| Back to Review Index | Go to the Home Page |
August 2005 A Christmas gift from my loving, book-addict Mother.
BUT... this was a version Abridged and Edited by Paul Bénichou.
This was then, the second time that I've read this book. The first time, it was the FULL version, and over 1000 pages long. This was a paltry 520 pages, which I thought would be a good thing, because the original story has so much war in it, and lengthy, drawn out, descriptive sidelines, which would tell about the history of one certain house, or square, or sewer, or garden, or industry, or any of a number of other things. There were also quite a few descriptions of Napoleon, (Who doesn't REALLY play a roll in the story at all; only in the sense that he was still felt to be a part of the national identity.) There was one part where the book went on for pages, and pages, about some battle of Napoleon's army in and around a country house,and then the bones of the dead which filled the well. I still have no idea what that had to do with the story at all though. Anyhow, as one can see, there were a number of things that I thought could be left out of the book without being missed at all.
This Edited version of it though... lacked something. Something important. I read it, and followed the story, but did not cry. (well, OK; One place I did. But when I read the full version, there must have been at least five or six places.) And I really felt that I got much less of a feeling for the characters; There were so many details that were left out. Gavroche, for example. He's not a Main, main character, but he's one of the smaller secondary characters, or a large tritary character. But I didn't have the same feeling at all for who he is. There was a better description of his character type in the original, which tells us what a "Gamin" was, in that time in Paris, and there was also this very touching scene, where Gavroche extends his whole and complete aid to his two little brothers, who he chances to come across. I had a much, much better feeling of the Goodness of his soul, although he's at the same time quite indifferent to the entire concept of a soul; He is simply a true, good person by nature and instinct. That's one thing that didn't show through properly in this Edited version.
Then all the characters were missing... something. Some more, some less, but I don't think any of them were complete. Hmmm... how annoying. I guess that it's just the impossible question of How much should be cut out? How much is superfluous? It's an impossible question, because for every one, that amount is different. Then again, perhaps I was mistakened from the beginning: that Nothing could be cut out, and although the battle descriptions seemed pointless to me, they actually did have a noticeable effect on the story.
What did I think of the story though? Well, it's one of my favorites, I suppose. It's a massive, massive work, tying the complete lives together of at least five people... no wait, six. Perhaps more. Curiously, it seems to me that none of the people's lives were followed from beginning to end. Jean's life was mostly described, but not his childhood. The same with Javert, Fantine, Thenardier, and the Grand-father. Marius, and Cosette's lives are described from the beginning, but go on after the end of the book. AH! Two lives are completely contained then: Eponine's and Gavroche's! OK, those two are fairly well explained from birth to death. (Though not completely well, we still have a feeling that we knew what they were like at each point of development.)
I have said that it's a great book? It is moving, thought-provoking, and touching. It brought tears to me a number of times. It does so well, showing the goodness of man, (at least, the possible goodness.) Jean Valjean is such a hero, but also believable; I can truly believe that such goodness can exist in the heart of a man. Not only such goodness, but goodness that is struggled for, against such odds, and gained after sinking to such depths. As for Bishop Bienvenu, at the beginning of the book, he is simply divine. That makes his character a little harder to believe in, and seems less realistic, but I want such people to exist, and to believe in them. So, I do so without too much difficulty. As such, I adore this Bishop, as the highest degree of attainable human goodness and virtue.
I hope readers of this have some clue what Les Misérables is about: Jean Valjean is a ex-convict, who struggles to be good, better, and virtuous to the highest degree, after having his soul touched by the Bishop. Then there are many characters, some of pure good souls, some with the cruellest, most base personalities, and some, like himself, struggling for a light. (For Example, What is Javert? A "Good" or "Bad" person? He never "sins" but, still, ends up committing unkind, ever cruel deeds. He has only the will to do the Right though, and to make the Law absolute. Perhaps the entire point of him, is that there IS no absolute goodness; The "Best" and "Most Correct" can only be realized in the struggle to improve the self. Even then, it will never be Attained, as in a level of goodness one can reached. It will be approached though, Only while it is being sought. (But as soon as the seeking stops, any proximity to it is lost.) Does that make any sense?
In the end, the effect it has on me... is (I hope,) important; It gives me conviction that I can be a better, (a much better) person. I have no right to rest, and be content, and think to myself "ah yes: I am quite good, and am virtuous whenever a possibility to be so arises." There is always, ALWAYS, room for more... improvement. I still have limits, which can be pushed further. There are still so many situations which come up, when I don't even think of being virtuous, because I think... my help might not be appreciated. -That I think it might not be accepted. -That I don't think at all, and try to avoid realizing that someone near me could use a helping hand. There is, There MUST be, forever, a higher degree of virtue and kindness that I could try to achieve. This book reminds me of that, and humbles me, for indeed, I tend to think of myself as a good, and helpful, and very kind man.
Even this less-effective, incomplete, edited version, reminded me of that.