Reading the Chunksters discussion
This topic is about
Les Misérables
Side-Reads
>
1/20 Les Miserables, Volume I, Book III (Part I, Book III), SPOILERS ALLOWED FOR THIS SECTION ONLY
date
newest »
newest »
1. In the beginning of the book, Hugo lays the scene for his new character and provides an extensive background chapter. In this chapter he alludes to a number of historical figures and social changes taking place virtually everywhere. Did you find this chapter informative, challenging, impeding comprehension, useful or necessary? Did his approach work? Although I am somewhat familiar with French history, I found this section quite dense. Moliere and Voltaire are familiar (I've read some of their works), and of course I've heard of Napoleon and Louis XVIII, but I drew a blank on some of the others. I last studied French history in depth about 25 years ago, so maybe I would have caught more of the references back then. I'm not sure of the purpose of this chapter at this point, but maybe it will make sense later.
2. The company of students and their paramours enjoys carefree life, the sans souci lifestyle. Is Hugo critical of this lifestyle or is his writing naturalistic and comment-free?
I am torn on this one. He does seem somewhat critical of the actions of the men and the older three women, but Hugo seemed sympathetic to the plight of Fantine.
3. How would you define 'a surprise' organized by Tholomyès and his posse? Were they bored to death and that was their way of expressing their emotions or were they uncomfortable facing the actual 'breakup'?
Their "surprise" was very cruel and cowardly. They were using those poor girls, and then didn't even have the guts to tell the women to their faces that they were being dumped. These men didn't seem to truly care for their lovers, and were only with them for sex and companionship until their parents told them it was time to settle down. The older three women may have understood the terms, but it seems apparent that Fantine didn't.
4. How can Fantine's life change now when we know that she is with the child? Do you find Fantine and her friends Dahlia, Zéphine, and Favourite irresponsible and immoral or were the young ladies in love and thus their actions were redeemed by this feeling?
Fantine seems to have been rather naive. I think she honestly believed that she was in love with Tholomyes and had probably convinced herself that he felt the same for her. I have a lot of sympathy for her. Her life is likely to be very difficult now that she is a single mother. The other three girls were older and more worldly, so they understood the situation better. None of them seemed to truly love their boyfriends. At that time, their actions would have been deemed immoral and irresponsible, but I wouldn't necessarily define them that way. The men were at least as irresponsible, and their abandonment was what was truly immoral.
Other items
My translator is driving me crazy. He left whole lines in French without explanation. There are no footnotes, and the meaning could not be obtained from the context. If I understood French, I would be reading the book in French in the first place, so I'd really appreciate it if the book was entirely written in a language I understand. It made this section much more difficult and frustrating.
Anne wrote: "1. Although I am somewhat familiar with French history, I found this section quite dense. Moliere and Voltaire are familiar (I've read some of their works), and of course I've heard of Napoleon and Louis XVIII, but I drew a blank on some of the others"I struggled with this passage, too. Too many references, too many allusions. It was definitely more meaningful for his contemporaries, but time sets borders we are not able to cross.
Anne wrote: "He does seem somewhat critical of the actions of the men and the older three women, but Hugo seemed sympathetic to the plight of Fantine."Fantine was in love or believed she was sincerely in love. Others, conversely, knew that whatever they had would not have any consequences.
Anne wrote: "At that time, their actions would have been deemed immoral and irresponsible, but I wouldn't necessarily define them that way. The men were at least as irresponsible, and their abandonment was what was truly immoral."It is obvious that Fantine will be one of the leading characters; otherwise, the volume would not be eponymous. I think Hugo will reveal her plight to his readers; as I mentioned elsewhere, Hugo and Dickens are two advocates for the wretched, the miserable, the dispossessed, the fallen, the condemned. Hopefully, it will be the novel that raises social awareness and appeals to our compassion regardless of the spiritual path we take.
P.S. Whose translation are you reading, Anne?
Zulfiya wrote: "P.S. Whose translation are you reading, Anne?"I own a hardcover version of Wraxall's translation. I downloaded a different version on my phone, but it wasn't much different. Tonight I downloaded a version translated by Denny. That one has footnotes, at least. I plan to stick with my hardcover for now, but I'll turn to the Denny one for the footnotes. I'm glad my local library has so many different versions, so I can experiment with the different ones.
Zulfiya wrote: "I struggled with this passage, too."I'm not at all looking forward to reading this part. This book has been quite underwhelming so far. Classics attain their status by being part of another time, when there were not copycats of their stories about, well no many anyway. Whenever I've come across various movie adaptations of this story, I've shunned them. If the book continues to be this disappointing, I'll stop reading, even if it means I'll be banned from this useful group.
I'm through, somehow, the first four chapters. This book is starting to disappoint. The four chapters were utter, utter garbage. But this attempt is the best opportunity of reading an established classic like LM. If I give up now, I'll never read it again. That's the only strand that's keeping my resolve together. I'm mightily tempted to simply ditch this book and move on with my life.
I found the first chapter with the historical references to be extremely difficult to get through and to be honest, for the very first time in reading this book, I skimmed. In the first section, about the priest, I read several of the chapters several times. I wanted to completely understand. However, I skimmed this, hoping that this one little section was not going to have a huge impact on the story. I found the actions of the four young men to be cowardly and reprehensible. In my opinion, they were clearly using the young women for their pleasure and when they were "finished" with them, they "dumped" them without further consideration. However, I also think that the ladies, with the exception of Fantine, knew all along that the gentlemen were "using" them and that nothing would ever come of the trysts. Fantine, however, was young and idealistic, "starry-eyed" and I believe she truly thought that the guy loved her and perhaps would even marry her eventually.
By the way, I must say I am truly enjoying this book. I was not totally hopeful in the first section about the priest, but at this point, I am loving it. I wish I had more time to just sit, read and get totally lost in it.
For what it's worth, and I hope this doesn't constitute a spoiler, the references are not all-important. You can easily read Les Mis without understanding the references and asides (that's what I did). That's not to say that they are pointless, but if they are bogging you down, focus on the storyline instead and enjoy the ride.
Lisa wrote: " Fantine, however, was young and idealistic, "starry-eyed" and I believe she truly thought that the guy loved her and perhaps would even marry her eventually. "Fantine out of all of them deserves a literary 'redemption' a new lease of life, a chance to get a better life. She is naive, hopeful, romantic, sincere, but I am afraid this is the paradox of the world we live in - I am afraid she will be punished even more by being the nicest of the group.
As far as allusions and historical references, I have simply accepted that I will miss some of it, but so be it. Communication without information loss is inevitable , and it is especially true if an author from another linguistic country is trying to reach us with the powerful message written more than 150 years ago. I have a sketchy understanding of the plot because I watched the movie when I was in my early teens, and it was twenty years ago (oh, my ...), but I mostly remember the names:-) I do remember crying, though, so I think the book will have its redeeming qualities.
Lisa wrote: "By the way, I must say I am truly enjoying this book. I was not totally hopeful in the first section about the priest, but at this point, I am loving it. I wish I had more time to just sit, read and get totally lost in it. "You're not alone. Other than the frustrations with the translation, I have really enjoyed this book so far. The characters are really interesting, and I'm curious where the plot will go. I have to purposely set this book aside so that I won't read ahead. I want to keep it fresh for the discussions, so I wait until Sunday each week to read the assigned section.
I haven't read this section yet, but just wanted to confirm from our other thread that the Cliffs Notes are not going to be that helpful. That said, I didn't mind spending the $4 to have the hard copy of them at hand while reading. I thought maybe it would be more comprehensive than the free online one that I saw and others mentioned. I remember Cliffs Notes as being more helpful in that AP English class in high school. Maybe I was just dumber then, so they SEEMED more helpful! So since I'm definitely not going to look up all those obscure (to me) references, I guess I will it let them fly by. I did look up a few using the Wikipedia/X-Ray feature on the Kindle, but most of them didn't come up with anything at all. The CN does have a lot of introductory material on Victor Hugo so I am going to read all that.
Luffy wrote: "I'm through, somehow, the first four chapters. This book is starting to disappoint. The four chapters were utter, utter garbage. But this attempt is the best opportunity of reading an established c..."Luffy, why do you think they were garbage? I'm curious as to your more specific thoughts on the shortcomings? I'm not so crazy about the book so far either, but I would tend to write that off as my own issue - just not a story I like, just not a style of writing I like, etc. since it is widely known as a classic/masterpiece/whatever you want to term it.
And I highly doubt you will be banned from the group for not finishing the book if you choose! This group doesn't do that, do they? I'm new, so what do I know, but I would guess not.
That is the problem with classic novels. It might not be the book after your heart, and it might not be the easiest book, and it might not be the best book, but it is the book that influenced many, or the book that changed something in literature or introduced a new concept or a new approach. Some of modern literary fiction that I immensely enjoy reading is better and surpasses the classic western canon, but will they be as influential and their predecessor is another question.
There are many reasons why a book becomes a classic novel, and its literary quality is only one of many.
Look at Ulysses. Is it deeply emotional? No. Is it relatable? It depends. Is it enjoyable? In a very peculiar labyrinthine way. Is it original and innovative? YES, YES, and YES. Is it literary? Very much so. And it is a classic book.
Victoria wrote: "I'm not so crazy about the book so far either, but I would tend to write that off as my own issue - just not a story I like, just not a style of writing I like, etc. since it is widely known as a classic/masterpiece/whatever you want to term it."Every book or movie or song should be judged on its own merit. I think that Les Mis is a case of the emperor's clothes. If we live in a world where some people doubt some historical events ever happened, if people believe in the occult, if some people believe the moon landings never happened, then why is it hard to believe that some books' reputation is passe and hollow and only survives because of empty championship.
The problem partly lies with me, but I would embrace a book which provides me with food for thought. Not this outdated dime novel with the reputation of a classic. If the fault lies only with me, why do I rate other books highly? Why is it that I'm complaining about LM? I'm not going to rant on, but let me just say that the way I've been brought up makes me susceptible to call a spade a spade.
Zulfiya wrote: "It might not be the book after your heart, and it might not be the easiest book, and it might be the best book, but it is the book that influenced many, or the book that changed something in literature or introduced a new concept or a new approach. "
I think LM is more like The Birth Of a Nation, or the Jazz Singer, than a likable masterpiece like Citizen Kane or Casablanca.
You cannot keep bending over backwards till you're doing a 180. That's not honest.
Luffy, are you reading in in French or in English? I personally know how the book will or will not talk to a reader depending on the language you are reading it in.(I hate finishing my sentences with prepositions:-)) I did have so much trouble with Dickens when I read him in Russian; granted, I was also quite young, but I really rediscovered him in my twenties when I started reading him in English.
You once mentioned that you would like to read LM in the original. Do you think it is worth trying?
Thank you Luffy. I take no issue with your opinions and I really appreciate you coming back to elucidate further. I like the emperor's new clothes analogy even if I don't know if I agree with it yet for this book.
Zulfiya wrote: "I did have so much trouble with Dickens when I read him in Russian; granted, I was also quite young, but I really rediscovered him in my twenties when I started reading him in English. "I don't like to read French books anymore. I've read too many dull french magazines and newspapers, so now I associate the language with my pre-internet days. Russian is a great language. I envy you reading the great Russian novels as they were intended. Meanwhile I'm stuck with LM. I think the only thing that can keep me going is that I can disparage LM more so. But for how long will that be attractive?
Victoria wrote: "Thank you Luffy. I take no issue with your opinions and I really appreciate you coming back to elucidate further. I like the emperor's new clothes analogy even if I don't know if I agree with it yet for this book. "You're too nice. No need to try review what's only my inane comments, I'm not worth it. But I've fallen short of the more acquired tastes. I don't like classical music, I don't like 2001 A Space Odessey, I can't comprehend Victorian books. My tastes are not of the highest brow. But then, when I read something like LM, all 1400 pages of it, I become convinced I'm being taken for a ride.
Ha, ha - I watched 2001: A Space Odyssey in the last year or so and when it was over I had the overwhelming feeling of "Huh? Ok, scratched that off my lifetime movies I need to see list."
Victoria wrote: "Ha, ha - I watched 2001: A Space Odyssey in the last year or so and when it was over I had the overwhelming feeling of "Huh? Ok, scratched that off my lifetime movies I need to see list.""^Taste^
Nina wrote: "For what it's worth, and I hope this doesn't constitute a spoiler, the references are not all-important. You can easily read Les Mis without understanding the references and asides (that's what I d..."The notes to my edition say that this chapter was added in a later revision, so it wasn't part of the original edition.
I didn't follow much of it, and only looked at a few of the notes (for this chapter, the notes section was twice as long (10 pages) as the chapter itself (5 pages).
So why did Hugo insert it? I don't know, of course, but my sense as a reader is that what it does is anchor the section historically, lay a serious groundwork in the social environment for the fluff that is to come with the Sunday excursion of the four couples. It gives some weight to an otherwise almost weightless (except for the last line) book 3.
Whether that's at all what was in Hugo's mind, I have no idea. But it did, for me, focus me (even if I did skim and not understand a lot of it) on the serious part of France in 1817 before we get to the lighthearted events of a Spring day.
Victoria wrote: " So since I'm definitely not going to look up all those obscure (to me) references, I guess I will it let them fly by."If there are any particular ones that you are itching to know, ask and I'll share what my notes say about it. And there's almost certain to be a note -- my translator (Rose) is an avid note make (there are 87 separate notes on Chapter 1)
Luffy wrote: "Every book or movie or song should be judged on its own merit. I think that Les Mis is a case of the emperor's clothes. "It's early days yet. We're only about a tenth of the way through the book at this point (that's the equivalent of page 35 of an average Modern novel of about 350 pages.) We're still getting introduced to the characters and their backgrounds.
Maybe you'll feel the same way by page 700. But maybe not.
Everyman wrote: "So why did Hugo insert it? I don't know, of course, but my sense as a reader is that what it does is anchor the section historically, lay a serious groundwork in the social environment for the fluff that is to come with the Sunday excursion of the four couples. It gives some weight to an otherwise almost weightless (except for the last line) book 3. ."I do agree with you - it is an anchor chapter for his contemporaries. The end of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth century were tumultuous, revolutionary and too shifty even by modern standards. Sometimes it is important to give readers the feeling of direction and historical changes.
On the other hand, even immediate communication acts, i.e. taking place when two or more people are talking and seeing each other still are conducive to the loss of nearly a half of the information. So it is only logical to assume that we can get 10 or even less information from the book written in French more than a hundred years ago when the verbal information is relayed by a means of a written language (and participants of this communication are separated by space and time), translated into another; we are all reading it all over the world and using interwed to express our understanding.
A book is a labyrinth, according to J.L. Borges, and a perpetuum mobile that generates new meanings all the time, according to a semiotician and famous writer, U. Eco; as a result, our misunderstanding is only a part of the literary game we all agreed to play when we decided to read this book.
If someone wants to know what this chapter is all about, then Wikipedia and other references will help you; I am a lazy reader, so I will leave some mysteries unsolved. :-)
It does frustrate me that I misunderstand something or miss clues, but it is not a norm when you read, write, or talk or listen to someone, it is A RULE. It is an arch-rule if we are talking about books.
Nina wrote: "For what it's worth, and I hope this doesn't constitute a spoiler, the references are not all-important. You can easily read Les Mis without understanding the references and asides (that's what I d..."Agreed. When I read this the first time, I found large sections of the purely historical information to be tedious and not important to the story. I used Cliff's Notes to help me understand what was going on, but I skimmed large sections. The parts that were actual storyline, however, I find and am finding incredibly compelling. Don't give up because of the tedious sections, there are large parts that are much better!
And Luffy, you're not going to get kicked out for not reading this. For one, it's a side read and not the actual group read. For another, some books are just not going to be to your taste, as others are not going to be to mine. I don't do horror stories, so my participation in Stephen King novels is going to be minimal or nonexistent, for example. The broad tastes is what gives book discussions their interest :) Although I'll admit, it stung a big to hear Les Mis called an "outdated dime novel." Agree to disagree, though :)
Lisa wrote: "I found the first chapter with the historical references to be extremely difficult to get through and to be honest, for the very first time in reading this book, I skimmed. In the first section, ab..."Instead of restating what Lisa said, I'll just say that I completely agree with her post - both about the references (I did a bit of research at the beginning of the novel, but then ended up skimming the large historical section in this part hoping it would not matter for the bulk of the story) and about the young mens' cruel way of ending their "fun" with the four young women. Fantine's three friends seemed to take the "joke" in stride and they were clearly just having a good time with the men while it lasted, whereas Fantine was really in love and I felt bad for her.
Like I said in the previous section, I really got wrapped up in this novel from the beginning. Each of the characters introduced so far is completely different in terms of their situation in life and storyline, but I have been fascinated by each one. I had read up to and past this section awhile ago and had to put the book down so that I could try to read more closely to the schedule.
I'm enjoying reading everyone's posts so far, it has really made me think about some aspects of the novel that I might not have otherwise thought about.
Zulfiya wrote: "A book is a labyrinth, according to J.L. Borges, and a perpetuum mobile that generates new meanings all the time, according to a semiotician and famous writer, U. Eco; "Nice.
I finally finished this section today. I don't yet feel very engaged with Fantine, she hasn't yet struck me as a three dimensional character and I was shocked at the end to learn she had a child with Tholomyes. I just wasn't picking up on that level of their relationship, naively, I guess. I thought she really was as innocent as the book described vs. her more worldly friends. I guess I missed those cues entirely. And I did find the men's actions to be awful, sneaking out and leaving a note.
Victoria, I think we all agree with you. This is a transition book; it tries to introduce the new character and the new plotline that is eventually intrinsic for the book. I will encourage you not to give up. It only gets better from this point, and very quickly.
Finally getting back to this book. Like many, I had trouble getting through the historical section... I am sure that contemporary readers understood the references but they haven't withstood the test of time. I am bad at skimming and kept falling asleep during this part... but as soon as I finally made it through to the meal worn the eight friends I felt myself get sucked back in. What I am now interested in is that, at least at this point in the book, there seems to be no connection between the priest or the criminal from the previous two sections. I look forward to learning how their stories entwine.
The "surprise" was horrendous, what awful people those boys were. Even for the girls who were less invested than Fantine, they had to wait around for an hour in anticipation of something wonderful only to be presented with this miserable note. And poor Fantine! what will she do? Unwed, single motherhood was far less acceptable in this time period.
The plot itself is marvelous and breath-taking, but his digressions .... grrr. They make me grind my teeth every time I come across one of them, but the plot itself redeems his ramblings. I hope you will not give up on the book. Some episodes are truly visceral, pulsate with emotions, and left me breathless. So I forgive Hugo for his historical lectures :-) And yes, the plotlines will merge nicely.
Zulfiya wrote: "The plot itself is marvelous and breath-taking, but his digressions .... grrr. They make me grind my teeth every time I come across one of them, ..."For me, the digressions are what make the book so glorious. Without them, it's just a fairly mundane story, at least so far, of a good priest, a bad man who robs him, group of irresponsible young blades and the girls they have sucked in, three of whom seem perfectly able to take care of themselves but one of whom is not. Interesting enough as a plot, but nothing special, as far as I can see. But ah, the digressions, the little asides tossed in here and there, they are the eagles seen soaring in the sky as you commute to work, the nasturtium pedals garnishing the tossed salad lunch. I love them.
I love drama, and you love meditations. Obviously, Hugo loved "feeding" our passions with appropriate reading material.
Everyman wrote: "But ah, the digressions, the little asides tossed in here and there, they are the eagles seen soaring in the sky as you commute to work, the nasturtium pedals garnishing the tossed salad lunch.Love your analogies! I like the digressions to some extent - they certainly add to the story and the ambiance of the time and surroundings. But some digressions, such as the one in this section and the upcoming Waterloo, were a bit much for me, probably because the content was a bit over my head and beyond my understanding.
Linda wrote: "But some digressions, such as the one in this section and the upcoming Waterloo, were a bit much for me, probably because the content was a bit over my head "Well, yes, I have to agree that on occasion he goes overboard. But I'm willing to forgive that for the times when he doesn't.
I don't mind the small digressions, which I think he does quite well -- a paragraph here or there. But the long one that took up half of section 3 I could have done without :P
Because this book was not as big as others, there are only a couple of questions I would like you to chew on.
1. In the beginning of the book, Hugo lays the scene for his new character and provides an extensive background chapter. In this chapter he alludes to a number of historical figures and social changes taking place virtually everywhere. Did you find this chapter informative, challenging, impeding comprehension, useful or necessary? Did his approach work?
2. The company of students and their paramours enjoys carefree life, the sans souci lifestyle. Is Hugo critical of this lifestyle or is his writing naturalistic and comment-free?
3. How would you define 'a surprise' organized by Tholomyès and his posse? Were they bored to death and that was their way of expressing their emotions or were they uncomfortable facing the actual 'breakup'?
4. How can Fantine's life change now when we know that she is with the child? Do you find Fantine and her friends Dahlia, Zéphine, and Favourite irresponsible and immoral or were the young ladies in love and thus their actions were redeemed by this feeling?
Feel free to vent or express your feelings in any form. I understand :-)