Why I hate Laura Kalpakian's "Cosette, the Sequel to Les Misérables"
Chapter 3
Kapakian continues to rewrite the ending to Les Misérables, which is an insult to the original book, the original author, and the fandom
(page 25)
Kalpakian references the musical again in saying "The Bishop had bought his [Valjean's] soul for God..." making it clear that Kalpakian lacks the intelligence to distinguish the two.
(pages 26-27)
Two more pages with no errors. That makes three, which is very surprising
(page 28)
Kalpakian calls Thénardier careless, which is one thing that he was not. Thénardier carefully thought through his schemes.
(page 29)
Instead of having Valjean reconsider his feelings about Marius immediately after taking his letter from Gavroche, he does so now and the part with Gavroche is mentioned only in passing.
(page 30)
Valjean makes reference to Marius being poor. How the hell would he know that? He has never met him, and has only read the letter that he wrote to Cosette, which never made any mention of his being poor. How the hell would Valjean know that he is poor?
(page 31)
This one isn't so much an error, as much as it's an idiotic pun, "An armed man [in reference to Valjean] in the rue de l'Homme Armé."
This chapter was short, so I'll combine it with chapter 4.
Chapter 4
In which Kalpakian continues to rewrite the ending to Les Misérables, an insult to classic literature
(page 32)
Kalpakian writes that Marius helps with the injured, having been trained by Combeferre. This never happened in the brick.
(page 33)
Feuilly carves into the wall of the Corinthe "Vive le peuple!" Wrong. He wrote "Vivent les peuples." Again, who the hell is Clerons?
(page 34)
Marius writes another letter to Cosette, at the end writing for the finder to deliver it to Rue de l'Homme Armé. This is pointless as, in the event of his death and by the time the letter would have been found, Cosette would be gone, in England.
(page 35)
Enjolras addresses Marius as friend, something that they were not. Enjolras' face is described as pallid, again contradicting Victor Hugo's description of him. Enjolras tells anyone who wishes to leave to do so, in the book it is specified that only four can leave as they have four National Guard uniforms to be used as a disguise and Valjean ends up giving them a fifth. Pajol is mentioned again, we still don't know who he is. Marius speaks passionately about the revolution, which he cared little about in the brick. Colville is brought into the story with no introduction. Verdier makes another appearance.
(page 36)
What the hell is a "Parisian's shrug"?
(page 37)
Kalpakian writes that Gavroche does not starve. This is a lie. Now Kalpakian combines two of her errors: using French when unnecessary, and swearing ("...I said, Enough of this merde.") Who the hell are Blanchard, Colville, Latour, Clerons, and Aulard? Also, Aulard has cholera which is very deadly and contagious. He probably wouldn't have been alive enough to even be at the barricade.
(page 38)
More swearing that involves excrement. Seriously, Kalpakian, learn more words.
(page 39)
Enjolras says, "... like vermin on the back of a rat." Enjolras would say much more clever things than that.
(page 40)
The Amis seem no where near as witty or intelligent as they are in the brick
(page 41)
The musical is referenced AGAIN when Kalpakian writes, "No one is coming to help you to fight!" DAMN IT KALPAKIAN, LEARN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE BOOK AN THE MUSICAL AND GET A LARGER VOCABULARY! In what world would Enjolras stand atop the barricade and yell to the army, "Merde!"
Excuse me while I go and smack my head off a wall... This book is shit, which, apparently, happens to be Laura Kalpakian's favourite word.