Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.16 AVERAGE
4.16 AVERAGE
Finally. This took me over a year to get through. I stopped reading for a while about half way through and it was hard to get back into the habit.
Duration aside it was great. As I'm sure you know already, Jean Valjean is a real source of power and emotion. Looking back along his character arc is really interesting. His journey is so long and varied that it very strongly justifies the length of the book. I can't imagine having his story truncated and still being as powerful. Marius was interesting and you want the best for him but his tunnel vision made it a little harder for me to get a good grip on him. The only other character I felt like I had some window into was Javert, which compared to the amount of time you spend with him vs Marius or Cosette, was a little unexpected. The short times you spend with him are very concise though and you get to understand him very quickly. I guess it helps that he's fairly flat for the duration of the book, but you quickly learn to respect him even though you're rooting against him. I haven't decided how I feel about the ending yet but I won't mention anything for spoilers sake.
The only real complaint I have is all the tangents the author goes on. They were generally interesting so I think if the book was shorter they wouldn't have made me so mad, but they felt like weights holding me back from getting to the finish line. I was just getting impatient by the last third or so.
But again, overall it was very good. I think the strongest trait to shine through was commitment. Each character had incredible unyielding commitment and for a variety of reasons. Most obviously Jean Valjean to Cosette in the form of fatherly love and sacrifice, but also to Fantine from pity and to Marius out of devotion to Cosette. Cosette to Valjean and Marius, and Marius to Cosette all from simple love. Javert to Valjean through duty. Gillenormand to Marius from love and then from a sort of fear. Eponine to Marius from some kind of confused love. Even Gavroche to I don't know exactly what. The streets? Exuberance? I'm not sure. Gavroche is actually a really interesting character whom I wish I had given more consideration to in retrospect.
The whole story is very intricate and evocative and ... french? It feel's pretty french. I mean that in the complimentary. Probably.
Duration aside it was great. As I'm sure you know already, Jean Valjean is a real source of power and emotion. Looking back along his character arc is really interesting. His journey is so long and varied that it very strongly justifies the length of the book. I can't imagine having his story truncated and still being as powerful. Marius was interesting and you want the best for him but his tunnel vision made it a little harder for me to get a good grip on him. The only other character I felt like I had some window into was Javert, which compared to the amount of time you spend with him vs Marius or Cosette, was a little unexpected. The short times you spend with him are very concise though and you get to understand him very quickly. I guess it helps that he's fairly flat for the duration of the book, but you quickly learn to respect him even though you're rooting against him. I haven't decided how I feel about the ending yet but I won't mention anything for spoilers sake.
The only real complaint I have is all the tangents the author goes on. They were generally interesting so I think if the book was shorter they wouldn't have made me so mad, but they felt like weights holding me back from getting to the finish line. I was just getting impatient by the last third or so.
But again, overall it was very good. I think the strongest trait to shine through was commitment. Each character had incredible unyielding commitment and for a variety of reasons. Most obviously Jean Valjean to Cosette in the form of fatherly love and sacrifice, but also to Fantine from pity and to Marius out of devotion to Cosette. Cosette to Valjean and Marius, and Marius to Cosette all from simple love. Javert to Valjean through duty. Gillenormand to Marius from love and then from a sort of fear. Eponine to Marius from some kind of confused love. Even Gavroche to I don't know exactly what. The streets? Exuberance? I'm not sure. Gavroche is actually a really interesting character whom I wish I had given more consideration to in retrospect.
The whole story is very intricate and evocative and ... french? It feel's pretty french. I mean that in the complimentary. Probably.
challenging
dark
emotional
hopeful
informative
inspiring
sad
dark
emotional
hopeful
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
This rating is for the fact that I finished this book and less about the story. It's a personal triumph that I finished it (and as quickly as I did for that matter). While not a favorite book of mine it will be in my collection as a "trophy" perhaps. A book a thought was gonna take me into the end of the year suprisingly gripped me and with it's fictional plot line and less prevalent for me, the historical sections. Now onto the good before I hit my gripes.
The first 400 (or 350-400 can remember that well) pages was what really got me hook and took me by suprise. Starting with the beloved character Bishop and his interraction with Jean Valjean was great, then meeting Fontaine and the daughter back to back made it a hit. Another thing I really liked was how he wrote the devils, excuse me, the Thénardiers was amazing. I kept reading so I can see them get their karma (but ill leave my opinions on that alone).
Hugo really made you feel like you were living in that time, even the worse of the worst of this book can have some actions and behaviors explained by how France was suffuring (at the hands of the royals, rich, and politicans) at the time. Hugo had a issues with how is country was suffuring and wrote a book about it, using fictional characters to make us not only symapthize with them but the time they were living in. You can feel how he wanted to write for the people who didnt/weren't given a voice in France. Lastly the whole where's Waldo adjacent actions of Jean Valjean gagged me the first few time ngl.
Now to what I didn't enjoy. Like I said the first 400 pages were my fav, there were other peaks in the book but not as high as that section. The reason for that is Hugo's rightful hate for various real life people was seeped into this book. While I was okay with him sharing his feelings on it, the timing and the length of it took away from the story greatly. Right when the action was getting high he went on long tangents that feel like loud screech from a train. It made reading less enjoyable for me when theses sections came on. They were for the most part long winded and needed editing, if it was shortened it still would've been able to blend into the story without feeling like he's trying to incude his historical recounts/memoirs/essays into the fictional narrative. Most of the time the character who were mostly connected to these spsecfic were incorporated well. With the small and short connctions to the characters he did with theses long tangents were disruptive to my reading experience.
And its not that I want all of them to be removed per say For me his tangents that I felt were good for the plot such as Waterloo or as much as it annoyed me the sewers couldve been edited down and moved into the appendix. I kid you not, I skimmed through the appendix and most of that stuff could've been interchangable without ruining ths history needed to the story. It coudl've been amybe 10 pages with a couple of astriks to add extra info in the margins with most of it being in the appendix. A lot of times it felt like he wanted to share the ups and downs of France in memoir form (which I would've liked to read in a seperate book) and less of how it ties into the characters if that makes sense. This book didn't need to be 1200+ pages, with slow lows, readable middles, and commedandble highs often felt tired finishing a part knowing I would have to read a historical narrative. Would it still be a big book, yes, just not that big.
The way he wrote people deaths felt extremely lack luster. Fontaine, Bishop, and the others (forgot the names he didnt write them so well imo) who died in the barricades were short and underwhelming. For characters so good as the first two the deaths could've been written better (mostly his). Also the barracide scenes didn't mesh with me for some reason his writing style didn't work then. Not lastly (I'm just tired) but Marius is a pedophile. I dont know how you can meet someone in their tween when your an adult and want them. He's a loser.
Thats all I have for now given I just finished it and my mind is boggled so sorry for the mishmash of thoughts and the spelling and grammer errors. Just wanted to get my thought in. But after all that do read it! Hopefully at a slower pace.
The first 400 (or 350-400 can remember that well) pages was what really got me hook and took me by suprise. Starting with the beloved character Bishop and his interraction with Jean Valjean was great, then meeting Fontaine and the daughter back to back made it a hit. Another thing I really liked was how he wrote the devils, excuse me, the Thénardiers was amazing. I kept reading so I can see them get their karma (but ill leave my opinions on that alone).
Hugo really made you feel like you were living in that time, even the worse of the worst of this book can have some actions and behaviors explained by how France was suffuring (at the hands of the royals, rich, and politicans) at the time. Hugo had a issues with how is country was suffuring and wrote a book about it, using fictional characters to make us not only symapthize with them but the time they were living in. You can feel how he wanted to write for the people who didnt/weren't given a voice in France. Lastly the whole where's Waldo adjacent actions of Jean Valjean gagged me the first few time ngl.
Now to what I didn't enjoy. Like I said the first 400 pages were my fav, there were other peaks in the book but not as high as that section. The reason for that is Hugo's rightful hate for various real life people was seeped into this book. While I was okay with him sharing his feelings on it, the timing and the length of it took away from the story greatly. Right when the action was getting high he went on long tangents that feel like loud screech from a train. It made reading less enjoyable for me when theses sections came on. They were for the most part long winded and needed editing, if it was shortened it still would've been able to blend into the story without feeling like he's trying to incude his historical recounts/memoirs/essays into the fictional narrative. Most of the time the character who were mostly connected to these spsecfic were incorporated well. With the small and short connctions to the characters he did with theses long tangents were disruptive to my reading experience.
And its not that I want all of them to be removed per say For me his tangents that I felt were good for the plot such as Waterloo or as much as it annoyed me the sewers couldve been edited down and moved into the appendix. I kid you not, I skimmed through the appendix and most of that stuff could've been interchangable without ruining ths history needed to the story. It coudl've been amybe 10 pages with a couple of astriks to add extra info in the margins with most of it being in the appendix. A lot of times it felt like he wanted to share the ups and downs of France in memoir form (which I would've liked to read in a seperate book) and less of how it ties into the characters if that makes sense. This book didn't need to be 1200+ pages, with slow lows, readable middles, and commedandble highs often felt tired finishing a part knowing I would have to read a historical narrative. Would it still be a big book, yes, just not that big.
The way he wrote people deaths felt extremely lack luster. Fontaine, Bishop, and the others (forgot the names he didnt write them so well imo) who died in the barricades were short and underwhelming. For characters so good as the first two the deaths could've been written better (mostly his). Also the barracide scenes didn't mesh with me for some reason his writing style didn't work then. Not lastly (I'm just tired) but Marius is a pedophile. I dont know how you can meet someone in their tween when your an adult and want them. He's a loser.
Thats all I have for now given I just finished it and my mind is boggled so sorry for the mishmash of thoughts and the spelling and grammer errors. Just wanted to get my thought in. But after all that do read it! Hopefully at a slower pace.
adventurous
challenging
emotional
informative
inspiring
reflective
sad
tense
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
Man, I don't even know what to say. This book contains like all of human emotion and experience in it somehow? It's kind of ridiculous. Very slow read, obviously, but there are sections that you physically cannot put down. The barricades sequence, from infodump to its end, is some of the craziest shit I've read all year. Love Hugo's copious infodumps. I love the musical a lot but it really does pale in comparison to this fourteen hundred and sixty-three word book, who would've thought?
The abridged English translation was not a difficult book. It's a self-aware novel set in a specific time and place and which builds every character to mythic proportions.
The book is defenitely not for people who want witty banter or political intrigue, but grabbed my attention especially with complex backstory and character development. Jean Valjean is way larger than life and he makes you wish every second of the story he was back on stage. What's crazy, is he goes through at least 3 psuedonyms so he often IS on the page somewhere and if you read closely you can usually guess which one he is before it's revealed.
If all of that interests you, here's a huge spoiler that might spark your interest to read this: Jean Valjean rushes into battle wearing an enemy's uniform to carry a future son-in-law he doesn't like 4 miles through the Paris sewers.
Watch the movie first, it helps, but the book is (predictably) much better.
The book is defenitely not for people who want witty banter or political intrigue, but grabbed my attention especially with complex backstory and character development. Jean Valjean is way larger than life and he makes you wish every second of the story he was back on stage. What's crazy, is he goes through at least 3 psuedonyms so he often IS on the page somewhere and if you read closely you can usually guess which one he is before it's revealed.
If all of that interests you, here's a huge spoiler that might spark your interest to read this: Jean Valjean rushes into battle wearing an enemy's uniform to carry a future son-in-law he doesn't like 4 miles through the Paris sewers.
Watch the movie first, it helps, but the book is (predictably) much better.
challenging
emotional
funny
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Quando ho iniziato a leggere I Miserabili ero entusiasta: le prime pagine mi catturavano al punto che non riuscivo a staccarmi. Hugo sa costruire un mondo vivo, popolato da personaggi indimenticabili e capace di trascinare dentro un flusso narrativo potente. Col passare dei volumi, però, la mia lettura si è fatta più faticosa: il ritmo rallenta, le digressioni diventano sempre più frequenti e a tratti mi sono ritrovata a perdere entusiasmo. È un romanzo che alterna momenti di assoluto splendore a passaggi in cui la prolissità di Hugo rischia di farlo sembrare quasi impenetrabile. Eppure, proprio questa alternanza è forse il suo fascino. Alcune digressioni mi hanno colpita e arricchita, come l’approfondimento sul gergo: nella mia edizione Mondadori erano riportati i termini originali accanto alla traduzione, ed è stata una lettura sorprendentemente piacevole e persino “formativa”. Altre, invece, mi sono parse insostenibili: la celebre digressione sulle fogne, ad esempio, mi ha annoiata al punto da farmi chiedere se fosse davvero necessaria. Solo dopo ho colto il senso di quella scelta, il modo in cui Hugo voleva legare l’ambiente fisico al destino dei personaggi, ma resta comunque una parte che ho trovato eccessiva. Ci sono stati momenti di stallo, soprattutto nella lunga sezione ambientata nella trincea: il tempo sembra dilatarsi, come se la narrazione si fermasse. Ma, improvvisamente, Hugo sa sorprenderti con pagine di una bellezza disarmante, che mi hanno fatto sottolineare interi passaggi e mi hanno riportata dentro al romanzo con entusiasmo.
Tra i personaggi, quello che mi ha colpito di più è Javert: il suo ritratto psicologico, così dettagliato e coerente, lo rende uno dei personaggi più affascinanti e tragici dell’opera. La sua fine mi ha lasciato dispiaciuta, proprio perché era uno dei miei preferiti. Al contrario, il nonno di Marius l’ho trovato francamente insopportabile, quasi caricaturale nella sua rigidità. Ma è questo che rende I Miserabili grande: ogni personaggio, anche il più marginale, porta con sé un pezzo di umanità, di luce o di miseria.
Gli ultimi capitoli mi hanno ripagata di ogni fatica. La confessione di Valjean a Marius mi è rimasta impressa come una scena cinematografica in bianco e nero, e il monologo finale ha una potenza che da sola vale l’intero libro. È una chiusura intensa, struggente e perfetta, capace di risignificare tutto ciò che l’ha preceduta.
Alla fine, chiuso il libro, mi sono ritrovata a pensare: bellissimo! Ma non posso ignorare la fatica, le noie, i momenti in cui avrei voluto abbandonarlo. È un romanzo che chiede moltissimo al lettore, ma alla fine restituisce altrettanto. Mi ha ricordato Dostoevskij: pagine e pagine di smarrimento e complessità, per poi arrivare all’ultima riga e rendersi conto che tutto ha preso senso.
Leggere questo romanzo è una vera e propria esperienza di vita: impegnativa, contraddittoria, ma indimenticabile. Un’opera che rimane dentro, con i suoi personaggi e le sue parole, anche dopo averla chiusa.
Tra i personaggi, quello che mi ha colpito di più è Javert: il suo ritratto psicologico, così dettagliato e coerente, lo rende uno dei personaggi più affascinanti e tragici dell’opera. La sua fine mi ha lasciato dispiaciuta, proprio perché era uno dei miei preferiti. Al contrario, il nonno di Marius l’ho trovato francamente insopportabile, quasi caricaturale nella sua rigidità. Ma è questo che rende I Miserabili grande: ogni personaggio, anche il più marginale, porta con sé un pezzo di umanità, di luce o di miseria.
Gli ultimi capitoli mi hanno ripagata di ogni fatica. La confessione di Valjean a Marius mi è rimasta impressa come una scena cinematografica in bianco e nero, e il monologo finale ha una potenza che da sola vale l’intero libro. È una chiusura intensa, struggente e perfetta, capace di risignificare tutto ciò che l’ha preceduta.
Alla fine, chiuso il libro, mi sono ritrovata a pensare: bellissimo! Ma non posso ignorare la fatica, le noie, i momenti in cui avrei voluto abbandonarlo. È un romanzo che chiede moltissimo al lettore, ma alla fine restituisce altrettanto. Mi ha ricordato Dostoevskij: pagine e pagine di smarrimento e complessità, per poi arrivare all’ultima riga e rendersi conto che tutto ha preso senso.
Leggere questo romanzo è una vera e propria esperienza di vita: impegnativa, contraddittoria, ma indimenticabile. Un’opera che rimane dentro, con i suoi personaggi e le sue parole, anche dopo averla chiusa.
Victor Hugo, uno de los escritores más emblemáticos de la literatura francesa, publicó su obra cumbre “Les misérables” en 1862 convirtiéndose en una de las obras más importantes del siglo XIX. La expectación era máxima y el éxito asegurado, tras siete meses de lectura y 1632 páginas leídas, solo puedo avanzaros que estamos ante uno de los libros más importantes de mi vida: una novela romántica, épica y realista que resulta difícil de leer por su extensión pero que merece todos los elogios que le han dedicado a lo largo de todos estos años.
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
La historia nos presenta a Jean Valjean, un ex convicto condenado por robar un pan a permanecer veinte años en prisión, tras su salida vuelve a robar y solo encuentra consuelo en un obispo que le salva y le ofrece un hogar cosa que le lleva a tomar la decisión de reconvertirse en un hombre honesto. Pero este hecho lo convierte en reincidente y la policía lo perseguirá. A partir de entonces comenzará una historia llena de lamentaciones, de huidas, de falsas identidades, de persecuciones en la que entrarán en escena carismáticos personajes. Entre ellos una joven, Fantine, que luchará por darle un futuro a su hija Cosette.
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
Los temas que trata, dada la larga extensión de la novela son numerosos pero sobre todo se centra en la miseria y la pobreza, el amor, la revolución, el romanticismo y la injusticia. Hay un gran debate entre el bien y el mal, lo ético, aparece la política, hay una clara defensa de los oprimidos y también tiene una parte fundamental en la trama la religión y el perdón. Seremos participes de muchísimos momentos históricos de la historia de Francia, de batallas intensas y de tragedias dolorosas. Hugo teje sin compasión una leyenda, algo que resulta imposible de volver a realizar, una obra sublime y reconfortante con un estilo pulcro, con una elección del vocabulario exquisita, logra la profundidad que requiere y que resulta accesible a todo tipo de lector.
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
No os voy a engañar, desde que comencé a leer esta obra, me di cuenta que podríamos separarla en dos partes, una: la trama principal y la otra de contexto histórico y social. La primera de ellas es amena, trepidante y sumamente interesante, por otro lado, las partes en las que Hugo decide contarnos detalles extra son sumamente, en su gran mayoría, densas. Estos pasajes son extensos y tediosos, pero no por ello desmerecedores de alabanzas pues narrativamente hablando son impecables y poseedores de un trabajo de documentación extremadamente minucioso, pero irremediablemente te hacen desconectar de la lectura.
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
Para finalizar, solo me queda deciros que estamos ante una de las mejores novelas de la literatura universal, prodigiosamente escrita, con una trama original y unos personajes increíbles tales como Jean Valjean, Javert, Éponine y Fantine (mis favoritos, por su evolución y la implicación que tienen en la trama). Al terminar la lectura y hallarme ante tan magistral y emocionante final desaparecieron de mi mente los sentimientos negativos que tuve conforme leía con los pasajes documentativos que he mencionado anteriormente. El recorrido es duro pero merece enormemente la pena, es una historia sin igual, preciosa, amarga y sumamente completa. Os aconsejo no leerla con prisa, dejarla reposar entre capítulos y además, si la podéis disfrutar en su idioma original, ni lo dudéis, con las traducciones siempre se pierde magia en la narración.
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
La historia nos presenta a Jean Valjean, un ex convicto condenado por robar un pan a permanecer veinte años en prisión, tras su salida vuelve a robar y solo encuentra consuelo en un obispo que le salva y le ofrece un hogar cosa que le lleva a tomar la decisión de reconvertirse en un hombre honesto. Pero este hecho lo convierte en reincidente y la policía lo perseguirá. A partir de entonces comenzará una historia llena de lamentaciones, de huidas, de falsas identidades, de persecuciones en la que entrarán en escena carismáticos personajes. Entre ellos una joven, Fantine, que luchará por darle un futuro a su hija Cosette.
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
Los temas que trata, dada la larga extensión de la novela son numerosos pero sobre todo se centra en la miseria y la pobreza, el amor, la revolución, el romanticismo y la injusticia. Hay un gran debate entre el bien y el mal, lo ético, aparece la política, hay una clara defensa de los oprimidos y también tiene una parte fundamental en la trama la religión y el perdón. Seremos participes de muchísimos momentos históricos de la historia de Francia, de batallas intensas y de tragedias dolorosas. Hugo teje sin compasión una leyenda, algo que resulta imposible de volver a realizar, una obra sublime y reconfortante con un estilo pulcro, con una elección del vocabulario exquisita, logra la profundidad que requiere y que resulta accesible a todo tipo de lector.
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
No os voy a engañar, desde que comencé a leer esta obra, me di cuenta que podríamos separarla en dos partes, una: la trama principal y la otra de contexto histórico y social. La primera de ellas es amena, trepidante y sumamente interesante, por otro lado, las partes en las que Hugo decide contarnos detalles extra son sumamente, en su gran mayoría, densas. Estos pasajes son extensos y tediosos, pero no por ello desmerecedores de alabanzas pues narrativamente hablando son impecables y poseedores de un trabajo de documentación extremadamente minucioso, pero irremediablemente te hacen desconectar de la lectura.
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
Para finalizar, solo me queda deciros que estamos ante una de las mejores novelas de la literatura universal, prodigiosamente escrita, con una trama original y unos personajes increíbles tales como Jean Valjean, Javert, Éponine y Fantine (mis favoritos, por su evolución y la implicación que tienen en la trama). Al terminar la lectura y hallarme ante tan magistral y emocionante final desaparecieron de mi mente los sentimientos negativos que tuve conforme leía con los pasajes documentativos que he mencionado anteriormente. El recorrido es duro pero merece enormemente la pena, es una historia sin igual, preciosa, amarga y sumamente completa. Os aconsejo no leerla con prisa, dejarla reposar entre capítulos y además, si la podéis disfrutar en su idioma original, ni lo dudéis, con las traducciones siempre se pierde magia en la narración.
challenging
emotional
funny
hopeful
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
dark
emotional
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
This has to be one of the most frustrating books I have read and the fact it's so long makes it even worse. I have at the top of my head three gripes with this book and it's entirety.
1) PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE get an abridged version if you plan on reading this. Hugo does what is refer to as some people as "digressions" where he dedicates chapters of him just speaking to the reader or describing something. I don't have any qualms with fleshing out your story and making things more engaging with use of description, however Hugo takes this to an extreme. Most of these digressions DO NOT SERVE ANY PLOT RELEVANCE, some do but a good chunk of them don't. What makes it worse also is the fact that these digressions most of the time are at least 20 pages long and I remember one of them was 50 pages only for the last 4 chapters to matter. One of these digressions is about a covenant that can be argued as a cult, but I'm not going to do that now, but these 20+ pages about how the people in the covenant are practically self-harming themselves and living such an unorthodox life where they're bleeding members DOESN'T HAVE ANY BEARING ON THE PLOT. EVEN WHEN THE MAIN CHARACTERSLIVE IN THE COVENANT NONE OF WHAT HUGO WAS TALKING ABOUT IS BROUGHT UP AGAIN. Seriously Hugo could've used these moments to flesh out the characters, but no he uses it to get his point across in some aspects in such an heavy handed way or to just talk about how a barricade in a certain time was so innovative and the prettiest thing ever
2) Characters in this book are just so...bland most of the time. There are some highlights but they are few and far between. The heroine of the story deadass DOES NOT DO ANYTHING. She only is mentioned and while I was taking notes for the book I realize that she's not even a character she is mostly just there. If I had to write an essay on the main heroine and her as a character I would struggle because she doesn't even really speak till the last few parts of the story. My gripes with the heroine does extend to all women characters of the book as Hugo is definitely one of the authors who just can't write compelling woman, or at the very least in this book. Besides with the woman characters some characters are just neglected like The Friends of the ABC. Only one of these people matter and there's like 9 of them and Hugo spends pages upon pages describing them only for when they take the center stage in the story they legit lose their personality in order to be a carbon copy of the only one that matters, Enjolras. The criminal group that is supposed to serve as an underbelly for The Friends of the ABC don't do anything and are abruptly written off.
3) However there is one character I want to talk about and it is Marius who infuriates me for days on end. The more Marius appears the more I felt like Hugo isn't exactly honest with his characters or understand them and even though that is pretty crazy for me to say it is something I believe. Hugo tries to frame Marius as this heroic figure who is practically unable to do anything wrong. He's falls into poverty but it doesn't feel authentic because he has a safety net and when you spend many pages seeing characters go through the worse thing ever, seeing a guy who is stretching meat for three days because he refuses to accept money that his uncle is giving him does absolutely nothing for me when their are characters who had removed their own teethes to stay alive. On top of him masquerading as a poor person he's also a stalker as he stalks the main heroine and writes her the most incomprehensible love letters that Hugo writes as endearing and cute when it is at the very least creepy and outright dangerous. One more thing, Marius is to down bad for the main heroine that he often only thinks of her, evenwhen his closest friends die, and he can't even be bothered to pay any homage or respects to them . Marius time on end is willing to throw himself to death at any setback with his relationship with the heroine which even includes, fighting in a revolution (that he doesn't even believe in) just so he can die because there is a setback with his marriage. There's more I can say about Marius but I should leave it at that (don't get me started about him and Thenardier) and I do believe that as soon as Marius came into the story it was a downward spiral for what was a pretty good book in the first two parts which makes me a bit sad. A book that was commenting on the societal condition of the people in Paris devolved into a romance book and stopped commenting on the condition (and I wholly believe Flaubert did such a better job at this even referring to a different revolution).
(Also did I mention Marius and the heroine's relationship is just the worse thing ever and I can't believe that they end up together it's frustrating.)
1) PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE get an abridged version if you plan on reading this. Hugo does what is refer to as some people as "digressions" where he dedicates chapters of him just speaking to the reader or describing something. I don't have any qualms with fleshing out your story and making things more engaging with use of description, however Hugo takes this to an extreme. Most of these digressions DO NOT SERVE ANY PLOT RELEVANCE, some do but a good chunk of them don't. What makes it worse also is the fact that these digressions most of the time are at least 20 pages long and I remember one of them was 50 pages only for the last 4 chapters to matter. One of these digressions is about a covenant that can be argued as a cult, but I'm not going to do that now, but these 20+ pages about how the people in the covenant are practically self-harming themselves and living such an unorthodox life where they're bleeding members DOESN'T HAVE ANY BEARING ON THE PLOT. EVEN WHEN THE MAIN CHARACTERS
2) Characters in this book are just so...bland most of the time. There are some highlights but they are few and far between. The heroine of the story deadass DOES NOT DO ANYTHING. She only is mentioned and while I was taking notes for the book I realize that she's not even a character she is mostly just there. If I had to write an essay on the main heroine and her as a character I would struggle because she doesn't even really speak till the last few parts of the story. My gripes with the heroine does extend to all women characters of the book as Hugo is definitely one of the authors who just can't write compelling woman, or at the very least in this book. Besides with the woman characters some characters are just neglected like The Friends of the ABC. Only one of these people matter and there's like 9 of them and Hugo spends pages upon pages describing them only for when they take the center stage in the story they legit lose their personality in order to be a carbon copy of the only one that matters, Enjolras. The criminal group that is supposed to serve as an underbelly for The Friends of the ABC don't do anything and are abruptly written off.
3) However there is one character I want to talk about and it is Marius who infuriates me for days on end. The more Marius appears the more I felt like Hugo isn't exactly honest with his characters or understand them and even though that is pretty crazy for me to say it is something I believe. Hugo tries to frame Marius as this heroic figure who is practically unable to do anything wrong. He's falls into poverty but it doesn't feel authentic because he has a safety net and when you spend many pages seeing characters go through the worse thing ever, seeing a guy who is stretching meat for three days because he refuses to accept money that his uncle is giving him does absolutely nothing for me when their are characters who had removed their own teethes to stay alive. On top of him masquerading as a poor person he's also a stalker as he stalks the main heroine and writes her the most incomprehensible love letters that Hugo writes as endearing and cute when it is at the very least creepy and outright dangerous. One more thing, Marius is to down bad for the main heroine that he often only thinks of her, even
(Also did I mention Marius and the heroine's relationship is just the worse thing ever and I can't believe that they end up together it's frustrating.)