#(ex Javert hating thinking.)

[secretmellowblog]

I wrote a new Les Mis fanfiction, in a Victor-Hugo-inspired writing style! The summary:

Jean Valjean, exhausted from the barricades and the sewer, somehow finds the strength to drag Javert out of the Seine. He has no strength left for anything else. The situation rapidly devolves into tragicomedy.

Inspired by a tumblr post from @ Alicedrawslesmis:

“Oh god can you imagine Valjean having to jump into the Seine to get Javert out? the man has had No sleep for the past idk 40 hours and just had to crawl through 5 miles of sewer carrying a dead body and thinks he’s going to lose everything to the law and then this fucking asshole jumps off a bridge? and he has to jump after him? and swim like an olympic athlete against the current to get the guy out of the water from the rapids? that’s too much. That’s just god fucking with him at this point.

Valjean pulls Javert out of the water and passes out from the exhaustion of the last two days and Javert is like ’…great. Now I have to drag this man back to his apartment AGAIN’ but Javert is also exhausted from the last two days so it’s just a comedy of errors”

Thanks to @shitpostingfromthebarricade and @fremedon for beta reading, and to @alicedrawslesmis and @valvertweek for the inspiration!

Here is the link! : D

[cliozaur]

That’s what it means to speak out! In this really long chapter, both Marius and Jean Valjean spoke more than in the whole book! (Ok, Marius did have his moments a couple of times, but Valjean has never spoken SO much.)

What is interesting, Valjean speaks very matter-of-factly: he doesn’t waffle but immediately says that he is an ex-convict. And Marius’ reaction to these words is so revealing! And sadly, it is very similar to Cosette’s reaction to the gang of convicts they met a year or so ago. This means that Valjean’s fears were not unfounded. But Marius and we all want to know: why not to keep this information for himself? People in their society do not want to look beyond such labels, even Marius becomes blind to the essence of who Valjean really is as soon as he hears that he is an ex-convict. So why does Valjean have to be so exhibitionistic?

Valjean’s reasoning is very complex. To start with, he tells his life story in a rather unflattering key, forgetting to mention all the important circumstances. “What am I to Cosette? A passer-by. Ten years ago, I did not know that she was in existence.” He never mentions that he saved her from abuse, misery, and maybe even death. And, of course, he never says about his role in Marius’ own rescue from the barricade. Then there is Valjean’s honesty and conscience. And it’s an amazing paradox that the man who is the best expert in lying and playing roles to survive and save Cosette, is unable to keep away just one truth when it comes to matters of honour, morality, and Cosette’s safety. This brings to mind parallels with Javert: he was pathologically unable to lie even about small things his whole life but eventually managed to tell lies in a decisive moment (let’s think it was decisive enough); whereas Valjean could easily lie about most things, but had to be pathologically honest in the decisive moment.

It might sound strange, but I like this chapter for the opportunity to hear Jean Valjean finally speaking for himself at length. It’s not the author, the omnipresent and omniscient Hugo, but Valjean finally expressing himself—his feelings, fears, moral code, etc. This is killing me: “To be a false signature in flesh and blood, to be a living false key, to enter the house of honest people by picking their lock, never more to look straightforward, to forever eye askance, to be infamous within the I, no! no! no! no! no! It is better to suffer, to bleed, to weep, to tear one’s skin from the flesh with one’s nails, to pass nights writhing in anguish, to devour oneself body and soul.”

But, of course, I hate most of this chapter. Especially the part involving Cosette. What has happened to her? Why is she acting like this? And Marius is absolutely terrible to her – and it’s just after one night of married life! He repeats: “We are talking business,” like a parrot. “We are talking figures. That will bore you.” She can manage figures! She was managing the whole household for several years. Cosette is joking when she says: “My husband beats me,” but it is still quite disturbing.

I absolutely hate this dialogue: “do you think… that I ought not to see Cosette any more?” - “I think that would be better.” – “I shall never see her more.” This is the beginning of Valjean’s slow suicide. Despite Hugo several times emphasizing that suicide is against Valjean’s belief, there are several hints that we are dealing with an inventive form of suicide. Reference to the seventh circle of hell—reserved for those who take their own life—in the title of this chapter is one of them.

[dolphin1812]

As much as I hate Marius’ reaction to Valjean’s confession, I do like how his thought process is portrayed. Firstly, it’s nice because of the time for introspection. Marius is (understandably) shocked, and I like how he considers how his own traits could have contributed to the situation. He’s right that he should have talked to Cosette about the Gorbeau ambush. And he’s right that he wasn’t thinking clearly during his time with Cosette. I wish he spent more time examining how he should feel about Valjean rather than immediately condemning him as an ex-convict (I think Valjean did mention stealing bread, so his crime was alluded to, but it’s fair if Marius isn’t certain if that’s the extent of what he did; still, I think he should focus more on trying to understand this past Valjean and reconciling him with the present Valjean, i.e. Cosette’s father), but his self-reflection here is a sign of maturity. And it’s kind of moving to see Marius be self-aware like that after watching him grow up.

I also like this part:

“Here, for Marius, there was a strange reversal of situations. What breathed from M. Fauchelevent? distrust. What did Jean Valjean inspire? confidence.”

I still think Marius’ suspicions around Fauchelevent are class-based – not in the sense of overt prejudice, but in knowing that something’s off about him for a man of his status and not being able to say why. I like, though, that Jean Valjean is seen as the trustworthy one and that he’s aware of this incongruence. In a sense, it’s true. Jean Valjean’s aliases are all good people, but they are, as Hugo says, “masks.” Valjean is his true identity, and his true identity is still trustworthy.

I find the line about pursuing Valjean funny as well because it reminds me of Javert trying to capture him. Post-crisis, the only one capable of pursuing Valjean and catching him is Jean Valjean himself. 

[pianocat939]

Random Ideas of Yan Les Miserables Characters

Cursed ideas I thought of since I'm in this musical for my school's drama

If people like it, I might add more..I'm really interested in Marius.

Tw: mention of murder, kidnapping, Marius is a little freak and breaks into your home, manipulation, Eponine literally hates her life so much

(Know that this won't follow the entire plot of the book/musical. Nor do the ages of these characters- Ex. Javert is not an old geezer)

(MC/Reader is in some ways Cosette I suppose- not following her complete character though)

Marius

Type: Obssessive + Protective

The definition of sweet. Ever since he met you, he's been wanting to hold you in his arms and gently kiss you. His mind is filled with thoughts of you- just you. At night, he writes in a journal about his undying love and how no one else could make him feel this way.

If you deny his love for too long, he'll take drastic actions: when you're sleeping in your bed at night he'll slide in next to you to give snuggles and kisses- he just can't contain his yearning anymore! He also leaves gifts and letters on your window sill, a nice present for you to look at when you're all sad and need comfort! Or really, you could just come to him for comfort...

That being said, when he goes to fight the monarchs the entire time he thinks about protecting you, and nothing else. He's crazy when he fights to go absolutely batshit feral to keep you safe- and to ensure he'll be the one to return to you; that he'll be the only one confessing his love.

If there's another suitor, he'll first try to get you to love him. If that doesn't work, he won't hesitate to kill them.

He actually is quite possessive, he just doesn't show it as much.

Javert

Type: Possessive + Violent

(He is not an old geezer in this-)

Oh wow, out of all the people you decided to garner the attention of- it decided to be his. At first, he tries to deny his adoration for you but comes to a realization when he witnesses you interacting with someone else. He HATES it when you talk with someone that isn't him. You should only talk to him, you should only love him! He's your true love, your future spouse!

At first, he'll try to be normal and court you, but if you deny...Hell breaks loose. He'll kidnap you without hesitation, saying you're a criminal and need to be taken to prison under the laws of the government- only for the prison to be his home. There, you'll stay as his spouse. Don't worry about the world outside, just think about loving your rightful husband!

I wouldn't be surprised if he tries to use marriage as a way to tie himself with you. Oh and-

He'll kill anyone who tries to help you escape or if you try to talk to anyone else.

Eponine

Type: Manipulative + Stalker

Instead of being in love with Marius, she's in love with you! If Marius is also in love with you, she'll try to push him away by manipulating both you and him. For example, with you, she'll try to say how much of a fool Marius can be at times and how he isn't fit for a role as husband. With him, she'll try to tell him that you're already in love with someone else or that you're in a relationship with someone else.

All her life she hasn't been gifted a single good fortune- shouldn't she get a happily ever after too?

If you deny her, or just simply don't notice her all that much she'll follow you around. She makes sure no one tries to court you and that she has a good chance of obtaining your love. Despite being poor, she's learned to be good at one thing- observing. She can memorize any piece of information of you and remember it for years- a true sign of love, no?

Please, just love her! She can't stand this suffering any longer! She doesn't wish to be the daughter of hated innkeepers', she wants to be known as the lover of someone so beautiful and etheral- which is you!

——————————————————

Ngl, Marius being all soft and sweet is really indulgent of me-

- Celina

[malcontentmathador]

Malding about Les Mis Musical

I love Les Misérables, it's a fantastic and poignant brick of a book written by an absolute champion of a man, a brilliant dude who fought for literally every good social change in 19th century France. Les Misérables is about how generally awful society is to ex-cons, you can judge how incredibly relevant that still is today.

That said, the musical is not the book, and it really misrepresents it in a bunch of spots. I haven't seen enough of it to scream TOO much, but watching this bit today really annoyed me:

Specifically this line: "All I did was steal some bread", which is admittedly very funny, but also... He Would Not Fucking Say That.

First off, it's just... not true lmfao. Stealing a loaf of bread is indeed the reason why Valjean was initially imprisoned, but his sentence was prolonged to 19(!) years instead of 3 due to 4 different failed escape attempts. And even after the end of his sentence he commits 2 more crimes some years before the scene in question: he robs the bishop of Digne, stealing 2 silver chandeliers from him, and shortly afterwards, in a daze, he steals money from a boy on a countryside road. Both of these are mentioned in the novel as crimes he is still being pursued for. "All I did was steal some bread" my ass

But more importantly, this line just completely butchers his character from the novel. In Hugo's original work, Valjean would NEVER try to pass off his crimes as just little uwu mistakes that he went punished unjustly for, because those crimes fucking haunt him.

Hugo's thesis was that Valjean is not an evil man, but a man repeatedly pushed to the edge of society by circumstances and by the scorn he faces for being an ex-convict. When he exits prison, Valjean is misanthropic, hateful, and immensely bitter and resentful. He thinks himself wronged, unjustly imprisoned; he blames the criminal justice system for stealing his life away over a minor offense. He is hated by all he meets, and his defensive mechanism is to hate back, to viciously tear away at the society that shuns him. Here is my shitty translation of a relevant bit (page 229):

"Jean Valjean was not of evil nature. He was still a good man when he had entered the labor camp. There, he had blamed society, and he had seen himself become wicked; he had blamed the heavens, and he had seen himself become impious."

His soul had been purchased by evil. The bishop of Digne's kindness in lying to the cops and saying he had gifted the chandeliers to Valjean is the pivotal act that buys it back from the devil and puts him on the right path again; two silver chandeliers for a soul.

From then on, Valjean is terrified of ever falling back into wickedness. He never actually sells the chandeliers for money - he keeps them in his room as a reminder of the Bishop's kindness, to not forget the man he was, and to force himself to be better.

So no, he would never say or think that "all he did was steal some bread". The bread, the chandeliers, the stolen coin; to Valjean, these are symbolic of his descent into sin, and he would never downplay these events or try to excuse them to Javert.

(lil extra: I also hate that Javert overpowers Valjean in this scene. In the novel, when Javert enters the room as Fantine is dying and starts gloating, grabs Valjean by the collar and demands he follows him, Valjean responds by forcing his hand open "like he would with a child's", walks to a nearby bed, dislocates a long iron bar from it, and says "I do not advise you to bother me right now" as he kneels to pray for Fantine. And Javert, terrible, unyielding Javert whose simple sight is enough to inspire fear, shivers, and he waits obediently for Valjean to be done and willingly follow him. It is such a hard scene, and they traded it for... an action sequence. ugh)

[autistic-spirk]

Hey uhh idk if you still want asks but I saw your post and thought I’d ask:

What’s your favorite adaption/version of Les Mis (ex. a specific cast of the musical, the movie, the brick, etc)

Thank you for your time, I hope you have a wonderful evening!

That's actually a really good question

It's definitely not the movie (2012), I love Aaron and George and all the other barricade boys' actors, but the rest of the casting really wasn't the best, the fact they recorded on set makes it sound weird, plus the songs/parts of songs they cut and the general erasure of most of les amis is not something I enjoy.

The brick. is a bitch. I love some parts of it, but I have no idea what the fuck is going on 99% of the time and also the racism when it comes to Javert's description especially is. not the best.

I really love the 2014 Broadway revival, but I'm a little biased with that because my cousin was in it, although I do love both Andy and Chris as Marius.

I also loved the 25th anniversary concert (except Nick Jonas he can fuck off) because 1. Ramin, 2. Hadley, 3. Alfie, 4. Norm (finally they didn't white-wash Javert), and 5. Rob Madge, among other reasons.

I think my favorite concert is the 2020 live one, just because it was done so well (imo, no hate to anyone who disagrees) and I do love the casting (except for the white Javert, although Michael played the part well), also just. Accented Grantaire. And Alfie again! And also long-haired Enjolras!! (Thank you Bradley)

And the 2010 West End cast. There wasn't anything particularly different than other casts/productions, I just genuinely like their performance and portrayals.

Thank you for the ask! And I apologize for how long this is-

Edit: I've been informed that Javert is most likely canonically Roma, not black, therefore Norm Lewis would not be accurate racial casting. I apologize for the misinformation./g

[vamprisms]

jean valjean: runs from the cops occasionally in like a normal way for an ex con

javert: this man is the devil. My sworn enemy. he hates me.. evil bastard man who i will hunt to the ends of the earth. none of us may live while the other survives it is either valjean or javert i think about him every day if i can't get him i hope he kills me im the normal one

[neroushalvaus]

can i receive the blorbo info? i feel like i dont post enough blorbo content for a while, so give me your utterson takes please

You totally can! The blorbo I mostly associate with you is Utterson and that's a blorbo we have in common so giving uttertakes will be very easy ;) Giving you more takes to compensate for the lack of blorbos.

G.J. Utterson (The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde) - before giving the joke-y takes i've given with every blorbo i would like to preface this by saying that I still sometimes think about the messages you sent to me in like 2015 about Utterson/Jekyll ship's academic basis and I think that that shows how much I respect your Utterson takes - now anyway - the man is the driest guy around but make no mistake, he is a pun master. "if he be mr hyde, i shall be mr seek"? hilarious. give this man an award. - gay - hopelessly and devotedly in love with Henry Jekyll - unreliable narrator - I've probably said this before but him and Javert would get along because they would have the worst time ever. Javert who reads despite hating the whole activity and who sometimes treats himself with a pinch snuff when he's "pleased with himself"; Utterson who enjoys theatre but just won't ever go there. I can imagine these two just sitting in a dark room and having a terrible night. - a problem solver with a really bad case of "I can fix him" syndrome - (only in the musical) him and Simon Stride are exes - Him and Richard Enfield are partners in crime. What crime? The story doesn't tell. - the walking stick kills me (not in the same way as it killed sir danvers carew.)

[phantomtrader19]

Les Miserables UK tour REVIEW

Theatre royal Glasgow 16/12/2021

Finally after 3 years I got to see the touring production of Les Mis and wow it did not disappoint I was in tears for the whole thing 😭

I got to see Will barratt as valjean and haven’t really listened to him in the role so was very intrigued. He was absolutely breathtaking he had amazing acting and such a clear and soulful voice he reduced everyone in the audience to tears with Bring him Home, extremely lucky to have been able to see him as Valjean!!

Nic Greenshields as Javert ... I haven’t heard brilliant things about his portrayal and I can see why tbh other than himself I’ve only seen Bradley Jaden as Javert and they are VERY VERY different I can’t emphasise that enough. I absolutely by no means hated his performance but I didn’t get much from him he was just kind of there, however his voice seemed to be on good form today so that was nice.

Katie Hall as Fantine was I think one of the highlights of the show she absolutely broke me. From audios I’ve heard her before covid she sings ‘I dreamed a dream’ quite differently a lot more pain and you can totally tell she’s so fed up of her life it was just wonderful. Her acting was out of this world she was so raw and it felt so real it was gut wrenching. Loved her!!

Ian Hughes and Helen Walsh as the Thénardiers, they were good and delivered the jokes and funny parts how they should be but other than that I wasn’t too fussed about them. They both didn’t seem rough and nasty enough.

Nathania Ong played Eponine and had a gorgeous voice she was fantastic. She really played the Tom boy part of the character amazingly. Was devastated when she died even though I knew it was coming.

Will Callan as Marius I was really impressed at his portrayal for being literally the same age as me I was like oh.... 😶 lovely voice and fantastic acting especially in Empty chairs you could feel his agony. Definitely a rising star

Paige Blankson as Cosette seemed to breathe a bit of life into the character which was nice to see. She slightly struggled to hit the high notes but was by no means bad. I’m sure she’ll go on to do great things.

Samuel Wynn Morris as Enjolras was just unbelievable his voice was stunning and wasn’t bad to look at must I say ahhaah. I noticed he wasn’t wearing a wig and had his own hair which was cool as I’m not a massive fan of the beach wave blonde surfer dude wigs tbh.

Ensemble we’re fantastic and lovely to see ex phantom swing Rebecca Ridout again!

And of course brilliant to see Earl as the bishop again

Fabulous show would love to see this cast again!!

[secretmellowblog]

What are your favourite pathetic Javert moments? I read your post, and now I'm curious

(CONTEXT: a while back I made a post where I jokingly promised to list my top ten pathetic Javert moments. It is finally that time. Thank you anon and @revolutionaeternam.)

I had trouble writing this post because there are way too many moments in the Brick where Javert is a horribly pathetic creature.  So here are the Top Eleven Pathetic Javert Moments I Am Currently Thinking About:  #11:

“This man was at the barricade,” said he in a low voice and as though speaking to himself. “He is the one they called Marius.” A spy of the first quality, who had observed everything, listened to everything, and taken in everything, even when he thought that he was to die; who had played the spy even in his agony, and who, with his elbows leaning on the first step of the sepulchre, had taken notes.

This line really encapsulates the tragic pathetic side of Javert for me. His entire existence is built on mindless groveling and performing useless tasks in the service of an authority that does not respect him and never will. He is the kind of person who will waste his last hours alive pointlessly ‘taking notes’ no one will read simply because it is what he has been ordered to do, and he cannot disobey orders.

#10. The entire “Punish me, Monsieur Le Maire” scene. No explanation needed. 

#9. Every moment when Javert expresses vehement hatred for some random inoffensive thing that no reasonable person would ever hate. (Ex. Thinking, kindness, facts, books, stoves, etc.) 

#8: Javert recognizing Eponine's body right before his execution,  and saying “It strikes me that I know that girl.” The Javert/Eponine parallels, and that way Javert-Eponine are the failed  “shadows” of Valjean-Cosette....

#7. Every time Javert is compared to a dog. It’s always easier to feel sorry for a furry. 

#6. The moment when the National Guard has an opportunity to trade Jehan’s life for Javert’s --and doesn't. (And Enjolras telling Javert that "your friends have just shot you.") Like?  The way Javert is serving a society that does not value his life; the way the National Guard could have easily rescued him, but didn’t know or care that he had been captured! And the fact that "your friends have just shot you" is immediately followed by Eponine, Javert’s narrative foil, dying of a bullet wound as she begs for attention from a man who doesn't even recognize her...the way both Javert and Eponine made themselves the “guard dogs” of someone/something that barely remembers they exist...  

#5. All of Javert’s behavior at the barricade in general, and the way it parallels Jean Valjean's behavior. It’s fascinating how Javert acts so similar to the way Jean Valjean acted while captured by Thenardier — they both ‘do not utter a single cry,’ and remain utterly calm even when tied to a post awaiting death. They are superficially polite, save for a few passive-aggressive insults. It’s one of the few moments where you see “oh yeah, Javert was born in a prison, and like Jean Valjean he’s learned how to 'properly' behave in situations where he's trapped and has no autonomy, to the point where it’s second nature for him.” Fanfic writers often portray the barricade as uniquely traumatizing for Javert, but the sad thing is that Javert is pretty “eh this is just Tuesday for me” about it until Jean Valjean saves his life.

#4. Javert’s inability to lie at the barricades. He cannot lie to save his life. At the barricade they ask him who he is and he responds “my name’s Javert and I’m a cop.” Who made this man a spy???? Why did they did they send HIM on the spying mission???

#3. Javert IS SO BAD at lying I'm putting it on this list twice. 2012 Les Mis Fandom often liked to make Javert a ~closed book who secretly has a soft heart and hidden depths~ but to me…, one of the most pathetic things about Javert is that what you see is what you get. He is physically incapable of pretending to believe things he does not believe or feel things he does not feel. He’s described as someone whose eyes are so clear you can see the very depths of his conscience in them. Javert can be stoic and level-headed while dealing with severe emotions, but he cannot lie, and the one time he attempts to lie (“I will wait for you here”) he’s so bad at it that even a very distracted Jean Valjean notices something is off. And idk, to me it seems like there can be a really painful vulnerability to that.

#2. “You annoy me. Kill me rather.” ICONIC. And the tu/vous switch that happens here, where Javert is trying to act harsh toward Valjean but is incapable of concealing the fact that he’s developed a new terrifying respect for him!! Because he is a terrible liar! Something is wrong with him. <3 The entire 'execution' scene is a beautiful farce.

#1. This is cheating but: everything involving Javert's final confrontation with Jean Valjean after the barricades, including all of Derailed. These brief chapters are the only time when we see how a doubt-ridden post-barricades Javert interacts with other people, especially Jean Valjean, and it’s all deeply pitiable. His characterization in these chapters is fascinating, and is almost never captured in any adaptations. He isn’t shouting at Valjean or violently threatening him with death; for the first time he’s lost, wandering, and uncertain, speaking "as if in a dream" and passively allowing Jean Valjean to decide where they go and what they do. It's Javert at his most wet and pathetic. Javert sees Jean Valjean and is torn between feeling like quote "the wolf which regains its grip on its prey and the dog that finds its master again...." and he deals with that by Bluescreening. I have this theory that Javert is at his most 'likable' when he has the least power. When Javert has power, he is terrifying. But when he's powerless, when he’s been “declawed," when he's incapable of doing harm, he's just this strange pitiable Creature.  And these last chapters are peak Declawed Javert.

[meta-squash]

Brick Club 1.5.8 “Madame Victurnien Spends Thirty-Five Francs On Morality”

Hugo does this with so many of the societal tragedies in this book. He sets everything up like everything is great and everyone is happy, only to have the facade crumble. It happened with the students/grisettes outing in 1.4 and in the description of the Thenardier children at Montfermeil, and it’s happening now with the description of Montreuil-sur-Mer’s prosperity. Everyone’s so happy and has good income and pays taxes! Oh wait, here’s how the people of this town fucked over one poor woman. (And how many other women have had something similar happen to them because of the nosey people.)

I’m really stuck on the line that Fantine “forgot many things.” She admired her appearance and thought about Cosette and the future and was almost happy, but she also forgot many things. What did she forget? Not Tholomyes, I don’t think, because on the next page he says she thinks of him. It’s such an odd little phrase. I just can’t think of what “many things” she could forget.

Hugo says she rented a room and furniture on credit, “a remnant of her former disorderly ways.” Fantine thinks she’s getting herself back on track, that this renting stuff on credit will be the last time she’ll have to do something “disorderly” and that now that she’s making a living with her own work she’ll be fine. The Hapgood translation is “improvident,” by the way, which I think makes more sense. However I find it interesting that Hugo calls her renting a room on credit a lack of foresight, when really it’s just a necessity out of extreme poverty. She had 23 francs when she left Montfermeil, and I can’t imagine she has much--or any--left when she arrives. Her behavior in Paris, of not taking job opportunities when they arose because of her affair with Tholomyes, I think that makes at least a little sense to call improvident. But not her renting and furnishing her rooms on credit, which seems desperate rather than prodigal.

The townspeople whisper that Fantine “put on airs,” which is the same accusation Favourite had of her back in 1.3.4 while on the swing. Something about Fantine’s odd sort of innocence makes people think she feels superior to them. I was going to say I wonder if this is another way of Hugo insinuating her goodness, but I don’t think Fantine’s “goodness” is the same as Myriel or Valjean’s. Hugo called Fantine “wise,” and I think an aspect about her is that she’s wise on an emotional level, not on a social level. She understands the importance of emotional connection and devotion on a level we don’t see with the other grisettes or with the people of M-sur-M. She doesn’t seem to have any idea about the whisperings going on around her, she has no idea that her child has been discovered until she’s fired. And yet even when she hardens due to her suffering, she never loses the softness about Cosette. Her wisdom is about sacrifice, which is exactly the kind of wisdom that these nosey townspeople (and probably Favourite) lack.

I love Hugo’s condemnation of gossip and rubbernecking. It also makes me laugh because it’s so similar to the way that cops act. This feels like a condemnation of both gossips and cops. What’s the phrase? Kill the cop inside your head? Anyway, he sounds so frustrated and exasperated here. I haven’t read very much further into the Hugo bio, but I’m wondering if there was some rumor or scandal that he personally experienced that made him feel so strongly here.

Hugo’s really hammering home the beauty of Fantine’s hair and teeth here in preparation for two chapters ahead. Weirdly, this reminds me of the Bishop’s silver. Back in 1.1.6 we learn about Myriel’s silver, and it’s mentioned multiple times afterward. When he gives it up, he’s giving up the last thing that connects him to his past life and is put on the same level as any of the poor parishioners or citizens of Digne. When Fantine gives up her teeth and hair, she sacrifices the last two things that tie her not only to her old life in Paris, but to the possibility of success in society as a woman.

So from what I can tell, the Bernardines are a Catholic order also called “Cistercians.” Originally they tried to observe the Rule of St Benedict and focused mostly on manual labor, but later become more focused on intellectual and academic rigor. There was a semi-successful reform movement to go back to old ways in the 17th century. By the 19th century it seems it was mostly dissolved. The “Bernard” of Bernardine was Bernard of Clairvaux, a powerful French abbot who actually wrote up rules that allowed Templar knights to pass through all borders freely. He also encouraged the Second Crusade, though it failed. The Jacobins were anti-royalist republicans who encouraged dechristianization of the country. The Jacobins spoke on behalf of the people but many were bourgeoisie.

So Mme. Victurnien’s ex-monk husband went from being a monk of a fairly intellectual order who observed pretty strict Benedictine rules to joining the fairly atheistic, republican, radical Jacobins.

Madame Victurnien was strict and harsh because her husband was strict and harsh to her. Something I’ve noticed about the way Hugo writes about toxic/abusive/bad relationships between people is how children are affected versus adults. Victurnien and her dead husband, the Thenardier parents, even Gillenormand (with his spinster daughter) to some extent, are all horrible relationships where the treatment of each other means they both turn out pretty awful. However, the same treatment to children (Thenardier parents to their children and even more so to Cosette, Gillenormand to Marius) actually creates an opposite personality. Eponine and Gavroche are both pretty rough, but they’re also both fairly kind in certain ways, which their parents are definitely not. Marius is socially awkward but happy to help when he can. Cosette defies her childhood completely. It’s just an interesting observation that adults abused as adults become abusive themselves while children who were abused have the chance to end the cycle.

“She was a nettle bruised by a frock.” Does Hugo use “nettle” in this metaphor as a verb or a noun? Because to nettle someone is to annoy them, which works, as Victurnien seems to be an extremely annoying individual. But also we have nettles as prickly, stinging plants and as a metaphor from a few chapters ago for the way people become hurtful when neglected. Here we have Victurnien, this nettle bruised by a frock, hurt and damaged by this ex-monk, who becomes prickly and abusive herself. Perhaps with better treatment she would not have turned out this way; but she continues the cycle, beating down others and turning them into stinging nettles rather than them becoming useful.

Fantine is given her fifty francs upon her termination “on behalf of the mayor.” Madeleine is not even Madeleine at all in this chapter. He’s just “the mayor,” as Fantine had been just “the mother” back in 1.4.1. To her he’s this entity that has power over her, that even hates and persecutes her the way the townspeople are. She doesn’t see him, and neither do we; by this point he seems to have relegated factory admin jobs to others, who are then able to make the choice about who to dismiss and why. Again this presents a problem to his rules. People can make up any old rumor or reason to dismiss a person they don’t like or see as morally unfit, and because Valjean doesn’t seem to play as much a part in the running of the factory as before, there’s no way to dispute, except to go to him. And who’s going to go to him, if they feel the same shame that Fantine does?

Fantine is in limbo; she’s told to leave the city but she cannot because of debt. Hugo’s characters in limbo are usually on the edge of an emotional or ethical breakthrough, as with Valjean leaving Digne, Marius just outside the barricade, or Javert at the bridge. Fantine’s limbo doesn’t seem like the edge of a breakthrough, more like the edge of collapse. She really doesn’t have many avenues open to her anymore.

Also, what about sex workers who are more obvious? Later, we see Fantine walking the street in a ballgown. That’s very unsubtle. And, I don’t know, maybe it goes with her sort of social innocence that she would do something like that, but surely there are other desperate women who blatantly walk the streets like that. They haven’t been kicked out of the city. Surely they don’t--or can’t--hide their trade completely. It must be some sort of open secret. I understand that the reasoning for her being banished from M-sur-M is that Valjean has very strict rules, but it still seems so weird to me to set these rules up for some of the city but not all.

Fantine feels shame more than she feels despair. Which. Is a lot. It’s just awful that she has to feel ashamed for this thing that she would have kept hidden if the townspeople weren’t so awful. She has to feel ashamed for the one thing in her life that she truly actually loves and sacrifices for. Which is another parallel between her and Valjean. Fantine feels ashamed not because of her love of Cosette, but because of the “mistake” and stigma that Cosette’s existence implies. Valjean loves Cosette but he always feels a little bit ashamed, not at loving her, but because he feels she doesn’t deserve his love. Despite both of their shame regarding their love for Cosette, both Fantine and Valjean will sacrifice anything for her. It’s definitely a statement about the power of Love, but I think it’s also a good illustration of how both Valjean and Fantine seem to think of themselves as people meant to Suffer For The Good Of Another.

Fantine was “advised to see the mayor; she did not dare.” She believes this was his decision, and not some foreman’s. This is a failure on her part and on Valjean’s part as well. It’s a failure on Fantine’s part because had she gathered her courage and gone, she could have avoided everything that soon comes. But Fantine is so optimistic and sees through rose-tinted glasses, all the way until the moment everything collapses on her, and then she can’t go on. Her optimism doesn’t get her far enough to stand up again immediately; it has to rest first. But more than Fantine’s failing, this is Valjean’s. I assume he gets notified of who is hired and fired at his factory; does he not reach out when someone is dismissed to make sure they’re okay and to see if he can help? Even more of a failure is this rigid system he’s set up combined with his kind-but-mysterious air. He’s so nice and fair that the townspeople see these rules as kind and fair as well, when they’re very much not. But no one--including Fantine--is going to question it because they assume it’s set up in the spirit of kindness. Which I suppose it is, from Valjean’s point of view, but it’s misguided and twisted and ends up being far more damaging than it could ever be helpful.

[dolphin1812]

Why is Javert so funny?

I think I have a new favorite wild coincidence from this book:

“He no longer thought of Jean Valjean,—the wolf of to-day causes these dogs who are always on the chase to forget the wolf of yesterday,—when, in December, 1823, he read a newspaper, he who never read newspapers; but Javert, a monarchical man, had a desire to know the particulars of the triumphal entry of the “Prince Generalissimo” into Bayonne. Just as he was finishing the article, which interested him; a name, the name of Jean Valjean, attracted his attention at the bottom of a page. The paper announced that the convict Jean Valjean was dead, and published the fact in such formal terms that Javert did not doubt it. He confined himself to the remark, “That’s a good entry.” Then he threw aside the paper, and thought no more about it.”

Of all the days Javert, who hates reading, could have read a newspaper, he specifically reads on the day Valjean “dies.” And he believes it has to be true because it’s said “formally.” And he feels the need to comment to himself about it. The mental image is just so funny.

I do think this chapter serves not only to update us on Javert’s side of the chase, but to remind us that he’s the best police officer we’re going to see. We last saw Javert when he checked in on Sister Simplice in his search for Valjean, but right before that, he’d killed Fantine with his presence and his cruelty. We’re well-positioned to hate him, and we’re definitely not supposed to be rooting for him. At the same time, Hugo makes sure to remind us that Javert is “moral” in his own way. For instance,  as an officer in Paris, “Javert rendered himself useful in divers and, though the word may seem strange for such services, honorable manners;” police work isn’t “honorable,” but Javert comes as close to making it so as is possible through his integrity. He even gets back on Valjean’s trail through a duty that seems much more sympathetic than chasing ex-convicts: searching for an “abducted” child. We know that Cosette wasn’t “abducted” and that Valjean is an infinitely better caretaker than the Thénardiers, but the police don’t. Javert may suspect that Valjean was involved with this, but ultimately, he’s there because he’s been called on to check on a “kidnapped” child, and if Cosette had actually been kidnapped, it’d be very easy to think positively of his work. 

He’s also so cautious while pursuing Valjean, partly for selfish and/or career-related reasons (he’s secretive, he likes drama, and he wants the credit for capturing such a “dangerous” man), but because of his “conscience” as well. He doesn’t even pick up the chase until he’s certain that this man is a criminal of some sort, either Jean Valjean or someone well-connected. We still despise him for what he’s done, but we’re also made to recognize his integrity (and perhaps to contrast him with the implied bluster of other police officers, who brag about their “captures” even before they catch anyone, whereas Javert is quiet about his work and only wants to be praised when he feels he’s earned it. He seems humble and modest in comparison). 

At the same time, we can’t forget the situation Valjean is in. Javert fears catching him too quickly for this reason:

“The reader can imagine the effect which this brief paragraph, reproduced by twenty newspapers, would have caused in Paris: “Yesterday, an aged grandfather, with white hair, a respectable and well-to-do gentleman, who was walking with his grandchild, aged eight, was arrested and conducted to the agency of the Prefecture as an escaped convict!””

Javert worries about this man’s “respectability,” but with the exception of that line, basically everything else is true. Valjean was almost arrested while walking with the child he cares for, without having done anything immediate to warrant the attention of the police. This arbitrary and unjust division based on “respectability,” then, is what makes all of Javert’s actions absurd and cruel. The best of the police force still punishes people based not on their morals or their actions, but on generalized perceptions of their identity. 

[lizardrosen]

BrickClub 1.7.9-1.7.11

IX. A Place Where Convictions Are About to Shape Up

This courtroom is really grim, and it must be so much worse for Valjean, who’s been in the same kind of setting already. “This man was the man. He did not look for him, he saw him at once. His eyes gravitated toward him of their own accord, as though they had known in advance where he was.” Oh noooo!

Only, above the president’s head there was a crucifix, something that was missing from the courtrooms at the time he was convicted. When he was tried, G-d had not been there.

Except the mercy and humanity that’s so integral to Hugo’s vision of G-d is completely absent in both of the lawyers, it’s so awful.

Would anyone have cared about the Petit Gervais incident if it weren’t evidence to make Valjean’s crime even more severe, and thus a way to make it “clear” that Champmathieu must be guilty of this theft as well?

“That provincial lingo that had long constituted the eloquence of the bar and that lawyers used to use in days gone by...” Oh good, a preview of the Argot digression! <3

But what proved that this thief was Champmathieu? A single thing -- his status as an ex-convict. The attorney did not deny that this status appeared, unfortunately, to be clearly proved [...] but supposing he were the convict Jean Valjean -- did that prove that he was the stealer of the apples?”

AUGH, even the defense attorney doesn’t believe him and thinks he’s half-guilty and “obviously a cretin” D:

I despise the prosecution too, and I’m really sad!

X. The Strategy of Denial

Champmathieu’s defense is admittedly far from convincing, but it paints a horrible picture and reminds me of Fantine and Jean Valjean spilling their miserable life stories to the first person who gives them half a chance.

“In winter you get so cold you have to flap your arms to keep warm; but the masters don’t like that, they reckon it wastes time.” oh NO, why is this still a conversation we need to have in 2019, why is capitalism and profit so horrible, I hate this!

“She’d get home at seven at night and she’d get to bed quick she’d be so beat. Her husband hit her. She died. We weren’t very happy.” Those three short sentences always just SLAY me.

Everyone laughs at him and he doesn’t realize that HE’S the joke here, so he laughs too, which makes him look bad and guilty. But basically NOTHING he can do here will make him look innocent to this audience.

The accused had ended up sitting back down; he shot to his feet again when the counsel for the prosecution was finished and cried out: “You’re a nasty piece of work, you are! That’s what I wanted to say. It wouldn’t come to me at first.”

He’s right but he really shouldn’t say it.

This is so sad and it makes me so ANGRY that they keep using his confusion and defense to further vilify him. I want to dismantle the entire prison system with my bare hands, it’s not FAIR!!

Ahhh, Javert’s statement says Valjean tried to escape five or six times when it was only four D: I’m so upset.

Brevet lowers his gaze when told he can’t take the oath, but Chenildieu looks straight into the audience, and I love that peek into their characters.

The president addressed him: “The accused has heard the testimony. What do you have to say??”

He answered: “I say, Marvelous!”

And then Madeleine reveals himself!

Chapter XI. Champmathieu More and More Amazed

“His hair, still gray when he arrived in Arras, was not yet completely white when he first stepped into the courtroom. It had gone white in the hour he had been there.” I love this book.

Here are the words he spoke; we record them verbatim such as they were immediately written down after the hearing by one of those who witnessed this scene, such as they are still ringing in the ears of those who heard them, now nearly forty years ago.

I LOVE this book and its insistence that it all happened and Hugo has the primary sources to prove it. It’s so good.

“They were right when they told you Jean Valjean was a mean wretch of a man. He is perhaps not entirely to blame [...] The galleys make the galley slave” I love this BOOK, it’s so good and necessary (but seriously WHY is it still necessary?)

The poor man turned toward the audience and toward the judges with a smile that still, to this day, breaks the heart of those who saw it when they think of it. It was a smile of triumph and it was also a smile of despair.

oh SWEETHEART! Jean Valjean needs a hug!

Anyway, everyone’s too stunned to arrest him and he has a job to do, so he just leaves. His counterpart, Champmathieu, has NO idea what’s going on, poor guy.

[bbclesmis]

‘Valjean is like Spider-Man’

DOMINIC WEST FIGURES he's played his share of awful people. The serial killer Fred West in Appropriate Adult? Jimmy McNulty, the Baltimore cop in The Wire? A lovable rogue, but a rogue nonetheless. Noah Solloway, the lead in The Affair? "He's deeply silly," West contends. "Just a silly man!" In the film Colette (out this Friday), he plays a sadistic husband who locks his gifted wife (Keira Knightley) away and makes her write books for which he claims credit.

"As an actor, you do live with these people and experience what they're feeling," sighs the actor, 49. "If they're a******s, it's exhausting and ultimately degrading. So it was such a relief to play someone who's great." And he smiles that irascible smile, the one that makes you root for West even when he's playing murderers and pretentious, adulterous novelists.

Jean Valjean, West's character in the BBC's adaptation of Les Miserables, is not only "great" in the actor's eyes. He is nothing less than the "greatest hero in all literature": a superhero ex-convict who has spent 19 years in prison being tortured by Inspector Javert (David Oyelowo) for stealing a loaf of bread, but who determines on his release to be the best possible man he can be... with heartbreaking results.

West considers Victor Hugo's French revolutionary epic to be the "greatest novel ever written", too - "much better than War and Peace!" - and certainly much better than the famous musical (he's not a fan).

"Valjean is not just a good guy, he's an amazing guy. Like Spider-Man!" he beams. "He climbs up the sides of buildings to rescue kids. And he has the legitimacy of intense suffering; he's done 19 years of hard labour. That knocks Iron Man into a cocked hat! Then you get into the humanity of Valjean, his demons, his desperate need to redeem himself... He's trying not to be the brute that the prison has turned him into. You become a better person by spending time with someone like that."

He has asked me to his home, a converted brewery in Wiltshire that he shares with his wife, Catherine FitzGerald, and four children - Dora, 11, Senan, ten, Francis, nine, and Christabel, five - "I'm trying to cut down," he jokes. (He has another daughter, Martha, from his first marriage, who is studying English at Oxford and wants to act.) "I think all households should have a five-year-old girl running round," he says. "I just think it's better for children. Stops them from becoming little princesses. It's much harder to be a spoilt brat as one of four."

HE OPENS THE door unshaven and unkempt with a general air of bohemian bonhomie. He puts on a succession of silly voices as he leads me through to his kitchen. "Teas? Light refreshments? Do we want hot milk in our coffees? Yes?" He's such a chameleon as an actor that even his own accent sounds as if it's put on. He was educated at Eton, but his family isn't proper posh. His Irish father owned a plastics factory in Sheffield, his mother was an actor and he's the sixth of seven children.

The Wests have been doing up the house for about three years, but only moved in last summer - there are paintings waiting to be hung, pieces of Lego, mugs, antiques scattered around... The house used to be a "very manageable cottage next to a derelict brewery, but having decided to connect them all together they're only now getting used to the layout. "There are about five different doors to choose from. I didn't realise how spread out it would be. It's enormous!" They moved from west London to give the kids more space to range around when they're teenagers: "I want my kids to be around trees and animals more."

We take refuge in his office, up in the rafters of the old brewery, where he sinks into an armchair and resumes recounting his love affair with Les Miserables.

THE BBC VERSION is written by Andrew Davies and picks up more or less where his adaptation of War and Peace left off. It opens on the field of Waterloo in 1815 in the aftermath of Napoleon's defeat. Back in Paris, the royalists are resurgent - but can't quell the forces unleashed by the Revolution.

In the first episode, we follow Valjean's ill-starred attempts at redemption after his nemesis, Javert, releases him; meanwhile, the grisette Fantine (Lily Collins) falls for a cad (Johnny Flynn) and becomes pregnant with little Cosette - whose path will cross with Valjean's in the future. Six episodes, much heartache and many improbable coincidences will take us all the way up to the 1832 June Rebellion in Paris.

West hadn't read the epic novel, but now that he has, he's a convert. He even loves Hugo's digressions into the design of the Paris sewers. "Actually, I'd have loved it if we could have made six seasons out of it," he says. 'There's more than enough material and it's all important and relevant. As with any great classic, it's big enough to handle any amount of interpretations."

Javert's antipathy to Valjean is one of the engines of the plot - but it's also something of a mystery. Why does Javert hate him so much? "I always like to trace motivations to sex," West says. "I said to David, 'Javert obviously fancies him!' But he thought that was crass."

Did the rivalry extend off-set? "You're never quite sure where the character ends and the actor starts," he laughs. "But the key to David is that he's actually royal. He's a prince in Nigeria. And he doesn't drink. He's very religious. He's been married to his wife since he was 19 and they have four beautiful children. I hadn't realised people like that existed in the acting world! He's a very inspiring guy."

The co-stars decided it was the shared trauma of being institutionalised that set their characters against one another. "Valjean doesn't think he deserves anything other than brutality. Javert is constantly reminding him he's just a common criminal who breaks rocks and murders people."

Oyelowo is one of a number of non-white actors in the cast, marking a departure from traditional costume-drama casting. West jokes that he really wanted to do it all with 'A1lo'Allo accents, but: "Like any classic, it's not a museum piece. It has relevance to modern life. Eponine and the girls all talk like modern London girls. And therefore it looks like modern Britain, too."

THE PRODUCTION LOOKS likely to make Collins, as Fantine, a star. "She's incredible," says West. "It's an exhausting part. So harrowing. Any actress who goes for it deserves all the accolades she gets..." The first scene they shot together was Fantine's death, filmed in a freezing manor house outside Brussels at 5am. "She really went for it. I was like, 'Oh my God! How did you do those spasm things?' She said, 'I just made it up'." I imagine it's reassuring to have West on set: he is very experienced, but doesn't take himself too seriously. Do the younger actors come to him for advice? "Pfah! No. I'm jaded and lazy."

The Wire was the show that brought him fame, as well as a credibility not usually open to Old Etonians. But originally he didn't want to be in it. "And it turns out to have been the one thing that everyone knows me for and it was one of the best shows ever made! I think [creator] David Simon is almost the Victor Hugo of our time... certainly the Charles Dickens."

The Affair offers more escapist pleasure, its marital rows interspersed with good-looking people having sex (even if he doesn't think much of Noah). The Wests are about to decamp to LA for the filming of the final season, but it will be without Ruth Wilson this time. Last February, she disclosed in a Radio Times interview that she was "sure" she earned less than West. "I don't want more money, I just want equal money," she added. Not long after that her character Alison Bailey was killed off. What was all that about? "Oh, not related!" West yelps.

He remains good friends with Wilson. The main point of contention on set was whose behind would be visible in the sex scenes. "We used to fight about it. 'You're on top this time', 'No! I was on top the last three times!'"

He'd never given much thought to who was paid what, he says. "I never asked what the money is on a show. It was more a question of if I wanted to do it. So it woke me up to the issue. I never realised the disparity and the injustice."

It's one of a number of changes he has noticed since the #MeToo movement gained ground. "One thing that's happened is a positive discrimination in favour of female directors. But the main thing is that unacceptable behaviour from male directors or actors is now either not possible, or you can call them out on it. There was one guy in particular whose behaviour was disgusting. Particularly to young females in minor roles. I tried to counter it on several occasions. But now it wouldn't be so hard to get rid of them."

'Treatment of women has taken a big step back in television'

He twists his face in derision at those who feel the feminists have gone "too far". "Treatment of women has taken a big step back in the past 20 years," he says, his voice rising. "Particularly in television, which has become more pornographic and the burden of that falls squarely on young women. Things like Game of Thrones, where you get a pair of bare breasts every five minutes... I mustn't say this, but..." Say it!

"I'm fairly sure that 20 years ago young actresses would not have had pressure put on them to take their clothes off. The parts young actresses get, particularly pretty ones, involve violent rape. When I think about my daughter going into the profession... I'm just really glad that #MeToo has started to counteract what has happened in the past 20 years."

He puts it down to internet porn - "It's made boys feel that women are sex objects who are easily available" - as well as social media. "If you can swipe someone's face because you don't think they're pretty and it costs you that little... I haven't done it myself, but it cheapens it."

HE's CONCERNED AT the turn the world is taking: he mentions Trump, climate change, teenage boys becoming addicted to the online game Fortnite. A wariness of modernity seems to have inspired the move to the countryside; he and his wife are "luddites", he confesses. "I'm not one of those people who say, 'How can you bring children into this world?' But I do want to spend a lot more time hanging out with my kids and running around in forests."

Once he has finished filming the last season of The Affair, he plans to hire an enormous camper van, bundle the entire family into it and spend a few months driving around the States.

"It's the last chance we have," he explains. "They're nearly teenagers, so they're not going to want to spend that much time with their old man for much longer. I've spent a long time away from them. So we're taking six months, four months of it travelling. I've taken them out of school - there are no big exams. We'll home school them. They'll read. No screens. You're not going to get a better education than that. If you travel with as little as possible, you get much more interesting experiences."

Radio Times 5-11 January 2019

[akallabeth-joie]

The new Les Miserables, Episode 1

Bless you, kind soul of the internet, who condescended to aid us wretched Americans, in this, the hour of our fandom-need. 

Random, spoilery thoughts:

*The Mud at Waterloo finally gets its moment on screen. Alas, no Cambronne  (for all that yelling "Merde" is one way to make things 'relatable').

*Tiny Marius! All is forgiven!

*Serious hairpin rationing. At least half of the extras appear to have bonnets, but Fantine and her friends are suffering from named-characters-can't-wear-hats syndrome. At least Georges Pontmercy appears to have found a vaccine against it.

*Nicolette talking to Georgie was a neat way of setting up the whole stalk-Marius-to-church thing. But where is Aunt Gillenormand?

*Javert is not played by Russell Crowe. Hallelujah.

*Got the Toulon color scheme.

* Is JVJ's avalanche...thing meant to reveal how the prison conditions have made him hateful and despairing? He doesn't immediate try to run and get caught, so it's not one of his four failed escape attempts. 

*Then JVJ does a premature Fauchelevant save--I'm sort of conflicted about that? Sure, it establishes that Javert knows JVJ is ridiculously strong, but it's also weirdly specific. Do they think we and/or Javert are too stupid to recognize JVJ and Madeline are both really strong without having them achieve the exact same feat?

*The mixture of French and English in the background is sort of jarring.

*I like this Javert. He's a lot more human than I've seen the character portrayed before.

*I'm All for fanservice, but the script is painfully obvious in its Valvert shipping.

*Ok, so all the hairpins went to the dance extras. Likewise, all the approximately 1815 hairstyles. Wish I could see them better--there's at least one awesome turban in the group.

*Tholomyes does 'charismatic jerk' very well.

*Favourite spelling things out in advance pushes Fantine's characterization from 'naive, but good-hearted' to 'willfully stupid.'

*MORE TINY MARIUS!!!!! Can we just follow him around for the rest of the episode?

*The seasonal montage shows a year progressing...you don't need to tell us as well.

*Power move: "[my name is] JEAN VALJEAN."

*Wait, why are they moving up the timeline on Fantine's plot? Cosette was born in 1815, and Tholomyes buggers off in 1817. Part of the epic jerkitude is that he abandoned Fantine and Cosette knowingly and without warning. This is a huge change. I know not everyone reads the drafts, but Hugo explicitly wrote Cosette as old enough to recognize and remember Tholomyes. 

 *Ponytails on street-scene extras are really distracting from otherwise nice shots. Hairpins are cheap even in 1815; simple period updos can be achieved in under 5 minutes, even for waist-length hair; and putting your long hair up is really practical when working or going outside.

*Go nice lady of Digne! 

*Also Myriel's "a man cannot help his face" line. And they kept the basket exchange! Can we make this the "Adorable Tiny Marius and Occasional One-liners from the Bishop" show?

*Honestly, I like how the meal with JVJ and Myriel started (excepting the lack of Mademoiselle Baptistine); it just got bit heavy-handed as it went on. 

*Hugo's love of lighting made it into the theft scene!

*Look, it's the swing! And the girls found some bonnets and hairpins!

*Petit Gervais! Engaged in the forbidden act of singing! And he has his marmot!

*Baby Cosette!

All in all, I think it's a solid adaptation. If anything, the hype about it being "the most accurate to the book, ever" detracted more than any of the changes, because that set up every change as a failure, rather than a necessity of adaptation or an artistic choice (ex: Baptistine, quartets becoming trios, not digressing for chapters of exposition). Also, dissing the musical--another solid adaptation--was utterly unnecessary. 

So, I want to like it, and think that I will. Especially if we can end this "hair pins are expensive and only used for special occasions" issue.

[myfandomrambles]

An Analysis of Villianey

( This is Part 1b, Part 1a here)

Section II: Tragic Backstories

This is another super common way to make villains sympathetic. Giving someone a terrible childhood is a short cut to make someone feel bad for someone. Tragic backstories are super common and sometimes making the villains the most compelling character in really good ways. Both to make the characters truly a person who is empathetic or just understandable. There are three ways I think this can be done really well.

You can make them a redeemed character like Zuko (Avatar: The Last Airbender), Megamind (Megamind) or Peridot (Steven Universe).

An anti-hero/grey characters who don’t join the light side but acts heroically but on their own code. Wade Wilson (Deadpool), Dexter Morgan (Dexter), Punisher (Marvel), Harley Quinn (DC)  or Don Vito Corleone (The Godfather)  

A  bad guy who remains bad at the end, we know why they are bad but aren’t ever fixed. EX: Merrin Meredith (Septimus Heap), Morgana (BBC Merlin), Voldemort (Harry Potter),  Bane (DC), Or Davros (Doctor Who)

One important thing about writing these stories is to be done right you do have to choose the end game. How the character acts in relationships during the story changes which outcome is compelling and even feels possible. Things to consider:  rather they have any guiding belief system if this backstory includes trauma how the heal from that, their relationship to the power system, and how much they change their actions to move towards saying sorry and becoming better. Not every character is written in a way where a character can become better, or even should. The Diamonds (Steven Universe) keep having their characterization, actions, back story, and relationships altered leaving a confused story arc. The Diamonds are also on a list of characters who should not be redeemed because of the severity of their actions. They are written as space fascists no matter how sad they are it’s problematic to pretend the trauma of a dead love excuses attempted genocide.

A revolting part of this trend is tragedy porn. Stories of violence, poverty, mental illness, child abuse, disability, domestic abuse or sexual assault are exploited for shock value and making money from real pain. This is used to create a reason for a character to be broken or evil. A cheap gritty story of how our villain got there instead of writing an interesting motivation or taking into account the cultural and psychological damage of associating trauma and mental health with villainy. This also plays into the trope of mental illness being dangerous or a problem of morality. If it’s just because they are too broken you can kiss it away and fixing the trauma fixes the problem of horrible acts of violence.  If you do write traumatic backstories as motivation for their actions have the behaviours actually track with trauma. Catra’s (She-Ra 2018)  trauma is inherently tied to her motivation as the villain and essentially to her role as the deuteragonist of the narrative. But they show how and why this trauma matters, and choose to display the abuse in a way that while explicit and horrific isn’t exploitive and the refrain from showing realistic physical abuse that too clearly mirrors real life trauma. Her narrative of becoming the antagonist makes sense with her history of indoctrination, betrayal, fear of violence, and psychological trauma. It mirrors the narrative of the hero as well throwing off their primary abuser in both instances making it possible for this story to not demonize trauma. Another important thing to keep in mind when writing these kinds of narratives is to do research and represent any mental illness at least mostly accurately.

Another frustration is when people use these backstories to form a “well they could never have done/known better” and therefore they did nothing wrong mindset. This an oversimplified reading of good storytelling and the reading for poorly written characters. The idea that no one could ever know better is used in defence of characters like Kylo Ren (Star Wars), Azula (Avatar: The Last Airbender), Billy Hargrove (Stranger Things), Draco Malfoy (Harry Potter). However this excuse really only extends so far it tracks best with children when we see them alter perspective when exposed to other ideas and when the behaviours mirror what was done to them. Abuse and trauma don’t always make angry violent people and the majority of people who do become angry hurt people but not murders. Then you do have indoctrination but there is a reason the Nuremberg defence doesn’t excuse everything.

This excuse also falls apart somewhat when you can point to another character [or real life person] in the same or similar situation who did change. This whole way of viewing things become an exercise in letting people who have hurt others go without their actions analyzed and without being held responsible. In a literary analysis standpoint it’s lazy and in reality, it is dangerous to do this with anyone who was hurt in the past. Empathy and understanding are always important, understanding why people end up where they do is key to life. Some people do horrific things with no trauma, and who did know better searching for a sympathetic reason doesn’t help make things better. And even more so those who have been abused or manipulated and did wrong should be helped to work through trauma and learn to understand and change from they have done in the past not have all of their behaviour excused with a handwave. People shouldn’t be taught that abuse forgives abusing, later on, they should know they never deserve to be treated poorly and they can’t love abusers better.  And of course, this is often applied enviable around factors like race, gender, power level and perceived hotness.

Anti Heros I think are criminally underrated wanting them to either be good or be bad. We romanticize the ones we should see as good [usually hot people] or demonize the ones it’s easier to see as all bad. Anti-heroic characters are hard because the lines differentiate these from redeemed people and real villains are connected to personal morality. But making them black and white is rationalizing when they make choices that are truly harmful as part of their “good” actions. Making them all bad strips the way they are often societal outsiders and the way they learned in the stories to move and act in life. This is the grey morality people claim to want in characters, and claim to see in their faves but people don’t appreciate it when they happen.

Constant manipulation of tragic backstory to say a character didn't really do anything bad, or they deserve redemption excuse also strips away truly tragic stories like the life of Inspector Javert (Les Miserables). Fall from grace stories can be really interesting like Walter White (Breaking Bad) or Harvey Dent (DC). Because sometimes life does eat someone up and they can’t find it in themselves to act in a different manner. Tragic stories are still okay, villains aren’t always going to be the good guys because they are meant to be just that villains. That is how they were written and how the best fit in stories and tell the story wanting to be shared. Sometimes villains made to many choices to hurt other people to be capable of total transformation to hero. These characters can still be three dimensional and interesting but they aren’t people who “done nothing wrong”. They did do something wrong and in the story that is fine, it’s what works in the narrative. Not every person can be healed with forgiveness and a hug.

The concept that Deserving redemption is tied to how sad their life was before but it isn't, it's based on the actions they do during the story.  a careful narrative that shows the path a person took to get the right place, the ways they changed and what influenced it is much more important. Let's use Tony Stark (Marvel) most of Iron Man 1 and iron man 2 are dedicated to him trying to be a better person, to use his remaining life to make the world better and atone for his wrongs. Tony Stark starts off as an unrepentant war criminal allowing the way he was groomed to ignore harm and gain power as an excuse to never address any of what he did was harmful. He drowned his trauma with addictions, shallow relationships. Yes, his trauma as a kid and during the narrative are driving pieces but why he is so heroic, why his phoenix narrative is one of the best in history is the choices he makes with what to do with that pain, he uses it to be earth's greatest defender. You do have some snapshot redemption stories that are good namely Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader (Star Wars) but I think [save the ret-cond Anakin force ghost] this wasn't so much meant to be proving he is a good person, but just acknowledging that no one is truly dark or light side. Anakin’s life is more told as a Shakespearean fall from grace, but even if this arc comes out of nowhere it works because the actions are narratively and thematically done correctly.

People who are obsessed with redemption also often don’t do a real analysis of societal structures, cultural history or context. It’s not that they really are deconstructing societal factors, or understand trauma, mental health or what really causes crime and antisocial behaviour when they try and justify via trauma and no other choice. I think starting to create and analyse content on a wider more holistic standpoint would be a good exercise to apply empathy to real-life crimes of desperation, end the killer = crazy myth, and stop letting people blame hate crimes on white kids being bullied.

[other posts on this topic: Zuko and good redemption arcs, trauma and justification of violence, Catra, Adora & trauma part 1 & 2, the diamonds still suck ]