19th Century Epic Romances discussion

Please discuss this section of the book here. Please remember to label all spoilers.

I realized that doing this by chapters was probably confusing and I apologize for having part 1 set up like that. So to keep this from getting too confusing, we will just discuss each part in one discussion from now on. Please make sure to label spoilers since this topic covers such a large portion of the book! Sorry for the confusion!

Although the beginning of Part 1 about the Bishop was ultimately relevant, I am hoping the part about Napoleon flies by a little quicker and these names/strategies/locations prove relevant, too. What a tedious section!

Actually the whole Napoleon digression- as some like to put it- is also very important to the story itself but you don't understand it until further on in the story. That is all I am going to say about that but honestly it is worth it because it has a lot to do with the novel as a whole, as you will see later on.

Nothing in this work is there just because there is a bigger reason behind it you just have to keep reading it to fully understand the intentions.

That is definitely what I was thinking, I just wish it would pick up a little and get more into "storytelling"

Just push through it, you gotta get through your vegetables before you get desert, that is kind of what that section is. If you know what I mean.

I already read this part so I know what you are saying, it took me a while to get through Napoleon, but once I got into the pages further on everything comes together and makes sense and you will have your "ohhhh, that's why that was there" moment.

I think I finally got that! I just got to the end of the first part within that section where a character reveals his name and thought, "Ooooooh!"

I had a hard time with this section too, and honestly I feel like it could have been summed up in a much neater package. It's a lot of rambling. There are many sections like this throughout the Unabridged version of this novel...many tangents. This is what is so great about 19th century literature though. Editing did not really happen to the extent that it does today, so you get the true raw grit of the stories, and I feel the authors true intention for the story. Ashley is right, the pay off is further down the road. In all honesty though, I skimmed through much of the tedious parts (shhh...don't tell.) ;-)

Jen wrote: "I had a hard time with this section too, and honestly I feel like it could have been summed up in a much neater package. It's a lot of rambling. There are many sections like this throughout the U..."

That is very true. I remember my copy of Don Qixhote had a list of pages/sections that could be skipped by those reading for the 'story' rather than the writing in the introduction. I read the whole thing but found it a struggle.

I rather enjoy Les Miserables but that is because, rather like War and Peace the story is so wonderful that I can forgive the padding. I failed to finish Hunchback of Notre Dame.

As this is a re-read for me I am skipping about a little too.

Gentian wrote: "Jen wrote: "I had a hard time with this section too, and honestly I feel like it could have been summed up in a much neater package. It's a lot of rambling. There are many sections like this thro..."

I actually have read The Hunchback of Notre Dame previously and it is a good starter to get used to Hugo's writing style, I through being annoyed and bored with tangents during that read, I do appreciate the comments said whatnot and how they connected to the story but for me it was a good introduction to Hugo because by now I am perfectly content reading his tangents and understand how they are components of the story- since this is my first read of Les Miserables.

Yes I would agree that so far as Hugo goes you do need to read all of the book, at least the first time.

Depending on why you are reading the book I think this is less the case for some other authors though - Cervantes and Tolstoy stand out there.

Man, this Napoleon part would be wonderfully interesting if I had any idea what was going on! I am rather thankful for it - helped me realize some of the history I didn't know about. It's hard to read though - in the same way I remember All Quiet on the Western Front to be... :) thank Heavens for Wikipedia! :) summaries!

Yes it was difficult...especially in bed before going to sleep...i didn't get past a few pages before i conked out. Read it in the morning and found it very interesting...learnt a lot about the Battle of Waterloo and Napoleon i never new before...last time i read this i skipped the whole section, i was very young then!!!! I do think it could have been a bit more concise...kept wanting to get back to the story, i am so enjoying a lot more this time round! :)) i too used wikapedia a lot...so easy on the ereader!!