1001 Group Read - February, 2013: Les Miserables

Ladies and Gentlemen, start your engines!

I started last week and have gotten through about 10%. This is a LONG book, and I think that dyed-in-the-wool francophiles will get the most out of it. Like I can see my colleagues who study French art and history loving this book. But for me, an entire chapter that just listed what was trendy in 1815 (or was it 1817) just lacked that little je-ne-sais-quoi.
But I suspect this is a book we can discuss a lot and I look forward to that!

I know what you mean. I really got tired of reading about the sewers under Paris. But the overall quality of the book is fantastic. That helps with the painful parts.

I'm about two-thirds of the way through and am mostly really enjoying it. Some of the Hugo's tangents go off from the story a little bit too much for me... (I know more about Waterloo now than I ever cared to.) But the story itself is just wonderful.

On a side note, this is technically a re-read for me... I bought my copy back in high school, but frankly I'm doubting now that I actually made it all the way through. I can't imagine high school aged me got through all the passages of French history.

I read this a couple of years ago, so I'll be following along. As you've all already mentioned, I loved the story and main characters, but some of the tangents, especially about the politics and battles, really lost me.

I am about 15% in to the book and finding it very readable. The most interesting "side story" for me so far was the discussion between the bishop and the dying member of the Convention about the rights and wrongs of the French Revolution:

"The brutalities of progress are called revolutions. When they are over, the fact is recognised that the human race has been treated harshly, but that it has progressed."

I'm mixing up my reading of this book with shorter books so expect to be still going into March...

I am at 31% and enjoying it very much. So far I also liked most of the digressions, especially the first long one about Monsigneur Bienvenu. Waterloo not so much, I am just not enough of a strategic thinker to enjoy extensive battle analysis, it was the same with War and Peace.

But during those Waterloo chapters I thought something with my Kindle edition must be wrong and another book got mixed in, so abrupt was the break from the main story.
So I consulted wikipedia and found that a quarter of the book consists of digressions...

(I had almost accidentally bought a new and abridged German translation, I was only warned by the reader comments, because it didn't say 'abridged' in the description. The readers complained that the work was shortened almost by half, which then I couldn't imagine. Now I know the publishers just left out 'all those annoying digressions that will bore our readers anyway' and shortened the main story a bit.)

I had planned to read this book very slowly - 1 or 2% a day and to take it into March/April, but clearly it wants to be read faster. I'm considering reading one of the later volumes in French, but the whole thing would be too long for my limited knowledge of that language.

I'm not sure if I am looking forward to this read or not!

I've just started Volume I, Book Seventh, Chapter IV. That's about 17%.

At this point Jean Valjean is agonizing over his great moral dilemma. I've enjoying the book immensely so far (minus that "what's trending now" chapter).

I like Hugo's writing style. The language & sentence structure is complex enough to be challenging, but not to the point that I have to reread and labor over overly complicated passages. I think it's just right - very satisfying. Kindle's built in dictionary is getting a workout ;)

The most impressive aspect to me has been the level of character development. For example: the Bishop was an important character only because of a very short (but life-altering) encounter with Valjean, and yet 14 chapters were dedicated to examining what kind of man he was. In over 1400 pages, I expect we'll get to know all the characters really well!

This isn't the only book I'm reading right now, so I may not finish in Feb - hope to come close though.

I will start this soon but I don't anticipated getting it finished this month

#9, we are at exactly the same place, thanks to a massive traffic jam yesterday that had me stranded for two hours, with nothing to do but listen to my audiobook. Due to the length of this tome I am both listening to it and reading it on paper, which is slightly confusing (two different translations) but doable.

#7, I also loved the whole introductory section on Monsigneur Bienvenue. The dynamic of his household is so lovingly portrayed, and it gives a very clear sense of what, in the Hugo's world, makes a man truly good.

On the topic of characterization, Fantine is a very interesting figure, because she is a person of ordinary weaknesses. Bienvenue has no weaknesses, and Jean Valjean is extra-ordinary in his person and his struggles (so far). But Fantine is a person who any of us might know (even be!) and who makes mistakes that are stupid but not inconceivable. So Hugo makes us ask, are these mistakes enough to cause her ruin? Was the first one enough of a mistake? the second? etc. And if not, what about society allows that to happen?

Javert seems like the necessary counterweight to that question. He is almost autistic, or otherwise socially maladjusted: he sees the world starkly in black and white. Fantine is the figure of grey, for Hugo.
At least in the first 220 pages!

#11: Javert seems like the necessary counterweight to that question. He is almost autistic, or otherwise socially maladjusted: he sees the world starkly in black and white.
This is just becoming my problem with him... I am at about 35% now (mainly concentrated on finally finishing La Coscienza di Zeno during the last days), and I am finding Javert so unbearable that it's getting difficult for me to read on... *sigh*

I can't deal well with all-good or all-bad characters. Bienvenue has a grey past and became good - I can accept that. Valjean's struggles make him such a real, believable character. But Javert... I see that he wants to follow what he interpretes as justice. But his obsession with Valjean is so over-the-top, it makes the reading totally uncomfortable for me at this point.
Are there no other, more important criminals to spy on?

By the way I was outraged about the behaviour of the 4 young men towards the girls. How absolutely cruel! And just thinking about their return home 'in style' for a bright successful future. (yes I know that was all normal and quite accepted by those girls as well, but still...)

I saw the film yesterday (and absolutely loved it!) and it got me thinking about the tangential passages.

Aside from obviously giving the story context and depth, I wonder whether these passages were intended also to just give space to the story?

One thing that the film was always going to struggle with was that the complex story moved too quickly, making some of the character developments seem a bit swift and unrealistic. The extended musings of Hugo quite literally put time between sections of the story, giving the impression that the reader is following along with the story in (sort of) real time. The sheer length of the book is one thing that I felt added to impact of the end of the book.

p.s. I like the idea of Javert as being autistic! This would certainly go some way to explain his thought processes.

That's interesting. I always thought that Javert behaved the way he did because he was obsesive, compulsive. This, then, lent itself to his incessant pursuit of Jean. He couldn't let it go. He had to be after him. . .couldn't get him out of his mind. He was driven to the conclusion of his pointless view of justice. . .which was to bring him back to prison no matter how things changed.

Yes, Javert seems just obsessive, but when Hugo first introduces him he emphasizes the way he sees the world in completely absolute terms, that right is right and wrong is wrong and hierarchies must never be disturbed and punishments must be carried out. So the obsession comes from him seeing an instance of what we'd perceive as grey, but he perceives as a disturbance in the order of things.
I am now in the middle of the Battle of Waterloo. The description is actually pretty good and I'm taking it as an exercise on Hugo's part -- like, can a novelist recount a battle, or something. I am assuming that it has no relation whatsoever to the story at hand. Or is the point, don't count your chickens before they are hatched, or something to that effect -- because that seems to be the lesson of the battle.

Re: Javert's obsession.... I think you also have to remember that Javert's hunt becomes personal for him after Valjean's trip to the courthouse. He is personally affronted because he was tricked (and in his mind made to look like a fool.) For someone with such a black and white vision of the world, he becomes almost single minded about restoring the proper order to things, as annamorphic says. At least, that's my take on it.

I struggled through all the information on Waterloo.... it was more than enough for me. However, I've seen several reviews complaining about some of the other tangents (the nuns and the sewers specifically) and those didn't bother me at all. I guess just not all that interested in the military aspects of history.

Well, it looks like we all agree that Javert simply could not tolerate a disturbance in the time warp continuum. I liked the Waterloo part.

I've just finished the Waterloo section. As a school-boy I was obsessed with the Napoleonic Wars, particularly Waterloo, and read various books on the battle so this section was a bit of nostalgia for me.

I was interested in comparing this with Tolstoy's view of Napoleon in Russia in War and Peace. I read the latter book 15 years ago so my recollection might be hazy, but I think both authors emphasize that the outcomes of battles are the result of chance actions, choices made by individuals in the heat of battle, and luck. In both books Napoleon's fate is largely out of his control once he has commenced the action. Where they do differ is that Tolstoy emphasizes the importance of the actions of individuals in the field, whereas Hugo sees the outcome as the result of fate/destiny - "The force which is mightier than man produced that day... In this event, stamped with superhuman necessity, the part played by men amounts to nothing"

Back to the story...

At first, I found the chapters-long tangents very annoying as they always came when I was on the edge of my seat to find out what was going to happen next. After a while, I realized that they were related to the plot - yes, even the one about the sewers - and just decided to calm down and go with it. I was all set to give this four stars until Javert's big moment (doing my best not to give too much away). Definitely five stars, a rarity for me.

emaestra, you mirror my sentiments almost exactly! I think from the barricade onwards there was no way it could be anything but a hall of fame, 5 star, read it every year book.

I personally really like the Waterloo section, both for the details of the military strategy and for the staggeringly deep context that was ultimately provided for the relationship between Marius and Thernardier (a relationship that was sadly, but understandably, not included in the film apart from one theatrical nod)

I definitley agree with amerynth's sentiment that the sheer volume of tangential topics mean that there will undoubtedly be something that doesn't grip most readers. For me it was the section on French slang.

Final thought for today, from my fairly limited experience of working with children on the autistic spectrum, one aspect that is quite common is a difficulty to cope with people not following rules, or rules being ambiguous. This trait seemed very prominent in Javert.

Wow, I'd give it 5stars (or 4.75) already now and I am in the middle of vol. 4!

I found I really need those digressions to calm down again, because the actual plot is sometimes almost too gripping for my poor weak nerves. That scene with Marius listening through the wall by the end of vol. 3 was just incredible.

Little spoiler: What I don't need that much and I hope won't be too much emphasized on is that love story... Although I liked very much what Hugo did with Cosette after the relocation, very believable. But then Marius was back on scene too quickly for my liking.

I just got through the description of life in a Bernardine-Benedictine convent. I know that Hugo made up this particular order but evidently based on reality, and it's a fascinating vision of life in the strictest of "perpetual devotion" convents. So this was a digression that I loved! Evidently it does not figure in the movie at all, because when I told my daughter that I was on the convent section she was completely perplexed.

Technically the convent section is in the book, but only extremely briefly. He does scale the wall, and he does meet up with Fauchelevent and request that he hides him in what is clearly a monastery. However, all this happens very quickly so I can see how the significance of the setting is lost for the film viewer.

There is a quite a bit like that in the film, fleeting attention to detail of characters/location that will please the book lovers, but not get in the way of the pace of the film.

I only finished Les Mis less than a month ago, and this thread is making me want to read it again! So, so good.

That digression on slang was the first one I didn't read fully, I just couldn't concentrate on it. Maybe it works better in the original French.

And now I learned that I have never been in love in my life... gazing into each others eyes for 6 weeks without at least once discussing life situations??? That may be okay for Cosette, but how old is that guy again?
I'm not exactly a friend of Marius.

But I like Eponine, and my heart breaks for her already although I don't know what will become of her.

I am now somewhere between 80 and 85%, in the middle of the barricade action.

I can see that this story just had to be turned into a musical and I wonder why it didn't happen earlier. I've never seen any of it and I don't know any of the songs, but I just can't help seeing all those great scenes played out before my inner eye and almost hearing the music. Not just the loud revolutionary part, also the quiet bits around Fantine (first happy, then sad and lost) in the beginning, and Jean Valjean's struggles with his conscience.

I used to be among those who complained about everything being turned into 'one of those musicals', but now I see that a theater play or a simple movie wouldn't have done here, this work needs some bombastic music.

Spoiler without names:
I really didn't expect he would be killed off!

Edit and maybe little spoiler:
I am now at 91% and I think for me the story's peak has been passed with the last chapter. Slowly exhaling again after having held my breath for too long. What a wonderful, strong, powerful story! I even liked those sewer chapters. But now I fear I'll have to cope with my 'friend' Marius for the remaining 9%.

Is anybody except me still reading Les Miserables? There was a hiatus of about a week in my reading, because I was travelling and this book was much too heavy to bring along to New York! So I am just getting to the half-way point. For the first half of the book I kept thinking "this is SO French, more French than any English book is English or any German book is German." Now I am thinking, OK, got it, it's about Paris. Paris is the center of the French universe, France is the center of the world, so Paris is, well, everything.
The marvelous immodesty of it all!
Sometimes the absurd digressions do drag. Reciting every battle Pontmercy fought in. The salons of whomever, with all their political nuance or lack thereof, again with endless names and references unretreivable even to somebody who, at one point, did teach 19th-century French culture! And yet I mind these much less than I minded the ones in Walden which were, of course, basically the entire contents of that book. Both are very self-satisfied in their own ways. But Hugo just feels like a more jolly person. You'd like to meet him and have a drink and hear about, well, Paris. Whereas I never much felt that I liked Thoreau.

#27. I'm still here - about 60% through. Still enjoying it very much. For me the digressions are the cake under the icing. Despite seeing the musical many years ago I can't remember how it all ends.

I've been following this thread (read the book years ago) and love reading everyone's comments. I just want to mention that, if you ever get the chance, see the 1995 movie adaptation by Claude Lelouch, which is probably THE best adaptation of the book out there. In addition to following the plot, it follows the spirit of the book, with digressions and characters and ramblings and it's all wonderful. As it's set in modern times, the best part is that the characters all know and discuss the book and the parallels with their own lives.

Here is the Wikipedia entry and here is the trailer.

Where has Feb gone????? I will be snowed in for a couple of days here In Kansas City BLIZZARD OF OZ OF 2013 ANYONE!!!! I have the book on my kindle but I think I will go ahead and get a hard copy since I will be snowed in with 2 kids for a couple of days and will probably only see my kindle when the battery is dead.

I read this on my Kindle, but I loved it so much I'm considering buying a hard copy to show my respect (and for inevitable future re-reads)

Does anyone have any recommendations for a decent edition to buy? I'd quite like to spend a bit more and get a really nice one if anyone knows of editions that would fit the bill?

Another major blizzard, here in Toronto!

#31, I first bought the Heritage Club edition because it was nicely produced and had woodcut illustrations (and there was a copy going cheap on ebay). But it was much too heavy and unwieldy for actual reading. Also the Penguin Classics translation (Norman Denny) is definitely better than the very old one used by Heritage, and the Penguin is a nice book to handle -- opens easily, strong binding, important things for such a massive clunker! My audiobooks translation is by Charles Wilbour and that is good as well. I've been alternating between one and the other and while I do notice that they are different, I don't have a strong preference.

#30: I will tell you a well-kept secret - *whispering* "February is shorter than any of the other months" ;)

Finished the book today. What a magnificent book. The characterisations and the conflicts in personalities of most of the major characters (even the intractable Javert) makes them more real than the standard good v evil. As others have mentioned there are lengthy diversions on historical and cultural matters, but these not only add depth and context to the story, but also give a chance for you to catch your breath, elevating something that could have been an exciting but standard cat-and-mouse pursuit into something majestic. 5/5

Finally finished this tome! I have a longer review on my own thread but wanted to add -- how can I have taken so much French art history (and TA'd several classes in it) without reading this book? Nobody should be allowed to do anything on French 19th-century culture without reading Les Miserables. I feel as if I understand SO much more about the mentality of this period after reading Hugo's epic.

I really hate to admit but Im just now starting this gem... Im only 4 months behind what can I say :(

#37: 4 years had been worse ;) I mean, one can look at it with a positive view - you're still with us, and reading in your own pace.

I visited Victor Hugo's house in Paris last week and picked up a copy in French as a present pour mon père.

I am seriously considering teaching myself to speak French (beyond the GCSE french that I've spent the last 12 years forgetting) just to read this one book. A lifetime challenge I think.

I also picked up a delightful little comic book style version of it, also in French. Perhaps I could start by learning to read that one in French!

Final Les Mis thought of the day...at Arukyomi's suggestion I have booked surprise tickets for my wife's birthday to see the show on the West End in August.

Les Mis is very quickly taking over my life!

My reading time the last couple of months has been crap. There has been a moving situation and Im stuck in a 400 sq ft room with 3 other people until we can find another place to live. And Im the only 1 out of the 4 that can not stand the tv. So really the only place I can go now to get any type of peace and quiet so that I can actually read is in the bathtub.

40 -
That reminds me of when I shared a hotel room with 7 other people. The AC at night was so loud and the only thing louder was my friend's snoring that my only escape was to make myself a bed in the bathtub! Waking up to someone trying to pee was interesting.

39 -
Good luck with that project. As a French native speaker and Hugo lover, his books are definitely very difficult in French (lots of vocabulary!) so I applaud any non-native speaker who tries to attempt him.

Well I love white noise so the AC would not bother me that much since I always have a fan in my face. My husband snores something awful but a few pokes and he turns the other way. But yeah it can get very interesting when all 4 of us has to get up and get ready all at the same time.

Since Im so far behind and most everybody that was reading Les Mis is already finished I will not worry about spoilers.

It just breaks my heart that Valjean sentence did not fit the crime for stealing a loaf of bread to fed his family, but once his time was served people wouldnt even give him a chance except the bishop. And come to think about it have times changed that much??? Many ex-felonies have a hard time finding a job or in some places even a place to live so most of the time even if they want to come out of jail and live right they cant. But in Valjean example people can change if given a chance they can become a productive member of society.

Javert now that man just gets on my ever lasting nerves his holier my shat dont sink type of person. I will just leave him alone for now.

And poor Fantine and Cosette okay Fantine made a stupid mistake by loving the wrong man. And in some ways things has not changed all that much. Sure women are not treated like Fantine now but many times the man is able to go about his business leaving the child with the mother and go on and live his life like nothing ever happened. And the Mother is left trying to provide for her baby any way she can. Fantine gave up her long beatiful hair and teeth and finally her very being and soul just so her little girl could be taken care of or so she thought. But it breaks my heart that Fantine had to give up the one thing that meant the most to her and that was her baby and to a couple of people that was so horrible there is a special place in hell for people like the Thenardiers. And then Cosette that poor little girl so beat down in life at the young age of 8 she felt so nobody in the world loved her including her Mother. I wish I could just go into the book and wrap my arms around that little girl and never let her go.

Now enough on my rant.

#43 I had the same thought about felons today. It was one of the things that made this book seem so immediate and relevant to me. And then Fantine and that jerk -- so appalling. The movie completely left that out, which was a curious decision because it's so crucial to understanding her character. Of course the movie left out a lot of things but many of them it alluded to in ways that, if you know the book very well, you would pick up.

Now that you have finished the book, in fact, you should watch the movie. It's very interesting after you've read the book -- it leaves out so much and yet in fundamental ways it feels right. I thought both book and film were quite brilliant, each in their own media.

Im about 40% into the book but have looked through the cliff notes so thats okay. I did find a 1985 version without all the singing that was really good. But like you said they leave out alot about how and why Fantine ends up a single mother that leaves her baby and ends up as a prostitute.

I know that in that day and age that it was very frowned upon to be an unwed mother but why wouldnt she just say that she was a widow and that her husband was killed in the war or whatever.

But this book just proves that people have always and will continue to be self righteous. 5 years of hard labor for a loaf of bread really????? Most of us has done things alot worst then people that is serving time right now and the only difference is we were not caught.

Having performed in a local production of Les Miserables, the song "I Dreamed A Dream" is probably the most well known song of the production, and during that song Fantine screams and cries and whispers her story to the audience in a belting alto ballad. The original thought was to give her the spotlight instead of granting the guy a character in the musical. Unfortunately most recent movies are based more on the musical than the book, so this song/scene is gradually moving away from its original intention.