双城记读后感心得
爱让马内特医生重获新生，爱让达奈摆脱家族的桎梏，爱让露西拥有幸福家庭，爱让卡顿英勇就义。爱让渺小的个人不致在社会狂潮中淹没，让卑微的生命有自己的活法。以下是整理的双城记读后感心得资料，仅供参考，欢迎阅读，希望能够帮助到大家。
双城记读后感心得一
那是最美好的时代，那是最糟糕的时代;那是智慧的年头，那是愚昧的年头;那是信仰的时期，那是怀疑的时期;那是光明的季节，那是黑暗的季节;那是希望的春天，那是失望的冬天;我们全都在直奔天堂，我们全都在直奔相反的方向--简而言之，那时跟现在非常相象，某些最喧嚣的权威坚持要用形容词的最高级来形容它。说它好，是最高级的;说它不好，也是最高级的。
这是整本书的开头第一章，将全书的基调定上了悲剧色彩，然而就在这矛盾的时代中，也确实存在过光明。
这本书叙述了法国大革命时期围绕在医生马奈特一家周围的事，这本书颠覆了我对自由，权利以及善恶的看法——法国人民不堪重负，推翻了波旁王朝，然而新政权建立之后朝他们走来的难道是他们心驰神往的自由吗?不，仍然是以往的提心吊胆，稍不留神明天就会被送上断头台。得势之后的德发日太太滥用职权，将死敌们个个置于死地，最后却落得个惨死的下场。正如那句话所说的：“自由啊，有多少罪恶是假借你的名义干出来的。”大革命并不如想象中的那么美好，而是以暴易暴。它没有拯救人民，而是将人民推入了另一个火坑。
再来看看另外一位大革命的牺牲品——达内，革命前，他放弃了国内的家业，只身来到英国谋生，在他看来，压迫人民是一件极不人道的事，然而，革命爆发后，他反而无辜地成为人民的敌人，人们不分青红皂白地要将他领上断头台。不过相信在九死一生之后，他依然是原先那个善良的达内。
而卡顿——一个才华横溢却自甘堕落的律师，他与达内有着相同的长相，却有着不同的命运，在面对活着还是让自己心爱的人得到幸福的抉择时，毅然决然的选择了后者，在他看来，生命在爱的面前是微不足道的，即使在断头台上，他也表现出了令人难以想象的沉着冷静。因为在他的心底，一直有一个信念在支持他：“耶稣说，复活在我，生命也在我，信我的人，虽然死了，也必复活。凡活着信我的人，必永远不死。”他用死完成了自我救赎，他用死来反抗虚伪的革命者，他用死来诠释对露丝的爱。生命，成了他最后的武器，爱，成了他唯一的支柱。
双城记读后感心得二
《双城记》是继《大卫·科波菲尔》和《远大前程》后看过的第三本狄更斯的小说。
本书以法国大革命为背景，讲述了一个自愿放弃贵族身份的法国正直青年查尔斯·艾弗勒蒙德(又名达奈)靠自己的双手在英国成家立业，不曾想他的岳父——一名在巴士底狱关押18年，心智受损的法国医生亚历山大·马内特，正是受他家族迫害的无辜百姓。马内特在女儿露西爱的呼唤下回归正常阳光生活，为回报女儿的爱他战胜了内心的阴影。善良友爱的一家人其乐融融，直到法国革命的风暴来临。
达奈为了搭救曾经的仆人毅然回国，然而等待他的却是断头台，他大大低估了激化了的阶级矛盾的力量。马内特凭借巴士底狱囚犯的身份成功解救达奈，然而其牢狱之灾的阴影被曝光，前一天还热烈拥戴的狂热群众此时成了波涛汹涌的狂暴复仇者，无辜的达奈终被判死刑。不过老天或者狄更斯并没有放弃达奈，一个品质良好却无所作为的堕落青年西德尼·卡顿代达奈赴死。卡顿怀着对露西的爱，至死相信这是他所做过的最好的事。
爱让马内特医生重获新生，爱让达奈摆脱家族的桎梏，爱让露西拥有幸福家庭，爱让卡顿英勇就义。爱让渺小的个人不致在社会狂潮中淹没，让卑微的生命有自己的活法!
开篇名言——“那是最好的年月，那是最坏的年月，那是智慧的时代，那是愚蠢的时代，那是信仰的新纪元，那是怀疑的新纪元，那是光明的季节，那是黑暗的季节，那是希望的春天，那是绝望的冬天，我们将拥有一切，我们将一无所有，我们直接上天堂，我们直接下地狱——简言之，那个时代跟现代十分相似，甚至当年有些大发议论的权威人士都坚持认为，无论说那一时代好也罢，坏也罢，只有用最高比较级，才能接受。”
就义名言——“耶稣对他说，复活在我，生命也在我。信我的人，虽然死了，也必复活。凡活着信我的人，比永远不死。”
双城记读后感心得三
“复活在我，生命在我，信我的人，虽然死了，也必复活;凡活着信我的人，必永远不死。”
这是一个不幸的年代，作品以法国大革命为背景，反映了封建贵族对人们的迫害，以及法国大革命的欺压，整部故事情节围绕马奈特医生一家展开描述，其中查尔斯·达内便是法国大革命的受害者，他是一名自愿放弃贵族生活，希望独自在社会上找到地位立足的人，不料，却被指控为逃亡贵族，不幸的他即将被送上断头台，而这时，意想不到的事发生了。
当时，法国人民攻破了巴士底狱，并开始疯狂地惩罚压迫者，这便是著名的法国大革命，他们以德日法夫妇为首，不分青红皂白地把人送上断头台，多么荒唐，只为达成他们每天所订的人头个数。于是，他们便渴望能够让达内为他们增添一个人头，达内有一位兄弟：卡顿，他是一位自甘堕落的律师，他得了绝症，于是便恍恍惚惚地苦熬着剩余的时光，他的哥哥达内常常欺辱他、排斥他，甚至不将卡顿当人看，但就在达内被判下死刑的那一天，只有卡顿来看了他，卡顿迷昏了达内，并用自己改装替代了他，让达内终于逃脱了一死，而自己，却在第二天失去了生命。
这就是爱，朴实，真诚，在兄弟之间，没有你我，你的生命，就是我的生命，爱是互相的，并不需要过多的语言去表达，只需要用行动去证明。在一起生活的兄弟，有时会耍耍脾气，但永远都无法堵上他们心灵之间的那条通道，它是兄弟的见证，爱的奇迹。
在双城记中，作者用大量的笔墨描写了人民的抗争，这也是狄更斯所要揭露的——美与丑，美与丑是相互对应的，但它们却绝非任何人都能分辨出来，“人不可貌相，海水不可斗量。”我们要正确认识到自己或别人的缺陷，并且进行反思、改正，同时，认真地发现周围所有美的事物，用心灵去感受他们。不要被表面所迷惑，更应该做一个正直、善良的人。
双城记读后感心得四
众所周知，法国大革命是人类的一个血的印记。而《双城记》真实地描绘了统治阶级的凶残和腐朽。通过阅读《双城记》，我深深的感受到了法国大革命时期法国统治阶级与广大人民之间的尖锐矛盾，体会到了作者狄更斯的思想“鲜血无法洗去仇恨，更不能代替爱”。
《双城记》以法国大革命为背景，描绘了十八世纪的一位医生梅尼特从监狱中重获自由，和女儿一起到伦敦生活，五年后，他们在法庭上为名叫代尔纳的法国青年作证，露西和代尔纳因相爱而结婚。1789年，法国大革命爆发，代尔纳因身为贵族后裔而遭逮捕并判死刑。在千钧一发时刻，一直爱恋露西的英国青年卡尔登代替代尔纳上了断头台。
卡尔登是书中最富魅力，也是最为复杂的一位人物，他颓废消极，浑浑噩噩地生活着。求学时，他只替同学写作业，工作后，即使拥有一身才华，他仍然选择默默无闻的打工。但是，在他冷漠的外表下，没有看到他有一份深沉的感情。他温柔的，执着的爱着露西，甚至最终为了露西愿意奉献出自己的生命。他让我们看到了他对露西那深沉的爱：用自己的性命换回自己心爱的女人的家庭幸福与她的笑颜。无论在哪个时代，卡尔登对露西的爱都显得那么珍惜和高贵。
相较于卡尔登所代表的温柔与爱，得伐石太太则是杀戮和血腥的象征。因为亲人惨死在代尔纳叔叔与父亲的魔掌下，所以她一生只为仇恨而活。得伐石太太的嗜血固然使人不寒而栗，也叫人不禁感叹仇恨的力量。18世纪末的法国，就被这种执拗复仇的火焰燃烧成了修罗地狱。
小说同样也赞美了其他角色：梅尼特医生正直高尚，且善良宽容，是仁爱的理想化身;露西则是爱和温情的化身;代尔纳是给统治阶级指明出路的人。这些人物表现出来的种种美德，都是作为人道主义者的狄更斯所热情赞颂的。
作者狄更斯是19世纪英国现实主义文学的主要代表。他以妙趣横生的幽默、细致入微的心理分析，以及现实主义描写与浪漫主义气氛的有机结合着称。他所着的《双城记》以法国贵族的荒淫残暴、人民群众的重重苦难和法国大革命的历史，来影射当时的英国社会现实，预示着这嘲恐怖的大火“也将在法国上演。
这就是狄更斯为”最坏的时代“开出的良药，然而这毕竟是一种理想。有人说，《双城记》作为一部不朽的着作，如果没有卡尔登的存在和所作所为，这部小说就失去了它的价值和光辉。
卡尔登的死，就像是羽毛轻柔地飘落水面，没有水花，却涟漪阵阵。它提醒了我们：真正的自由与平等是无法用断头台建立。
双城记读后感心得五
爱情在生与死的悬崖边上徘徊，而死亡则是解决最终爱情的唯一方法。
“这是最美的时代，也是最糟糕的时代;这是智慧的年代，也是愚昧的年代;这是信仰的时期，也是怀疑的时期;这是光明的季节，也是黑暗的季节。”这是书中我认为最经典、最有分量的语句。
英国著名作家狄更斯为我们讲述了在这样复杂的时代背景下一个感人的爱情故事。
卡顿，这个故事中的一个男主角。他深爱着女主人公露西，然而露西有一个深爱着的而且对方也深爱着露西的爱人--达尔内。对此，他选择了放弃，用宽容来成全他们的爱。
书中，他在每个喝醉了酒的夜晚，晃悠到露西他们所在的街角。清冷的月色下，唯有街道两旁的影子与他相伴--坐在那儿，就那样望着那栋房子。不知何时，晨曦的第一缕光已洒向不远处教堂的顶端。
“复活在我，生命也在我，信仰我的人虽然死了，也必复活，凡活着信仰我的人，必永远不死。”书中，道路悄然，夜色渐浓，《圣经》的词句拌和着他脚步的回音，在空中回荡。由于达内尔家族的关系，法国大革命后的他将要被群情激愤的广大人民送上断头台。卡顿为了爱情，毅然决定用自己酷似达内尔的长相去换回达内尔的生命。
塞纳河岸依旧，水浪怒涌着，扑向岸边，打起一串串水珠，而后转瞬退去。新生还是死亡?在这个最好也最坏的时代，一切都是未知的。
在即将踏上断头台的那一刹那，他看见露西：抱着那个以他来命名的孩子在多年以后，和达尔内在一起，达内尔向这个孩子讲述着他的故事。长大成人的孩子在这条路上奋勇前进……
他满足地笑了：因为他现在所做的比所做过的一切都要好;他将要到一个比他所知道的还要好的地方去好好休息!
卡顿为了爱情，选择了牺牲。然而不知道为什么，在我的身边和许多的影视作品中，人们在爱情的道路上往往都是自私的。难道，看着自己爱的人幸福不是一种幸福吗?
道路悄然，夜色渐浓，泰戈尔的那句话似乎又在吟唱，自心底升起：“让死者有那不朽的名，让生者有那不朽的爱。”
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 lifele 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 flawle pair--flawlely 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, Mi Manette.To further turn us against good old Madame Defarge, Dickens has her using a toothpick publicly in her opening scene, an activity dainty Mi 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 kindne? 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 weaknees 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 humanne 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 correctne and anti-racism, a Tale of Two Cities written today would never leave the word proceor.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 meage 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 streful moments, but when her husband is before a heartle, 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 mercilely and her brother was killed by a pair heartle \\\"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
能自己用就好！
无尿点。
