Les Misérables, the review

At 1200 pages this is the longest book I have ever read and I congratulated myself right at the 1000 page mark, this was a marathon, a first for me. It took me 3 years to read the Bible completely (roughly from 2017 to 2019) and so to finish a grand novel in the March of Mammoths (big books) seemed a challenge and as I previously mentioned I failed because I finished precisely one week into April 2024 and no sooner so it took me one month and one week to read. This is because I was not being consistent in doing the reading everyday since March 1st and so I started to lag behind, even despite days when I read double the amount of pages. I thought about giving up but I pressed on. I had divided the book initially into 31 parts, approximately 42 pages each, my thought was to portion it in such a way that would read 42 pages daily. Les Mis is divided in endless books and chapters but unlike the Bible there is just one author and the context is not to be compared with the Word of life at all. What I learned by reading a book this way is that it doesn't really suit me to have multiple books going on or to chop up a grand book into daily readings, setting goals is awesome but goals that are too minute might destroy the joy of reading. Also if i may, a tip for improved reading: do not get caught up, highlight words or sentences that appeal to you or stuff you don't understand, but don't get stuck. At times, when it get's boring pick up the pace, read faster and accept imperfections, you don't have to and probably can't understand everything perfectly on your first or second read, let it be, the story is what counts. 

What then is Les Mis? -In all simplicity it is one man's manifesto against poverty, social injustice and evil. It's also a grand story that gives perspective on human life. Les Misérables are the wretched, the downtrodden people, the suffering, the disadvantaged, in the end. It helps to broaden narrow views, makes you understand that morality and goodness go hand in hand. 

The take away for me is overall that no matter how many coup d'état's society stands alone still as unjust because it's compromised by sin. Goodness, love and mercy are individual acts of kindness shining bright on the dark blue sky on the night of humanity. We must choose to do good and to be good men and women, even when it's hard. Goodness is not dictated by man made laws but emanate from the heart of God.  

Victor Hugo's thesis seems to be that in this world man cannot win, and so he creates a character: Jean Valjean who becomes sort of like the perfect irreligious monk in civil clothes, he is ultimately national hero, the father of France, Adam prior to the fall and Hugo uses Jean Valjean's life to show the good and rough path. Men who nowadays take great interest in ancient Greek stoicism could do well to read Les Mis it gives a little bit more to ponder than a random few lines by alleged Marcus Aurelius. Sometimes we have to digest more than clips and random lines of wisdom, 3 second videos can't tell it all. Sometimes it's good to sit down with a big book that doesn't allow you to go nowhere fast, it'll seem a tedious task but what Hugo exemplifies through narrating the story of Valjean is that we must take in a fuller picture, we must see it all and then decide what is good and worth keeping in terms of principles and opinions. Our time is plagued of fast opinion making, like machines, that's how ruthless decisions and poor judgment is formed.

It was a conscious choice for Jean Valjean to become a benevolent man spurred on by the true Christian solitary Monsieur Bienvenu who showed the great example of how grace operates, that act begins the saga of Jean Valjean and births the person whom we follow through the book until the end. He once stole a loaf of bread and is then hunted for it until the end more or less. On the run and in the fallen world he spends most of his adult life shielding and protecting Cosette and prior to that her mother Fantine, and in a Christlike manner he gives to the poor, helps by strength and alms those in need of rescue. 

At half way through one begins to tire, can the man never have some rest. It's then that Hugo introduces us to Marius (what a beautiful name) the odd an melancholy kid who is deprived of his father because of wealth. He eventually falls in love with Cosette prior to a big riot breaking out. It is at this, last part of the book when almost all that needs to be said has been said when Hugo spends too much ink on the trenches, going on and on about the mob's in Paris, describing each nook and cranny of Paris and very confusing and longsuffering episodes of the stages of revolution and riot and the differences between them. 

Yes, yes, we know that Parisians and the French love the quarrel, we've seen the streets of France 2020 (on the alternative news outlets) there is absolutely nothing more that can be told on the subject of rioting, Hugo has said it all, so if ever one wants to delve into why the French are so difficult to control, may I suggest a dive into Les Mis about 60% into the book, that's where the lecture starts and it goes on and on and on. There's also a very soothing lesson in all of this rambling on about government, state and emperor... it's the fact that unlike Finns, Frenchmen always have regarded themselves as free individuals, the nation consist of the people and the people are divided by class, nevertheless the downtrodden are always greater in number than the ruling class. Hugo consequently also talks about Paris and France as a woman, she's emancipated, free, has her own will and is at her people's disposal as their true queen. It's a breath of fresh air to think of nation and government so divided and realize the endless opportunities thereof. What Hugo is trying to convey between the lines and at times directly is that a better world, a better society, a better France can only be if kindness and compassion rules. At the end Javert (the villain in the story) relinquishes control, as does Valjean. Grace and mercy is the underlying theme. 

The individual life and egotism doesn't triumph over the history of events, we are all part of something larger. Humans are a bunch of egotistical beings usually and Hugo's grand novel might be a reminder for us all to think about the fact that a personal destiny matters little and it also matters much. There are a thousand stories within a story, and so, without the natural realism of Guy de Maupassant and without the rosy pink glasses of dreamers, Victor Hugo retells a credible saga, at times placing himself into the plotline. 

I have to admit still that I have ambivalent feelings towards the author overall, Hugo was unfaithful to his wife, he lived with his mistress close at hand by the ocean side where he finished this long awaited master piece in 1862. I struggle to find compassion for shrewd authors especially if they're supposed to leave a exemplary legacy of a morally superior or better society. To have recently learned that Frank Herbert (author of the Dune saga) behaved like the bene gessirit with their black box of pain towards his own child, makes me rethink if I really want to read six science fiction novels about big worms, similarly I listened to the NY Times Book review podcast just last week and learned that Thomas Mann, the greatest author of 19th century Germany was not a loyal husband and father of six but also a passionate homosexual, forgive me, but I fail to understand...I purchased Marion Zimmer Bradley's well known Avalon series last year and learned the same day what she was like, as a person and as a parent while reading about her on Reddit, I threw the books then straight away in the trash-can for the rats to gnaw on. So then, is it a trifling matter that Hugo had an affair, and not only an affair but a long time mistress. For me the life, legacy and personality of an author matters a great deal because the author is never just a tool, a channel for a story, a true author gives of himself or herself, and his or her work is an extension of the self, in that sense Hugo is forgiven a lot, perhaps too much. He is arrogant in his work almost to the extent that it sometimes feels like he is writing for himself, I would dread to be a guest at his dinner table had I lived in his time, I can see it before my eyes, how he would go on and on about some curious details to events and history that is totally irrelevant to the point. It annoys me to the point that I want to ask, why is Hugo allowed these digressions and still Les Mis is praised as a masterwork. What I will say is that I get why the Norman Denny translation is a masterwork, Denny did a truly great job in translating it. 

Well, it's done now. When I finish a story it's never really as rewarding as I think, the more superior feeling is to sit down with a tea pot and a book in a hideous reading chair clothed in flowery corduroy and enjoy the silence of morning, a new day dawning full of endless possibilities.