Les Miserables reread (skygiants)

[cahn]

Just so you know, skygiants is hosting a reread of Les Misérables! First post, on the first book "Fantine," is here, second post sometime soon! skygiants is reading and hitting all the high parts so you don't have to. (Although I have wanted to reread for years, and am taking this as an opportunity to do so, at least if I can keep up, which looks promising if I keep doing as many clean-up chores as I was doing today... anyone want to join? Or just read skygiants' posts so you don't have to?)

After this, someone needs to host an Aeneid read, because I have had it unfinished for an embarrassingly long time now. Maybe if I get through listening to Les Troyens (why so many ballets, Berlioz?) that will be the kick in the pants I need.

(Anyway, the highlights of the Fantine book for me: a) There are a lot of words about the Bishop of Digne, way more than I remember! b) being a woman in France in the early 1800's and/or in a Hugo novel really sucked a lot, c) Jean Valjean is so awesome, and d) the musical is actually all kinds of awesome in abridging the book while keeping the spirit of it. But way more at the post above.)

Comments

[antisoppist]

Thank you for mentioning it. I tried reading Les Miserables a decade or so ago but got terribly bogged down in the Battle of Waterloo and gave up. I keep wondering whether I should try again and either slog through it or just skip that bit and this might be the incentive.

[cahn]

*cheers*

There is no shame in skipping (or skimming) the digressions, because there really does not need to be 60 pages on Waterloo, or on the Bishop of Digne, or on convents in general. (For some reason, I'm getting bogged down on the convents right now...)

I actually read a Reader's Digest super-abridged version of Les Mis, the first time around -- and I'd never actually read the entire Waterloo section before this readthrough. (And I can't say I paid the most attention in the world to it this time either :) Although it's a lot more fun on the Nth time through, where N >> 1, because one is in less of a hurry to get to the story!)

[antisoppist]

At the time I felt skipping was bad and wrong and despite knowing the musical backwards I wasn't sure whether Waterloo might turn out to be terribly significant later. It should come with "this bit is completely irrelevant" markers really.

The Bishop of Digne is really unfair because he's at the beginning.

[cahn]

Heh, yeah. I was shocked to find the Bishop of Digne part, because my abridged version cut pretty much the entire thing, so I was under the impression that the book, like the musical, started with Valjean. The musical really does make a lot of good abridgment choices...

The last two pages or so of Waterloo are important -- plot point that doesn't appear in the musical. I don't think any of the Bishop is important (he has candlesticks, he's very nice -- but you knew that already). The convent bits I just slogged through are also not important to the plot, except to ascertain that a) the convent has a school for girls, and b) they live under a fairly harsh rule. (M. Fauchlevent, though, is definitely worth reading about!)

I've always had this idea that abridging books is wrong, and I still think that in a lot of cases, but I have realized that Les Miserables is an exception to the rule, because come on, this is ridiculous! :)