3

This reference to the coat of no cut and no time, the unfortunate gentleman gasped forth, in a scarcely audible voice, and with his clenched pocket-handkerchief raised in the air.

What does "coat of no cut and no time" mean in the preceding passage from Dickens' Little Dorrit Chapter 31?

5
  • The language in Little Dorrit, written more than 150 years ago, is almost meaningless to this native speaker. I have found other novels by Dickens easier to follow. Commented Jan 9, 2023 at 14:36
  • 3
    @Lambie: No. The reference is to one thing. A thing that has two attributes - or more precisely, lacks two attributes (neither a known "cut", nor a style associated with any particular period). But in truth those two things overlap anyway. Commented Jan 9, 2023 at 17:46
  • @FumbleFingers Yes, the coat is OF no cut and OF no time, but my parse is right. I didn't bother to explain the whole thing. But still, it is not one thing but two.
    – Lambie
    Commented Jan 9, 2023 at 22:42
  • 3
    @Lambie Your original slashes ("This reference to //the coat of no cut//and//no time. ") seem to indicate that you parse it as the combination of "This reference to the coat of no cut." plus "This reference to no time." -- This is opposed to "This reference to the coat of no cut." plus "This reference to the coat of no time.", which I assume would be slashed as "This reference to the coat of //no cut//and//no time." (That is, "no time" is parallel to "no cut", both belonging to a single coat, rather than being a separate thing parallel to the full phrase "the coat of no cut".)
    – R.M.
    Commented Jan 9, 2023 at 22:58
  • @R.M. You can turn it any way you like. The fact remains I said it was two things, Obviously, the "of no time" is implied, sure., That does not make my parse inaccurate.
    – Lambie
    Commented Jan 10, 2023 at 15:28

1 Answer 1

10

The highlighted text refers back to a line in the very first paragraph of the containing chapter...

His coat is a colour, and cut, that never was the mode anywhere, at any period.

I assume the reference to "colour" is self-explanatory. The "cut" of an item of clothing refers to how the different pieces of cloth making up a garment are shaped and stitched together so as to fit the body well (or hang down elegantly, as appropriate). And never was the mode is just a slightly "literary" alternative to was never fashionable / in fashion.

So the text is saying the coat was very "unusual" - probably not in a good way, but the OP here can decide for himself whether it's an unusually good or unusually bad looking coat.

2
  • I'll just add this as a comment, because it's not really a necessary part of the above Answer, but I was genuinely surprised to find how often the word coat occurs in Little Dorrit. When searching for the "antecedent" referent (which logically had to exist earlier in the text) I just started searching the full text (as per link in the Answer) forwards from the beginning. And I had to wade through dozens of instances before I got to the one I was looking for. (I should've started by finding coat of no cut, and searched backwards for the nearest preceding instance! :) Commented Jan 9, 2023 at 16:05
  • 1
    Putting on my "literary critic" hat, I assume it's no accident Dickens likes referring to coats. As a general principle, the kind of coat you wear is often seen as a reliable indicator of your social status (poor people are "ragamuffins" dressed in rags and tatters while the stereotypical cartoon millionaire wears a fur coat and smokes a fat cigar). Several of Dickens' stories turn on the idea of a central character who appears to be "low-born" (being poor and thus poorly-dressed), but is actually from a high-status background (and thus "lives happily ever after" at the end of the book). Commented Jan 9, 2023 at 16:16

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .