The Three Musketeers
Ratings277
Average rating3.9
Checked this out from the library on audiobook. Only the first half was there. So I have to check it out again. Here are my thoughts on the first half.
http://bookwi.se/thoughts-on-three-musketeers-by-alexander-dumas/
The Three Musketeers by Alexandre Dumas is a famed classic adventure novel. It tells the adventurous tales of four young soldiers, three musketeers and one young man (D'Artagnan) aspiring to be one.
The narrative flow of this book went like this - D'Artagnan picks a fight with someone, his three compatriots (Athos, Porthos & Aramis) join him in the fight, they win regardless of how many odds were stacked against them.
The motives for picking the aforementioned fights keep on changing and these motives are supposed to drive the plot forward.
Herein lies my main concern, the first half of the book portrays the entire party of cardinals as the antagonists and the royalists as the protagonists but the second half transforms into a revenge plot against one of the cardinal's minions (Milady) and the punishment she receives at the hands of the musketeers is the conclusion.
As the reader, there's no particular resolution regarding the tumultuous relationship between the cardinalists and the royalists.
Frankly, it felt like the book made big promises but failed to deliver them.
P.S. I didn't mention the sexist remarks made by the musketeers here because well I should have known what I signed up for when I chose to read a classic about the machismo of soldiers in early 17th century.
A genuine classic. The adventures of d'Artagnan and the three musketeers is one that I am glad has continued to thrive throughout the ages. A story I hope everyone at least attempts to engage with, for it is stories like these that make us better human beings.
This story is filled to the brim with action, adventure, romance, mystery, intrigue, and so so much more.
There is something in this book for everyone.
Simply the best classic author I've ever read. His flow is much easier to read then other classic authors like James F. Cooper. This story has multiple protagonists that you love and loathe for different reasons. d'Artnen for example is brave and chivalrous but any girl he sees he falls in love with no matter how vile the creature may be cough cough* Milady, or should I say Anne de Breuil. Milady just might be one of the best antagonists that has ever been written in classical literature. Bravo Monsieur Dumas!
Maybe 3 to 3.5 stars. Entertaining enough, but overall riddled with so much time-period-specific issues that are too prominent for me to sweep under the carpet while reading with my modern lenses, and everything/everyone felt like a gender-role caricature, not even just a stereotype.
d'Artagnan is a young Gascon who travels to Paris to fulfil his life's ambition - to be part of the Musketeers. Along the way, his letter of recommendation from his father to the Treville, the Captain of the Musketeers, is stolen by a mysterious man. As such, d'Artagnan is instead assigned to the King's Guards, but becomes fast friends with three musketeers that he meets and fights along the way, Athos, Aramis, and Porthos. Their friendship tides them over the various challenges and plots that they uncover being laid out by the Cardinal Richelieu and his own guards, who have historically been the enemies of the Musketeers.
There's really not much to say in terms of plot - everything feels rather episodic in nature (which probably makes a lot more sense given that it was serialised when originally published) and there isn't really an overarching hook to it all, except maybe a vague sense that the four friends are defending themselves against various hidden enemies.
The biggest issue when it came to reading the book was how much the characters felt like caricatures of gender stereotypes of that age. The three (or four) musketeers come across as huge tools overall. They randomly gamble precious horses and equipment away for no good reason, randomly fall in love with any pretty face and then come up with schemes to try to sleep with said women, or just spout a ton of misogynistic philosophies. In the opening few chapters, d'Artaganan was willing to duel with anyone who judged him for the colour of the horse that he sits on.
The female characters were decidedly worse, either being entirely too easily won over by a few sentences of professed love from men, and then becoming massively attached to them to the point of aiding and abetting their nefarious schemes against other people (both men and women), or being ridiculously evil and villainous. Surprisingly enough, the main villain in this story was probably one of the female characters and not, in fact, the Cardinal or Rochefort as I had gone in expecting. She is described as entirely lacking in any sort of feeling, and, of course, being only a woman, she falls back on her womanly wily ways of utilising temptation and seduction to lure all these good, honourable men to their downfalls. It's not an accident that she's compared to your classic serpent more than once.
So if it wasn't enough that I couldn't find myself rooting for any one character in the book, I also couldn't root for any relationship in the book either. Almost every romance in the book is extra-marital and almost always founded on either insta-lust or avarice, in the case of Porthos sticking with his (married) mistress for the sake of accessing her husband's riches. Of course, the narrative points out and laughs at this said mistress for being old (50+ years old) and not handsome, and she is described as being a complete sucker for Porthos.
Possibly the main relationship of the book, d'Artagnan's love for Mme. Bonacieux, the young wife of a middle-aged mercer, is founded on a classic “love at first sight” moment. Aside from perhaps two or three meetings in which they barely spend any time getting to know each other, they barely meet for most of the book, but yet so much of the plot is driven by their “relationship” which is hard to believe. It also makes it hard to root for when, throughout this time, d'Artagnan isn't impervious to the charms of other women, and actively courts and sleeps with them. It is only when he realises that his other amours aren't quite who they seemed they were that he suddenly recalls his love for Mme. Bonacieux.
I can't help comparing this book with the Count of Monte Cristo, which was the first Dumas I read and not too long ago. While I thought there had been problems with female characters in COMC, it wasn't quite as bad as in this one. I get that this was all written in the 1840s and I generally try to close one or even both eyes to these time-specific issues (which I did for COMC in rating it 5 stars), but the ones in this book were really hard to ignore for some reason. Further, I felt like COMC had an overarching plot that I could get really invested in and every chapter felt like a purposeful step towards an ending that I was really interested in witnessing. This wasn't the case for The Three Musketeers though, which felt like episodic adventures of four man-boys.
Quel plaisir de relire « Les Trois Mousquetaires » et de redécouvrir les aventures de D'Artagnan, Athos, Porthos et Aramis ! Je crois que c'est la troisième fois que je lis ce célèbre roman d'Alexandre Dumas et je prends fois un plaisir plus grand à replonger dans ce grand roman de cape et d'épée.
Je vais enchaîner directement avec la suite, « Vingt ans après ».
This book reads somewhat like the stereotypical Spanish soap opera. It's an entertaining read but I found myself thinking “of all the adventure stories released around the 1840s why is this one the classic? Why is this the breakout?”
I enjoyed it enough to read to the end but I wouldn't consider it anything more than really entertaining pulp (semi-historical) fiction.
3.5 Stars
I found this story both amusing and, so far as the finalé is concerned, a bit anti-climactic. I was in love with the characters from beginning to end. The writting was fun and Dumas should be known more widely as a wise ass, always cracking dry jokes at the expense of one character or another.
I loved The Count of Monte Cristo, but this one just didn't hit the mark for me. Glad to have finally read it though!
A fun and energetic tale of adventure and friendship. The characters feel real enough that, even across the intense cultural differences, they still feel like a modern group of friends
WHAT
A quintessential adventure consisting of a few distinct plots woven together through the recounting of the daily life of mighty figures from the 17th century French aristocracy. The King, the Cardinal (his main advisor), the Queen and four members of France's elite guard known as the Musketeers, all play an important role on this spectacular tale of bravery, loyalty and intrigue. The book feels a bit too mundane at some parts, and there is nothing epic about any of the plots, but the wit and charm of the main characters and the interesting situations they mix themselves with make this a worthwhile read.
TLDR
+ Friendship, bravery and loyalty unmatched by the four musketeers
+ Distinct characters fleshed out with interesting motivations
+ Interesting plots and intrigues, for a reality based (as opposed to epic fantasy) adventure
+ Humor helps to dissolve the absurdity of some scenes
- main character transitions from brash and foolish to prudent and wise in the blink of an eye
- unbelievable villain: I liked Milady fine until the part where she is held captive, which nearly ruined the book for me
- at times the book feels like having too much filler content
PLOT
The young d'Artagnan leaves his home and heads out to Paris, seeking to enlist himself with the King's Musketeers. Upon arrival, he manages to accidentally and consecutively insult three musketeers by the name of Aramis, Athos, and Porthos. He schedules a duel with each of them, but circumstances leads them to become the best of friends. Together they find themselves in mortal danger in defense of the honor and virtue the King and Queen, making in the way a powerful enemy in the of the figure of the Cardinal Richelieu.
The adventures of the main characters are told through distinct main story arcs, like the return of the Queen's Diamonds and The Siege of La Rochelle.
ANALYSIS
The four musketeers are not heroes. They have more vices than virtues. The very first scene of the book describes d'Artagnan as an impetuous sword fighter that seeks to duel and kill anything that moves. He settles his lust for combat by attacking a man just because he was laughing with his friends.
Athos is misogynous and arrogant. He believes his noble birth puts him above other men. He forced a vow of silence on his servant. He advised d'Artagnan to get himself a servant as the most necessary thing he should do. Upon acquiring such servant and not being able to pay him after a while, d'Artagnan decides to beat him up in order to keep him from complaining. When he sees that his method worked, he is very please with himself.
Porthos is avaricious, a glutton and a womanizer. They all are gamblers and ruffians that seek to duel, and often kill, anyone that looks at them the wrong way. They destroy public property without any consideration. They see in the Cardinal, the second in authority in France, as an enemy for the sole reason that he divided the musketeers in King's Musketeers and Cardinal musketeers. They will do whatever they can to thwart his plans, even when those plans would benefit the country.
Cardinal Richelieu is a machiavellian and powerful character. He is a true patriot, willing to do anything necessary for the good of France. He is the one who actually rules France, by negotiating with foreign ministers, deciding when to wage wars, keeping himself informed through a network of spies, coordinating assassinations and intricate blackmails.
I found the Cardinal be the hero of the story, the only one willing to do what it takes to get the job done, even in detriment to his own desires. He is flawed as well though, because his rejected love for the Queen guides some of his actions.
The book pays special attention to the musketeers servants as well, giving each of them a distinct personality and important roles to play during the events of the book.
The book looses some of its focus in between events and mostly towards the end. There are whole sections without any action, intrigue or interesting character involved. I kept reading on waiting for the next adventure to begin, but dismissing those passages as just fillers to the story.
There was one thing though that nearly destroyed the whole experience for me, and that was the scene where Milady was held captive by her brother in law. That whole portion of the book lacked the kind of wit I enjoy reading. There were no plot play/counter-play involved. Milady says she is going do something, spend the next many pages doing it, then moves on to the next thing.
Her brother in law says to the man he entrusted to keep her confined in a bedroom that she is the devil, that she is capable of the most outrageous acts and lies to get what she wants. He describes in details how she will try to seduce him, and act the role of the damsel in distress. The man truly believes him. Yet in a matter of 3 days or so he not only he helps her escape, but also goes on to kill Lord Buckingham, his country's own second in command in the war against France.The thing I was expecting the most in that whole scene was that the guard knew he was being played all along, that Milady whole act was just a ruse. But he decided to make her think he was believing her in order to make her more compliant, and then in the end he would crush her by telling how all her attempts were futile against his superior strength of character.I was also hoping that when Milady met Madame Bonacieux at the convent that the musketeers would have already reached her beforehand, and warned her. So when she mentioned them by name, they would suddenly appear and apprehend her.
The book has some clever and funny situations that I really enjoyed. During the Siege of La Rochelle, the four musketeers decided to go alone and unarmed into an abandoned Bastion in the middle of the battlefield in order to have breakfast. They knew that at any time the enemy would try to capture the Bastion, yet they kept cool and calm eating while attempts were being made to take the place by force.
Although I've seen most of the movies based on this novel in the last 25 years, I never got around to reading it until now. I also downloaded the Audible.com edition and listened to about two-thirds of the story narrated by a fellow named John Lee, who did a sensational job voicing all the characters. Dumas' book was every bit as exciting as I hoped it would be.
I finally finished it. Over seven hundred pages. And I finished it.
It was fantastic. Plots and schemes. Duels. Men thrown in prisons. Gambling. Sword play. Admirable women and treacherous women. Friendships among men. Loyalty. Struggles for power.
My favorite read of the year. Not sure anything else could even come close.
To be honest, that really surprises me. I never dreamed I would love The Three Musketeers like I do.
Ever read something you'd expected to hate but found yourself loving?
