Les Miserables, Anyone?

Anyone wishing to start reading the novel, "Les Miserables," by Victor Hugo, please leave a message. I would like to start discussing the novel with an interested party as we read it. At the moment, I am also involved with a discussion about the novel, "Demons," authored by Dostoevsky. That discussion, although with only one other person, is going real well. I have found that it's easier to read these sort of novels (I don't generally read the contemporary literature) while also considering the work as it is involved in a discussion about the characters, the plot, etc. Anyone is invited to participate, and I would really like as many people as possible. This is my first Victor Hugo novel, and thus far, I have found it fascinating.

I am reading the C.E. Wilbur translation.

--Thanks, Mark

Thus far, I have read up to and including "Petit Gervais," which, I think, is the nionth section of the first portion of the novel. It is becoming a rather interesting story, although it started out sort of slow.

Question: Interlaced throughout the text, the author designates the names of cities and some names of people (for example, the city Digne) with only the first letter, followed by a single line: D______. I understand that this was a common practice, specifically in French literature at that time, but I don't understand why. Does anyone know why the author chooses to designate the city, Digne as D_____?

It depends which edition of Les Misérables you take, though. Mine (in French!) has just got 'Digne' in it.

I suppose the practice of designating cities and sometimes even people with just the first letter or the initial is a kind of means to set the story in a place without naming it exactly because 'it might be true'. As you do in our own diary. If you want to name the person you're in love with and you don't ant anyone to know, in case someone might just read your diary, then you just put his initial rather than his own name.
Not that no-one knew what city it was, though, because there were not a lot of cities with bishops in it starting with the letter D and in the neighbourhood of Toulon where Jean Valjean came from.
But with the letter and diary conotation, you do bring the story on a higher level of truthfulness than your bok would be if you just named the time and place.
On top of that the using of only intials makes the story timeless and placeless, universal. If you were to name the place, and consequently the bishop, people would be able to check and so determin the time of your story, which makes it narrow to one person in one place. Here, Hugo universalises the city and also his Jean Valjean and the bishop who buys his soul.
I don't know if this practice is really limited to French literature... Jane Eyre took place in ___shire, P&P had Mr Wickham belonging to the ____shire regiment. So there are English works that also refer to places in a kind of 'you are not allowed to know'-format.

First, that was the most informative reply I have received to date on this specific forum. I want to thank you for taking the time to address this question for me. What you said, well, just makes a lot of sense to me, and it's the most plausible explanation as to why the terms were not fully cited. Once again, thanks for replying in such an informative way.

By the way, I am assuming that you have already read the novel, correct. What sort of reaction do you suppose I might receive in my own plight to draw others to read the novel with me, commentating as they proceed?

I couldn't help but note that you are in Germany. The nation of my dreams. I have spent the last six months trying to learn the language, to no real avail.

Thanks, from Sunny Florida.

As I continue reading Les Miserables, I am wondering how many different (well-known) translations exist. I ask this question because I see that there are a good number of differences between those of which I am aware; for example, the "Sparknotes" booklet that I purchased along with the novel depicts a different title folr most of the chapters in the novel in which I am reading. To further note this example, consider Book Four: The title in the novel reads as follows: To Entrust is Sometimes to Abandon, whereas the title depicted in the "Sparknotes" reads differently: To Trust is Sometimes to Surrender. These two words, "Abandon," and "Surrender" only serve to demonstrate the differences that could exist with respect to the variations in translations. What say you?

I've just completed reading Book Four, having already read and understood the previous three books. After Book Two, I might add, the reading went a likttle slower-paced (this was when Fantine was first introduced to the reader). This novel is wonderful. I cannot get over the level of imagery that is used by Hugo throughout the text; he was, clearly, an asute author, of not only the novel, but the poem and other forms of literature as well. There is no doubt that I will continue to enjoy this novel. I know, however, that I would certainly enjoy it much more should I have others with whom I can correspond with respect to what is read.

Interesting that you mention that about the titles. I had a look in my French version and book IV says: 'Confier, c'est quelquefois livrer.' Which means 'To confide/entrust sometimes is giving up/handing over'. No abandon or surrender, really. I think the title signifies the fact that Fantine tells of her troubles to Mme Thénardier and leaves Cosette in the end with the Thénardiers believing that they will care well for her. Sadly she is mistaken and Cosette will be 'handed over' to bad people who want to make money out of her...
I don't think it has anything to do with abandon because the fact that Fantine leaves her daughter with carers wasn't really that shocking for single mothers. They just didn't have time in the 19th century with 16 hour days, and there was a stigma attached that might have prevented getting work. I think the really issue is the fact that Cosette will be 'handed over' like a prisoner. Not from her mother's side but she will be received by Mme Thénardier as if she was one...

No problem for the reply.

Hugo was also a poet and playwright. I thought you might like to know. ;)

The work often goes at a slower pace. It is like that because in the process he reworked and reworked it, added things (even wole books!) and reread and altered things. It is really sometimes a little too much...
Still, it is a very very very deep and universal work that still speaks to people today!

I was hoping that I would receive a reply to the message, specifically because you told me that your version is actually in French. I agree with you; and the reason I brought up the titles (as opposed to some text) is simply because I have but one version. I extracted the title information from the "SparkNotes." If the titles are often mis or mal-translated, then one could easily assume that there are many words within the text (and sometimes, perhaps whole sentences or ideas) that are also lacking definitive translations.

The way in which you described society during the 19th Century in France only supports your own conclusion about the most correct title for that specific chapter. It's great when I have an opportunity to discuss something like this with someone who is clearly educated with regard to the language. Oh, and thanks for setting me straight with respect to Hugo; I didn't realize that he was also a Playright, although I did know that he was a poet. You are absolutely correct with regard to the text -- in that the author (apparently) went on....and on about certain situations. But, in the same respect, his literature has been unmatched, even to this day.

I have the impression that some translators do not think about the story, and more importantly the meaning of the words in the story, when they are translating. Not judging on your translation, because I don't go and take all translations under scrutiny...

The thing about historical literature, and certainly Hugo's books, is that they very much slave to the principles of their time, and certainly Hugo's work is very much embedded in society after the revolution in 1789. The advantage of Hugo is that he actually criticises it in his books and that he writes his critique plainly, which you can't say for example about Dumas. It is an advantage because you only have to be open-minded about it and go wit the flow... When it comes to issues about 'child-abandonement', you only have to look at what happens when Fantine's superior discovers that she has a daughter... With every book one learns. :)
If there is somethig you are in the dark about, then just look on the internet, plenty of information about! Of course you can also ask it here, if you wish...

I would say most writers at least once try their hand at writing a play... Of course there are people like Shakespeare and consorts who only write plays or poems.

It is interesting to talk to someone who is interested. :)

One of the greatest novels ever written...
I myself ; enjoyed reading it.. & loved it .
The idea of the book .. the unfairness of the life , how harsh it is ?
and how Jean Valjean lived , struggled all that gives us an idea of how Victor Hugo looked at the whole point & how he decorated all his characters in the novel so perfectly .

Les Mesirables , is the of the novels that i can't foget.

What fascinating information I am receiving and reading about on this forum, specifically about Hugo. You seem to be extremely knowledgable about the life and times of Hugo and you have that ability to apply what he has said in the literature to today's society. Interesting. I am only up to the point when Jean Valjean is "arguing" with himself about his own past (this is following the time when Jarver suspects Madeleine, then later when it is discovered that another prisoner has been accused of actually being Valjean. It is becoming a very interesting book; but, more important, I am doing my best to find those areas within the text when it is obvious that Hugo is making a critical comment about society, and whether such a critical comment can be applied to a "timeless society."

When it was obvious that Fantine would not see her child for some time (I have not, in fact, reached the point in the story when she actually does see her child), I was heart-broken. It's a tear-jerker, no doubt; but, again, more important is the fact that Hugo is making a comment about society and the ways in which both children are treated and how society treats the workforce in a nation that is embracing the industrial revolution. It is quite obvious that Hugo does, in fact, embrace the revolution (Industrial); but he is making critical comments concerning the labor force. One cannot endure the industrial revolution without also affecting another portion of society, whether good or bad.

The novel is obviously convoluted in a good number of ways, and I am diligently reading it (sometimes reading the same sections more than once), trying to understand both the story(ies) as well as what Hugo is trying to say with regard to society and human nature. I am appreciating the comments from those who have posted them and I enjoin others to do the same. This is getting extremely interesting.

I must be honest with those who are following these threads: if it were not for the fact that I have a hard copy of the "Spark Notes" for this novel, I would probably not be able to understand the social implications of what Hugo was trying to say in the work. I was surprised, actually, to find the SparkNotes in the local bookstore; and, the process of buying the book started, actually, with seeing the notes, and then buying the novel. It offers a critical analysis of the different sections, along with a number of other useful resources about the work, as well as Hugo's own life. I would feel deprived if I had not been able to find this wonderful resource.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mea505

By the way, I am assuming that you have already read the novel, correct. What sort of reaction do you suppose I might receive in my own plight to draw others to read the novel with me, commentating as they proceed?

---

I won't read it again :D It's more than 1300 pages, and I don't have that much time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hoope

The idea of the book .. the unfairness of the life , how harsh it is ?

---

Is it harsh?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mea505

It is becoming a very interesting book; but, more important, I am doing my best to find those areas within the text when it is obvious that Hugo is making a critical comment about society, and whether such a critical comment can be applied to a "timeless society."

---

Bishop Myriel is best part of showing Hugo's critics toward society. ''And who will judge the attorney?'' That part reminds a lot on part from Idiot, where Dosotevsky gave his opinion and experience on that situation.

Sometimes the critique is also in the situation itself... Take book 6 Javert and there the second chapter How 'Jean' can become 'Champ', about this chap Champmathieu they arrested for steeling cider apples and they put him in the departemental prison in Arras (because the other prison was in such a bad state). There, Brevet, an old prison mate of Jean Valjean 'recognises' this person Champmathieu and they start looking at Champthieu's past. Unfortunately for him, he did work in the same place as Jean Valjean. So they conclude that Brevet was right, that the local pronunciation made 'Jean' 'Champ' and that Jean Valjean took his mother's name 'Mathieu' and thus became 'Champmathieu'. It doesn't occur to Javert that there is a possible mistake. Think about how many poor people could have landed in prison like that! They couldn't pay for a lawyer and were not able to proove the court wrong... What will occur later in Arras is the conclusion. I won't tell you because it would spoil it...

I think BBC radio 7 is doing an adaptation of it at the moment. If you live out of the UK this might be meaningless. I've not got round to reading it just yet, I'm going to read it after I've read Little Dorrit.

[QUOTE=bazarov;640673]
Is it harsh?
QUOTE]

No i didn't mean that .. i meant saying
the book is about how harsh the life is..
and how unfair it is..

Although I initiated this thread and decided to read "Les Miserables," I am going to take a Hiatus from the book for a short period of time so that I can devote my time to "Crime and Punishment," by Dostoevsky. We are currently having a discussion about that novel in the other forum.

I will get back to "Les Miserables" shortly.

Les Miserables is a great book, and though I've just finished it...I'd still love to continue discussing it. I'm also trying to look for social comments Hugo's trying to say, especially through the main characters. However, I can't really find anything about Cosette aside from child abuse...can anyone help me with that??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Violet Quartz

Les Miserables is a great book, and though I've just finished it...I'd still love to continue discussing it. I'm also trying to look for social comments Hugo's trying to say, especially through the main characters. However, I can't really find anything about Cosette aside from child abuse...can anyone help me with that??

---

Hi Violet Quartz, and welcome to this forum.

Well, even thought it was years ago, that I read this tremendous book, maybe I can add someting here.

Fantine, Cosette's mother, is forced by poverty and the unfairness of society to turn to prostitution in order to support her child. Also, she has to place her in a home living away from herself, since she has no one to turn to or other option; remember she feels this is best for her child; little does she suspect the child abuse that goes on; Fantine has been deceived, robbed. Fantine is 'imprisoned', much the same as Jean Valjean is, within a corrupt system; recall that he stole the bread to feed his family. Both put family ahead of themselves. As far, as directly speaking about Cosette in relation to social commentary, she is a product of this sad alienation from her mother and the abuse she endures daily; amazing she turns out so well. I don't know what else you cold contribute to her, as far as social commentary; perhaps that she could love an adopted parent as though he were her own blood relative, maybe even better. Perhaps her reasons, at first, for being so drawn to Marius, are because he is part of the noble 'cause' to end this corrupt system; so, in many ways she sees Marius as a 'heroic' figure; one that could help end the injustice, that her mother had to endure, as well as her step-father/guardian, Jean Valjean. Marius and Cosette represent the 'new generation', of those who will, with their persistent efforts, eventually change the system and people's way of thinking.

I agree with that approach, Janine!

In addition t at you said about putting their family first:

Somewhere a little further (I think when Jean Valjean has taken Cosette to their first place in Paris, I think, where they need to leave because Javert has found them) it says that there was a great need for rowers for the galleys and thus needed prisoners (they relied on). As a result, crimes that were before a minor offence which wouldn't require such a harsh punishment but just imprisonment (like what happened to Thénardier who was getting charity under false pretences), they were made galley-offences which had a bigger supply of rowers for the galleys as a result.
It shows the irony and coincidence of Jean Valjean's lot as opposed to the on of Thénardier who keeps on doing what he does and is not punished seriously for it while Jean Valjean is punished harshly for a bread he stole, just because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Fantine was tricked by a student she loved and thought he was going to marry her and then got ripped off by Thénardier... Wrong place at the wrong time again. If only she hadn't met Mme Thénardier...

I've been through Les Mis 3 times, however the book is so long that it is hard to give full intellectual attention to all of it. Nonetheless, I regard it as one of the greatest stories ever told for its literal achievments, and more for its vision of human greatness even in the midst of depravity. For anyone as fascinated with Hugo as I am, I highly suggest breezing through Ayn Rand's collection of essay's Philosophy: Who Needs It where Rand shows her deep and hard earned reverence for Hugo's ethics. Looking at the big picture of the story, I believe that those who grasp the subtle interconnectivity of the many events of the story, not only understand Hugo's brilliance, but see a philosophical case for Faith unsurpassed in the last century. If a reader would choose just one of Hugo's historical references to research a bit further, it would have to be Voltaire, to get a full appreciation of the intellectual army Hugo is fighting in between the lines of this story. Thank you all for the postings on Les Mis. It is a lot of fun to share these thoughts.

I haven't read the book yet (my uncle's copy seems to be missing), but I did see the musical and I absolutely loved it! Eponine is my favorite character. It's the bit about unrequited love that made me fall in love with the story...:D I think I was in the sixth grade when I first got acquainted with it...:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LostPrincess13

I haven't read the book yet (my uncle's copy seems to be missing), but I did see the musical and I absolutely loved it! Eponine is my favorite character. It's the bit about unrequited love that made me fall in love with the story...:D I think I was in the sixth grade when I first got acquainted with it...:)

---

Then read the novel and you won't notice Eponine too much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bazarov

Then read the novel and you won't notice Eponine too much.

---

Really, sir? So does that mean that the musical is quite far from the book?

I don't know, miss. I haven't seen it, but book is really masterpiece. It is a bit long, but worth it.

This is very timely, I have just this morning finished watching Les Miserables, one of the many film versions out there. I have only listened to an abridged audio version of this, I haven't read the complete book, so I imagine that there was so much left out as it is a monumental work. It clearly needs a lot of time and devotion to do Hugo justice, which is why I haven't read the full version yet :D but it's one of those books that I really want to read in its entirety. A masterpiece.

I would also like to read The Hunchback of Notre Dame, as I recently heard a radio adaptation, which had me on the verge of tears by the end.

Also try 1793, really good novel. Hugo is great!

Its infact a great book by a Great Novelist.
I have read alot , and its has inspired me .
Jean Valjean is my fav. character and how Hugo came up with such personality
proves the fact that he is a bright writer & with a vision ; and imagination.

I also THE FIRST WORD which Hugo presents in each part of the book
its one that have to be mentioned
best i ever read on introductions .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bazarov

I don't know, miss. I haven't seen it, but book is really masterpiece. It is a bit long, but worth it.

---

Well, that makes me want to read it more then!:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LostPrincess13

Eponine is my favorite character. It's the bit about unrequited love that made me fall in love with the story...:D I think I was in the sixth grade when I first got acquainted with it...:)

---

I must agree with bazarov on this one. Eponine is depicted MUCH more sympathetically in the musical than in the book. Plus, she simply doesn't get that much face time in the novel. I feel like the love triangle between Cosette, Marius, and Eponine in the musical is something that the directors really exaggerated to add drama. When Eponine gets shot and dies, she's treated like a martyr by Enjolras' entire company, but in the novel it's tragedy of a much lesser extent. I feel like the musical treats Eponine like the ideal of the French Revolution; she's kind of the unspoken reason the men are rebelling. But in the novel, only Marius mourns her...and not for long, at that.

About Eponine:

I think there is a triangle... But I think the triangle is more in Eponine's head than in Cosette's or Marius'. I have the impression that she (sadly) sought out Cosette, and does stuff for Marius to make him fall in love with her (possibly so she can be a normal woman in stead of a street child). I believe she is a really sad character, there is no hope for her. The very short mourning of Marius speaks as well: when he is about to be shot she saves him by blocking the bullet by her hand and dies, believing he loves her 'as she gave her life for him', but not even that she is allowed to have, because naturally love cannot be earned...

Maybe they have tried to portray her in the musical like 'Marianne' (?), still the symbol of the republic in France. But I don't think that is right...
We have to keep in mind that the misérables, all through the book, are the same, they always end up the same, athough they might climb the ladder they will fall down. It is a certainty. Only Cosette and Marius move up with Cosette's dowry, but that is deerly 'bought' by Jean's life. He did 'penitence' his whole life and never used his money and in the end dies because of sacrifice. Eponine is a perfect example of a misérable: she is anonymous, all through history (the revolution, the end of Napoleon, the new kings, the barricades) she is miserable. Life does not change for her, whether egality, liberty and fraternity are or are not. So portraying her as the reason for the revolution is not right, because it would not have been to Hugo's liking, because 'society did not care about those people', as he proves in his book.

I wrote a discussion of "Les Miserables" some time ago, and posted it on the net. You'll find it at www.geocities.com/stuartfernie . I'd be delighted to hear from anyone wishing to discuss Les Mis or my notes.

I have just started Les Mis. it might take me a while... or surely it will take me a while.

But I will tune in here to chat sometimes :)