marginaliant's review against another edition
4.0
Victor Hugo wanted to write a social history of lower class French people but social history hadn't been invented yet.
In seriousness, this is a classic, and it's a classic for a reason. Yes, it's a slog, but some worthy things in life ought to be. I disliked several of the characters and plot points, but I also loved parts of this novel. I loved some of the anecdotes, the asides, the way he could characterize people by using "he was one of those people who _____" and it just gave such a light into his world. I'm glad I read it.
In seriousness, this is a classic, and it's a classic for a reason. Yes, it's a slog, but some worthy things in life ought to be. I disliked several of the characters and plot points, but I also loved parts of this novel. I loved some of the anecdotes, the asides, the way he could characterize people by using "he was one of those people who _____" and it just gave such a light into his world. I'm glad I read it.
carrix2's review against another edition
2.0
I really really struggled to finish this audiobook! I only hung in there because the play is one of my favorites and I loved to hear parts I recognized. I could have done without 80% of the book - I never want to hear about Waterloo again! LOL
I think editors were an amazing invention and will never take them for granted again.
I think editors were an amazing invention and will never take them for granted again.
zeloco's review against another edition
4.0
Very hard to read unabridged, so ended up finishing with the abridged audio-book. The story is wonderfully human, great for introspection.
thejoyofbooking's review against another edition
5.0
Ah, Les Miserables. Also known as the tearjerker musical that I'm madly in love with.
This was a re-read, and the first of my classics in 2012. How can I critique the work of a master like Victor Hugo? I can't. All I can tell you is what there is to love about Les Mis.
First, it's the classic hero's journey tale. A man faces obstacles, overcomes them, and is changed in the process. In Jean Valjean's case, the obstacle is love and kindness - he doesn't know what to do with kindness when it is shown to him, and he doesn't love until he does something selfless for someone else. The effect of both love and kindness in Valjean's life is to lift him up out of certain despair, to elevate him to become someone to want to emulate.
Javert also faces obstacles, but in his case, he is overcome by the obstacle. Namely, duty. Javert is unable to see things in shades of grey, preferring the black and white of right and wrong, virtuousity and criminality. When he is shown mercy by a convict, it is more than he can take and he is crushed by the failings of his internal system of justice.
Of Cosette and Marius, there's little more to say. While they grow in the book, I wouldn't say they are particularly changed by the love they experience for one another or the events that happen in their lives. Likewise the lesser players, like the Thenardiers. I must say I prefer the musical for fleshing out their characters a little more, particularly Eponine, who is my favorite character from the stage show.
Overall, the benefit of reading any classic work of literature is an appreciation of language and storytelling, of a quality that is almost missing from modern literature. Contemporary writing is good, enjoyable, entertaining, but there's something about reading something that was written in translation or with a certain formal standard that has degraded over the years to really bring back the former English major in me. :)
Les Miserables was a great way to start out my classics list this year, and I'm looking forward to continuing in this vein. Next up, I think, is either Great Expectations or Tess of the D'Urbervilles. The former is a re-read, the latter a new experience.
This was a re-read, and the first of my classics in 2012. How can I critique the work of a master like Victor Hugo? I can't. All I can tell you is what there is to love about Les Mis.
First, it's the classic hero's journey tale. A man faces obstacles, overcomes them, and is changed in the process. In Jean Valjean's case, the obstacle is love and kindness - he doesn't know what to do with kindness when it is shown to him, and he doesn't love until he does something selfless for someone else. The effect of both love and kindness in Valjean's life is to lift him up out of certain despair, to elevate him to become someone to want to emulate.
Javert also faces obstacles, but in his case, he is overcome by the obstacle. Namely, duty. Javert is unable to see things in shades of grey, preferring the black and white of right and wrong, virtuousity and criminality. When he is shown mercy by a convict, it is more than he can take and he is crushed by the failings of his internal system of justice.
Of Cosette and Marius, there's little more to say. While they grow in the book, I wouldn't say they are particularly changed by the love they experience for one another or the events that happen in their lives. Likewise the lesser players, like the Thenardiers. I must say I prefer the musical for fleshing out their characters a little more, particularly Eponine, who is my favorite character from the stage show.
Overall, the benefit of reading any classic work of literature is an appreciation of language and storytelling, of a quality that is almost missing from modern literature. Contemporary writing is good, enjoyable, entertaining, but there's something about reading something that was written in translation or with a certain formal standard that has degraded over the years to really bring back the former English major in me. :)
Les Miserables was a great way to start out my classics list this year, and I'm looking forward to continuing in this vein. Next up, I think, is either Great Expectations or Tess of the D'Urbervilles. The former is a re-read, the latter a new experience.
katiem0201's review against another edition
5.0
I DID IT. I FINALLY CONQUERED LES MIS!
And oh my god was it a whirlwind of emotions.
And way more depressing than the movie (but I think it's unfair to compare this to the movie and vice versa since they're both good in their own ways).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This version is a lot smaller than what I was expecting which is good since I have to read this within a month. One day I’ll read the full version, but for right now, I’ll stick to this.
And oh my god was it a whirlwind of emotions.
And way more depressing than the movie (but I think it's unfair to compare this to the movie and vice versa since they're both good in their own ways).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This version is a lot smaller than what I was expecting which is good since I have to read this within a month. One day I’ll read the full version, but for right now, I’ll stick to this.
aplanos018's review against another edition
5.0
I know its like, 1,600 pages... and before you ask, "did Hugo HAVE to make it this long and detailed?" the answer is YES. This brilliant piece of literature is heartbreaking, spiritual, and beautiful.
Jean Valjean goes through a metamorphosis and his thought process and monologues are so beautiful I cried. Esp his convo w the bishop in the beginning :,)
Javert's stubborn ideas that stemmed from his traumatic past make you sympathize with his positivist views.
I know its a fat book but I can see myself rereading it, or at least my favorite passages from it, many many times.
I remember watching the movie after reading the book (the one with Anne Hathaway and Hugh Jackman) and thinking I can probably never enjoy it again. After reading the depth of the characters and the story structure, the movie just felt rushed and shallow? I still love the musical and Russel Crows stinky voice singing stars, but I probably will reread the book before rewatching the movie hehe.
Jean Valjean goes through a metamorphosis and his thought process and monologues are so beautiful I cried. Esp his convo w the bishop in the beginning :,)
Javert's stubborn ideas that stemmed from his traumatic past make you sympathize with his positivist views.
I know its a fat book but I can see myself rereading it, or at least my favorite passages from it, many many times.
I remember watching the movie after reading the book (the one with Anne Hathaway and Hugh Jackman) and thinking I can probably never enjoy it again. After reading the depth of the characters and the story structure, the movie just felt rushed and shallow? I still love the musical and Russel Crows stinky voice singing stars, but I probably will reread the book before rewatching the movie hehe.
alen97's review against another edition
5.0
It took me last than expected hahaha
I loved it, I firstly saw the musical film and I have to say that I felt the exact same way as when I was watching it.
So many emotions, so much sadness and happiness at the same time.
I loved it, I firstly saw the musical film and I have to say that I felt the exact same way as when I was watching it.
So many emotions, so much sadness and happiness at the same time.
hannahtosh's review against another edition
2.0
"History neglects nearly every one of these little details and cannot do otherwise if it is not to be swamped by the infinite minutiae. And yet, the details, which are wrongly described as little - there are no little facts in the human realm, any more than there are little leaves in the realm of vegetation - are useful."
I am in awe that this novel took over thirty years to complete, but you can also tell…y’know? You get the distinct impression Victor Hugo was paid per word, however it turns out this was not the case.
The method Hugo uses in his other works, devoting enormous sections to argue a moral point or show off his vast knowledge, takes up more than a quarter of Les Misérables and these little (monumental) deviations do not advance the plot, or even the numerous subplots at all. Mister Hugo, was it absolutely necessary to devote over four full chapters to describing the poetic side of the Parisian sewers? He titles one part of the novel: “Parenthesis” to alert the reader that the relevance to the main plot is zilch. He visited the battlefield of the Battle of Waterloo, where he completed the novel, I’m not sure the 19 chapters he dedicated to the reflection on its place in history was absolutely fundamental though. A whole 19 chapters.
This novel achieves its gargantuan length due to…digressions (it doesn’t even begin at the beginning, but at the beginning of a digression!), yet also from extensive speech and ‘extensive’ is putting it mildly. The convolution does nothing to help keep your attention, no matter who is monologuing. It appears that Hugo repeats himself, tiresomely, or repackages identical messages multiple different ways in consecutive sentences, which makes you think you weren’t paying attention (I was 100%, all the time…).
His continuous evangelising was eventually exhausting, one wishes Hugo would have just taken a moment.
Hugo based the plot on such exaggerated coincidences that you can’t help but believe them. Also, was Javert really that hell-bent on apprehending a guy that stole a loaf of bread (the proverbial crime of the poor) instead of the murderers and whatnot flitting round Paris?
His aim was to include the unknown (mission: accomplished), to almost rewrite history with microscopic details – clearly wanting to teach us all a lesson in philosophy and politics.
"If it hadn't rained during the night of June 17-18, 1815, the future of Europe would have been different. A few drops of water, more or less, brought Napoleon to his knees. So that Waterloo could be the end of Austerlitz, Providence needed only a bit of rain, and a cloud crossing the sky out of season was enough for a whole world to disintegrate."
I am in awe that this novel took over thirty years to complete, but you can also tell…y’know? You get the distinct impression Victor Hugo was paid per word, however it turns out this was not the case.
The method Hugo uses in his other works, devoting enormous sections to argue a moral point or show off his vast knowledge, takes up more than a quarter of Les Misérables and these little (monumental) deviations do not advance the plot, or even the numerous subplots at all. Mister Hugo, was it absolutely necessary to devote over four full chapters to describing the poetic side of the Parisian sewers? He titles one part of the novel: “Parenthesis” to alert the reader that the relevance to the main plot is zilch. He visited the battlefield of the Battle of Waterloo, where he completed the novel, I’m not sure the 19 chapters he dedicated to the reflection on its place in history was absolutely fundamental though. A whole 19 chapters.
This novel achieves its gargantuan length due to…digressions (it doesn’t even begin at the beginning, but at the beginning of a digression!), yet also from extensive speech and ‘extensive’ is putting it mildly. The convolution does nothing to help keep your attention, no matter who is monologuing. It appears that Hugo repeats himself, tiresomely, or repackages identical messages multiple different ways in consecutive sentences, which makes you think you weren’t paying attention (I was 100%, all the time…).
His continuous evangelising was eventually exhausting, one wishes Hugo would have just taken a moment.
Hugo based the plot on such exaggerated coincidences that you can’t help but believe them. Also, was Javert really that hell-bent on apprehending a guy that stole a loaf of bread (the proverbial crime of the poor) instead of the murderers and whatnot flitting round Paris?
His aim was to include the unknown (mission: accomplished), to almost rewrite history with microscopic details – clearly wanting to teach us all a lesson in philosophy and politics.
"If it hadn't rained during the night of June 17-18, 1815, the future of Europe would have been different. A few drops of water, more or less, brought Napoleon to his knees. So that Waterloo could be the end of Austerlitz, Providence needed only a bit of rain, and a cloud crossing the sky out of season was enough for a whole world to disintegrate."
nietzschespeaches's review against another edition
3.0
A Few Observations for the Benefit of the Readers.
First: I enjoyed the dramatic imagery and satisfying pacing of Hugo's writing style, and I'm sure the translation (I read Christine Donougher's) plays an essential role. Descriptions of things like the barricades, "the third level down", and the sewers were some of my favorite parts of the book. The style excelled at conveying the horror of poverty.
Second: I liked the story on a larger scale, but so many secrets and developments were manufactured from flimsy excuses.
Third: I didn't care for Marius or Cosette.
Fourth: A bit of my spirit died every time I saw a monologue extending before me.
Fifth: This book was written with certain references for a certain audience. There were pages with over ten footnotes, and there was rarely a page with none.
Sixth: This book couldn't decide if it wanted to be a story or a political/historical treatise. The sections on Waterloo, convents, slang, and even the one about the sewers, which I genuinely enjoyed, intruded far too much on the story and brought my attention to a screeching halt.
I wanted to like this book more than I did. It has passages that have stayed in my mind longer than ones from any other book I've read, but there were so many other things about it I disliked.
First: I enjoyed the dramatic imagery and satisfying pacing of Hugo's writing style, and I'm sure the translation (I read Christine Donougher's) plays an essential role. Descriptions of things like the barricades, "the third level down", and the sewers were some of my favorite parts of the book. The style excelled at conveying the horror of poverty.
Second: I liked the story on a larger scale, but so many secrets and developments were manufactured from flimsy excuses.
Third: I didn't care for Marius or Cosette.
Fourth: A bit of my spirit died every time I saw a monologue extending before me.
Fifth: This book was written with certain references for a certain audience. There were pages with over ten footnotes, and there was rarely a page with none.
Sixth: This book couldn't decide if it wanted to be a story or a political/historical treatise. The sections on Waterloo, convents, slang, and even the one about the sewers, which I genuinely enjoyed, intruded far too much on the story and brought my attention to a screeching halt.
I wanted to like this book more than I did. It has passages that have stayed in my mind longer than ones from any other book I've read, but there were so many other things about it I disliked.
bookworm_lv's review against another edition
3.0
Bija smagi, vēl priekšā otrā daļa...
Sižets - 5 zvaigznes, bet visi pārējie blakus apraksti kaut kā nemanāmi "apēd" 2 zvaigznes.
Sižets - 5 zvaigznes, bet visi pārējie blakus apraksti kaut kā nemanāmi "apēd" 2 zvaigznes.