Victor Hugo was greater than Shakespeare in every way

read a good Hugo poem this morning, called a vous qui etes la

Have you guys noticed a pattern in his poems where the majority of the poem is expounding on a particular theme or device and then the last like 4-6 lines are a kind of 'twist' that almost refutes the entire rest of the poem? i dont like it

Oh yes he subverted your expectations didn' he? The now classic Rian Johnson method.

His characters and prose were a lot better though.

im not really a fan. I like the end of the poem to sort of deepen and finish the rest of it, like the resolution in music or whatever

>tfw don't know French

Dude they aren't from the same era...
A comparison to Molière, Racine or Corneille would be more appropriate

Attached: 1522013926758.jpg (604x516, 31K)

Then why did you post here? Who are you trying to validate your opinion to if you already know it to be correct?

Marlowe, Aeschylus and Sophocles are greater than Shakespeare in every way and this isn't up for discussions in the least

I just hate him for his unbelievably petty, misguided politics, desu. This man single-handedly blackened the historical legacy of Napoleon III in the public consciousness.

>le miserables

literally ribbit

napoleon iii was authoritarian and an expansionist his regime was not a utopia faggot. hugo had been advocating for a republic BEFORE Napoleon III even took power

That might have something to do with the fact that Dante didn't write prose

>americans know who hugo is
surprising since i've never seen a thread on him ever

Yeah, I know. But Napoleon III was the most capable French head of state of the century, who made France into a world power again and created a constitutional monarchy. Hugo's political acumen was limited to writing fanfiction about a small failed uprising against the July Monarchy, and advocating for Adolphe Theirs who was a terrible head of state.

He's a low-tier propagandist. If you wanted to spark a real debate, don't mention Hugo. Mention the true genius, Racine.

Victor Hugo literally received prizes and funding when Napoleon III was president, and vouched for him. He even called him "prince-président". Hugo's a slime.

Look at that broad, thick, prole nose. Nah, he has nothing on the spear.

No he wasn't you Roundhead scum.

>napoleon iii was authoritarian and an expansionist
And that is bad exactly why, you faggot?

>who made France into a world power again and created a constitutional monarchy.
*collapses in 1870, leading to 30 years of diplomatic and military isolation*
also
>thiers
>bad
He was literally napoleon's prime minister in the end and maneuvered to enshrine the Third Republic. He was an opportunist shithead but he was politically smart and competent enough
>And that is bad exactly why, you faggot?
*collapses in 1870, leading to 30 years of diplomatic and military isolation*
I don't recall that at all. from wiki, for example.
>Hugo decided to live in exile after Napoleon III's coup d'état at the end of 1851. After leaving France, Hugo lived in Brussels briefly in 1851, before moving to the Channel Islands, first to Jersey (1852–1855) and then to the smaller island of Guernsey in 1855, where he stayed until Napoleon III's fall from power in 1870. Although Napoleon III proclaimed a general amnesty in 1859, under which Hugo could have safely returned to France, the author stayed in exile, only returning when Napoleon III was forced from power as a result of the French defeat in the Franco-Prussian War in 1870.

Attached: 800px-Victor_Hugo_by_Charles_Hugo,_c1850-55.jpg (800x963, 251K)

Hugo is absolute garbage. The worst that 19th Century "realism" has to offer, his fame relies entirely on the pure power of French cultural memery.

Based.

Attached: Aeneas.jpg (1050x729, 119K)

oh deary me. none of those writers have the depth of Shakespeare.

By the time Shakespeare was Marlowe's age Marlowe was certainly better - but Shakespeare certainly went on to better him. If only Marlowe didn't die so young ;_;

>le patrician contrarian meme

He was somewhat ambiguous. His portrayal of Caesar is of a much more prideful and mediocre man than the one we find in Plutarch, and he shows a lot of simpaty towards Brutus (and his will to save republicanism).

Then there is also the fact that he shows Kings to be again and again just normal people making terrible mistakes. To be honest, he probably knew very well that a republic is just a bunch of wolfish, selfish people knotted together, but he also probably realized that to have one egocentric curbing other by virtue of the law is better than to have just one egocentric without any legislation to refrain him.

What Shakespeare was terrified off, however, seems to be civil war and intestine conflicts. But if he had the option to choose, knowing both systems today - an absolute monarchy and a republic - there is no doubt in my mind that, wise as he were, he would choose the latter.

The thing with a monarchy or empire is that you have to be extremely lucky to have a real worthy leader in command, and that is very, very rare. It’s a naive dream that one would be lucky enough to have a Reinhard von Lohengrand figure as Kaiser of ones nation.

>hasn't read the Waterloo part of Les Mis

Napoléon III was elected president from 1848 to 1851. He did a coup because he couldn't get re-elected as there was a term limit of one. Hugo was also a monarchist before the second republic. He's a slime.

Hugo isn't even top 15 best french writer

This, desu

Well-written, a pleasure to read your thoughts.

You're aware that he wasn't responsible for how badly France got crushed in the Franco-Prussian War right? He saw the writing on the wall in the late 60s and drafted a defense bill which would have reformed the army, but was shut down by the parliament he had returned power to.

The political collapse on the home front after Sedan was entirely on the hands of a clique of self-serving republicans in the Senate and General Staff.

Même pas proche, mon petit. Ne sois pas ridicule.

lol i hate this board

Just studying the fuck out of him as part of my upbringin (thank you French school), I will admit that I made the OP just to get a rise, I'll always put Hugo ahead for sheer versatility and insane mastery of the language

This one is hella gud
Read "Demain, dès l'aube" by him and "Le dormeur du Val" by Rimbaud for extra spicy twist endings

If you can understand and wield French like in Hugo and Zola books you basically can start pretending to academician levels of French really

But Hugo just destroys them
...okay maybe not Racine

>implying I'm amerimutt and Hugo isn't my great national hero along with Georges Brassens
:(

I came to this analysis

>Mon petit
Voyons donc, soyez gracieux cher ami

>Georges Brassens

Literal trash-tier musically and in terms of poetry.