Tougher going than I remember -- maybe because it's unabridged? Some of the preachy/speechy parts are hard to slog through... but even so, what a joy to reread this, and what a beautifully done translation. ( )

I have never read the book but I did paticipate in a musical about it and I highly recamend that you either read the book or the musical. ( )

I've just finished reading Les Miserables by Victor Hugo. I read it once before, sometime between 18 and 20. I was absorbed in Jean Valjean's story from beginning to end, as well as in the stories of more minor characters, and perhaps half of the long digressions about economics, politics, the sewers of Paris, etc.

---Spoiler alert, although I don't really think the enjoyment of the book is based on not knowing the plot ---
But, I find that I have to begin near the end, because I ended up feelings the books strongest effects there when Jean Valjean reveals to Marius, now Cosette's husband, that he had been in the galley. It was apparent earlier on that Valjean saw Cosette's love for someone else as the end of his relationship with him, and I was puzzled by this, and I didn't see why he needed to tell Marius. Jean Valjean's reasoning was that he didn't want someone unwillingly to be associated with someone like him if they didn't want to, and he didn't want to live a lie. But, at the same time I was emotionally struck by his sense of shame about what seemed so trivial, having stolen a loaf of bread, and doing it to feed his sister's children. For this he felt so low as to be below the lowest in society. It didn't seem to matter that he had also created a business that benefited a town, saved several lives, given to the poor, still he needed to shrink and hide. Perhaps I felt this more strongly because I currently have a friend in jail on a serious charge. Maybe it is just knowing all the ways throughout history in which people have been made to feel unworthy, untouchable for things which now make no sense to us, and, at the same time it continues for reasons that are similarly senseless.

The other parts of the book that seem amazing to me are psychic struggles that occur within Jean Valjean - first when he has stolen the Bishops silver plates, and, on being brought back by the police, the bishop has said that he gave them to Valjean, and then brings out his candlesticks as well, telling Jean Valjean that he had forgotten them. Valjean has been hardened by his experience of 19 years in the galleys for stealing bread and then trying to escape, and the battle is whether to hold on to his bitterness or to allow himself to feel goodness.

The next struggle is after he has established himself in a town, creating an enterprise which has enriched him as well as the town. But another man has been falsely identified as him and is about to be sent to the galleys for life for stealing apples, and another offense which Valjean had committed shortly after his release. So he struggles over whether he needs to turn himself in. In all these times his struggles were wrenching to me. These are common struggles - the process of change from a habitual way of feeling to one that allows more of life inside; the desire to shrink into the shadows.

While some of his characters may be exagerated, perhaps Javert is in his dogged, unquestioning respect for authority, law and the upper class, the depiction of what Valjean struggles with in his own mind seems extremely realistic to me.

in the Le Salon Litteraire du Peuple pour le Peuple which is currently discussing the book, there are some comments about the depiction of women in a stereotyped way, even though most of this is done in what seem to be favorable statements about women, such as "One of the generosities of women is to yield." To me it makes no difference or little difference whether the stereotyped statements are positive or negative - it is always negative to impose a view that denies a person their full humanity and Hugo, to my eye, is definitely guilty of that. Toward the end I was beginning to feel that it was turning into a happily ever after story, with Cosette, who'd been an interesting enough kids, turning into this woman ready to submerge herself in her husband, and leave the room when he and her father had important things to discuss. Sure that was the view of the time, but then we appreciate Hugo for the ways in which he was able to see beyond his time, not for the ways he was limited by it.

There was a lot too that was good about the depiction of the relationship between Marius and his grandfather, and his grandfather's treatment of Marius's father, though that got glossed over in the end.

As I read the book I was amazed at times by just how much Hugo seemed to know about conditions and events around the world. I don't know exactly when Marx's ideas became popular, but, Hugo discussed economic ideas that were similar and the problems of creating and distributing wealth. He seemed very familiar with political events in the United States, and elsewhere. I don't know about other writers who wrote about the difficulties of poverty at that time. Dickens was about that time. E.Nesbitt and Frances Burnett were writers of children's books who wrote about poverty in England perhaps 50 years later. If I compare him to Dickens he seems to me both more realistic and not so confused about class. Thinking of Oliver Twist one difference is that Oliver who had the audacity to ask for more never does actually steal - and he turns out to be of gentile birth. While bringing attention to the misery of the poor he's depicted as being able to rise above it, seemingly as a characteristic of his class. Hugo's depiction of poverty is a bit less of a fairy tale. Fantine does sleep with someone without marrying, so she has some responsibility for her fate, unlike Oliver, but she is is not villified for that, or depicted as a person of bad character. Jean Valjean really did steal the bread, and having done that, and suffered out of proportion for it, acquires a character that includes some hardening against the world.

I don't really have a summary for this discussion, except all in all it seems like a big and compassionate work. I liked it when I first read it and I still do. ( )

Les Miserables is one of the longest books I've ever read (and I've read a lot of long books) and as someone with very little knowledge of French history, it was also one of the most challenging.

Jean Valjean has just been released from prison after nineteen years (he had been sentenced to five years for stealing a loaf of bread to feed his starving family, and then a further fourteen years for his attempts to escape). As an ex-convict, Valjean finds himself rejected by everybody he approaches until the kindly Bishop Myriel takes him in and gives him shelter for the night. However, Valjean repays him by stealing his silverware. When the police catch him and take him back to the bishop's home, the bishop tells them they've made a mistake - he had given the silverware to Valjean as a gift. The bishop's simple gesture of kindness has a profound effect on Valjean, filling him with the determination to be a better person.

After establishing himself as a successful factory owner and becoming mayor of Montreuil-sur-Mer, Valjean promises a dying woman that he will take care of her daughter, Cosette. The rest of the book follows Valjean's attempts to escape the investigations of Inspector Javert and to build a new life for himself and Cosette. Along the way we meet a gang of criminals, a group of revolutionary students, and a greedy innkeeper called Thenardier.

Most of the characters are very well developed and Hugo spends a considerable amount of time introducing us to them. However, I didn't find the characters of Marius and Cosette very interesting, despite their central roles in the book - I thought some of the secondary characters were much stronger, such as the street urchin Gavroche and the Thenardiers' eldest daughter Eponine.

I almost gave this book four stars rather than five, because of all the lengthy digressions on the Battle of Waterloo, life in a convent, the July Revolution of 1830, the Paris sewer system etc. Although these pages are often interesting and informative and contain some beautiful writing, they have very little direct relevance to the plot and interrupt the flow of the story. However, this is really the only negative thing I can say about the book. It's worth perservering through all the social commentary, politics and history to get to the actual story itself - and the wonderful, moving, thought-provoking, suspenseful story is why I finally decided to give the book a five star rating. ( )

Silly, facile, predictable. Flaubert calls it "infantile", Baudelaire, "tasteless and inept"; even Hugo himself seems (I.1.13) to realize its puerility. ( )