(note: unlike The Blotter Talks!, which has to have the spoilers edited out, there is no editing out in this. The only edits made on this are to add accents to the words that need them (darn that French!) and the occasional spelling error. Other than that, these are being printed AS IS.)

Okay. Commentary. Besides saying I enjoyed reading it very much...

One of the things I like about this is its "legitimacy" as a sequel or continuation of Les Misérables. Obviously, there's the similar language (at times it even mirrors his didatic bent), updated for contemporary use--post-modern Hugoesque, I suppose. Sentences double back and build on themselves, and a verdant fields of commas appear. That kind of language helps establish the time period and make for some nice descriptive passages with lots of detail.

The other obvious connection to Les Misérables is the Hugo framing story. I like it a lot, partly because it explains the discrepancies between the two versions of the story, and partly because it's funny to have Hugo confronted with his "characters." You may decide for yourself which "part" is the greater.... At any rate, it frees up events to be changed around without disregarding what has gone before and perhaps could give the characters a chance to reflect on their adventures (I am going out on a limb and assuming there will be adventures of some sort)...and it's funny!

Then there's parallels between the Les Misérables sequence of events and character arcs and the Pont-au-Change ones. The biggest instance of this... some of my favorite parts of Les Misérables are Jean Valjean's interior monologues. Within the Les Misérables universe, if a person is going to reach a life-altering decision and make a one hundred and eighty degree turn, he's going to have to sit and think about it to himself for a while. So Valjean's contemplations are paralleled by Javert's (who, incidentially, you made me pay more attention to). I think that sort of thing's pretty darn neat, and the only way to make a big change in character believable.

Oh, and it's great fun to watch the characters bounce off of each other. Valjean and Javert and Cosette and Javert in particular--the first pair because they're great opposites (the bit at the tail end on the boat's really very nice), and the second because it's unexpected and gives both characters a chance to develop and show different sides of themselves--Javert's civil and Cosette has some spunk. Another thing, about Valjean, he's portrayed well, especially with some of the imagery used to describe him (let's see, his hair gets described at a halo...). That and the light/dark stuff, which is hard to miss but fun to notice. Marius...I ought to mention him...he's getting more likable the more he figures out. All the characters behave in character and all that good stuff and they remain believable. They're well-drawn and it's nice to get more background on some, and "screen time" for others (such as Jules and Auguste--no one gets left out).

As for plot, I could engage in speculation, but I've done that already...I'll just have to wait and see how some of the things that have been set up will unfold and what the heck will happen in England. Enough of this. Suffice it to say, it's excellent and has been a great treat to read.

Thanks for sharing, and I look forward to more....

Lindsay

Hi!

Well, I think you should be proud of yourself. Dang it, it's 170 (give or take a few) pages of good stuff, and people ARE reading it! So far it's excellent, and I can't wait for more. I think I found a slight typo, though. In the Epilogue, it starts off, "There exist in the city of San Francisco..." Unless it's my printer, I think it's supposed to be, "There exists in the city..."

Anywayz, onto my feedback. Actually, I would have been ecstatic to write on and on about each posting, but at first I wasn't sure how you'd take it. Didn't want to seem like put-downs or anything. But now, I have to write.

It's awesome. All of it. Unlike Hugo, who can go on and on about sewers, slang, etc., every single section is engaging to read and kept my mind going. Sometimes, when reading fan fiction or books in a series, and the next section or book is due out, I'll let the book or story alone until the next time. With Pont-au-Change, I always had an urge to read the newest section again once I finished. Sometimes I'd do it to figure out what a character was going to do or what was in his/her mind, or I'd read it just because I think it's excellent stuff to read.

The way it's written is something I love. I can't quite explain it. I guess it's because this is a continuing story of the charaters adored around the world, and in particular a lot has been focused on my two favorite characters. Although, I think it may be leaning a lot toward the fact that the 'voice' of the narrator is a lot like the one in 'Les Misérables', and yet the voice in PoC is modernized to our times.Hmm, I don't think I quite got my meaning across, but I hope you understand.

The story has taken so many little twists and turns sometimes it makes my head spin. However, it only adds to the story. First it started off sort of along the lines of the original book, and there it takes the reader on a ride that I can only compare to a never-ending rollar coaster. I could pick out so many little hidden plots and situations that I thought were fun to read and added so much life to the story. (The cliffhanger before the last posting was an excellent one, imho)

And the Epilogue...ooooh! Very intresting. (However, once the whole thing is completed, CAN that be called an epilogue? Won't it have to change to something else?) Is San Francisco going to play a major part in the book? BTW, was Avery Nichols a real person? I thought I've heard the name before. And those little knick-knacks found in the trunk. Obviously, some of them have something to do with the story, but I'm curious to see how the phoenix jade and metal hairpin will (might?) fall in. I think I've figured out what notes (by Hugo, supposedly) refer to whom and what situation, but I'm not sure about the one giving up the house. Was it Mère Jeanne?

And I'm curious to see how Nichols ties to Valjean and Javert. The charity described seems to indicate Mrs. Nichols might have known Valjean in England...but my conjectures are almost always wrong. :-)

Whoa. Very long. One more thing. Jean Valjean is commonly referrered to as "JVJ". I noticed that if you put Javert's full name into initials, it will be 'JEJ'. Did you do this on purpose? Or did you just like those names for Javert?

Totally amazed and in awe,

Christina

Comment on the story itself: Calais, Chapters 3 and 4 are both fantastic.

Virtually everything one could hope for with a denouement of such magnitude! I felt a twinge of regret that Marius didn't come to his realization of who'd saved him until Valjean was gone, as I'd have liked to see him grovel a bit more (he earned every grovel you had him do and then some, the little cuss...) but there was a certain poetry to it the way you had it, so I don't mind TOO much!<G> Intriguing that Valjean still thinks of himself as a thief. I never really thought of him as one: somehow stealing a loaf of bread for a starving child never seemed like thievery to me, and although his treatment of the Bishop and Petit Gervais did indeed qualify, certainly his many years of abstention since, and penance for, should have got him over it. Rather like suffering through the measles does not mean you have them for life. But I make the observation NOT because you were wrong to write him as you did. In fact it was consistent with the way you've painted him throughout. I just found it interesting and food for thought.

And I DO love your "blooper reel," with "My angel!" "My own!" "My God!" You actually could have given Javert that thought bubble, without perhaps the hurling part, and got away with it! Loved the comparison of young love to a rich dessert.

And now, just to hear myself think, since I know you won't answer unless it's with one of those teaser lines like "you'll find out when I write it, so there!" Where is it going from here? I mean, it seems so complete! Granted, Thenardier and the boys constitute a loose end, but heck, Hugo didn't tie up his own ends. You could have them show up later, but it's not mandatory.

The only thing I see as mandatory is the Javert/mother thing: this looks like foreshadowing to me. Maybe not, but it does cast a sense of unease over an otherwise happy ending. After all, if the ending is completely happy, why even bother with a subsequent book -- who cares what happened after? So something bad...maybe several bad things...must happen.

Of course, they could get arrested by the Channel police for being litterbugs...<G>

BUT I must ask the question, as I have never been to San Francisco. How much, if any, of the epilogue is true????????????? And if you say "well, there's a lot of big and a lot of small museums..." I shall be annoyed.

One more comment, about your Blotter talks: I recall you making the statement that July 20 was a good date for several reasons. Well, I can add one -- it was the day the Germans tried to get rid of Hitler; the famous bomb plot was executed on that day. Of course, it would have been a better day if the plot had worked!

A superlative read -- better, in some ways, than the original, heaven help me!

Mel

First off, as with the rest of the novel, the exsquisite writing style in Hugo's own vein. Whether or not you were trying for it, that's what I picked up. However, there wasn't the ramblings off in directions unknown that I think Hugo was so marked for, and I enjoyed that.

Character interpretations, as well. Reactions, dialogue and mannerisms all stayed true to the original characters, and nothing overly OOC was done to them, like a certain other author and a certain other book did with Azelma....=P

Another thing was the research. It's quite obvious that this was not just a spur-of-the-moment thing as soon as you take into account the simple amount of work you put into this thing. Sentence structure is perfect as far as I can tell (and I'm no editor), and except for a few inevitable typos that happen to everyone, mechanical work is pretty damned good too!

The plot line was clean-cut and not at all confusing for me to follow, and I had very clear mental images almost all the way through the text, which does not happen very often. It's quite clear that this is a well thought-out, well laid-out and superbly written piece of literature, and I tip my hat to you, Arlene!

(WhiteWhisker)




And, since mom wouldn't let me print hers (geez...) I present: A Review by Leonard Maltin:

Pont-au-Change: Continuation of oft-retold Les Misérables. Ex-convict Jean Valjean saves the life of the policeman who has been hunting him for ten years. Globetrotting adventure ensues. Solid performances turned in by the two leads. **1/2

(thanks, Lindsay!)