Patron-Minette

Please enjoy my very obvious trust me bro interpretation.

Demi-Liard is an extremely minor character in Les Misérables, but is important as he is one of the novel's few examples of a character that is explicitly coded as non-white. But I argue here that to a 19th-century French reader, Demi-Liard would clock as Ottoman, but even more likely as one of these three Ottoman minority populations, or as an amalgamation of stereotypes from each.

Part 1: Physical Descriptions

Demi-Liard’s description as a bearded man wearing une calotte grecque places him very clearly within the Ottoman world. English translations that render the garment as a “fez" show this even more explicitly.

By the 1830s, the fez had become a worldwide symbol of Ottoman reform and masculinity, especially after Sultan Mahmud II’s dress reforms standardized it as official headwear. It was worn by Ottoman Muslims, as well as by Jewish and Christian minorities.

There is also a possibility of it referring to an arakhchi, another traditional skullcap common in what is now Armenia and Azerbaijan, however, I find this unlikely.

It is also worth mentioning his beard. A beard in France at this period was relatively uncommon. Characters can be portrayed as having beards in this period without pointing to them being non-white, as the beard was also associated with revolutionary movements as France inched closer to 1848, but combined with the hat and there being no implication of Demi-Liard as a revolutionary, I believe this points towards more evidence of him as Ottoman, and now more explicitly as Sephardic Jewish or Armenian.

Beards were much more common among Sephardic Jewish populations than among white Europeans. To a reader of the time, it very likely could have been read as Mediterranean.

Armenians, being a nearly homogeneously Orthodox Christian population, is well known for clergy and monastics having large beards. This is a common practice throughout most of Eastern Christianity, which could also point towards him being intended to be read as Levantine Christian such as an Assyrian or a Maronite, other important minorities in the Ottoman Empire.

Part Two: Name

Demi-Liard's name refers to a very low denomination of money. His second alias, Deux-Milliards, cleanly translates to "two billion," a name that's also likely referring to money as well. It suggests he's either very poor or very rich, one being ironic.

His name is what distinguishes him from the other ethnicities that could have been meant based on the description of his appearance and clothing alone such as Greek, Turkish, or Kurdish.

As seen with other Patron-Minette characters, their names are extremely important for discerning who they are. A financially related name combined with the earlier Ottoman implications shows to me he’s being framed not simply as “foreign,” but as a foreigner associated with money. This is where his portrayal becomes really problematic.

Most obviously, this brings to mind antisemitic stereotypes and conspiracies that were common in Europe during this period and were present in literature.

His relationship to money could also point to the orientalist stereotype of the greedy Arab merchant, shopkeeper, or tradesman.

While being mostly unknown in communities with small Armenian populations, in areas where Armenians are a significant minority, such as France, stereotypes of Armenians being wealthy are commonplace. This stems from the Ottoman Empire in the 18th and 19th centuries. Many Armenians found success in the empire's banking industry and were the backbone of the Ottoman financial system.

But as Turkish nationalism and racial supremacy grew in the empire, Armenians were targeted as a political threat, and their disproportionate representation in finance became a justification for oppression. This idea spread and continues to live on.

----

Like I said, trust me bro, very much. But I do believe Hugo explicitly coded him as Ottoman, most likely an uninformed amalgamation of problematic stereotypes from these three groups and more. But regardless of actual plausibility, I claimed him as Armenian in my heart and will continue to do so.

Your first sentence is literally copy and pasted, as are many other parts of this post. I was extremely disappointed to log on to find this, because I know Anna personally and I was speaking to her when she was crafting the original post. She spent weeks perfecting it.

The following screenshots are just a few examples where words were either completely copy and pasted, or just reworded slightly. I highly encourage everyone to read Anna’s post on her blog and give it the recognition it deserves.

To my knowledge, research on the racialised interpretation of Demi-Liard had never been published or discussed — not only on Tumblr, but in academia more generally — until my blog post from a few years back. It is a concept that I spent many hours researching and developing. As nobody else had, to my knowledge, discussed this interpretation before then, this post appears to draw directly from my work: both in its central ideas and, in places, its wording.

I am a staunch advocate for building on existing research and contributing to academic conversations. Indeed, I always encourage this, and I love seeing people build on research I’ve previously done or come up with new ideas that make me look at things from a new perspective. However, crediting the sources you’ve relied upon is a fundamental part of respectful engagement with the work of others. In relation to the original post in this thread, directly copying sentences or specific concepts without acknowledging the original source is poor practice and has been personally very upsetting, even if it was not intended to be.

My Wordpress blog includes a clear statement on referencing, asking that: ‘If you would like to share or reference any material, please include proper attribution and a direct link to the original post’. The blog is licensed under a CC BY-NC 4.0 Creative Commons licence, which requires attribution whenever content is repurposed or reused. The direct copying of content created by others is not something I can ever condone. Ultimately, there is no other way to put it: it is wrong.

It has been extremely hard to write this because I always try to avoid conflict whenever possible, and I am incredibly anxious about speaking up. However, I also don’t want my silence on this matter to be interpreted as acceptance or approval. I do not approve of what happened, and I am deeply upset to have learned that it occurred.

During the rue Plumet sequence in Les Misérables, we see Éponine employ a range of different tactics to try and get her father and the Patron-Minette to leave the property, initially attempting to again convince them that the house is not worth robbing before making her famous speech of defiance.

When it comes to Montparnasse in this scene, Éponine appears to appeal to him in a slightly more personal (and/or romantic) way than the other Patron-Minette rogues. She initially addresses him informally— “Comment ça va, Montparnasse”— and uses language throughout the chapter that indicates she shares a closer relationship with him than she does with the other members of this criminal gang, employing numerous terms of endearment such as “mon petit Montparnasse” throughout (I’ve written a separate post going into further detail on this so will not repeat myself here). In addition to this, she holds out and grabs his hand early on in the chapter: “Éponine prit la main de Montparnasse” and appeals to him specifically about not going in, saying he is a “good boy”.

All these phrases vaguely imply that these two characters are a little closer than the other figures present in the scene. However, there is one other telling phrase that I feel is of particular importance when it comes to examining the glimmers of dynamic between Montparnasse and Éponine:

“Mon bon ami Monsieur Montparnasse”

What makes this line so noteworthy? Well, because “bon ami” has numerous meanings… On one hand, and in a literal sense, it translates to ‘good friend’. However, ‘bon ami’ is also a common way one might refer to their partner or lover informally. In fact, we even see ‘bon ami’ used in other parts of the novel to explicitly refer to a lover in a tongue-and-cheek manner—specifically, ‘bonne amie’ is used when we are introduced to Babet's mistress!

So, again, here is another instance where Hugo makes an obvious allusion to the fact that Montparnasse and Éponine are likely sleeping together (the first indicator being in the “Némorin” line).

It is the “bon” in “bon ami” which is especially notable in this context. Normally, the phrase ‘mon ami’ was only really reserved for close friends— which is interesting enough anyway, as even under these circumstances it certainly indicates that Éponine perceives herself to be very close to Montparnasse. But, the added ‘mon bon ami’ indicates an even closer relationship than ‘mon ami’ does. While the term cannot be used as an indicator of any sort of formal relationship going on between Montparnasse and Éponine, it certainly is suggestive.

Why would Hugo bother using this ambiguous phrase here? Well, to me it appears to be a purposeful call-back to the couple’s rendezvous on the night of the failed Gorbeau ambush— where Montparnasse was “être Némorin” with Éponine. However, it should be noted that “mon bon ami” is a far more suggestive indication that these characters might’ve actually shared more of a ‘romantic’ relationship than the “Némorin” line does (which, in context, only really suggests that Montparnasse and Éponine slept together on the night of the Gorbeau ambush).

Additionally, in this particular moment I feel it is crucial for readers to acknowledge the semi-infrequent, potentially partially romantic dynamic that exists between these characters, as it makes things all the more crushing when we then see Montparnasse turn around and threaten Éponine’s life at the end of this scene—so perhaps that was also a motivating factor for the suggestive line to feature in this chapter.

Because of the phrase’s multiple meanings, there have been a myriad of different ways that ‘mon bon ami’ has been translated over time. I have compiled how these lines appear in every major English translation of Les Misérables below, excluding the A. F. Richard translation (1863), since it cut the rue Plumet scene. Sidenote, these below examples are really great indicators of just how different some of these translations are!:

"Mon petit Montparnasse," répondit Éponine très doucement, "il faut avoir confiance dans les gens. Je suis la fille de mon père peut-être." [...] "Mon bon ami monsieur Montparnasse", dit Éponine, "je vous en prie, vous qui êtes bon enfant, n'entrez pas!"

—In original French, 1862

"My darling Montparnasse," answered Éponine very gently, "we must have confidence in people. I am my father's daughter, perhaps." [...] "My good friend Monsieur Montparnasse," said Éponine, "I beg you, you who are a good boy, don't go in!"

—Wilbour trans., 1862

"My dear Montparnasse," Éponine replied very gently, "confidence ought to be placed in people, and I am my father's daughter, perhaps." [...] "My kind M. Montparnasse," Éponine said, "I ask you, who are a good fellow, not to go in."

—Wraxhall trans., 1862

"My little Montparnasse," responded Éponine very gently, "you must have confidence in people. I am the daughter of my father, perhaps." [...] My good friend, Mr. Montparnasse," said Éponine, "I entreat you, you are a good fellow, don’t enter."

—Hapgood trans., 1887

"Montparnasse, my love," said Éponine very sweetly, "you must learn to trust people. Aren't I my father's daughter?" [...] "Montparnasse, you're my friend," said Éponine, "you're a good lad. Don't go in!"

—Denny trans., 1976

"My darling Montparnasse," answered Éponine very gently, "we must have confidence in people. I am my father's daughter, perhaps." [...] "My good friend Monsieur Montparnasse," said Éponine, "I beg you, you're a good boy, don't go in!"

—Wilbour trans. revised by Lee Fahnestock and Norman MacAfee. 1987

"My dear Montparnasse," Éponine replied very sweetly, "you must learn to trust people. I am my father's daughter, after all." [...] "My very dear friend, Monsieur Montparnasse," said Éponine, "please, you're a good boy, don’t go in!"

—Rose trans., 2007

"My dear Montparnasse," Éponine replied very softly, "you should trust people. I'm my father's daughter, after all." [...] "My dear friend, Monsieur Montparnasse," said Éponine, "you're a decent lad, I beg you not to go in there."

I thought I would compile a handy reference sheet of all the locations we see the Patron-Minette and their affiliates (both formal and informal) at different points of the novel. The 1832 map that I used can be found at this website— the site was really accessible and has a handy tool that lets you compare this old map directly to a modern-day map of Paris by overlaying.

Anyway, without further ado, here is the map featuring all geographic information relating to the Patron-Minette. Please expand this post to see the corresponding list of location names and find out what happens at each location. At the end of this post, you can also find a “short note” where I dissect and speculate some of the movements during the sections of the novel that centre around La Force specifically.

Click for higher quality and ability to zoom in on each numbered point. Sorry that I can’t make the image any clearer!

Two illustrations of Patron-Minette's escape from La Force

Javert at Gorbeau House

by Mead Schaeffer

montparnasse commission for @patron-minette !!