Printable View
Well maybe that quote proves that Javert wasn't bad after all ; he conscious woke up late .. When he kills himself ! Because he can't live with !
Cultivators refers to humans - when we are unable to correct the system . The French system failed then .. isn't that why the revolution started in France!
The system failed Jean Valjean ... as it always does and we conclude that even now things like this happen .
Didn't Hugo write in Les Misérables at some point (I seem to remember some time after he escapes prison for the last time) that France (the king at that point) needed people to row on the galleys, because there were not enough? So, they needed people and they got them through convicting people to forced labour, which was Jean Valjean's lot. They exaggerated their sentences because, in those days, they did not believe that a person could get better (I mean, for God's sake, for one accusation (not necessarily true) a life sentence. If we were to try to introduce it now...). There was physiognomy that said that certain faces were doomed anyway (a person with a concave nose was avaricious, for example). Through the ages those views changed particularly in the age Hugo was writing in, there was a belief in bettering people by kindness.
I think Hugo's sentiment was rather anger at post-Revolution France.There was 1789 from which year on, everything would get better, but did it? No. They killed a whole load of people, including the king in 1793, who were alledgedly against the revolution, Napoleon became emperor and then lost half his troops in Russia because of bad planning and then France got forced onto it a king again by the rest of Europe which they kicked out in the 1830s (the barricades in the book). All through this, though, nothing got better for anyone. Maybe for the bourgeoisie (who really didn't have anything to say in the old days, but also really had a good life). They used the common people to storm the Bastille (the state prison for political prisoners), then now they became the new 'royalty'/'nobility'. They were so much in love with their own power that they ceased to care about the poor (emphasised in Jean Valjean, Cochepaille, the Thénardiers, Gavroche (part of the Thénardiers), also in Javert's attitude) although professing egality, liberty and fraternity. Hugo was disappointed with it because he started off very enthusiastic (like Marius and his friends), but clearly saw that it was not happening.
That's just it!Quote:
Originally Posted by hoope
But see it like this:
Javert has been trained as a policeman and has been trained according to certain principles (see above my post about physiognomy). He doesn't believe that a criminal can ever get better. Only, when he realises that he has been wrong about that all his life when he witnesses Jean Valjean convinced of Marius being alive instead of killing him and robbing him of his money, he cannot live with it. His self knows that he has been wrong, but his self cannot reunite with his material manifestation as a policeman. That is his problem. (I have mused on this in an earlier post) Notice that at that point, he calls Jean Valjean for the first time 'vous'. I know it cannot be translated in English, but the French form 'vous' is the form used for politeness. The common familiar you is 'tu'. All through the book, Javert has called Jean Valjen 'tu' (as an old convict who does not merit any respect), but just before he kills himself when they arrive at Gillenormand's place to deliver Marius barely alive, he calls Jean Valjean 'vous' as someone who deserves respect. It is such a poignant moment in that story and it shows Javert's changed mindset.
Ever seen John Malcovich as Javert? He IS Javert.
The cultivators refer the the human systems. The French judiciary system failed both Valjean AND Javert. The religious system would have failed just the same. However, the true Christian system that M. Myriel had adopted instead of the current religious system that he was under succeeded through the blessed Bienvenu. Instead of punishment and seeing the evil in men, the perspective of the Bishop was grounded in mercy and seeking the humanity in man.
M. Myriel saw the good in man. Valjean was also good at finding the good in things...after his conversion. Here is the excerpt from my quoted chapter...
One day he saw some country people busily engaged in pulling up nettles; he examined the plants, which were uprooted and already dried, and said: "They are dead. Nevertheless, it would be a good thing to know how to make use of them. When the nettle is young, the leaf makes an excellent vegetable; when it is older, it has filaments and fibres like hemp and flax. Nettle cloth is as good as linen cloth. Chopped up, nettles are good for poultry; pounded, they are good for horned cattle. The seed of the nettle, mixed with fodder, gives gloss to the hair of animals; the root, mixed with salt, produces a beautiful yellow coloring-matter. Moreover, it is an excellent hay, which can be cut twice. And what is required for the nettle? A little soil, no care, no culture. Only the seed falls as it is ripe, and it is difficult to collect it. That is all. With the exercise of a little care, the nettle could be made useful; it is neglected and it becomes hurtful. It is exterminated. How many men resemble the nettle!" He added, after a pause: "Remember this, my friends: there are no such things as bad plants or bad men. There are only bad cultivators."
Give men the right influence and understanding...and who knows what can be gleaned from them.
No...where...when...Malcovich would no doubt make a perfect Javert. Geoffrey Rush wasn't bad, but I have to see John...Quote:
Originally Posted by kiki1982
[QUOTEI think Hugo's sentiment was rather anger at post-Revolution France.][/QUOTE]
Anger as you said could be the reason but that stil doesn't deny th fact that its true
Agree with that !Quote:
They were so much in love with their own power that they ceased to care about the poor (emphasised in Jean Valjean, Cochepaille, the Thénardiers, Gavroche (part of the Thénardiers), also in Javert's attitude) although professing egality, liberty and fraternity.
Yea ! i believe that prisoner can change too ,,Have you watched 16 blocks :D ?Quote:
Through the ages those views changed particularly in the age Hugo was writing in, there was a belief in bettering people by kindness.
That also amuzed me ,,, I believe that this was the least he owe to Valjean.And as i said Javert Couldn't live with it ... You kiki , made it however clearer to everyone that Javert can't be a policeman unless he has such character( your physiognomy ).Quote:
Notice that at that point, he calls Jean Valjean for the first time 'vous'. I know it cannot be translated in English, but the French form 'vous' is the form used for politeness. The common familiar you is 'tu'. All through the book, Javert has called Jean Valjen 'tu' (as an old convict who does not merit any respect), but just before he kills himself when they arrive at Gillenormand's place to deliver Marius barely alive, he calls Jean Valjean 'vous' as someone who deserves respect. It is such a poignant moment in that story and it shows Javert's changed mindset.
One can't be a policeman without putting his humane a side.. ofcourse that is back at that time . Javert was presenting the vengeful form of the government and so he had to be .
Without any religion no nation can flourish - this i believe in . In here Mercy was the answer and the example . The saint was a sign , though it could have been anyone else. But Hugo wanted to link it with religion so he probably chose a Bishop , were Valjean came back and made his new start .Quote:
Instead of punishment and seeing the evil in men, the perspective of the Bishop was grounded in mercy and seeking the humanity in man.
In 2000. Depardieu as Jean Valjean and John Malcovich as Javert. That mini series was just... what to say... words fail. There exists a French version and an English one. I prefer the French as the text is more to the point. John Malcovich considers his French as 'poor', but really, he cannot say that. One cannot hear that he is of another nationality and he act in this admirable emotionless/neutral French way. That makes it all the more real. And it is his voice.
It was Depardieu, I think, who persuaded him to do it as they are great friends. John Malcovich considered his French fluent (he lives in France), but not enough to do a French film and play a role of this magnitude.
The series was magnificent and made by the same people that made Cyrano de Bergerac, The Count of Monte Cristo and a number of other acclaimed series.
I didn't watch that one.. nor any french version ,,
I watched the English ones .. and that of 1998 movie starting Liam Neeson, Geoffrey Rush, Uma Thurman and Claire Danes.
As for Goeffrey Rush ; he has played Javert quite well and Liam Neeson .. was really awesome in playing Valjean :)
I found that one too shot and too emotional. That film was lacking in depth.
Hoope: “No man can do anything like that .”
You pointed out that no man could do the kind acts Jean carries out. I disagree, I think that part of the beauty of Valjean comes from the fact that he is simply an average man who chooses to reform and do good. Therefore, he symbolizes hope for others to do good as well.
Kiki: “Javert has been trained as a policeman and has been trained according to certain principles (see above my post about physiognomy). He doesn't believe that a criminal can ever get better. Only, when he realises that he has been wrong about that all his life when he witnesses Jean Valjean convinced of Marius being alive instead of killing him and robbing him of his money, he cannot live with it. His self knows that he has been wrong, but his self cannot reunite with his material manifestation as a policeman. That is his problem. (I have mused on this in an earlier post) Notice that at that point, he calls Jean Valjean for the first time 'vous'. I know it cannot be translated in English, but the French form 'vous' is the form used for politeness. The common familiar you is 'tu'. All through the book, Javert has called Jean Valjen 'tu' (as an old convict who does not merit any respect), but just before he kills himself when they arrive at Gillenormand's place to deliver Marius barely alive, he calls Jean Valjean 'vous' as someone who deserves respect. It is such a poignant moment in that story and it shows Javert's changed mindset.”
Really? That’s great stuff! Thank you for explaining. =]
Everybody: Regarding Javert as portrayed by actors: Geoffrey Rush did well as Javert, and I have not seen John Malkovich (but then, I don't speak French). However aren't you forgetting Philip Quast? I mean, I know there are a lot of character differences between Javert and musical-Javert, but seriously, Quast is awesome as Javert.
Also, I've seen the 1998 version. I give it a 3.5 out of 5. It was like a fanfiction that got turned into a movie. A pretty good fanfiction, but nonetheless, it lost something quintessential about the spirit of the story. Hard to explain. The musical found it, the movie not so much. Fantine's descent was effective and rather disturbing - quite well done. Also, I rewatched parts of it that were really good, but overall was very upset by the utter destruction of Jean's character. I mean, Liam Neeson's a good actor, but Neeson-Jean is all wrong. He actually hits Cosette. I mean, what the hell?
There you are right, Bluesun, about the hitting. Jean Vajean would rather die than do anything, however small, to Cosette.
I found Geoffrey Rush in the scene prior to where Jean Valjean attempts to hit Cosette much too friendly. Javert should turn up and should awaken fear: he is a man (he has two arms and two legs and can talk), but empty; there is no emotion in him, nor in speech, nor in demeanor; only his silhouette on the wall should scare you. He is like a machine and therefore relentless in his pursuit of Jean Valjean. The sad thing about Javert is that he does not even have a personal motive to pursue Jean Valjean.
In Geoffrey Rush's Javert there was too much intonation in his speech, too much interest, too much politeness and at some point I think I saw a little smile on him. His face is also too nice. It does not scare, it puts you at ease (the nice policeman who comes to visit you). Maybe it is his nose, maybe his mouth. I don't know, but he is not Javert.
Philip Quest I haven't been able to see because he is from the musical right? But the pictures I can see of him do not have the same effect that Javert should have.
I always wondered if Javert actually had a wife and children or not. I bank on 'no', because I can't see Javert courting. I see can Phillip Quest doing that.
Apparently John Malkovich (of which Javert there is a version in English) was a renewal, because he is no longer the nasty villain who is there to willingly destroy Jean Vajean's life, but he is the machine of the original who commits suicide because he cannot deal with his issue. At least this was so in French cinea according to director Josée Dayan adn her screen play writer, but I expect that it cannot be any different in English cinema.
As for Philipp Quast I'd like to add without having seen one of the movies that he displays Javert excellently to me because he does not make him appear like a machine. And neither does Hugo describe him that way. Hugo's javert does have feelings. Maybe not deep enough for courting but deep enough for over-confidence - when hunting Jean Valjean and Cosette through Paris and thinking them trapped, for example. Hugo's Javert isn't a monster that evokes fear wherever he goes, he's discipline that became flesh. He hunts Jean Valjean because he is convinced that it's the right thing to do and one must do the right thing. He's a representative of a society which firmly believes there is only two kinds of people: the good ones and the bad ones and the duty of the police and other leading authorities is to distinguish between them and keep the distinction clear. Since Jean Valjean belongs to the bad ones it is inevitable that Javert hunts him, it's the ORDER of things.
There is a saying among fans of the musical that Javert is not the bad guy and many actors play him that way, add a touch of soul to him. Some overdo it and act like he really had a personal spite at Jean Valjean or like he was on a crusade against him but Philipp Quast is marvelous, I fully agree.