I’m reading Bleak House at the moment. When I started, I had the same questions you do. My simple answer to your two questions are that both Grisham and Dickens provide average readers with a good story. They address contemporary issues the reader will be happy to buy. They’re both popular writers who wrote for the publishing industry as it exists(ed) to sell the most product. Dickens wrote in serials. Grisham (at least in his early years) cranked out a novel or more a year.
Neither, though are experimental writers. They’re popular writers. It doesn’t make them any less pertinent or literary, it just makes them successful.
Grisham’s work, I suspect, would have been quite popular in the mid 19th century. They breeze along, tell snappy tales (generally), have a little sex, and, in the end, make the reader feel superior to the characters. Dickens wasn’t a whole lot different.
Huge passages of Dickens can be skimmed. But in my estimation, he writes dialogue as well as anyone ever has. That’s the cream of Dickens’ work in my mind. And that’s what Grisham’s good at, too. That’s what makes his novels so valuable to the film industry.
The fact that we find Dickens’ long, descriptive passages and obscure allusions difficult doesn’t make us dumber. We have 150 to 175 years more of our language and cultural references to deal with than he did. Charles Dickens didn’t have Adolf Hitler, D-Day, Jackie O, Watergate, Vietnam, The Jeffersons, 9/11, the Bay of Pigs, Stonewall, OJ, Sesame Street, the Panama Canal, 2 1/2 Men, or an infinite number of other references to deal with
In my reading I find that most of the difficult pieces in Dickens fall into four categories:
-
The Bible – A lot of Americans seem less attuned to this document than Victorians were.
-
Shakespeare – Sadly, The Bard doesn’t play as well as he once did in a “classical education.” I think we’re the poorer for it.
-
Mythology – It was important once. Back when coal soot raining on the streets of London was considered “progress.” (Not by Dickens, of course).
-
London in the 19th Century --Things have changed. I’ll catch a cab.
I’ve read several of Grisham’s books. I don’t read him any more, though, largely because his plots are simplistic and his characters are formulaic. I suspect some said the same about Dickens in 1868.