#Clairemiserables Series: Introduction

Les Miserables is a whopper of a musical and it is chock-full of contrasting points of views posited by an enormous cast of characters. It is extremely tempting to reduce it to a smaller story.

For example, evangelical Christians love it because they see it as allegorical of the New Testament (Valjean) supplanting the Old Testament (Javert) ...but they completely ignore the implicit antisemitism in that rendering, not to mention the Friends of the ABC and their efforts to fight for justice.

Then you have people like me, fangirls who find barricade boys critical to the moral fabric of the musical (and have taken decisive quizzes to determine which minor character represents our essence.) On the other hand, they also die in what the other characters consider a futile effort, having changed zero in their little kerfuffle with the National Guard.**

The finale ends with an anthem of heaven’s promises to provide the peace that has been denied to the characters on earth…. and that is some opiate-of-the-masses bullhoey.

Essentially, Les Miserables is the opposite of a Tim Rice musical: it says so many things.

It is positively Shakespearean in its political malleability. Therefore, each minute directorial decision or orchestral swell is enough to tip it in one direction or another, and that is why I am taking it upon myself to let you know which recording is more or less reactionary.

Back in the early days of the internet, I recall a detailed analysis of Les Miserables leitmotifs in each track of the 1987-1997 version. I believe it was probably the original version of Kelly Dean Hansen’s post here. I’m indebted to his scholarship and I’m sure I will be referencing his work liberally as I explore various stagings and orchestrations and the political questions posed by their confluence.

---

** Understanding which historical event happens in Act II is a Hill on Which I Am Willing to Die because there are so many French revolutions that it is not.

It is not the one with the capital letters or Marie Antoinette.

France continued to revolve throughout the 1800s and Les Miserables is not about any of the big ones -- not the July Revolution of 1830 or the June Days Uprising of 1848.

The skirmish that takes place in Act II is commonly known as the Paris Uprising of 1832, or the June Rebellion, a much smaller conflict: two days of battle between 3000 insurrectionists and an army of 60,000, resulting in enough carnage to quell the fervor among the republicans.

Victor Hugo did not write it into his novel because it was noteworthy to history; he wrote it into his novel because, though it hadn't made an impression on many, it had made one on him. It was important because he found himself literally in the middle of it.

If it did not figure so heavily in Les Miserables, this uprising would be an even teensier footnote in history than it already is. Writing about a largely forgotten effort of huge importance to a small number of people was precisely what Hugo was going for, and that is why it does the barricade boys a disservice to be fuzzy on these details.

I realize I’m likely preaching to the choir here, but you just never know. As same-y as Les Miserables costumes can be, I’m nonetheless scarred by having seen a regional theatre put their actors in breeches. This was a long pants era!!