Archive for Musicals.Net Musicals.Net |
| alien�gena |
enjolras&grantaire in broadway&london?Hello everybody, I�m a newbie here so, I�m not sure this topic hasn�t been covered before (althought I�ve checked the last pages�)Well, this is my question. I�ve only seen Les Mis on stage in Madrid (awful-awful lyrics). When I first went to the show I had not read the book nor seen any of the movies, or even listen to the musical ever, so everything that was happening on stage came out as a surprise (my god, how much I cried with all these people who kept on dying and dying!). They were too many things to take on and to me, the abc members (enjolras and marius excepted), were just a bunch of nondescript students. I even found surprising that �the producers� had bothered to give them names! At some point I read the book (I also went to see the show several more times� ) and discovered that it was Hugo who had given them names and in fact they were quite distinct individuals! 
After that I forgot about Les Mis for many years, not even listening to the cd (in English or Spanish)� until I recently downloaded the 10th anniversary concert. Even if it had been years since my last listening of Les Miserables I had listened to it sooooo many times, that I found that I remembered every single word and inflexion of it and when the singers did not give the same intention my cd singer has given to a word I couldn�t help but to be surprised (sometimes in a bad way, sometimes in a good way). It is really surprising how the way you pronounce a word can completely change its meaning or intention! The biggest change to me was the way enjolras and grantaire related to each other. When Michel Maguire says in such a gentle tone to Grantaire �put that bottle down� I was really surprised because the Madrid-Enjolras is quite harsh when he says it (something that fits better the character IMO). When �drink with me� (love the first part of the song/hate the marius whining part) arrived, something even more surprising happened when after grantaire sang his cynical lines, Maguire came to him and put his hand on his shoulder to comfort him! I couldn�t help but think: WTF! It is sooooo OOC! I perfectly remember the Spanish on stage version. When translating Grantaire words the translator had to make a choice. In English the �you� in �can it be you fear to die etc�� can be singular or plural and addressed to one or several people but in spanish you have to decide which one it is and the producer (and London director ken caswell) went for �t�� a singular �you�. It could still be ambiguous whether grantaire was saying his lines to everyone and expressing his own fear, or whether he is speaking to a particular person, but the director makes it quite clear on Madrid stage, though, since while he sings, Grantaire looks at Enjolras WITH AN OBVIOUS TAUNTING ATTITUDE. It is SO clear that he is provoking him! And the end of his lines he even offers his bottle to Enjolras who is obviously angry or offended and rejects it with a slap (he slaps the bottle, not Grantaire MIND YOU!) and instead drinks from the bottle SOMEONE ELSE is offering him, making his rejection even mor ebvious. This is so much more IC for both of them! I also noticed a small change in the way they both die (for those who don�t remember it in the 10thAC they show some theater images of the barricade). In the version they showed grantaire is just sitting with his bottle until enjolras gets to the top of the barricade and gets shot and it�s only then that he goes after him. The Spanish version is not that different BUT he stands up (wakes up?) a bit earlier (I think it is when marius is shot) and seems to want to stop (in a drunken and ineffective way) enjolras to go up barricade in such a suicidal way. I only found in the net a clip of the Mexican version but it seems to be played the same way that the Spanish one, so you can have a look here http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=7XfbN8ueDyI&feature=related Well, in any case, my question is mainly about the conforting attitude Maguire showed on the dvd, because it was so OOC!!!! It is just something he decided to do? Or is it always played that way in the Broadway version? And in the London one? I know it is silly but I love enjolras and grantaire characters (in a very NON slashy way!) and this Maguire did really bother me! |
||||
| Orestes Fasting |
In the Broadway revival, Grantaire sings that verse less tauntingly and more as an expression of his own despair. One of the other barricade boys starts toward him as though to pick a fight with him, but Enjolras holds him back and goes to tell Grantaire off himself. The emotional tone of the exchange (always conducted in whispers so the audience can't hear, but you can see the general meaning on their faces) varied from night to night depending on whether Grantaire was being more obnoxious or more pathetic, but it usually involved Enjolras being quite angry with Grantaire, Grantaire looking like he was about to cry, and sometimes Enjolras comforting him.
North Shore Music Theatre had an interesting take on that scene: Grantaire delivers his verse and lifts the bottle to his lips, only to find Enjolras staring at him disapprovingly. So he reflects for a moment, and puts it down without drinking. It's also worthy of note that many of the Grantaire actors deliver the "can it be you fear to die?" line, not to Enjolras, but to Marius. Hayden Tee apparently used to make "Do I care if I should die..." a direct response to Grantaire. |
||||
| lesmisloony |
It's been different every time I've seen it. Including the same performance from one night to the next. But I don't really find the comforting thing terribly OOC. Enj was cold, but he wasn't entirely asshat-ish. | ||||
| alien�gena |
Well, that's really interesting! And that's what I really love about theater (not just musical theater but every kind). You read a line on paper and it seems void but then, it can mean so many things on stage...
The truth is I don't find the approach Orestes Fasting is talking about OOC at all. I think that my problem with the TAC and Maguire's approach comes mainly from the fact that since I've always seen Grantaire sing his lines in a taunting-defying way (You know: "I'm Grantaire, I don't believe in anything, all this revolution stuff is complete nonsense, I don't give a damn about freedom or the republic and you've lead all your friends to dead with no real reason. Now that we are going to die: do you realize that I was right and your fight is stupid?")I assumed (wrongly) that TAC Grantaire was doing the same, and the Enjolras response was really OOC then! BUT if he is singing his lines just as an expression of his own despair and fear to die, and not just to accuse Enjolras, then, the conforting gesture does not seem that out of place at all. One of a leader responsabilities is precisely to confort his men when they are fealing sad or when they are scared! |
||||
| LesMisForever |
Hello alien�gena, and welcome 
I do tend to agree with you actually. I prefer the harsh Enjolras, and not the comforting one. As you said, it is more in line with the novel. On stage, as mentioned above, different actors do it differently. If i recall correctly, in the CSR Anthony Warlow does a marvellous Enjolras, and amongst others, he shouts the line "Put that bottle down". |
||||
| Orestes Fasting |
Well, that scene did vary from night to night, and oftentimes there was no comfort--Enjolras goes over to tell Grantaire off, Grantaire tries to stammer an explanation for why he's being such a pain in the butt, and Enjolras snaps at him and stalks off angry. But I liked it better when they had some sort of reconciliation, because unlike in the book, there's no way to establish it during their deaths. It had to come earlier, and that was the place for it.
But Broadway revival was the only production I'm aware of where Grantaire delivered that verse despairingly, thinking of himself and his own death, instead of as a taunt or challenge or what-have-you. In most versions it would indeed be OOC for Enjolras to comfort him. |
||||
| Fantine |
I absolutely love the comforting scene between Enjolras and Grantaire on the TAC. I get this weird feeling in my stomach every time I see it. | ||||
| Kragey |
A wibble over the gratuitous manlove? |
||||
| alien�gena |
Well, you know, this thread is making me think about something I never though before...
I still prefer harsh enjolras... but your posts made me think about something.
Thinking now more about the book than the musical I got the feeling that Hugo did not care about a reconciliation. What he gives to Grantaire is something much more important that a reconciliation from his point of view. Giving him a dignified and heroic death what Hugo grants Grantaire is REDEMPTION (after all, he wrote 1.500 pages in tiny print about a certain valjean seeking redemption, didn't he). From Hugo's point of view, Grantaire is a seriously flawled human being. For us (21st century people used to see all kind of lovable losers on screen), he may be fun and sweet, but to Victor Hugo, his cynicism and his weakness (the drunkard thing) are serious character flaws. Of course, Grantaire is not one of the "bad guys" since he is good hearted and warm and you can telle Hugo is sympathetic to him, but he is sooooo far away from a model. That's why his death (loyal, courageous and full of faith) is a form of redemption. And this leads me to another "weird" idea. We usually consider Enjolras as one of the heros/good guys because OMG he is soooooo cool on top of the barricade with that wonderful red vest!!!!!, and yes, in the musical he is that good guy who fights for freedom, but looking closely at the character in the book I'm thinking that from Hugo's point of view he is also a flawled one. And it is so beacause he may be brave and full of hope and everything, but in his purity he lacks humanity (one may wonder what would have he become if his revolution had succeed, a saint-just, probably). Hugo is quite clear when he says that Combeferre corrects enjolras (i read it in french so i'm not sure that is the exact word in the english translation). If you think about it, Enjolras and Javert are very similar. Javert worships LAW above everything, and Enjolras worships the REPUBLIC, but they are very similar after all. Well, yes, enjolras is pretty, and charismatic, and has lots of friends, plus the cool red vest, while javert is not very pretty, and puts people off, and is lonely (BUT he has a cool outfit too). I believe that from Hugo's point of view Enjolras also needs some kind of redemption, and he gets it when he delivers his speech at the barricade, a speech where combeferre's humanity corrects the idealistic but cold enjolras). So, yes, I guess now that Hugo wants to show a more human enjolras at the barricade (If I'm not wrong enjolras is willing to trade spy javert against prisoner prouvaire to save his friend's life and, doesn't he also cry when he shoots a young soldier?) to kind of redeem him and save him from become a sort of young Javert... Since the musical does not have a speech for Enjolras, or a great death scene for grantaire, I'm thinking that enjolras conforting attitude with grantaire could serve the purpose of humanizing him. Anyway (god this post is long, and I was complaining about hugo) I still prefer it when he is harsh with grantaire, it just seems more real and IC. And, OMG I've just seen Warlow Enjolras on youtoube and he is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO INCREDIBLE. I LOVE HIM!!!!! |
||||
| lesmisloony |
Wow, that's an excellent analysis!
This is exactly why I've never jumped on the Barricade Boy Love Train, especially concerning Enjolras. He's actually one of my least favourite characters, right next to Gavroche, but in a different way. I dislike Enjolras because he seems too cold and inhuman; I dislike Gavroche because little kids are annoying and I wish death to them all. Ahem. |
||||
| Orestes Fasting |
I agree, an excellent analysis, especially the point that Grantaire's cynicism, though made appealing in the musical and reinforced by the despair of Turning/Empty Chairs, is actually a serious character flaw for which he does need to seek redemption. As likeable as he is, he's neither right nor admirable; Hugo sets him up as a foil for Enjolras, who is (in Hugo's view) both right and admirable, but too cold to be likeable. He explicitly sets them up as opposites, albeit opposites who attract, and even goes so far as to invoke the law of complementary colors. So their death scene in the book is both a reconciliation and a redemption.
I also agree that Enjolras is very similar in character to Javert, and even--to draw a comparison to another book--to St. John Rivers in Jane Eyre. And they all represent more-or-less the same thing: an ideal--the Republic, the Law, Christianity--reduced to its logical essence and drained of humanity. The ideal that Enjolras represents is perhaps a more worthy one than Javert's, but they serve similar purposes. I have the feeling that Combeferre, though he has a relatively minor role in the overall action, was Hugo's mouthpiece for his real political views, and that he wanted to depict the underlying humanity of the cause he was championing rubbing off on the pure, cold "logic of the revolution." Or, in other words, for the ideal Republic he pictured to soften and humanize--or, as you said, correct--the spirit of 1793. And it's that slight softening--Enjolras being human enough to be tormented by the necessities of war, but still pure and distant enough to pursue it--that makes him so appealing to me. Of course he's flawed, but I love him for it. Forget the red vest; Enjolras is sexiest when he's holding a pistol to Le Cabuc's head and counting down the seconds until he fires. (Forgive my verbosity; I've been reading Dumas, and it probably shows.) |
||||
| lesmisloony |
Enjolras as St. John? That's brilliant. |
||||
| Orestes Fasting |
They were totally separated at birth, weren't they?
But I'd wager that the reason Enjolras has legions of fangirls and St. John is mostly just considered an asshole is precisely because he's a bit softer around the edges. Not enough to change what he is, but enough to give him a bit more depth. St. John knows what he is and demands that Jane follow in his footsteps; Enjolras knows what he is and allows himself to feel regret, and even be influenced by Combeferre to some extent. |
||||
| alien�gena |
well, I couldn't tell about St. John. I don't come from an english speaking background, so I've never studied jane eyre...
I read it several years ago, but I guess that I didn't think this st. john was specially engaging since I've forgotten all about him 
So I've been checking on him in google. Isn't he a booooring priest who intends to marry Jane? Well, then it is clear why he does not have fans!!! Where are the charismatic presence, the comanding attitude, the heroics and the vibrant songs on top of tables, charriots and barricades ???? Enjolras has many girlfans but also quite a lot of male fans, just because of the brave, military, energetic aura around him! I really don't see that in a priest
|
||||
| lesmisloony |
People hate St. John mostly because they've just been experiencing Rochester, I think. I abhor him. But I adore Rochester. So. In fact, whenever St. John appears in the book or the movie I usually groan.
But St. John definitely loved Rosamund Oliver, right? But totally denied himself because he knew she wouldn't make a good wife? Enj never loved any woman, from what we know... I dunno, I think a pros/cons list between the two would come out kinda even. At least for me. |
||||
| LesMisForever |
OF... i didn't know that you are related to Mrs Lovett 
|
||||
| Alexis Fernandes |
Well, for those who read my "Les Miz for first time in Portugal", they should know I'm doing Grantaire character there, and what I can say about this is that, I feel the "Drink with Me" song emotionally, it is a beautiful ballad, and for that reason I think that the song should be with less taunt, and with more passion, but that's just my opinion of course, I can't imagine myself living this song in other way but if the director says to do it, then I'll have no choice obviously. |
||||
| bigR |
Well, Alexis, your post made me think about something I never thought before!!! It must suck to be an actor and have a definite idea of the way you want to play a character and then have a director telling you to do it other way. How do you manage to believe in the truth of your character when what he is doing is not what you believe he should be doing???? It just seems so dificult to me! About Grantaire, well, everyone is entitle to his own views and maybe you are right, but I certainly don't see those lines the same way you do. Although maybe it is just that I don't really understand what you mean when you say "passion". Of course the lines are very emotional, but to me they mainly express a huge sadness and despair (maybe that�s what you mean when you say �passion�, sorry then). I mean, it is quite obvious that Grantaire is not asking those question in a rethoric way to himself. First, it�s not just that he fears or not to die: he thinks it is completely stupid to die for an ideal or cause and he says it in the novel. Second, he does not care AT ALL whether the world will remember him or not, so he would never ask that question to himself. And third, for Grantaire everything in life is a lie EXCEPT Enjolras. He is the only thing he believes in. So, he is at that barricade, he knows he is going to die, but he does not wonder whether it will have a meaning or not, or whether it will make a difference for other people. He KNOWS it is a stupid death that means nothing. He knows that their �death� at the barricade is a �lie�. And he knows he is going to die because and only because of enjolras, even if it is not really enjolras fault (after all, he did not want grantaire at the barricade and tried to send him away). So, even if I would not read those lines only as a taunt (although in the book grantaire actually mocks the idea of the insurrection and calls it pointless and stupid) I believe that they are mainly a taunt. I mean, he guy is plain sad because he is going to die, and there is true emotion in his words, of course, but I guess he is not happy at all to die for a stupid reason and it is only natural for him to feel kind of angry/resentful against enjolras and to try to make everyone else see the silliness of what is happening. I just don't see Grantaire singing those words to himself, but rather questioning the reasons everybody else has to be at the barricade. That�s why I think that the song is emotional but rather taunting too, because he must know for certain that he is going to annoy enjolras with that words! Actually I think that in the TAC anthony crivello manages to do it great, since he sings his lines with emotion and despair, but at the same time he throws such an acusing look at enjolras!!! |
||||
| Orestes Fasting |
No he doesn't, because that would be a conviction, and convictions are anathema to Grantaire. You're mistaking his aimless general pessimism for an actual reasoned belief that the revolution is pointless. Grantaire's problem--especially in the book--is his complete inability to take anything seriously, not actual belief that they're all idiots. If he believed that, why would he be there? Why would he follow a man he had no respect for? And more than that, he gets his chance to leave when Enjolras sends everyone away at the Dawn of Anguish. If he thinks it's all so pointless and stupid and silly, why does he stay? He has to acquire some conviction over the course of the second act, or he wouldn't stick around to die; why not use Drink With Me as a chance to develop that part of his character? |
||||
| Alexis Fernandes |
Sorry but no, it doesnt suck to be actor, not even if they want me to do this the way I'm not used to do it, you just have to practice that way until you get the habit of it, and that's all. And if I can do it, I believe everyone can do it. But until now the director said nothing about that, so I keep living the music the way I like
|
||||
| bigR |
Well we are becoming all philophic now! But I kind of like this discussion. I think that you misanderstood some of my points (not your fault, of course, I have trouble expressing myself in english). I'm under the impression now that my previous post wasn't clear and could be read as if I thought that Grantaire had a clear idea that this revolution was pointless and was against it, but that's not what I meant. When I said that revolution and fighting for the people are "lies" for him what I meant is that he does not believe in anything. For him there is only one certain think: "Ceci �tait son axiome : Il n�y a qu�une certitude, mon verre plein". I totally agree with you when you say that he does not have a "reasoned belief that the revolution is pointless". Of course he does not! But he has a "general believe" (if we can use the word "believe" talking about Grantaire) that every revolution is pointless, because everything is pointless in life... He also makes fun of Robespierre and every other revolutionary: "Ils sont bien avanc�s d��tre morts" (sorry, I don't have an english translation). About whether Grantaire thinks or not that what his friends are doing is silly or stupid, well, I think there is no doubt about it because he says it himself in the book!!! He actually calls them "imb�ciles". Even more, at the Corinthe he uses the words: "b�tise", "imb�ciles" and "sotisses". words that my dictionary translates as: stupidity,/foolishness/silliness, idiots and folly??? So, yes, even if he loves them, Grantaire thinks that all his friends are idiotis for fighting and they are doing a stupid thing. It is not my opinion here, but Grantaire own words! Why is he there? Well, we know it, because Enjolras is there. Period. And poor Grantaire is like a moth attracted by light... By staying at the barricade he is proving Enjolras that he CAN believe, even if there is only one thing/person he can believe in. In a way he is the more lucid of all the amis. He knows that they are all going to die even before they start building the barricade "ils vont se massacrer", but he is staying with them "jusqu'a ce que j'y meure" (untill I die here). I'm just realizing that Graintaire has something of Javert in him too. Javert believes in order, law, in a world of certainities. When this world disapears he can't llive anymore beacause all that remains is doubt and uncertainity, and then he commits suicide. Well without Enjolras, his only belief, all that remains for Grantaire is also doubt and uncertainity, and although he is much more used than javert to it, I guess that he also needs an anchor to keep on living. Without Enjolras, his only belief also disappears and all that remains is doubt and uncertainity too... Why doesn't he leave? Well, mainly I think that he does not live because in Dawn of Anguish nothing has changed for him. He knew from the begining that they were going to die a stupid death and he choose to stay. There is no reason why he should leave just because the others have realized that they are going to die only now... But also, I'm just realizing, OMG poor Grantaire!!!! in the book he does not leave because he never gets a chance to (not that he would have taken it, but he should have had it)!!!!! I've never realized how cruel this was! He can not leave because Enjolras is so busy talking all this strangers into getting out of the barricade that he does not even remember that Grantaire (by far the more useless man there, and the more pointless death) is sleeping upstairs and does not know that the battle is lost!!! He does not wake him up to tell him, everything is lost, some people are leaving, would you like to follow them? (althought now that I remember they were only 5 uniforms for 5 fathers leaving the barricade, no clothes for grantaire). Anyway, I never thought about this before and I'm suddenly so angry with Enjolras!!! Yes, we know Grantaire annoys you to no end, but he is there only because of you. If you cuold spare 5 minures to try to get him out of the barricade before the fighting, couldn't you AT LEAST wake him up now and tell him "we are going to die, would you consider leaving??????" bbbrrrrrrrrrrr |
||||
| bigR |
Well, I have no acting habilities whatsoever, and I really envy you people who can sing and act! Of course being an actor does not suck. I just thought that it must be really hard to have a clear idea of the way a character should be played and then having a director telling you that you have to do it a different way, because he thinks that the character is not the way you though!!! |
||||
| lesmisloony |
I dunno. I think Hugo may have alluded to the fact that, had he kept his head down and played dead, Grantaire would have been mistaken for a dead body. No? It was his own choice to jump to his feet screaming, "I am one of them!" |
||||
| bigR |
I know, i know it was his choice, and I am sure that if someone had suggested him if he wanted to leave he would have decided to stay, no doubt. But anyway, I think that it is a bit sad that NOBODY though about waking him up and tell him what was going on!!! 
|
||||
| Orestes Fasting |
Probably because they'd all completely forgotten about him, or assumed he'd stumbled away. Or couldn't wake him.
I just don't think, given the rest of his behavior, that Grantaire actually thought they were idiots--the reader isn't meant to take those words any more seriously than, for example, his flippant summation of Russian history. It's also worth noting that no, he didn't know they were going to die, because there was no way to know--after all, it hadn't been two years since a street insurrection had successfully deposed a king. They weren't dumb, and they wouldn't have thrown themselves into an �meute that they knew was doomed from the start. |
||||
| lesmisloony |
Agreed. And I think it's worth remembering that they were all fighting for their lives (or... composing poetry for their lives, depending on where we are in the timeline) and Grantaire was in the back corner of the second-floor room. Not exactly visible. I hope you don't think we're trying to be mean, or dumping all over your ideas, or something like that. I personally really love that you're taking a second look at the Book and at Grantaire. Good healthy debate, what?
|
||||
| bigR |
1. Of course, I know that you are not trying to be mean! As you said it is just a healthy debate and the little nerd inside me just loves these kind of pointless and picky discussios about books, don't worry at all
2. About nobody waking-up Grantaire, the truth is that I've been overanalizing for the sake of it and because although I've known the story for a long time it was the first time I realized this. I was kind of making fun at the situation. The truth is that there is only one reason why nobody wakes up the poor boy: Victor Hugo needed him to stay asleep in order to write a more moving and dramatic dead scene. Hugo wanted him asleep, that's all and in order to achieve that he deliberately "forgot" about grantaire. The problem is that doing so, he made his friends forget about him aswell!!!! I just thought that here, in a LesMis forums, it was funnier to deliberately "ignore" that there was someone writing the story and being angry with a character as if he was real
3. About the "idiots" part. I really think that we misunderstand each other! Come on! How many times did you think that a friend of yours was acting in a stupid way! It does not mean that you think that this person is really dumb!!!! Otherwise you wouldn't like him as a friend!!! Does grantaire call his friends and their actions silly and stupid? yes, he does. But I don't see it as if he didn't respect them or anything like that! I kind of see it more as a protective,caring attitude, because he sees that they are going to take huge risks to fight for something so abstract as the republic. So, I stick to my point of view. IMO Grantaire thinks that all this revolution stuff is a stupid folly (as everything else in life), and he tells so his friends, because he is worried about them, not because he thinks that they are complete idiots who shouldn't be respected! I don't know but I believe that you can perfectly think that someone you love is doing an stupid thing and still love and respect that person, can't you? About he knowing that they are going to die. well, he does not know it 100% sure, he is no fortune-teller, but it is obvious that he thinks that whether the revolutionaries win or lose the day, some of them will die. After all, it's just normal. In every fight they are loses on both sides. But what makes me think that Grantaire believes that it is a foolish action and most of them are going to die is his conversation with Enjolras. He asks him to let him stay at the caf� and sleep until he dies in there. Not until the fight is over, or until you leave the barricade, or anything else, but "until I die". Also, when Enjolras attacks him calling him useless, grantaire last words are "you'll see", as if he knew that he will have the chance to show enjolras that he is able to die for something/someone. |
||||
| LesMisForever |
I am enjoying this debate, and i actually feel kind of ashamed that what concerned me most about G. when i read the novel whether someone can really oversleep a battle.
I have never, not even once, been drunk in my life (not for religious reasons. i just don't like alchol, and i like to stay in control), so i asked my brother about it. I think G. is not really a unique case. In fact, i think there are millions like him. They believed in the leaders much more than the causes thmselves. |
||||
| windbelle |
All very nutritious comments you've made, guys! I enjoyed reading this thread too. 
Actually in the musical I've always tend to think Grantaire is more of expressing his own skepticism and despair to all of them rather than taunting Enjolras in Drink with Me. He does have the focus and probably contact with Enjolras in the scene, but just because Enjolras is the leader and the most firm one, not that he is personally focusing his fire at him. It's the same in the novel, IMO. Grantaire likes to speak loudly of his skeptical big talks in the ABC crowd, but it's mostly to all of them instead of anyone personally. I don't remember a line in the novel where he really comes up to taunt Enjolras. As for whether he knows the barricade's gonna fail, I guess he does think the fight is stupid, but it's just from his born skepticism about everything, not because he think he is prophetic. In fact I think he doesn't even believe he is right or wrong about the insurrection. |
||||
| Orestes Fasting |
That's because in the novel, every time he actually addresses Enjolras personally it's with protestations of devotion and pleas to give him a chance. The only remotely snide comment he makes about Enjolras ("So much the worse for him; I won't go to his funeral!") is a retort against a perceived slight, not a comment on the man's beliefs. I think it's rather telling that he rants aimlessly about what a sh*thole the world is when left to his own devices, but shuts the hell up whenever he thinks Enjolras is paying attention to what he's saying. |
||||
| bigR |
I had to quote you too, because you really made a point we were missing from the begining. grantaire may be totally "grantairesque" while speaking to his friends in his corner of caf� musain, and he may tell bossuet and jolly that they are all "imb�ciles" to be willing to fight and everything, but the moment Enjolras confronts him, he totally melts. he does not dare to keep on being grantaire. So, going back to the beginning of this thread, judging by what orestes has told, I really like the revival blocking of DWM now. I mean, Grantaire is being �grantairesque�, (as he is in the book while the others are building the barricade), and he could have kept on being so even if another student confronted him, but the moment enjolras comes to tell him off, he is all puppy-eyes and please don�t be mad at me for being the way I am� |
||||
| kemathenga |
Forgive me for digging out this old thread but I just plain LOVE it.
Hugo describes Grantaire as a born follower, as somebody who needs another one to become somebody. I know, given last century's experiences and lessons, the word "follower" leads to sum negative connotations like worshipping a leader no matter what his ideals are but I keep in mind that Hugo wrote before all this took place and some things he says are still true even after the hell of WW II. Lets say there is nothing makes a person more able to overcome his/her own flaws than devotion to another person, commonly called Love. Grantaire left to himself is virtually nothing, not even a bad guy. Grantaire AND Enjolras is somebody able to die with and for a friend and according to John 15,13 there is no greater love. Hugo says Grantaire himself is a living contradiction to his own "beliefs". He, who claims not to believe in anything can't live without friendship. he, who would scoff at the idea of dying for love and makes fun of Marius (this scene in TAC is divine) does the very thing in the end and with complete ease and even grace. I could go on like this for some time since you may have noticed I'm totally in love with Grantaire but the point I'd like to make is that I see much more of common people like me in Grantaire than in any of the other students. He is the most realistic character, the one who fails expectations as a habit. The one who gabs around, an expert for big words and small deeds (like Domino). A lot like St. Peter in the gospel, actually (sorry, I can't hide being a theologian for long). And HE IS GIVEN A CHANCE. So, yes, what is said before here about redemption and reconciliation is true, I believe. That I am also a "born lieutenant" looking for "my captain" still my add to my readiness to identify with him, of course. I hope I'll be given such a chance, too, some day although it needn't necessarily result in being shot . 
|