Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

´¡²Ô²Ô±ð’s comments from the Reading the Chunksters group.

Zulfiya- I hope you are feeling better now.

I found the passage about her teeth to be very moving too. I felt terrible for Cosette and Fantine while reading this week's section.

My favorite part was probably the part where Hugo describes the Thenardiers: "Theirs were those dwarf natures which easily become monstrous when any gloomy fire accidentally warms them. There was in the woman the basis of a brute, in the man the stuff for a beggar. Both were in the highest degree susceptible of that sort of hideous progress which is made in the direction of evil. There are crab-like souls which constantly recoil toward darkness, retrograde in life rather than advance, employ experience to augment their deformity, incessantly grow worse, and grow more and more covered with an increasing blackness. This man and this woman had souls of this sort." It was practically Dickensian in its contempt.

Other good lines:
"No one spies the actions of persons so much as those whom they do not concern."
"Some persons are wicked solely through a desire to talk, and this conversation, which is gossip in the drawing-room, scandal in the anteroom, is like those chimneys which consume wood rapidly; they require a great deal of combustible, and this combustible is their neighbor."

1. How long did it take you to figure out that Jean Valjean and M. Madeleine are the two names for the same person?
I saw this question before I had gotten to that section of the book, so I can't answer it. There were lots of hints: comments about his papers not being checked, his great strength, his lack of education, the candlesticks, mourning the Bishop, etc. If I hadn't known, I would hope I would have figured it out at least by the time the death of the Bishop came up.

2.According to the content of these two books, how can you define parental love?
For Fantine: she was willing to sacrifice everything for her daughter. She had practically nothing, and she willingly gave up her only asset, her beauty, to pay for her daughter's care.

For the Thernardiers: They wanted everything for their own daughters, but they cared nothing for their ward. They were selfish and greedy. The mother taught her daughters to be just as cruel as she is.

3. Is Fantine's life determined by her mistake or by her sin? Who is ultimately responsible for her misery and deprivation?
I think there is a lot of blame to go around. Fantine was naive to trust the Thernardiers (and Tholomyes before them). Considering her lack of education, her temperament, and her youth, that isn't too surprising. She wasn't worldly enough at this point to make good character assessments. She was trying to make the right choice when she left Cosette with the couple. Her later mistakes where she doesn't appeal to the mayor after losing her job and falls deeper and deeper into poverty trying to meet the couple's outrageous demands are understandable, if disappointing. Once someone starts to fall, it is very hard to get back up again.

4.Is Hugo commenting on bigger issues in his novel or is he telling us the story of the misfortunate and hapless lady?
He is definitely tackling bigger issues. At this point, there have been critiques of the purpose of the justice system (punishment vs. rehabilitation), what the proper role of the clergy is (living for charity or for power/advancement), the behavior of young adults, how businesses can be run (to elevate the status of just the boss or of all workers), what desperation and poverty can lead people to do, and the cruelty of busybodies. He also had scathing remarks about the Thenardiers and Javert.

5. In the spiritual opposition of 'Love the sinner, hate the sin' vs. 'Love the sinner. Period.', which side do you think Hugo takes?
Love the sinner. Period.

Lisa wrote: "By the way, I must say I am truly enjoying this book. I was not totally hopeful in the first section about the priest, but at this point, I am loving it. I wish I had more time to just sit, read and get totally lost in it. "

You're not alone. Other than the frustrations with the translation, I have really enjoyed this book so far. The characters are really interesting, and I'm curious where the plot will go. I have to purposely set this book aside so that I won't read ahead. I want to keep it fresh for the discussions, so I wait until Sunday each week to read the assigned section.

Zulfiya wrote: "P.S. Whose translation are you reading, Anne?"

I own a hardcover version of Wraxall's translation. I downloaded a different version on my phone, but it wasn't much different. Tonight I downloaded a version translated by Denny. That one has footnotes, at least. I plan to stick with my hardcover for now, but I'll turn to the Denny one for the footnotes. I'm glad my local library has so many different versions, so I can experiment with the different ones.

1. In the beginning of the book, Hugo lays the scene for his new character and provides an extensive background chapter. In this chapter he alludes to a number of historical figures and social changes taking place virtually everywhere. Did you find this chapter informative, challenging, impeding comprehension, useful or necessary? Did his approach work?
Although I am somewhat familiar with French history, I found this section quite dense. Moliere and Voltaire are familiar (I've read some of their works), and of course I've heard of Napoleon and Louis XVIII, but I drew a blank on some of the others. I last studied French history in depth about 25 years ago, so maybe I would have caught more of the references back then. I'm not sure of the purpose of this chapter at this point, but maybe it will make sense later.

2. The company of students and their paramours enjoys carefree life, the sans souci lifestyle. Is Hugo critical of this lifestyle or is his writing naturalistic and comment-free?
I am torn on this one. He does seem somewhat critical of the actions of the men and the older three women, but Hugo seemed sympathetic to the plight of Fantine.

3. How would you define 'a surprise' organized by Tholomyès and his posse? Were they bored to death and that was their way of expressing their emotions or were they uncomfortable facing the actual 'breakup'?
Their "surprise" was very cruel and cowardly. They were using those poor girls, and then didn't even have the guts to tell the women to their faces that they were being dumped. These men didn't seem to truly care for their lovers, and were only with them for sex and companionship until their parents told them it was time to settle down. The older three women may have understood the terms, but it seems apparent that Fantine didn't.

4. How can Fantine's life change now when we know that she is with the child? Do you find Fantine and her friends Dahlia, Zéphine, and Favourite irresponsible and immoral or were the young ladies in love and thus their actions were redeemed by this feeling?
Fantine seems to have been rather naive. I think she honestly believed that she was in love with Tholomyes and had probably convinced herself that he felt the same for her. I have a lot of sympathy for her. Her life is likely to be very difficult now that she is a single mother. The other three girls were older and more worldly, so they understood the situation better. None of them seemed to truly love their boyfriends. At that time, their actions would have been deemed immoral and irresponsible, but I wouldn't necessarily define them that way. The men were at least as irresponsible, and their abandonment was what was truly immoral.

Other items
My translator is driving me crazy. He left whole lines in French without explanation. There are no footnotes, and the meaning could not be obtained from the context. If I understood French, I would be reading the book in French in the first place, so I'd really appreciate it if the book was entirely written in a language I understand. It made this section much more difficult and frustrating.

Deana wrote: "Is it a free version? If so could you share the link? I found a summary for each section, but it doesn't explain any of the references."

It is a free version. It has summaries and some analysis but no explanation of the foreign terms. Some historical context is in the analysis.

I was looking at an online version of Cliff Notes. I read their summary and analysis after reading each book. Unless the printed version has a lot more than the online one, it wasn't much help for Book III. My translator left whole sections in the original French, and I haven't been able to find any explanations for their meaning. My own French is limited to about 15 words, so I was completely lost. I was loving the book up until that point, but now I'm frustrated and annoyed. I'll say more once the thread for the next section has opened.

My book also calls it D___. I suspect that is how it was written in the original.

1.What do we learn about Valjean and about the members of the Bishop's congregation?

Although they all seem to respect and admire the Bishop, the churchmembers haven't taken his teachings to heart. All they see in Valjean is the convict, not a man.

Valjean started out life as a good, hardworking man, but he fell on hard times. He resorted to theft out of desperation and got caught. Prison seems to have broken him. If he had been thinking rationally, he could have left prison 14 years earlier, but instead he made several futile escape attempts and prolonged his suffering. He left prison a bitter, conflicted man.

2.Is it the case of ignorance, prejudice, indifference, hypocrisy, or shall we explain this behavior using the Latin proverb 'Homo homini lupus est ' (Man is a wolf to [his fellow] man)? Is it a time-specific observation about human nature or is it an axiom that stands the test of time?
I feel like it is a mixture of several things, prejudice and ignorance being the most prominent. It could also be related to fear since, rightly or wrongly, people often fear those who have once committed a crime. That saying is as true now as it was when it was written. Although there are some people who are open and compassionate toward all (like the bishop), many are not. The reasons vary from person to person, but the reason doesn't really matter to the person on the receiving end of their contempt.

3.In his plight, Valjean exclaims, 'I am not even a dog'. Is it true? Is a dog more useful than this ex-convict? Is any dog more respected than Jean Valjean (dogs are fed, played with, and taken care of while Valjean is kicked out of every place he goes to without even being tossed a bone)?
I would say that he is treated worse than a dog. Most people, upon seeing a starving and weary dog, would want to help. Valjean couldn't even get food and shelter by paying for it.

4.Why does he steal the silverware? Why does he mistreat Little Gervais? Is Jean Valjean reformed at the end of the book? Is his moral conversion complete? Has he become a believer? A religious believer or a believer in human goodness?
Valjean has left the prison, but his mind is still caught up in what happened there. After such a long time, he has no idea how to function in society. His reception in town has left him feeling hopeless, and all the bitterness and anger and frustration that has built up over the years has left him a complete mess. He feels like the world owes him, and he makes futile attempts to get back at it. Valjean is touched by the bishop's actions, yet he falls back into old habits immediately with Little Gervais. He feels great remorse for his behavior. I am undecided whether his moral conversion is complete, but I do suspect he believes that human goodness exists. I am very curious to see what will happen next.

5.What are the questions that you asked yourself after you finished reading Book II? Is Hugo optimistic about human nature or is he mostly an observer, a naturalist of sorts?
After I finished this section, I was very eager to find out what would happen next. I have somehow managed not to find out even the basics of the plot of this book, so I don't have any idea what is to come.

Hugo seems to have some hopes for redemption and the ability for people to become better. Portions of this book seem to be clear criticisms of the French justice system. He appears to be arguing for rehabilitation rather than harsh punishment, which I wholeheartedly agree with.

6.Favorite lines or sections
The scene where Valjean stands quietly in the room near the bishop before finally seizing the silver and fleeing had me absolutely on the edge of my seat. I was terrified of what might happen. It's going to be very hard to wait until the weekend to read the next section.

Zulfiya wrote: "P.S. Anne, the group members discussed the role of the blessing, and there were well-grounded attempts to answer this question. I do not know if you will like answers because this is an open-end question, and I do not think one can give a direct answer, but the debate was quite interesting and thought-provoking. "

I saw that after I had posted. There were some good insights. Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ was acting weird last night, and somehow I couldn't see all the comments at first. It also lost one of my own posts. Oh, well.

Regarding the role of religion: Good people will be good regardless of their faith or lack thereof, and the same is true of bad people. I've seen far too many people use religion as an excuse for bigotry and cruelty to ever buy into the moral superiority of the religious. I personally have never believed in any sort of gods or the supernatural, and I've had a lot of "Christians" question my morality, patriotism, and generosity for no other reason than my lack of faith. That's utterly absurd. I volunteer every week, have a professional career, do not drink or smoke or do drugs, and obey the laws (well, other than speeding sometimes). I don't need the fear of punishment after death to do the right thing while I'm alive.

I suspect the bishop might have gone about things a little differently if he wasn't a bishop, but he still likely would have done charitable works. For evidence, there have been several very famous millionaires/billionaires in this country that were atheists/agnostics and have given large amounts of time and/or money to charities.

1. In the opening book of the novel, we are introduced to Charles François Myriel, the Bishop of Digne. Do you find him convincing as a character? Is he driven by mundane (poverty, food, etc) problems or by divine motives?
Like others, he reminded me of Pope Francis. They both focus heavily on charity and social justice.

2. We learn that the bishop provides solace and attends the execution of a convict. How does this experience change him?
He was horrified by the execution.

3.Do you think they are still relevant in today's world? Are the poor still villanized, women controlled and degraded, and children deprived of education/light?
Absolutely. You only need to spend a few minutes looking at the news to see that these issues are still very relevant today. Demonizing the poor seems to be the favorite pastime of certain politicians, and those same ones are often associated with denial of women’s rights and the defunding of education.

4. According to Hugo, what are the bishop's 'personal flaws'?
Partisan politics and personal feelings could affect his behavior just like anyone else, although he did try to overcome it.

5. Bishop is a Royalist, but he asks the Conventionalist and the former revolutionary to bless him? Why do you think he asks for a blessing? What does this plea for a blessing stands for? Was his plea for a blessing answered?
I don’t know.

6. Are there any passages or lines that resonated with you strongly within these opening pages?
I should have taken notes when I read it last Sunday. I can’t remember any now.

What translation are you using?
I’m using the Wraxall translation, which was the one authorized by Hugo. So far I’ve enjoyed it, and hopefully it won’t feel dated as I get further into the book.

Other thoughts
I’m glad I took AP European History in high school. It made the references to various historical figures much less confusing. When he was discussing the French Revolution and its aftermath, I knew who all the major players were and what the chronology was. It's been a while, but most of it seems to have stuck.

Becky wrote: "I'd also like to nominate

The Lies of Locke Lamora by Scott Lynch


That's one of my favorite books :)

Everyman wrote: "Barzun's From Dawn to Decadence From Dawn to Decadence: 500 Years of Western Cultural Life, 1500 to the Present might be an interesting non-fiction to start with. More general than so..."

That is a great book. I've read it twice.

Luffy wrote: "Doesn't Atlas Shrugged have a 70 page monologue? Blah."

It does. I'm glad I abandoned that book long before I got to that point. I didn't do much better on The Fountainhead. I've never understood how anyone enjoyed such poorly written books.

I'm in

I'm in.

I would be interested in a non-fiction read. I've already read a few of the books mentioned above, but many of the others are on my TBR list.

I didn't like it either. Unlike you, I am not going to finish it. I found my mind wandering constantly while attempting to read part III and decided it wasn't worth continuing. I returned it to the library that day, and I don't regret it. The sad part is this is an era of history I find fascinating, so this should have been a good fit for me. Unfortunately, I couldn't stand her writing style and found large sections of the book to be boring.

The overuse of pronouns has obviously annoyed a lot of people. Someone started labeling the pronouns in my library copy with the name/initials of whomever this previous reader thought was the right person. Unfortunately, I think the reader was even more confused than he/she thought since the labels are not always accurate. I have read extensively about this period of history (both fiction and nonfiction), and I feel bad for any reader who hasn't studied this era. She assumes a very high level of knowledge. I am not that impressed with her writing so far, but I'll stick it out at least a little while longer.

I'm really disappointed. I was really looking forward to rereading this book with the group, but my work schedule has been totally crazy lately (50-60 hours a week). I haven't even had time to start The Count of Monte Cristo yet, and it's already week 6. Maybe after my two project deadlines next week I'll be able to catch up.