<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8220;Les Miserables&#8221; by Victor Hugo</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.girldetective.net/?feed=rss2&#038;p=5033" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.girldetective.net/?p=5033</link>
	<description>Reading, Writing, Movies and Mothering in Minneapolis, Mostly</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2026 13:26:57 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: girldetective</title>
		<link>http://www.girldetective.net/?p=5033&cpage=1#comment-33682</link>
		<dc:creator>girldetective</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2013 15:44:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.girldetective.net/?p=5033#comment-33682</guid>
		<description>Sherry, I see what you mean, but my editor's finger was twitching. I don't think it's good writing to go on and one in alternate pages. I would have preferred to have that history severely edited to remove the many, many redundancies, and interspersed with the story to support it, rather than stop it cold. What surprised the heck outta me was that he was writing as if this were a serial with those long long chapters, but he wasn't. I'm reading Dickens, and his social and historical commentary is much shorter and interspersed, not as appended and ponderous.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sherry, I see what you mean, but my editor&#8217;s finger was twitching. I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s good writing to go on and one in alternate pages. I would have preferred to have that history severely edited to remove the many, many redundancies, and interspersed with the story to support it, rather than stop it cold. What surprised the heck outta me was that he was writing as if this were a serial with those long long chapters, but he wasn&#8217;t. I&#8217;m reading Dickens, and his social and historical commentary is much shorter and interspersed, not as appended and ponderous.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sherry</title>
		<link>http://www.girldetective.net/?p=5033&cpage=1#comment-33681</link>
		<dc:creator>Sherry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2013 15:31:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.girldetective.net/?p=5033#comment-33681</guid>
		<description>I don't know. I agree that the political/historical parts where Hugo writes about people none of us have ever heard of and who add no value to the story are skippable. But the sewer and the cloister chapters are actually quite interesting to me anyway and they set a tone for the setting of the story that I think makes it richer and more intense. (INot sure that's the right adjective? Maybe "deep" or "vivid".)  Yeah, you can skip those and the whole battle of Waterloo, except the part where Thenardier rescues somebody, and the argot chapter and it's OK, but I would argue that at the least there is good writing (essay writing) there, too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t know. I agree that the political/historical parts where Hugo writes about people none of us have ever heard of and who add no value to the story are skippable. But the sewer and the cloister chapters are actually quite interesting to me anyway and they set a tone for the setting of the story that I think makes it richer and more intense. (INot sure that&#8217;s the right adjective? Maybe &#8220;deep&#8221; or &#8220;vivid&#8221;.)  Yeah, you can skip those and the whole battle of Waterloo, except the part where Thenardier rescues somebody, and the argot chapter and it&#8217;s OK, but I would argue that at the least there is good writing (essay writing) there, too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Melinda</title>
		<link>http://www.girldetective.net/?p=5033&cpage=1#comment-33666</link>
		<dc:creator>Melinda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2013 02:28:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.girldetective.net/?p=5033#comment-33666</guid>
		<description>Yes, I have heard about the digressions in Les Miserables. In fact, that is one of the primary reasons I hesitate to begin the book again.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I have heard about the digressions in Les Miserables. In fact, that is one of the primary reasons I hesitate to begin the book again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: girldetective</title>
		<link>http://www.girldetective.net/?p=5033&cpage=1#comment-33623</link>
		<dc:creator>girldetective</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jan 2013 21:00:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.girldetective.net/?p=5033#comment-33623</guid>
		<description>Jennifer, I forgot to mention that this would make a great new year reading project. It's got 365 subchapters of 61 long chapters of 4 sections, so about 3 to 4 pages per subchapter. If you started Jan 1, read just a few pages a day, you'd be done in a year and it would take hardly any time at all. 

It would, however stretch out the deadly sections excruciatingly. So perhaps, a short chapter a day, except for the boring ones, and you'd be done well within a year with a tiny daily commitment! In fact, there've got to be at least 31 mini chapters of the boring bits; you could start tomorrow! 

Also, my husband and I started together thinking it would be a great couple's reading project but one or the other of us was always way ahead/behind, and now he's still not finished. So I can't really recommend it for tandem reading, either.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jennifer, I forgot to mention that this would make a great new year reading project. It&#8217;s got 365 subchapters of 61 long chapters of 4 sections, so about 3 to 4 pages per subchapter. If you started Jan 1, read just a few pages a day, you&#8217;d be done in a year and it would take hardly any time at all. </p>
<p>It would, however stretch out the deadly sections excruciatingly. So perhaps, a short chapter a day, except for the boring ones, and you&#8217;d be done well within a year with a tiny daily commitment! In fact, there&#8217;ve got to be at least 31 mini chapters of the boring bits; you could start tomorrow! </p>
<p>Also, my husband and I started together thinking it would be a great couple&#8217;s reading project but one or the other of us was always way ahead/behind, and now he&#8217;s still not finished. So I can&#8217;t really recommend it for tandem reading, either.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jennifer Reese</title>
		<link>http://www.girldetective.net/?p=5033&cpage=1#comment-33617</link>
		<dc:creator>Jennifer Reese</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jan 2013 19:26:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.girldetective.net/?p=5033#comment-33617</guid>
		<description>That's a hard-core reading project and I'm impressed! I know myself too well to tackle this one, especially after reading your report. I'll start it, struggle, avoid starting other books and watch more TV instead and then feel like a lame-ass when I give up midway through.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s a hard-core reading project and I&#8217;m impressed! I know myself too well to tackle this one, especially after reading your report. I&#8217;ll start it, struggle, avoid starting other books and watch more TV instead and then feel like a lame-ass when I give up midway through.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
