Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

We begin a new books, books III, and we 'travel in time' - nine years, according to Hugo. New names, new characters, and new settings, but surprisingly even now the connection with the main plot line is still strong. Hugo in general is very good at picking up the plot lines, and so far, all the seemingly loose lines have been picked up, developed, and incorporated into the fabric of the novel.

1. Do you have any predictions how the line about Marius and the line about Jean Valjean will eventually converge?

2. In the first book, Hugo portrays the image of an average street urchin, and even gives him a name, Gavroche. Gavroche's life, as well as the life of Cosette, raises many unpleasant questions, namely, the abuse and neglect of children in the society. Do you think his portrayal could play an important role and could raise awareness or is the image of Gavroche sightly romanticized and looks more appealing rather than abject?

3. M. Gillenormand, Marius' father, is a man of a different epoch. He is brusque, cocky, arrogant, and very opinionated. Despite his seeming unwillingness to accept the changes in France, he is still a deeply flawed, but sympathetic character? How do you feel about M.Gillenormand? Do you find him obnoxious? Amusing? Obsolete? Grotesque?

4. Do you find Marius' transformation believable? Will it affect the development of the plot and will lead Marius to Jean Valjean and Cosette?

5. Do you think Hugo is using this novel as an blatant outlet for his political and spiritual musings? Do you think they enrich the novel or do they impede the flow of the story?

6. Is Hugo the author of setting and places or the author of characters and action?

Looking forward to your opinions.

It was a bit difficult for me to read the beginning of this section - all the talk about Paris and how it is "every city". And then there were a lot of references to people or places that I did not understand, so sometimes I had no idea what Hugo was trying to say. I did pick up on the plight of the poor forgotten children, of course, but it seemed woven in with all the talk of the city (unless I'm confusing Books I and II?). In my translation, the children were called "gamin".

But then we move to meeting Marius and again I was really taken in by his life and how sad it was that he did not know how much his father loved him. The scene where he is in the church and accidentally sits in the chair, and then realizes who his father is from the man's story, this scene was absolutely heartbreaking. I loved how he had Baron Marius Pontmercy cards made up, even if he had nobody to give them to.

I can only guess that since his father left wishes for his son to do right by the man who saved his life at Waterloo, who happens to be Thenardier, that Marius is going to search Thenardier out. Somehow Thenardier is the connection where Marius and Jean Valjean will meet.

The idea of keeping a child from his father out of political malice and disagreement is heartbreaking and frankly makes me angry. Such things still happen, and it's not only sad but despicable. How can someone justify keeping a child away from the love of a parent because we differ politically? However, I suppose the argument could be made that if the parent were in some crazy cult or were threatened in some way by the political belief, it would be acceptable? Worth pondering.

I've read it before, so won't comment on the common threads, but I will say it's interesting to re-read because I had forgotten so many details of how all these characters came into the story and I keep having little "Ah, that's right, I forgot!" moments.

The first section about Paris did get incredibly tedious for me, I won't lie. I struggled through that on audio.

Alana wrote: "The first section about Paris did get incredibly tedious for me, I won't lie. I struggled through that on audio. "

Linda wrote: "It was a bit difficult for me to read the beginning of this section - all the talk about Paris and how it is "every city". And then there were a lot of references to people or places that I did not understand, so sometimes I had no idea what Hugo was trying to say. I did pick up on the plight of the poor forgotten children, of course, but it seemed woven in with all the talk of the city (unless I'm confusing Books I and II?). In my translation, the children were called "gamin". "

I think we are all here on the same page - Hugo is good at action and even suspense; his characters are believable despite their eternal goodness, love, and kindness, but his urban descriptions are sub-par. There is no vibe, no chemistry, no life in his descriptions of Paris.

I read The Hunchback of Notre Dame, and he is quite good at describing buildings and enclosed places, but the panoramic urban perspective is elusive for him

Linda wrote: "But then we move to meeting Marius and again I was really taken in by his life and how sad it was that he did not know how much his father loved him. The scene where he is in the church and accidentally sits in the chair, and then realizes who his father is from the man's story, this scene was absolutely heartbreaking. I loved how he had Baron Marius Pontmercy cards made up, even if he had nobody to give them to.
"

What struck me most is the tragedy of the man who was under the impression that his life was saved by a noble man, Thenardier (hhmmm). His son was also under the impression that his father was not a worthy being. Marious in this aspect is happier than his father - he learns the truth about his father and also respects and loves him posthumously.

On the other hand, this love might lead to some negative circumstances if he begins tracking Thenardier. Delusion is always dangerous.

Alana wrote: "The idea of keeping a child from his father out of political malice and disagreement is heartbreaking and frankly makes me angry."


M. Gillenormand aggravated me a lot. On one hand, he is comical and his words and actions diffused the tension in the novel, but on the other hand, political ideas should not be the dividing line between children and parents, especially according to the whim of a grandparent.

Zulfiya wrote: "Alana wrote: "The idea of keeping a child from his father out of political malice and disagreement is heartbreaking and frankly makes me angry."


M. Gillenormand aggravated me a lot. On one hand, ..."

I agree with both of you. At the initial descriptions of M. Gillenormand, I was unsure what to think of him, he seemed to have both some good and bad characteristics. It was described that he loved his grandson enormously, but he didn't seem to show it well. In the end, his withholding Marius from seeing his father trumped everything else and so I really despised him for that action alone.

I'm also worried about Marius seeking out Thenardier, I can see him giving everything he has to Thenardier out of respect for his father's last wishes, and Thenardier taking advantage of that kindness even though he doesn't deserve it in the slightest.

Yay, I'm almost caught up!

1. Do you have any predictions how the line about Marius and the line about Jean Valjean will eventually converge?

My best guess at this point is that Marius will meet them after being put on their trail by the Thenardiers. I wouldn't be surprised if he ended up falling in love with Cosette (they should be about the same age unless I'm getting my timeline off).

2.Street urchins
This section romanticizes their life, but I also felt that Hugo was sympathetic to the plight of these neglected and/or abandoned children. He wanted people to care about these children.

3.Gillenormand
I couldn't stand him. He was arrogant, petty, and selfish. He let his own political views interfere with his treatment of his family. His actions towards his son-in-law were reprehensible. Marius and his father both deserved much better. I have some relatives in my own family who have behaved this way at times, and it was incredibly hurtful to those affected.

4.Marius's transformations
I did find his transformation believable. Finding out the truth about his father shattered his illusions about his family and his country. The more he looked into history and his father's life, the more disillusioned he got with the "facts" that his grandfather and aunt had taught him. Considering his age, his political views were already somewhat subject to change. I knew quite a few people who had their worldviews change significantly after they left for college and got away from the sheltered world of their parents' home. Political and religious beliefs that had never been questioned before suddenly were seen with fresh eyes.

5.Outlet for Hugo's views?
I think it definitely is being used as an outlet for Hugo's spiritual and political views. At that time in history, books were often used as cover for expressing all kinds of "unpopular" views.

6.Type of author
I think that Hugo is good at characters and action. There are all kinds of moving and exciting scenes, and the characters are developed well enough that the reader can truly come to love or hate them and feel attachment to their world. I'm not all that interested in scenery in books, but I wasn't bothered by Hugo's descriptions.

Good job, Anne. I am finally home after a long but very pleasant weekend with friends. I will post my comments later today. You have read a lot this weekend. What a massive catch-up. Three sections, yay!

Thanks Zulfiya :) Shockingly, it was actually 4(!) sections. I abandoned the idea of reading a 5th section yesterday after things got a little too "exciting" at home. There was a fire in my apartment building, and all the residents were forced to evacuate for a few hours. Fortunately, no one was hurt (including pets), but a few of the apartments sustained damage. More than 24 hours later, they are still trying to get rid of the smoky smell that has permeated the building. I suspect it is going to smell like a bonfire in the hallways for at least a few more days.

Anne wrote: "I couldn't stand him. He was arrogant, petty, and selfish. He let his own political views interfere with his treatment of his family. His actions towards his son-in-law were reprehensible. Marius and his father both deserved much better. I have some relatives in my own family who have behaved this way at times, and it was incredibly hurtful to those affected."

I first found Gillenormand comical, but capricious and whimsical, but then when his political ideas became a dividing lines between him and his grandson, I did feel that he was a highly questionable character.

I hope we will be able to witness a certain reconciliation, but he has to change his views first. I do not ask him to betray his political views, I only ask him not to use them to judge people harshly.

Anne wrote: "There was a fire in my apartment building, and all the residents were forced to evacuate for a few hours. "

I do hope your life will return back to normal, and the smell will not haunt you for long. It is simply wonderful that no one was injured or hurt.

Zulfiya wrote: "Do you think his portrayal could play an important role and could raise awareness or is the image of Gavroche sightly romanticized and looks more appealing rather than abject? "

I've been meaning to get back to this. I don't think Hugo romanticized the street urchin or tried to make his life look appealing. Actually it seemed as though that's what he was doing until I read the following:

"To sum up the whole, and in one word, the gamin is a being who amuses himself because he is unhappy."


During the last break I was caught up and used it to read ahead. This time I'm behind (almost finished with Vol. III Book I). I'm glad for these breaks.

Kathy wrote: ""To sum up the whole, and in one word, the gamin is a being who amuses himself because he is unhappy."
"

It is mostly a tragic novel, but sometimes pathetic and slightly sarcastic notes could be perceived in his novel. And this quotation, in my opinion, clearly is an example of this tone.

Just finished this section last night. I am slowly getting caught up with the rest of the group :)

This section was really tough for me. I was surprised and annoyed that Hugo just dropped all the characters and settings that we have grown accustomed to and introduced us to new people so late in the game. I kept flipping ahead to see if maybe Valjean or Cosette would be mentioned soon, but haven't found them so far.

The first chapter, talking about all of Paris, I found myself skimming quite a lot. I just ... didn't care. The second one I skimmed a lot of as well, but not quite as much once we started getting to the characters, and the third I skimmed even less of.

But even as we were introduced to Marius and his father, grandfather, aunt and cousin, I kept thinking "BUT WHEN ARE WE GOING TO GET BACK TO VALJEAN AND COSETTE?!" And of course, we did not. Hopefully soon... I care a bit more about Marius now -- his story is tragic and I wish he had gotten to know his father when he was alive, but alas. I am also wondering about this cousin, and how the aunt will play the cousins off each other in the future.

I also worry that he will now expect M. Thenardier to be a wonderful person based on his father's delusions. Interesting that he went to track them down and found they had left.

At the end of the first section about the gamin, Hugo introduces one particular gamin, named Gavroche. He is a boy unloved by his parents, though they love their two daughters well. If I am not mistaken, they (coincidentally?) live in the same house where Valjean and Cosette were living previously. From the descriptions, I suspect that this will turn out to be the Thenardiers ... I seem to recall they had a small boy who they ignored when Valjean went to collect Cosette, though I am not sure he was ever named in the previous chapters.

I am wondering if this young boy will also become important in the story... otherwise why go off on this tangent about the street children? (Though really, why go off on ANY of these tangents he's gone off on so far. So I suppose this isn't a good reason to suspect...) I would love it if the Thenardier's boy and Cosette ended up together (wouldn't that piss everyone off!) rather than Cosette and Marius, who would seem an odd pair to me.

Deana wrote: "I also worry that he will now expect M. Thenardier to be a wonderful person based on his father's delusions. Interesting that he went to track them down and found they had left."

The difference between Marius and us, readers, is that we know that Thenardier is a despicable character who parasites on struggles and misfortunes of others. So Hugo masterfully builds our expectations and stirs our imagination - how is Marius going to accept the truth about the man he is currently worshiping? I really liked how Hugo used this element in his book.

Deana wrote: "I am wondering if this young boy will also become important in the story... otherwise why go off on this tangent about the street children?"

I think I mentioned elsewhere that Hugo does not leave loose threads and puts all the threads of the fabric together. He does test our patience, though with his lectures and historical digressions:-)

Zulfiya wrote: "I think I mentioned elsewhere that Hugo does not leave loose threads and puts all the threads of the fabric together. ."

Yes, he reminds me a bit of Dickens in this regard :)