在閱覽有關狄更斯的研究的過程中，我發現大多數的學者通常都很有默契的迴避一個事實：狄更斯不但是個名作家，同時也是個成就顯著的表演者。其中只有米勒(Melvin H. Miller)堅稱狄更斯的雙領域成就其實是缺一不可的。 然而米勒的發言並未引起其他學者的注意，即便後來柯林斯(Philip Collins)稍稍提到狄更斯雙領域的關聯，多數學者依舊保持沉默。但我認為柯林斯的論點實在太過草率，所以我轉向昂格(W. J. Ong)的口述理論，希望能藉由昂格的理論發掘狄更斯雙成就的關聯。 一如我所預期，狄更斯有意圖地結合口述傳統與文學性：一方面，狄更斯小說中的口述傳統幫助讀者更快適應新的故事表現方式；另一方面，文字所帶來的抽象思考形成了狄更斯所有作品的架構主幹。最後，狄更斯有意圖地演出他的作品，這三者的結合便使狄更斯能夠隨心所欲地游走在文字及口語表現之中。 接著，費娜根(Ruth Finnegan)的口述理論提醒了我所有文本的功能性的重要。我有點驚訝的發現狄更斯對於口說力量的強烈信仰和世界上其他地方的口語文化不謀而合。藉著費娜根的協助，我指出狄更斯作品中的高度互文性是造成維多利亞大眾無從意識到狄更斯所做的偉大嘗試，也就是試圖結合口述性及文學性。最後，藉著福洛克(Deborah Vlock)的觀點「狄更斯的小說能夠視覺地、口語地、及敘述地被表現」，我相當有信心地作結：狄更斯結合口述性及文學性的意圖正是他深受維多利亞大眾喜愛的主因。 / In reviewing papers related to Charles Dickens, I find that scholars tend to avoid the truth that Dickens is not only a famous writer but a very distinguished performer; only Melvin H. Miller, a contemporary of Dickens, asserts that Dickens’s two careers are indispensible to each other. After Miller’s remarks there’s a long-lasting silence until Philip Collins slightly touches this issue. Yet, not very satisfied with Collins’s hasty judges, I turn to W. J. Ong’s oral theory in order to figure out what is the connection between Dickens’s writing career and speaking achievement. As I expected, Dickens’s writing is a combination of orality and literacy: on the one hand, orality in Dickens’s novels familiarizes the reader with the new style of story-telling; on the other hand, modern consciousness, the product of writing technology, frames Dickens’s texts with logic and lineal thinking. Dickens’s intention to enact his texts finally results in his ability to freely present a text with either written words or spoken words. Later, Ruth Finnegan’s theory reminds me of the significance of functional value of texts. I’m kind of surprised to find that Dickens’s strong belief in oral power is very identical with other oral people’s in the globe. With Finnegan’s great help, I’m encouraged to conclude that it is the intertexuality that makes the Victorian unaware of Dickens’s combining his writing, acting, and speaking. Finally, Deborah Vlock’s remark that Dickens’s novels are “visually, vocally, and narratively written” strengthens my confidence in concluding that the combination of orality and literaty is the secret Dickens’s popularity.