Scan barcode
kermittfrog's review against another edition
challenging
reflective
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
anpu325's review against another edition
5.0
Somehow simultaneously the best book and the worst book I have ever read. The pointless and boring tangents were frustrating, but some of the tangents were actually good. Sometimes I was bored, but often I would lose track of time because I got so absorbed in the story. Some lines were just so profound and eloquent I wrote them down so I could return to them again and again. And when I got to the end, I cried so hard. I can't remember the last time a book made me cry that much!
misscoralinejones's review against another edition
5.0
Ceci n'est pas un roman.
È uno studio sociologico che si serve ANCHE della fiction come mezzo di espressione.
La figura del miserabile viene denudata e studiata a 360°, leggerete dei capitoli che sembrano strappati da un saggio più che da un romanzo. Mi ha colpito particolarmente un capitolo che sembrava dei più insignificanti (descriveva un giardino abbandonato). Leggendo mi sono resa conto che quel mostro di Hugo contemporaneamente descriveva un giardino, filosofeggiava su "la Vita, l'Universo e tutto quanto" (citando un altro autore) e descriveva la propria poetica. Cito: "Dove finisce il telescopio, comincia il microscopio. Quale dei 2 ha la vista più ampia? Scegliete. Una muffa è una pleiade di fiori; una nebulosa è un formicaio di stelle". Nel romanzo si serve del telescopio per parlare della Storia con la esse maiuscola, si serve del microscopio per parlare del singolo. Questo chiasmo, in cui utilizza l'Universo per descrivere la terra e viceversa lo ritroviamo lungo tutta la sua narrazione: Si serve di Parigi per parlare del miserabile, si serve del miserabile per parlare di Parigi. La narrazione di Hugo è, per così dire, una eterna "sineddoche", la parte per il tutto e viceversa.
Cito ancora: "Chi dunque può calcolare il tragitto di una molecola? Come possiamo sapere se vi siano creazioni di mondi determinate dalla caduta di un granello di sabbia?" --> nel romanzo ogni azione (anche la più insignificante) ha una conseguenza e diventa significante per la vita degli altri. L'Universo è un "enorme ingranaggio che ha come primo motore il moscerino e come ultima ruota lo zodiaco".
È uno studio sociologico che si serve ANCHE della fiction come mezzo di espressione.
La figura del miserabile viene denudata e studiata a 360°, leggerete dei capitoli che sembrano strappati da un saggio più che da un romanzo. Mi ha colpito particolarmente un capitolo che sembrava dei più insignificanti (descriveva un giardino abbandonato). Leggendo mi sono resa conto che quel mostro di Hugo contemporaneamente descriveva un giardino, filosofeggiava su "la Vita, l'Universo e tutto quanto" (citando un altro autore) e descriveva la propria poetica. Cito: "Dove finisce il telescopio, comincia il microscopio. Quale dei 2 ha la vista più ampia? Scegliete. Una muffa è una pleiade di fiori; una nebulosa è un formicaio di stelle". Nel romanzo si serve del telescopio per parlare della Storia con la esse maiuscola, si serve del microscopio per parlare del singolo. Questo chiasmo, in cui utilizza l'Universo per descrivere la terra e viceversa lo ritroviamo lungo tutta la sua narrazione: Si serve di Parigi per parlare del miserabile, si serve del miserabile per parlare di Parigi. La narrazione di Hugo è, per così dire, una eterna "sineddoche", la parte per il tutto e viceversa.
Cito ancora: "Chi dunque può calcolare il tragitto di una molecola? Come possiamo sapere se vi siano creazioni di mondi determinate dalla caduta di un granello di sabbia?" --> nel romanzo ogni azione (anche la più insignificante) ha una conseguenza e diventa significante per la vita degli altri. L'Universo è un "enorme ingranaggio che ha come primo motore il moscerino e come ultima ruota lo zodiaco".
izzys_internet_bookshelf's review against another edition
2.0
2/5
This book was so long I almost DNFed it multiple times because of how slow it was and how in detail everything was. The author putting his two cents in was enjoyable but it was one of the only thing I liked about the book. Which is odd but at the same time the book is not the same as the movie musical/musical
This book was so long I almost DNFed it multiple times because of how slow it was and how in detail everything was. The author putting his two cents in was enjoyable but it was one of the only thing I liked about the book. Which is odd but at the same time the book is not the same as the movie musical/musical
ewanmcmyn's review against another edition
dark
emotional
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
queen_perfection's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
relaxing
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.25
queen_perfection's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
knod78's review against another edition
4.0
I was a glass case of emotions after finishing this book, and I have now processed everything to write a review. My friend and I did this for a challenge by reading a chapter a day over the year, but we finished it much earlier mainly because some of the chapters are short and books could be super short, too. The book has Parts and then divided into Books and then further divided into Chapters. Yes, I am also confused.
So, let me start this review. I loved the story. I loved how it unfolded with everything. There were many times that I turned to my husband and said, "OMG this book is so sad." He just looked at me and said, "Well it's kind of in the title." This book had me on edge so many times. You didn't know where Victor Hugo was going to take the sad. Sometimes, it worked out okay and sometimes, it didn't. I just expected the worst all the time. Funny enough, I thought this book was set during the main French Revolution where they offed the heads, but it was actually much later. This was just a standard French riot, which Hugo explained the difference between the revolution and an insurrection in one Book. This also made me say outloud, "Ohhhh this is why the French like to riot for everything." Speaking of this, I was reminded by January 6 insurrection, and I often remarked how some of the stuff being said definitely applies to current times. Of course, who could not love Jean Valjean?! What a character of sadness, pity, danger, strength, remorse, love, and hero. Monsieur Mabeauf and the Priest in the beginning also had wonderfulness. Fantine's story was just sad and tragic, but you felt her strength. Cosette was sad too, but I ended up not liking her as much in the end. She's not bad, but more Marius doormat. I do love the way it ended (sort of); the last couple of pages were beautiful and full of love as Valjean dies, which you don't get many of throughout this book. So you take it where you get it. I just wished Marius got the stick out of his ass so that the weren't too late, which they were. And the surprise of all was Eponine. I kept thinking she would do Marius wrong to mess up Cosette, but she protected them.
Now, the things I didn't like. Victor Hugo has a habit of adding massively long tangents that have somewhat/nothing to do with the story, but goes on so much that you are completely taken out of the story. This is the very reason why my husband and I DNF'd The Hunchback of Notre Dame; he went on and on and on about Paris in this time period as if it was a travel guide instead of a story. There were several long Books about The Battle of Waterloo (I wanted to put a spork in my eye when I finished this one), the different types of riots, slang history, etc. etc. etc. And with this, we had so much detail of useless information that when Javert dies, it was almost thrown in there as an afterthought. Yes, we got a Book of how helping Valjean affected him so much, but he didn't die at the end of it; it was the random sentence thrown in later on that Valjean found out. I was shocked and surprised and felt he deserved to have more said about it than just a small sentence. And yes, I went back to reread the last page of the book and Hugo doesn't say he commits suicide. I mean you can infer that he died if you are really reading between the lines, but I missed it. I want that declared properly.
And now on to why I absolutely hated Marius character. My friend didn't like him, but I hated him and we could be in the minority here. In fact, he's in my top five hated characters of all literature. You can hate the Thenadiers and Javert, but they were obvious characters to not like and Javert was just a lawbiding policeman. But Marius...was sneaky in his shittiness. So, here are my reasons:
1. He was a narcissist...big time. If you don't think so and think he was such a great person, then you need to look at the bullshit he did and the many times he played victim. And narcissist likes to be in control. He definitely controlled Cosette. He even said he would use her money to find and pay the Thenadiers and the secret man (Valjean) to save his life.
2. He was a stalker to 11. My friend and I called him Stalker Marius.
3. Everyone else hated the Thenadiers, including Eponine. He even saw all the horrible shit they would do, and yet after all that, he STILL gives him money and still respects him. I think Marius paid the debt to him even though he didn't deserve it.
4. As a lawyer, he couldn't find out that Javert committed suicide? I mean seriously?! Thenadier had to be the one to convince him.
5. Instead of finding out information on his own (which he could easily do since he was a damn lawyer), he just took the word of someone who barely knew Valjean.
6. Because he thought the worst of Valjean and for some reason the okay in Thenadier, he slowly took everything away so that Valjean would leave on his own taking the blame for himself. The saddest thing I read was Valjean going as far as the street and just looking down it. All because Marius is an idiot control freak. Again.
7. He didn't ask questions, which is why he was an idiot and assumed bullshit without any evidence. Evidence is kind of important to a lawyer. I wouldn't want him representing me.
8. So, he hasn't talked to his grandfather in years and rejected him completely, but he thought it was okay to just show up to announce an engagement to a woman the grandfather didn't know and he somehow expected that the grandfather would be happy.
9. He sees initials and assumes they are Cosettes. He creates a name for her. Then, he gets mad at Cosette when he finds out the name he created in his head was wrong. He also gets mad at her when the wind blows her dress up a bit to show a small part of the ankle like she can control the fucking wind. No, she's not a witch and you would probably burn her if you found that out.
10. And the biggest one of all, which solidified why I hated this character was the judgement. Valjean confides in him and he immediately judges him for being a convicted felon. I'm sorry, but WTF. Marius was just revolting against the government for quite possibly the worst and stupidest reason ever...an old dude dies. He destroys a lady's business, which was a big deal back then and terrorizes the people living around in the area who couldn't leave their homes. He killed innocent guards trying to protect their city. All for an old dude who died. No laws were changed. Just the dude died. If he was caught, he would have been convicted as a traitor and felon and killed. So, at no point should he EVER judge anyone who is a convicted felon since he was a traitor convicted felon himself that Javert helped go away...all because an old dude died. And then he was upset that Valjean "killed" Javert when the order to kill Javert was made. He didn't try to stop it until it was too late. Typical.
Anyways. I know this was a long review. But I did love this book and I do recommend reading it, especially if you are a fan of the play. I plan to see the play for the first time in January. I would have given the book 5 stars if Hugo didn't have the tangents the size of Texas slowing down the book. This could have easily been less than 500 pages instead of 1400 pages. I would check out other editions, because I have a feeling there are shorter versions. It was an assignment to read in Beverly Hills 90210, and those books looked much shorter. And even though I hated Marius, he served his purpose for the story, which does make the story move along and keep me interested.
So, let me start this review. I loved the story. I loved how it unfolded with everything. There were many times that I turned to my husband and said, "OMG this book is so sad." He just looked at me and said, "Well it's kind of in the title." This book had me on edge so many times. You didn't know where Victor Hugo was going to take the sad. Sometimes, it worked out okay and sometimes, it didn't. I just expected the worst all the time. Funny enough, I thought this book was set during the main French Revolution where they offed the heads, but it was actually much later. This was just a standard French riot, which Hugo explained the difference between the revolution and an insurrection in one Book. This also made me say outloud, "Ohhhh this is why the French like to riot for everything." Speaking of this, I was reminded by January 6 insurrection, and I often remarked how some of the stuff being said definitely applies to current times. Of course, who could not love Jean Valjean?! What a character of sadness, pity, danger, strength, remorse, love, and hero. Monsieur Mabeauf and the Priest in the beginning also had wonderfulness. Fantine's story was just sad and tragic, but you felt her strength. Cosette was sad too, but I ended up not liking her as much in the end. She's not bad, but more Marius doormat. I do love the way it ended (sort of); the last couple of pages were beautiful and full of love as Valjean dies, which you don't get many of throughout this book. So you take it where you get it. I just wished Marius got the stick out of his ass so that the weren't too late, which they were. And the surprise of all was Eponine. I kept thinking she would do Marius wrong to mess up Cosette, but she protected them.
Now, the things I didn't like. Victor Hugo has a habit of adding massively long tangents that have somewhat/nothing to do with the story, but goes on so much that you are completely taken out of the story. This is the very reason why my husband and I DNF'd The Hunchback of Notre Dame; he went on and on and on about Paris in this time period as if it was a travel guide instead of a story. There were several long Books about The Battle of Waterloo (I wanted to put a spork in my eye when I finished this one), the different types of riots, slang history, etc. etc. etc. And with this, we had so much detail of useless information that when Javert dies, it was almost thrown in there as an afterthought. Yes, we got a Book of how helping Valjean affected him so much, but he didn't die at the end of it; it was the random sentence thrown in later on that Valjean found out. I was shocked and surprised and felt he deserved to have more said about it than just a small sentence. And yes, I went back to reread the last page of the book and Hugo doesn't say he commits suicide. I mean you can infer that he died if you are really reading between the lines, but I missed it. I want that declared properly.
And now on to why I absolutely hated Marius character. My friend didn't like him, but I hated him and we could be in the minority here. In fact, he's in my top five hated characters of all literature. You can hate the Thenadiers and Javert, but they were obvious characters to not like and Javert was just a lawbiding policeman. But Marius...was sneaky in his shittiness. So, here are my reasons:
1. He was a narcissist...big time. If you don't think so and think he was such a great person, then you need to look at the bullshit he did and the many times he played victim. And narcissist likes to be in control. He definitely controlled Cosette. He even said he would use her money to find and pay the Thenadiers and the secret man (Valjean) to save his life.
2. He was a stalker to 11. My friend and I called him Stalker Marius.
3. Everyone else hated the Thenadiers, including Eponine. He even saw all the horrible shit they would do, and yet after all that, he STILL gives him money and still respects him. I think Marius paid the debt to him even though he didn't deserve it.
4. As a lawyer, he couldn't find out that Javert committed suicide? I mean seriously?! Thenadier had to be the one to convince him.
5. Instead of finding out information on his own (which he could easily do since he was a damn lawyer), he just took the word of someone who barely knew Valjean.
6. Because he thought the worst of Valjean and for some reason the okay in Thenadier, he slowly took everything away so that Valjean would leave on his own taking the blame for himself. The saddest thing I read was Valjean going as far as the street and just looking down it. All because Marius is an idiot control freak. Again.
7. He didn't ask questions, which is why he was an idiot and assumed bullshit without any evidence. Evidence is kind of important to a lawyer. I wouldn't want him representing me.
8. So, he hasn't talked to his grandfather in years and rejected him completely, but he thought it was okay to just show up to announce an engagement to a woman the grandfather didn't know and he somehow expected that the grandfather would be happy.
9. He sees initials and assumes they are Cosettes. He creates a name for her. Then, he gets mad at Cosette when he finds out the name he created in his head was wrong. He also gets mad at her when the wind blows her dress up a bit to show a small part of the ankle like she can control the fucking wind. No, she's not a witch and you would probably burn her if you found that out.
10. And the biggest one of all, which solidified why I hated this character was the judgement. Valjean confides in him and he immediately judges him for being a convicted felon. I'm sorry, but WTF. Marius was just revolting against the government for quite possibly the worst and stupidest reason ever...an old dude dies. He destroys a lady's business, which was a big deal back then and terrorizes the people living around in the area who couldn't leave their homes. He killed innocent guards trying to protect their city. All for an old dude who died. No laws were changed. Just the dude died. If he was caught, he would have been convicted as a traitor and felon and killed. So, at no point should he EVER judge anyone who is a convicted felon since he was a traitor convicted felon himself that Javert helped go away...all because an old dude died. And then he was upset that Valjean "killed" Javert when the order to kill Javert was made. He didn't try to stop it until it was too late. Typical.
Anyways. I know this was a long review. But I did love this book and I do recommend reading it, especially if you are a fan of the play. I plan to see the play for the first time in January. I would have given the book 5 stars if Hugo didn't have the tangents the size of Texas slowing down the book. This could have easily been less than 500 pages instead of 1400 pages. I would check out other editions, because I have a feeling there are shorter versions. It was an assignment to read in Beverly Hills 90210, and those books looked much shorter. And even though I hated Marius, he served his purpose for the story, which does make the story move along and keep me interested.
esther_me's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
hopeful
inspiring
reflective
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
Loved it more the first time I read it. But it wasn't bad, just not as magical as I remembered.