Reading the Chunksters discussion
This topic is about
Les Misérables
Side-Reads
>
1/06 Les Miserables, Volume I, Book I (Part I, Book I), SPOILERS ALLOWED FOR THIS SECTION ONLY
date
newest »
newest »
Deana wrote: "I very much enjoyed this section, though (like others) I felt a lot of the historical references went over my head. I read sentences like "He was witty and just enough of a scholar to think himsel..."Those are some of my favourite quotes as well, Deana. I read this novel a few years ago so am not reading as closely as you guys - yet. Have to finish another book first. However, I agree that the Bishop is a believable character. He is so good that he could have become too cardboard-like, if that makes sense - so good he would become boring and uninteresting. But I don't think that's the case, because the Bishop practices what he preaches - he takes kindness seriously, making an atheist like me love him:)
It is challenging historically, but the message of the next book is SO POWERFUL!
Zulfiya wrote: "It is challenging historically, but the message of the next book is SO POWERFUL!"Caps lock AND exclamation mark? Sold.
Delmy =^.^= wrote: "No spoilers, I gave my opinion on the character and what I believe drives him. I don't think that's a spoiler, you might have a different view of him. I didn't answer anything that wasn't included ..."I found your comments totally fine and indeed helpful. Not spoilers at all to one who has finished reading Part 1 Book 1.
Delmy =^.^= wrote: "I think the red hat is a reference to cardinal. I think."Right. And the red bonnet was worn by the revolutionaries (citoyens).
As a character for a novel, the bishop was convincing in that his character was realistically drawn and internally consistent to the extent that humans are internally consistent. However, he was not persuasive to me as a realistic person. He was too perfect, too flawless. He out-Jobed Job. I wanted to see the Adam in him come out, but found him almost exclusively a Michael.
The only time I found myself relating to him on a direct rather than a literary level was in the episode with the Conventioneer (Chapter 10). I was fascinated by the exchange, the very powerful presentation by Hugo of two men both of deep belief and conviction still able to relate to each other so intensely without either denying their own principles or dismissing those of the other, but taking each other seriously in difference.
I understand that the incident where Myriel asked the blessing was very offensive to the family of Bishop de Miollis, on whom Myriel was loosely (or maybe not so loosely) based. But I saw it not as offensive, but as a recognition that even in approaching death the Conventioneer could remain true to his beliefs and principles, and that Myriel could respect and honor that even when he found those beliefs and principles in direct opposition to his own.
Everyman, thank you for joining us! I am convinced your contribution will give us the sense of direction due to your experience and the fact that you have already read this massive novel. To me, Myriel is idealistic, but relatable because he represents Light and Hope and a desire to go Good Things and cultivate Goodness in human beings. If you remember, he actually mentioned that one can cultivate mind and garden, and both types of cultivation are vitally important.
I am a humanist; that is why in my vision his goodness does not stem from religion - it stems from his own faith in doing good things.
Everyman wrote: "The only time I found myself relating to him on a direct rather than a literary level was in the episode with the Conventioneer"Conventioneer vs. Conventionalist :-) Translations, translations :-)
P.S. It looks like it is going to be a very absorbing discussion. I am very enthused about it.
Zulfiya wrote: "I am a humanist; that is why in my vision his goodness does not stem from religion - it stems from his own faith in doing good things. "
That is true, but his religious training shaped his thinking, just like a receptacle shapes its content. I think that since the bishop was a royalist, helped in him embracing religion as his garb. The biggest contribution of religion to his psyche is to identify who is redeemable, and who is damned.
And that is why he asked the Conventionalist for a blessing; it was an invitation to a bigger world where spiritual diversity is not damned:-) And I think you also answered the question about the Bishops's 'flaws' or the flaws that Hugo saw in him, but it is only MHO. Besides, Errare humanum est, so I might be mistaken, you might be mistaken, Hugo might be wrong about some things, and the bishop might be wrong about other things - it is the very affirmation of our humanity. So I am on the same page with you, but we might all be reading different lines on the same page.
Despite what I said earlier, I mostly concur with you. A receptacle shapes its content, but the content can also shape something as malleable as human psyche.
I also wondered if the bishop was based on someone Hugo might have known or did he represent religious hypocrisy in that there was no Bishop like that. What I like about this chapter is that we see the transformation of this Bishop an almost naive compassion to a more down-to-earth attitude, we definitely see a change in him after he spends that time with a prisoner and is there for his execution.
I watched "les Miserables" with Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway, I really do not like that movie. Amanda seyfried is the worst singer. BUT Anne Hathaway singing "I Dreamed a Dream" (?) makes me tear up every time! (Ok that's my rambling for today)
:D
I watched "les Miserables" with Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway, I really do not like that movie. Amanda seyfried is the worst singer. BUT Anne Hathaway singing "I Dreamed a Dream" (?) makes me tear up every time! (Ok that's my rambling for today)
:D
Delmy =^.^= wrote: "What I like about this chapter is that we see the transformation of this Bishop an almost naive compassion to a more down-to-earth attitude"He wasn't naive to begin with. He was just different because the narrator pictured him in an incomplete custom. The narrator is not totally omniscient so that may account for your misreading.
I didn't say he was completely naive but there's a naiveness to him and I didn't misread anything, that's Just my take on him. When I said naive is that he is compassionate to an extraordinary degree, you don't really get to see that nowadays.
Delmy, your idea about a prototype for a character is interesting. I know that the character from the next book is based on a flesh-and-blood person. But it is a spoiler, so we will have to wait till Monday :-)
"you don't really get to see that nowadays."I do get to see that whenever I have the unfortunate task of looking in a mirror. I kid you not.
Remember the exchange between Napoleon and Myriel. He was always aware of his qualities and had a ready tongue. I'm not saying he was down to earth, I'm not saying he was worldly. That's my two cents.
Zulfiya wrote: "I am a humanist; that is why in my vision his goodness does not stem from religion - it stems from his own faith in doing good things. "So do you think his goodness can be separated from his religious faith? I don't see him that way, personally.
I don't think, for example, that if he had inherited or purchased the large house instead of receiving it as a perquisite of his bishopric that he would have exchanged it for the hospital.
And I also wonder whether if he had a 15,000 frank income from employment, or rents on farms, or some other commercial source he would have devoted so much of it to good works (even if he were choosing in that case non-religious good works such as libraries, schools, museums, and the like.) I think it was because the income came from tithes, collections in churches, gifts given to the church by believers, and the like that he felt that the money really belonged to God and should be devoted to the poor and needy.
I'm not saying that humanists can't be concerned about the poor; they certainly can. But I don't believe that if he had been a non-religious person he would have committed resources to the poor to the extent that he did. And I think it's much less likely that he would have spent so much of his day devoted to the care of the people of his town. That, I think, is more of a religious duty than a humanist one.
Delmy =^.^= wrote: "I also wondered if the bishop was based on someone Hugo might have known e..."According to the notes in my edition, he was based on an actual bishop, Bienvenu de Miollis, who was the bishop of Digne during the time Hugo was writing the novel.
From his Wikipedia page: In 28 August 1805, he succeeded Irénée-Yves Desolle as the Bishop of Digne, which he remained till his resignation on 31 Aug 1838[2] at the age of 85 due to his health, becoming Bishop Emeritus of Digne. By then, he had earned the name "Bienvenu" (French for the word "Welcome") due to his charitable nature and evangelical virtues he had shown.
The Wikipedia page also lists similarities and differences between Myriel and Miollis. I won't repeat them here; you can consult the page if you are interested.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bienvenu...
Wow, that's really interesting will definitely check out the link.
Everyman wrote: "So do you think his goodness can be separated from his religious faith? I don't see him that way, personally. "I strongly do. I believe faith does not determine the person, otherwise we would have lived in the utopian world for quite some time now: Christian utopian world, Muslim utopian world, Buddhist utopian world, etc. If faith turns people into good ones, why are there so many people who talk the talk and do not walk the walk? Does it mean that faith has not reached them or is it not strong enough to reach them? Why are there so many people who claim to be spiritual but are in fact hypocritical, bigoted, and intolerant. Then if faith makes them good people, the same is true that faith makes people bad, and quod erat demonstrandum - that is not the faith that makes people good or bad, these are the decisions we take as people.
I can agree with the philosophy behind Christianity, but I am not invited to the after-party, and I am o'k with it. Any religion is a code of rules of peaceful co-habitation plus a story that helps people to accept their mortality.
Some people can do only with co-habitation rules without the story how to accept their mortality, but it is still true - you can be good without God.
Charity of spirit could be streamed with the help of religion and given a sense of direction for some people, but it does not come from religion. Kindness and sharing are not religious values; they are human values.
P.S. I am perfectly fine with any religion if it makes him/her a better person because religion and irreligiousness alike have been with us all the time we have existed, and those both antinomies are an integral part of human existence. It is the outcome that is important, not the way it is achieved. But when religion or irreligion becomes aggressive and starts cultivating the idea of supremacy, intolerance, bigotry, alienation, condemnation and/or becomes uber-politicized, then I think it oversteps the rules of peaceful co-existence.
1. In the opening book of the novel, we are introduced to Charles François Myriel, the Bishop of Digne. Do you find him convincing as a character? Is he driven by mundane (poverty, food, etc) problems or by divine motives?Like others, he reminded me of Pope Francis. They both focus heavily on charity and social justice.
2. We learn that the bishop provides solace and attends the execution of a convict. How does this experience change him?
He was horrified by the execution.
3.Do you think they are still relevant in today's world? Are the poor still villanized, women controlled and degraded, and children deprived of education/light?
Absolutely. You only need to spend a few minutes looking at the news to see that these issues are still very relevant today. Demonizing the poor seems to be the favorite pastime of certain politicians, and those same ones are often associated with denial of women’s rights and the defunding of education.
4. According to Hugo, what are the bishop's 'personal flaws'?
Partisan politics and personal feelings could affect his behavior just like anyone else, although he did try to overcome it.
5. Bishop is a Royalist, but he asks the Conventionalist and the former revolutionary to bless him? Why do you think he asks for a blessing? What does this plea for a blessing stands for? Was his plea for a blessing answered?
I don’t know.
6. Are there any passages or lines that resonated with you strongly within these opening pages?
I should have taken notes when I read it last Sunday. I can’t remember any now.
What translation are you using?
I’m using the Wraxall translation, which was the one authorized by Hugo. So far I’ve enjoyed it, and hopefully it won’t feel dated as I get further into the book.
Other thoughts
I’m glad I took AP European History in high school. It made the references to various historical figures much less confusing. When he was discussing the French Revolution and its aftermath, I knew who all the major players were and what the chronology was. It's been a while, but most of it seems to have stuck.
Anne wrote: "Absolutely. You only need to spend a few minutes looking at the news to see that these issues are still very relevant today. Demonizing the poor seems to be the favorite pastime of certain politicians, and those same ones are often associated with denial of women’s rights and the defunding of education."A true cornerstone of European literature - despite the numerous political and cultural references, we can still relate to it, and it does talk to us.
I am listening to the audio edition, and it makes it easier to plough through some political references and philosophical debate, but it also is very touching and it moved me to tears a couple of times. So it is a weird experience of chopping vegetables and shedding tears:-)
P.S. Ann, the group members discussed the role of the blessing, and there were well-grounded attempts to answer this question. I do not know if you will like answers because this is an open-end question, and I do not think one can give a direct answer, but the debate was quite interesting and thought-provoking.
Zulfiya wrote: "Any religion is a code of rules of peaceful co-habitation"You're giving religion more credit than it deserves, even though I agree with you on everything else.
message 72: by Anne"Well reasoned Anne. Hope to see more from you as we progress through the book!
Luffy wrote: "Zulfiya wrote: "You're giving religion more credit than it deserves, even though I agree with you on everything else."
I am expanding my idea:-) Any religion is a code of rules of peaceful co-habitation plus a story that helps people to accept their mortality. IDEALLY, but people have an amazing ability to corrupt even the best of ideas ... because we are humans. Light and Darkness, Bad and Good, Survival and Sacrifice, Possession and Charity, Yin and Yang and temptations, temptations, temptations... or let's call it Free Will.
I can not help it - I see Light in this bishop as I see Light in Pope Francis, Nicholas Tesla, Harriet Tubman, Henri Dunant (the founder of the Red Cross) and other spiritual and secular people alike, but it is also true that I do not see light in many other religious or secular people or characters. As the novel unfolds, we shall see darkness in the members of the bishop's congregation, and we shall see light in other members of the same congregation.
To keep the debate within the reach of Volume I, Book I, I think that a person who has good and bad aspects to their personality, have something wrong with even their good sides. The reason for their good behavior is based on baser reasons. I get this conclusion daily. This confirmation means that one CAN interpret the Bishop to be a normal human with base ideas. But he is so abnegating that it forces you to respect him. Most people WILL say that he's a very good man.
Everyman wrote: "I don't think, for example, that if he had inherited or purchased the large house instead of receiving it as a perquisite of his bishopric that he would have exchanged it for the hospital. "Hmm, I'm not sure. The Bishop raises money from the rich to distribute to the poor. I get the impression that if he were independently wealthy, he'd be walking that walk. I suppose it's hard for me to say whether he would give exactly as much, but I certainly think that he would give to the point of substantial self sacrifice. I don't believe that the Bishop's generousness nature is so narrowly defined and circumstantial. He's the real deal, yo.
In my opinion, the fact that the Bishop perceives his religious duties to be so expansive and consuming is a testament to his generous nature. I assume that prior Bishops of Digne were religious; Mryiel is the first one strange enough to move his family and himself into a hospital. ;) I do think that the Christian values he takes from the gospels serve to reinforce his innate generosity, but I don't think they are the cause. The rich man buying his penny's worth of paradise likely believes the same scriptures.
Zulfiya wrote: "P.S. Anne, the group members discussed the role of the blessing, and there were well-grounded attempts to answer this question. I do not know if you will like answers because this is an open-end question, and I do not think one can give a direct answer, but the debate was quite interesting and thought-provoking. "I saw that after I had posted. There were some good insights. Goodreads was acting weird last night, and somehow I couldn't see all the comments at first. It also lost one of my own posts. Oh, well.
Regarding the role of religion: Good people will be good regardless of their faith or lack thereof, and the same is true of bad people. I've seen far too many people use religion as an excuse for bigotry and cruelty to ever buy into the moral superiority of the religious. I personally have never believed in any sort of gods or the supernatural, and I've had a lot of "Christians" question my morality, patriotism, and generosity for no other reason than my lack of faith. That's utterly absurd. I volunteer every week, have a professional career, do not drink or smoke or do drugs, and obey the laws (well, other than speeding sometimes). I don't need the fear of punishment after death to do the right thing while I'm alive.
I suspect the bishop might have gone about things a little differently if he wasn't a bishop, but he still likely would have done charitable works. For evidence, there have been several very famous millionaires/billionaires in this country that were atheists/agnostics and have given large amounts of time and/or money to charities.
Luffy wrote: "To keep the debate within the reach of Volume I, Book I, I think that a person who has good and bad aspects to their personality, have something wrong with even their good sides. The reason for the..."I was very interested in your opinion here, Luffy. So I agree with your characterization which I interpret as "no one is perfect" but do you really believe all good acts stem from some baser motive - like the "what's in it for me" motivation and no good act comes from unselfish motives? That seems such a cynical interpretation of humankind. And one I don't really subscribe to.
Just picking this one up (had to finish another book first) and I am using the translation of Charles E. Wilbour (mostly because it happens to be the audio version I have available). This is a re-read for me, and one of the biggest reasons I wanted to re-read it was for this very section. I LOVE what Hugo does with these very real characters right from the beginning, setting the stage of how upbringing, heart and soul can effect one's decisions. (I haven't finished the first section yet and can't remember when certain events take place, so I won't say much more). There are some very Christian themes (by that I mean biblical teachings of loving one's neighbor, looking out for the needy, not thinking of oneself too highly, etc) coupled with the very human frailties of doubt, fear, angst. Having ideals of everyone living in harmony and loving one another while being stuck in a world that does not always (in fact, most of the time does not) live up to these values, is the essence of the struggle of humanity. I love that it's so cross-cultural, in that the struggles of one's heart are struggles all of us face.Sorry if that's a bit rambling: once I finish the section hopefully I'll have something more coherent to say :) I like everyone's thoughts and comments, though, I think I'll get a lot more out of it this time around!
Anne wrote: "Zulfiya wrote: "P.S. Anne, the group members discussed the role of the blessing, and there were well-grounded attempts to answer this question. I do not know if you will like answers because this i..."
I agree with you, you can be a good person and charitable without religion or faith in a higher power. I am a believer but i do not go to church. You have no idea how many times i get asked "how come you don't go to church? i thought you were catholic and believed in god" I tell them "I doubt God takes attendance, plus i believe my actions speak louder than words" Also, i believe that the Bible and God have become a bastardized version and have been molded and manipulated to fit a person's point of view. I don't believe God would want anyone to speak for him, Kill for him, Judge or hurt anyone on his behalf. Just because you are religious and go to church doesn't make you a good person, these same people who bitch about another person's views, sexuality or personal life, don't even follow what they preach.
It is very hard to be that person who is compassionate because you have to be able to put yourself in another person's shoes and therefore to understand their plight. I think it is easier for people to become indifferent, maybe not because they don't care but it is easier because most of the time, they think "well, there is nothing i can do" (even though that is just a cop out). I have seen many people be cruel and evil and then be nice and think they've done nothing wrong. BUT i have also witnessed compassionate people who give everyday of themselves, though most of the time you always remember the bad ones.
I think like Anne that if the Bishop had not become a Bishop, he might not have been as compassionate as he is but then again, in order for that to have happened he would have had to have been raised in a totally different way.Because i believe that people have certain paths that they follow and they are shaped by their environment and every decision, you make you make based on your life experiences (as much as religious people like to say that they are guided by their faith).
Very awesome discussions guys! loved reading them all.
I agree with you, you can be a good person and charitable without religion or faith in a higher power. I am a believer but i do not go to church. You have no idea how many times i get asked "how come you don't go to church? i thought you were catholic and believed in god" I tell them "I doubt God takes attendance, plus i believe my actions speak louder than words" Also, i believe that the Bible and God have become a bastardized version and have been molded and manipulated to fit a person's point of view. I don't believe God would want anyone to speak for him, Kill for him, Judge or hurt anyone on his behalf. Just because you are religious and go to church doesn't make you a good person, these same people who bitch about another person's views, sexuality or personal life, don't even follow what they preach.
It is very hard to be that person who is compassionate because you have to be able to put yourself in another person's shoes and therefore to understand their plight. I think it is easier for people to become indifferent, maybe not because they don't care but it is easier because most of the time, they think "well, there is nothing i can do" (even though that is just a cop out). I have seen many people be cruel and evil and then be nice and think they've done nothing wrong. BUT i have also witnessed compassionate people who give everyday of themselves, though most of the time you always remember the bad ones.
I think like Anne that if the Bishop had not become a Bishop, he might not have been as compassionate as he is but then again, in order for that to have happened he would have had to have been raised in a totally different way.Because i believe that people have certain paths that they follow and they are shaped by their environment and every decision, you make you make based on your life experiences (as much as religious people like to say that they are guided by their faith).
Very awesome discussions guys! loved reading them all.
Delmy, I do hope you don't judge everyone who calls themselves a Christian by the actions and words of the outspoken few. I'm not saying that you are, but as someone who has a deep faith and does try to live that out in my interactions and compassion for others, and knowing how much one person can give the wrong face to a whole group, it does grieve me to hear my entire faith be condemned because of just a few no less important but still very human individuals. I often tell people not to judge all of America if they've only visited New York City, or only seen one reality TV show. Faith is the same way, whether it be Christianity, Islam, Buddhism etc. I do know some very wonderful people who have huge hearts and are very "spiritual" people.That being said, one of the things that is so excellent about this book is the view of humanity in general. It happens to focus on the Christian faith, as Christianity and particularly Catholicism is the prevailing religion of the time and location of the story, but that is one lens through which to view the struggles of all of humanity. And I think one point of the book as a whole is that the Church (of whatever faith) cannot on its own "fix" the problems of the world. It's up to us as individuals making our own choices each and every day.
Alana wrote: "Delmy, I do hope you don't judge everyone who calls themselves a Christian by the actions and words of the outspoken few. I'm not saying that you are, but as someone who has a deep faith and does t..."
no, i am not in charge of judging anyone. I did not specify any one religion, actually a lot of religious groups have done really bad things in the name of God. What i agreed with was that you do not need religion to be a good person. Like i said, actions speak louder than words, you can be a Muslim, a Christian, a mormon, to me it doesn't matter. What matters is what the individual person does,however, you can make really bad choices and change for the better, i don't judge anyone on their past. I don't think anyone is condemning Christianity, i don't condemn anyone, i don't have that power (hehe). Its like saying all Mormons are polygamists or all Muslims are Terrorists, all those are generalizations that I DO NOT subscribe to. I like to see the person, not as part of a group but as a person within the earth. I think the world is too full with generalities and we put a group within a stereotype based on our experiences with a bad few. Which is sad because you limit yourself in knowing some excellent people that way.
no, i am not in charge of judging anyone. I did not specify any one religion, actually a lot of religious groups have done really bad things in the name of God. What i agreed with was that you do not need religion to be a good person. Like i said, actions speak louder than words, you can be a Muslim, a Christian, a mormon, to me it doesn't matter. What matters is what the individual person does,however, you can make really bad choices and change for the better, i don't judge anyone on their past. I don't think anyone is condemning Christianity, i don't condemn anyone, i don't have that power (hehe). Its like saying all Mormons are polygamists or all Muslims are Terrorists, all those are generalizations that I DO NOT subscribe to. I like to see the person, not as part of a group but as a person within the earth. I think the world is too full with generalities and we put a group within a stereotype based on our experiences with a bad few. Which is sad because you limit yourself in knowing some excellent people that way.
Delmy =^.^= wrote: "Very awesome discussions guys! loved reading them all. "CONCUR!
Let us not forget that there are many other wonderful parts of the novel to discuss, and as a moderator, I hope you will demonstrate the same willingness to discuss, debate, share, and express your opinions honestly, but with companionable respect as we mostly did in this thread.
And please guys, keep posting - this is not a closure post for this thread:-)
Victoria wrote: "A religious appointment was often a path to prestige and wealth in the past, and sought after for that reason vs. any spiritual calling. So the Bishop here is definitely cut from a different cloth ..."Thanks Victoria, I didn't realize that.
Deana wrote: I fell in love with the Bishop as a character on page 5 when he gave up his house to the hospital patients I did too! And it seemed there was no deliberating on the issue at all, it was just a matter of simple logic for him.
Zulfiya wrote: "Everyman wrote: "So do you think his goodness can be separated from his religious faith? I don't see him that way, personally. "I strongly do. I believe faith does not determine the person, other..."
Excellent post. I agree 100%.
Luffy wrote: "You're giving religion more credit than it deserves, even though I agree with you on everything else. "I think the record says otherwise, but that's a topic on which we are unlikely to reach agreement.
And it's not necessary to, outside of the context of the book at issue. Myriel was based quite heavily on a real bishop, who almost certainly would, if asked, had credited his religion for his virtue and care for the poor.
Zulfiya wrote: "I can not help it - I see Light in this bishop as I see Light in Pope Francis, Nicholas Tesla, Harriet Tubman, Henri Dunant (the founder of the Red Cross) and other spiritual and secular people alike, but it is also true that I do not see light in many other religious or secular people or characters. "This is hardly a surprise. True religion is hard work and requires real sacrifice, which many people even with the best intentions are not up to.
I loved this part also!