oliver’s dead mother and the small and frail Oliver attacks him. However, Oliver is punished severely, and he runs away to London. Here he is picked up by Jack Dawkins or the Artful Dodger as he is called. The Artful Dodger is a member of the Jew Fagin’s gang of boys. Fagin has trained the boys to become pickpockets. The Artful Dodger takes Oliver to Fagin’s den in the London slums, and Oliver, who innocently does not understand that he is among criminals, becomes one of Fagin’s Oliver is sent out with The Artful Dodger and another boy on a pickpocket expedition Oliver is so shocked when he realizes what is going on that he and not the two other boys are caught. Fortunately, the victim of the thieves, the old benevolent gentleman, Mr. Brownlow rescues Oliver from arrest and brings him to his house, where the housekeeper, Mrs. Bedwin nurses him back to life after he had fallen sick, and for the first time in his life he is , with the help of the brutal murderer Bill Sikes and the prostitute Nancy Fagin kidnaps Oliver. Fagin is prompted to do this by the mysterious Mr. Monks. Oliver is taken along on a burglary expedition in the country. The thieves are discovered in the house of Mrs. Maylie and her adopted niece, Rose, and Oliver is shot and wounded. Sikes escapes. Rose and Mrs. Maylie nurse the wounded Oliver. When he tells them his story they believe him, and he settles with them. While living with Rose and Mrs. Maylie Oliver one day sees Fagin and Monks looking at him in through a window. Nancy discovers that Monks is plotting against Oliver for some reason, bribing Fagin to corrupt his innocence. Nancy also learns that there is some kind of connection between Rose and Oliver; but after having told Rose’s adviser and friend Dr. Losberne about it on the steps of London Bridge, she is discovered by Noah Claypole, who in the meantime has become a member of Fagin’s gang, and Sykes murders her. On his frantic flight away from the crime Sykes accidentally and dramatically hangs himself. Fagin and the rest of the gang are arrested. Fagin is executed after Oliver has visited him in the condemned cell in Newgate Prison. The Artful Dodger is transported after a court scene in which he eloquently defends himself and his ’ plot against Oliver is disclosed by Mr. Brownlow. Monks is Oliver’s half-brother seeking all of the inheritance for himself. Oliver’s father’s will states that he will leave money to Oliver on the condition that his reputation is clean. Oliver’s dead mother and Rose were sisters. Monks receives his share of the inheritance and goes away to America. He dies in prison there, and Oliver is adopted by Mr. Brownlow.