What do you think?
Rate this book
Trilogie des Mousquetaires #1
螣喂 蟿蟻蔚喂蟼 蟽蠅渭伪蟿慰蠁蠉位伪魏蔚蟼
[...] 螖喂畏纬蔚委蟿伪喂 蟿喂蟼 蟺蔚蟻喂蟺苇蟿蔚喂蔚蟼 蔚谓蠈蟼 伪蟺苇谓蟿伪蟻慰蠀 未蔚魏伪慰魏蟿维蠂蟻慰谓慰蠀 螕伪蟽魏蠈谓慰蠀, 蟿慰蠀 螡蟿' 螒蟻蟿伪谓喂维谓, 蟺慰蠀 苇蟻蠂蔚蟿伪喂 蟽蟿慰 螤伪蟻委蟽喂 纬喂伪 谓伪 魏维谓蔚喂 魏伪蟻喂苇蟻伪 蠅蟼 蟽蠅渭伪蟿慰蠁蠉位伪魏伪蟼 蟿慰蠀 尾伪蟽喂位喂维. 危蟿畏 蟽蠀谓苇蠂蔚喂伪 胃伪 蟽蠀谓伪谓蟿萎蟽蔚喂 蟿慰蠀蟼 (萎未畏) 蟽蠅渭伪蟿慰蠁蠉位伪魏蔚蟼 (蟺喂蟽蟿蠈蟿伪蟿慰蠀蟼 蟽蟿蟻伪蟿喂蠋蟿蔚蟼, 蟿伪纬渭苇谓慰蠀蟼 蟽蟿慰 蟺位蔚蠀蟻蠈 蟿慰蠀 尾伪蟽喂位喂维 螞慰蠀未慰尾委魏慰蠀 螜螕'), 螁胃蠅, 螤蠈蟻胃慰 魏伪喂 螁蟻伪渭畏, 魏伪喂 胃伪 蟽蠀谓未蔚胃蔚委 渭伪味委 蟿慰蠀蟼 渭蔚 尾伪胃喂维 蠁喂位委伪. 螝伪喂 慰喂 蟿苇蟽蟽蔚蟻喂蟼 胃伪 伪谓蟿喂蟽蟿伪胃慰蠉谓 魏伪喂 胃伪 蟺慰位蔚渭位畏蟽慰蠀谓 蟿慰谓 魏伪蟻未喂谓维位喂慰 巍喂蟽蔚位喂苇, 蟿慰蠀蟼 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺慰蠀蟼 蟿畏蟼 蔚渭蟺喂蟽蟿慰蟽蠉谓畏蟼 蟿慰蠀 魏伪喂 蟿慰蠀蟼 渭蠀蟽蟿喂魏慰蠉蟼 蟺蟻维魏蟿慰蟻苇蟼 蟿慰蠀, 渭蔚蟿伪尉蠉 蟿蠅谓 慰蟺慰委蠅谓 蔚委谓伪喂 慰 魏蠈渭畏蟼 螡蟿蔚 巍慰蟽蠁蠈蟻 魏伪喂 畏 蠈渭慰蟻蠁畏 魏伪喂 渭蠀蟽蟿畏蟻喂蠋未畏蟼 渭喂位伪委未畏 螡蟿蔚 螕慰蠀委谓蟿蔚蟻, 渭蔚 蟽魏慰蟺蠈 谓伪 蟽蠋蟽慰蠀谓 蟿畏谓 蟿喂渭萎 蟿畏蟼 螁谓谓伪蟼 蟿畏蟼 螒蠀蟽蟿蟻委伪蟼, 蟿畏蟼 尾伪蟽委位喂蟽蟽伪蟼 蟿畏蟼 螕伪位位委伪蟼 (1601-1666). [...] (螒蟺蠈 蟿畏谓 蔚喂蟽伪纬蠅纬萎 蟿慰蠀 尾喂尾位委慰蠀)
500 pages, Leather Bound
First published July 1, 1844
16.7k people are currently reading
279k people want to read
About the author
Alexandre Dumas
9,463听books11.8k听followersThis note regards Alexandre Dumas, p猫re, the father of Alexandre Dumas, fils (son). For the son, see Alexandre Dumas fils.
Alexandre Dumas, p猫re (French for "father", akin to Senior in English), born Dumas Davy de la Pailleterie, was a French writer, best known for his numerous historical novels of high adventure which have made him one of the most widely read French authors in the world. Many of his novels, including The Count of Monte Cristo, The Three Musketeers, and The Vicomte de Bragelonne were serialized. Dumas also wrote plays and magazine articles, and was a prolific correspondent.
Dumas was of Haitian descent and mixed-race. His father, General Thomas-Alexandre Dumas Davy de la Pailleterie, was born in the French colony of Saint-Domingue (present-day Haiti) to Alexandre Antoine Davy de la Pailleterie, a French nobleman, and Marie-Cessette Dumas, a black slave. At age 14 Thomas-Alexandre was taken by his father to France, where he was educated in a military academy and entered the military for what became an illustrious career.
Dumas's father's aristocratic rank helped young Alexandre Dumas acquire work with Louis-Philippe, Duke of Orl茅ans, then as a writer, finding early success. He became one of the leading authors of the French Romantic Movement, in Paris.
Excerpted from .
Alexandre Dumas, p猫re (French for "father", akin to Senior in English), born Dumas Davy de la Pailleterie, was a French writer, best known for his numerous historical novels of high adventure which have made him one of the most widely read French authors in the world. Many of his novels, including The Count of Monte Cristo, The Three Musketeers, and The Vicomte de Bragelonne were serialized. Dumas also wrote plays and magazine articles, and was a prolific correspondent.
Dumas was of Haitian descent and mixed-race. His father, General Thomas-Alexandre Dumas Davy de la Pailleterie, was born in the French colony of Saint-Domingue (present-day Haiti) to Alexandre Antoine Davy de la Pailleterie, a French nobleman, and Marie-Cessette Dumas, a black slave. At age 14 Thomas-Alexandre was taken by his father to France, where he was educated in a military academy and entered the military for what became an illustrious career.
Dumas's father's aristocratic rank helped young Alexandre Dumas acquire work with Louis-Philippe, Duke of Orl茅ans, then as a writer, finding early success. He became one of the leading authors of the French Romantic Movement, in Paris.
Excerpted from .
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 10,419 reviews
March 18, 2020
This is not the most profound of novels, but it may be the most compelling. Many of its sequences--the Diamond Studs, Milady's seduction of Felton, the attempt of D'Artagnan and The Three to rescue Constance--move with remarkable rapidity. More notable than these, however, is the entire exposition, something many novelists have found to be a thankless chore, if not a stumbling block. It occupies a full sixty pages, 10% of the book, and, although it covers much ground--the introduction of our hero, the two principal villains, and all three Musketeers with their eccentricities and distinct characters, plus the fight with the Cardinal's Guards, the emergence of D'Artagnan as the "fourth musketeer," and an examination of the curious relationship between King and Cardinal--it is constructed with such seamless grace, accomplishes its purposes with such a light touch, and moves so swiftly that the result is astonishing.
Sir Walter Scott showed us that the personal is political, that our most particular, most intimate decisions are governed by the political milieu in which we are raised and the allegiances that our background requires. Dumas adopts the contrary principle, namely, that the political is personal: a siege may be lifted, a war started, because an English Duke loves a French Queen. It seems at times that all the characters of "The Three Musketeers"--even the King and the Cardinal, even that most gifted and ruthless of femme fatales, Milady--are satellites circling the binary star of Buckingham and l'Autriche, whose doomed love is the center of this impossible--and delightful--romantic universe.
September 15, 2011
I thought that couldn't be topped. I should have known better.
Honestly, I do not have enough space to fully explain all the ways I adore this book. But I'll try to condense it.
-First, the four main characters. Love, love, love, and more love. Aramis and Porthos - the Merry and Pippin of the group, if you'll excuse the extremely dorkish LOTR cross-reference - made me laugh; D'Artagnan was charming even though (or maybe because) he had multiple moments where, were I in the story, I wouldn't know whether to kiss him or smack him upside the head; and the pure unfiltered AWESOME that is Athos cannot be put into words.
-My copy of the book is 754 pages, but I was able to finish it in less than two weeks and not even notice the length because the story was so engrossing. As soon as I finished it, I wanted to flip back to page 1 and start all over again.
-Duels. Lots and lots of duels.
-The only complaint I had regarding the other Dumas book I'd read before this (, as previously mentioned) was that there was a total lack of what I will bluntly call the dirty details. In Margot, all the sex scenes were kept out of the way and, judging by the description Dumas gave us of the characters' nighttime activities, no one managed to get laid for the entire book. The Three Musketeers, on the other hand, is by no means a bodice-ripper but is still very romantic. And then there's the scene where D'Artagnan decides that nailing Milady will be a good way to get revenge on her for kidnapping his girlfriend. Which brings me to my next point...
-Milady. Holy crap. I try to come up with words to describe her, but I can't do it because my brain sort of slows down until all I can hear are the words "Most. Badass. Character. Ever." repeating in my head over and over while the song "Cold Hard Bitch" by JET starts playing in the background. (if that makes any sense at all. Just go with it, okay?)
But seriously, let's talk about Milady for a minute. She keeps poison in her ring, seduces a guard who has been specifically warned that she'll try to seduce him, stabs herself in the chest to make people think she killed herself, regularly tries to assassinate D'Artagnan and his friends, and was generally such a psychotic bitch that even Cardinal Richelieu was afraid of her.
UPDATE
Dear Hollywood,
What the is wrong with you?
Seriously, fuck you guys.
Love,
Madeline
Honestly, I do not have enough space to fully explain all the ways I adore this book. But I'll try to condense it.
-First, the four main characters. Love, love, love, and more love. Aramis and Porthos - the Merry and Pippin of the group, if you'll excuse the extremely dorkish LOTR cross-reference - made me laugh; D'Artagnan was charming even though (or maybe because) he had multiple moments where, were I in the story, I wouldn't know whether to kiss him or smack him upside the head; and the pure unfiltered AWESOME that is Athos cannot be put into words.
-My copy of the book is 754 pages, but I was able to finish it in less than two weeks and not even notice the length because the story was so engrossing. As soon as I finished it, I wanted to flip back to page 1 and start all over again.
-Duels. Lots and lots of duels.
-The only complaint I had regarding the other Dumas book I'd read before this (, as previously mentioned) was that there was a total lack of what I will bluntly call the dirty details. In Margot, all the sex scenes were kept out of the way and, judging by the description Dumas gave us of the characters' nighttime activities, no one managed to get laid for the entire book. The Three Musketeers, on the other hand, is by no means a bodice-ripper but is still very romantic. And then there's the scene where D'Artagnan decides that nailing Milady will be a good way to get revenge on her for kidnapping his girlfriend. Which brings me to my next point...
-Milady. Holy crap. I try to come up with words to describe her, but I can't do it because my brain sort of slows down until all I can hear are the words "Most. Badass. Character. Ever." repeating in my head over and over while the song "Cold Hard Bitch" by JET starts playing in the background. (if that makes any sense at all. Just go with it, okay?)
But seriously, let's talk about Milady for a minute. She keeps poison in her ring, seduces a guard who has been specifically warned that she'll try to seduce him, stabs herself in the chest to make people think she killed herself, regularly tries to assassinate D'Artagnan and his friends, and was generally such a psychotic bitch that even Cardinal Richelieu was afraid of her.
UPDATE
Dear Hollywood,
What the is wrong with you?
Seriously, fuck you guys.
Love,
Madeline
September 3, 2024
This review has been a long time coming. I read The Three Musketeers last year in August. Back then, I had high expectations for the book because a couple of months prior, Dumas鈥� The Count of Monte Cristo had become one of my favorite novels of all time and I couldn鈥檛 wait to check out more by this brilliant writer. Unfortunately, The Three Musketeers was a huge disappointment. Sure, there were some funny scenes and captivating moments but all in all, I was truly shocked by how unlikeable (and highly problematic!) our four main protagonists were.
D鈥橝rtagnan, Athos, Porthos and Aramis are absolute shit-heads; so much so that I simply couldn鈥檛 root for them at all. But before we get into it, let鈥檚 set the scene and remind ourselves what The Three Musketeers is actually about: It is the year of our Lord 1625. D'Artagnan, a young nobleman from Gascony, has just arrived in Paris to become a King's musketeer. There he meets Athos, Porthos and Aramis, as well as the Queen's beautiful maid, Constance.
Soon he is involved in an intrigue that involves the fate of all of France. Cardinal Richelieu, prime minister of King Louis XIII, is doing everything he can to discredit the Queen in order to further expand his own power in the Kingdom. Heeding his advice, the King is giving a grand ball at which the Queen is to wear the King's gift: a magnificent piece of jewellery with diamond studs. Unfortunately, however, she had given these jewels to her lover, the English prime minister Lord Buckingham.
The affair is highly explosive, all the more so because relations between the two countries are very tense. England supports the Protestant rebels of La Rochelle, which is besieged by Louis XIII in a long and gruelling campaign. With the honor of a lady and the stability of the Kingdom at stake, our musketeers decide to intervene. However, the scheming Cardinal has a trump card: his agent, the diabolical Milady de Winter, who will do anything to derail their mission.
So far, so good. It sounds like a conventional adventure tale that is bound to have you on the edge of your seat and rooting for the musketeers to preserve the Queen鈥檚 honor. Well, it didn鈥檛 turn out this way. When actually reading the book, it becomes crystal clear that our supposed heroes鈥擜thos, Porthos, Aramis, and D鈥橝rtagnan鈥攁re actually cruel and criminal. All they do is drink, steal, swindle, or seduce people of lower social classes. Their behaviour is absolutely appalling and disgusting. They even kill other members of their nation鈥檚 legitimate military and peacekeeping forces for petty reasons.
And to top it all of, D鈥橝rtagnan, who is supposed to be our lovely and ambitious country boy, rapes Milady. Yes, you read that right. He actually rapes her. What makes this even more iffy is the fact that most translations of Dumas鈥� classic have glossed over and altered this scene. However, when you look at the source material it becomes clear that d鈥橝rtagnan (in that one fateful scene) pretended to be Milady鈥檚 lover, the Count de Wardes, to coerce her into sleeping with him. [If you鈥檙e interested in this particular aspect of the story I can only recommend the Richard Pevear translation, as it is the only English translation that is truthful to the source material.]
So, yeah, our 鈥渉eroes鈥�, the people we are supposed to be rooting for, are actually deeply horrible and, quite frankly, disgusting people. The only character who made this novel worth reading was Milady de Winter. In my humble opinion, she is one of the most interesting female characters that were created in this period. She is among the first literary Femmes Fatales to be openly written as the primary villain of a story.
Irresistible, merciless and without remorse鈥攖his is how she is described in The Three Musketeers. At the tender age of 22, she has already had an impressive career, including a stint in prison, during which she was given a dishonorable brand on her shoulder, marking her as a criminal.
She hid the mark (probably under the pretext of chastity) from her later husband, the Comte de la F猫re. But he eventually discovered it, and then tried to hang her (I know 鈥� classy). He then ran away and took the name Athos, under which he served the French king as a musketeer. However, the lady's pretty neck withstood the rope, and the two walked the earth believing that their respective partner was dead.
Whilst Athos was off fighting for the King, Milady also made a name for herself as a capable and beautiful spy who offers assassinations of high dignitaries in exchange for the elimination of her own enemies. At age 22, she truly was that bitch and had all the men in her nearest vicinity shook. I mean, she kept poison in her ring (for emergency purposes, duh), she seduced men left and right (even those who were explicitly warned about her), she planned the assassination of her enemies with success, she fucking stabbed herself to prove a point (which is a fucking mood) and she raised herself from being a beggarly nun to a respected lady-spy with millions at her disposal.
And even though she is written in such a badass way, it鈥檚 still interesting to think about the paradoxes in how she is portrayed. I mean, she is described as being brilliant, seductive, ruthless, and demonic, so much so that the musketeers are actually terrified of her. However, at the same time, she also often outwitted and fooled. [I mean, not to re-hash the rape scene but it does make you wonder why she didn鈥檛 recognise d鈥橝rtagnan in the dark 鈥� it鈥檚 just such a lazily written plot-device, I cant.]
And so, on the one hand, Milady is demonized, which was indispensable because her head does roll by the end of the novel (I know, it鈥檚 so sad, I鈥檓 still not over it), so Dumas needed to clearly brand her as the enemy and leave little room for empathy for her, so that he could kill her off in peace without getting shit from his readers. But on the other hand, we are also supposed to root for our 鈥渉eroes鈥� and therefore, they have to outsmart her, even though that鈥檚 kinda illogical, since Milady has been portrayed as this demonic mastermind all along. It鈥檚 just a little too convenient. And if you, like me, didn鈥檛 fall into the trap of thinking of the musketeers as 鈥渉eroes鈥�, then the treatment of Milady throughout the novel becomes even more infuriating and appalling.
I said it in a video before but I truly think that Milady and Edmond (from The Count of Monte Cristo) are two sides of the same coin. They are eerily similar, but while the former is treated like the ultimate source of evil in her tale, the latter is hailed as the hero in his. Just like the Count, Milady comes from nothing. At a young age she is condemned and whipped (by a priest in a convent) and thrown into jail. And whilst Edmond鈥檚 prison break is admittedly more iconic, Milady鈥檚 is also legendary (and somewhat more realistic): she simply seduces her jailer. We stan.
After being branded on her chest with the fleur-de-lis (the mark of a criminal/ prostitute) and all that bullshit between her and Athos, Milady, just like Edmond, has to reinvent herself in order to make a name in high society for her. And she succeeds at that. Just like the Count, she has to mask her true identity in order to stay on the playing field, also by use of various different aliases. [If the two of them had to go head to head in regards to who came up with more ridiculous code names, I鈥檓 not sure who would win.] And, most importantly, the two also share the same ultimate goal, the same reason that drives all of their actions: the execution of revenge on the men who have wronged them in the past.
So, as you can see, they鈥檙e basically the same character but because Edmond is a man (and therefore a protagonist) he is allowed to thrive and be celebrated, while Milady is that evil bitch that gets guillotined by the end of the book. Not fucking fair.
All that remains to say is that The Three Musketeers left much to be desired. We think of D鈥橝rtagnan and his crew as heroes, simply because we鈥檙e told they are. But if we actually look at what is shown, we will quickly realize how despicable and horrifying most of their actions are. And then, this supposedly funny adventurous romp reveals itself to be what it truly is at its core: problematic, unoriginal and not fucking funny at all.
//
Original GIF "review":
18/8/2019: Watch me fight all the people who dislike Milady but love the Count... meanwhile, her true identity is concealed by various aliases and her main goal in the story is to get revenge on the men who hurt her, so they're basically the same character. In this essay I will...
18/8/2019: The moment I realised the only reason why the Cardinal wanted to take down the Queen was that she had previously rejected his advances...
17/8/2019: I was really out here thinking that Constance would survive this hot mess of an abduction and escape plan, and that she and d'Artagnan would live happily ever after. *sobs*
17/8/2019: Milady really was that bitch: kept poison in her ring, stabbed herself to prove a point, seduced a man who was warned as not to be seduced by her, planned the assassination of her enemies with success, evoked fear in the Cardinal himself, raised herself from being a nun to a prostitute over to a respected lady (and spy for the government) with millions at her disposal, whilst being 22.
16/8/2019: Athos is really out here trying to convince me that he has nothing against women and never had any complain of them, meanwhile he鈥檚 the guy who hanged his own wife after he found out she used to be a prostitute.
16/8/2019: Aramis is really out here trying to convince me that he鈥檚 a man of God and only an interim musketeer, meanwhile all he does is sulk over his mistress and conduct secret meetings with women at night.
15/8/2019: When the Cardinal sat a trap for Queen Anne, d鈥橝rtagnan and Constance moved heaven and earth to get the diamond pendants she gave to Buckingham back from London, only so she could bust them out and laugh in the Cardinal鈥檚 face. What a mood!
15/8/2019: I have to work today so I won't be able to read anything and I'm already mad ... I was just about to find out about Athos's wife. Argh. He's my mysterious fave.
14/8/2019: I, too, deserve friends who would travel across countries and risk their lives because of a romantic notion that I have but no, I can't even get a text back.
13/8/2019: Constance is really out here telling her husband he's an imbecile and a scoundrel, while still scheming away to protect her queen. D'Artagnan, I, too, would die for her!
12/8/2019: I'm only a hundred pages in but d'Artagnan is already my trash child; has challenged 4+ dudes to a duel for petty reasons and in general, lets his mouth get him into situations his ass can't handle. Ya gurl is here for it.
7/8/2019: The book has arrived and I am already quaking in my seat! The only question I have is why the fuck the book is called The Three Musketeers? D'Artagnan is looking at Dumas like ... AM I A JOKE TO YOU?
2/8/2019: I just ordered this and I am beyond excited!!! If this is even half as good as The Count of Monte Cristo I will bow down before Dumas and get him into my olympus of favorite writers.
D鈥橝rtagnan, Athos, Porthos and Aramis are absolute shit-heads; so much so that I simply couldn鈥檛 root for them at all. But before we get into it, let鈥檚 set the scene and remind ourselves what The Three Musketeers is actually about: It is the year of our Lord 1625. D'Artagnan, a young nobleman from Gascony, has just arrived in Paris to become a King's musketeer. There he meets Athos, Porthos and Aramis, as well as the Queen's beautiful maid, Constance.
Soon he is involved in an intrigue that involves the fate of all of France. Cardinal Richelieu, prime minister of King Louis XIII, is doing everything he can to discredit the Queen in order to further expand his own power in the Kingdom. Heeding his advice, the King is giving a grand ball at which the Queen is to wear the King's gift: a magnificent piece of jewellery with diamond studs. Unfortunately, however, she had given these jewels to her lover, the English prime minister Lord Buckingham.
The affair is highly explosive, all the more so because relations between the two countries are very tense. England supports the Protestant rebels of La Rochelle, which is besieged by Louis XIII in a long and gruelling campaign. With the honor of a lady and the stability of the Kingdom at stake, our musketeers decide to intervene. However, the scheming Cardinal has a trump card: his agent, the diabolical Milady de Winter, who will do anything to derail their mission.
So far, so good. It sounds like a conventional adventure tale that is bound to have you on the edge of your seat and rooting for the musketeers to preserve the Queen鈥檚 honor. Well, it didn鈥檛 turn out this way. When actually reading the book, it becomes crystal clear that our supposed heroes鈥擜thos, Porthos, Aramis, and D鈥橝rtagnan鈥攁re actually cruel and criminal. All they do is drink, steal, swindle, or seduce people of lower social classes. Their behaviour is absolutely appalling and disgusting. They even kill other members of their nation鈥檚 legitimate military and peacekeeping forces for petty reasons.
And to top it all of, D鈥橝rtagnan, who is supposed to be our lovely and ambitious country boy, rapes Milady. Yes, you read that right. He actually rapes her. What makes this even more iffy is the fact that most translations of Dumas鈥� classic have glossed over and altered this scene. However, when you look at the source material it becomes clear that d鈥橝rtagnan (in that one fateful scene) pretended to be Milady鈥檚 lover, the Count de Wardes, to coerce her into sleeping with him. [If you鈥檙e interested in this particular aspect of the story I can only recommend the Richard Pevear translation, as it is the only English translation that is truthful to the source material.]
So, yeah, our 鈥渉eroes鈥�, the people we are supposed to be rooting for, are actually deeply horrible and, quite frankly, disgusting people. The only character who made this novel worth reading was Milady de Winter. In my humble opinion, she is one of the most interesting female characters that were created in this period. She is among the first literary Femmes Fatales to be openly written as the primary villain of a story.
Irresistible, merciless and without remorse鈥攖his is how she is described in The Three Musketeers. At the tender age of 22, she has already had an impressive career, including a stint in prison, during which she was given a dishonorable brand on her shoulder, marking her as a criminal.
She hid the mark (probably under the pretext of chastity) from her later husband, the Comte de la F猫re. But he eventually discovered it, and then tried to hang her (I know 鈥� classy). He then ran away and took the name Athos, under which he served the French king as a musketeer. However, the lady's pretty neck withstood the rope, and the two walked the earth believing that their respective partner was dead.
Whilst Athos was off fighting for the King, Milady also made a name for herself as a capable and beautiful spy who offers assassinations of high dignitaries in exchange for the elimination of her own enemies. At age 22, she truly was that bitch and had all the men in her nearest vicinity shook. I mean, she kept poison in her ring (for emergency purposes, duh), she seduced men left and right (even those who were explicitly warned about her), she planned the assassination of her enemies with success, she fucking stabbed herself to prove a point (which is a fucking mood) and she raised herself from being a beggarly nun to a respected lady-spy with millions at her disposal.
And even though she is written in such a badass way, it鈥檚 still interesting to think about the paradoxes in how she is portrayed. I mean, she is described as being brilliant, seductive, ruthless, and demonic, so much so that the musketeers are actually terrified of her. However, at the same time, she also often outwitted and fooled. [I mean, not to re-hash the rape scene but it does make you wonder why she didn鈥檛 recognise d鈥橝rtagnan in the dark 鈥� it鈥檚 just such a lazily written plot-device, I cant.]
And so, on the one hand, Milady is demonized, which was indispensable because her head does roll by the end of the novel (I know, it鈥檚 so sad, I鈥檓 still not over it), so Dumas needed to clearly brand her as the enemy and leave little room for empathy for her, so that he could kill her off in peace without getting shit from his readers. But on the other hand, we are also supposed to root for our 鈥渉eroes鈥� and therefore, they have to outsmart her, even though that鈥檚 kinda illogical, since Milady has been portrayed as this demonic mastermind all along. It鈥檚 just a little too convenient. And if you, like me, didn鈥檛 fall into the trap of thinking of the musketeers as 鈥渉eroes鈥�, then the treatment of Milady throughout the novel becomes even more infuriating and appalling.
I said it in a video before but I truly think that Milady and Edmond (from The Count of Monte Cristo) are two sides of the same coin. They are eerily similar, but while the former is treated like the ultimate source of evil in her tale, the latter is hailed as the hero in his. Just like the Count, Milady comes from nothing. At a young age she is condemned and whipped (by a priest in a convent) and thrown into jail. And whilst Edmond鈥檚 prison break is admittedly more iconic, Milady鈥檚 is also legendary (and somewhat more realistic): she simply seduces her jailer. We stan.
After being branded on her chest with the fleur-de-lis (the mark of a criminal/ prostitute) and all that bullshit between her and Athos, Milady, just like Edmond, has to reinvent herself in order to make a name in high society for her. And she succeeds at that. Just like the Count, she has to mask her true identity in order to stay on the playing field, also by use of various different aliases. [If the two of them had to go head to head in regards to who came up with more ridiculous code names, I鈥檓 not sure who would win.] And, most importantly, the two also share the same ultimate goal, the same reason that drives all of their actions: the execution of revenge on the men who have wronged them in the past.
So, as you can see, they鈥檙e basically the same character but because Edmond is a man (and therefore a protagonist) he is allowed to thrive and be celebrated, while Milady is that evil bitch that gets guillotined by the end of the book. Not fucking fair.
All that remains to say is that The Three Musketeers left much to be desired. We think of D鈥橝rtagnan and his crew as heroes, simply because we鈥檙e told they are. But if we actually look at what is shown, we will quickly realize how despicable and horrifying most of their actions are. And then, this supposedly funny adventurous romp reveals itself to be what it truly is at its core: problematic, unoriginal and not fucking funny at all.
//
Original GIF "review":
18/8/2019: Watch me fight all the people who dislike Milady but love the Count... meanwhile, her true identity is concealed by various aliases and her main goal in the story is to get revenge on the men who hurt her, so they're basically the same character. In this essay I will...
18/8/2019: The moment I realised the only reason why the Cardinal wanted to take down the Queen was that she had previously rejected his advances...
17/8/2019: I was really out here thinking that Constance would survive this hot mess of an abduction and escape plan, and that she and d'Artagnan would live happily ever after. *sobs*
17/8/2019: Milady really was that bitch: kept poison in her ring, stabbed herself to prove a point, seduced a man who was warned as not to be seduced by her, planned the assassination of her enemies with success, evoked fear in the Cardinal himself, raised herself from being a nun to a prostitute over to a respected lady (and spy for the government) with millions at her disposal, whilst being 22.
16/8/2019: Athos is really out here trying to convince me that he has nothing against women and never had any complain of them, meanwhile he鈥檚 the guy who hanged his own wife after he found out she used to be a prostitute.
16/8/2019: Aramis is really out here trying to convince me that he鈥檚 a man of God and only an interim musketeer, meanwhile all he does is sulk over his mistress and conduct secret meetings with women at night.
15/8/2019: When the Cardinal sat a trap for Queen Anne, d鈥橝rtagnan and Constance moved heaven and earth to get the diamond pendants she gave to Buckingham back from London, only so she could bust them out and laugh in the Cardinal鈥檚 face. What a mood!
15/8/2019: I have to work today so I won't be able to read anything and I'm already mad ... I was just about to find out about Athos's wife. Argh. He's my mysterious fave.
14/8/2019: I, too, deserve friends who would travel across countries and risk their lives because of a romantic notion that I have but no, I can't even get a text back.
13/8/2019: Constance is really out here telling her husband he's an imbecile and a scoundrel, while still scheming away to protect her queen. D'Artagnan, I, too, would die for her!
12/8/2019: I'm only a hundred pages in but d'Artagnan is already my trash child; has challenged 4+ dudes to a duel for petty reasons and in general, lets his mouth get him into situations his ass can't handle. Ya gurl is here for it.
7/8/2019: The book has arrived and I am already quaking in my seat! The only question I have is why the fuck the book is called The Three Musketeers? D'Artagnan is looking at Dumas like ... AM I A JOKE TO YOU?
2/8/2019: I just ordered this and I am beyond excited!!! If this is even half as good as The Count of Monte Cristo I will bow down before Dumas and get him into my olympus of favorite writers.
March 10, 2010
This is a kick-ass novel, and I am indeed kicking my own ass for not having read it earlier. I'm ashamed to say that I thought it was a children's book. My wife indignantly refuses any responsibility for my mistake... as she points out, it's entirely my fault if I drew the wrong inferences from the fact that her mother read it aloud to her as an eight year old. It turns out, on closer examination of the facts, that Elisabeth's mom must have skipped about a quarter of the text - but I digress. No, far from being a children's book, this is a noirish thriller, stuffed to the gills with violence, sex, nudity, dangerous blondes, corrupt politicians and random acts of mayhem and destruction. I should have known that. Anyway, better late than never.
Quite apart from being a terrific read - I just couldn't put it down - Les Trois Mousquetaires is a remarkably interesting book for anyone who's fond of French literature. The merest glance at will show you that I like both so-called serious novels and trash - as everyone knows, the French write the best trashy novels in the world. But what do these two literary traditions have to do with each other? I feel like a paleontologist who's discovered one of those missing links in the fossil record. A kind of literary coelocanth, it's exactly halfway between the two genres. Too well-written to be dismissed as trash, it still has so many of the defining characteristics of the modern French trash novel that it can't possibly be anything but a direct ancestor.
I'd hate to give away any of the plot - there's a twist every other chapter - but let me explain in terms of generalities. Dumas is firmly in the great French tradition of Tragic Love. People in his world are divided into two classes: those who are motivated by Love and Honour, and those who want Money and Power. To be a superior person means belonging to the first group. Unfortunately, living only for Love and Honour isn't very practical, so these superior people generally have rather tragic lives; a theme you see over and over again in mainstream French literature. A particularly clear 20th century example is Belle du Seigneur.
Ariane's husband is only interested in Money and Power, and his dreary monologues about his prospects of being promoted bore her to tears. Naturally, she's drawn to the dashing Solal, who never misses a chance to show how much he despises money (it helps that he's very rich). Equally naturally, it all ends up very tragically indeed.
But let's get back to Les Trois Mousquetaires. Dumas takes real historical events, and reinterprets them through the prism of his ultra-romantic world-view. On his account, the political events of 1625-27 were all about a complicated tangle of love affairs. The beautiful Anne of Austria is Queen of France, but she has at best lukewarm feelings for her husband, the pathetic Louis XIII. Cardinal Richelieu, the true ruler of the country, has made advances towards her, but been rebuffed; he's eaten up by jealousy and spite, especially since he knows through his network of informers that Anne's heart in fact belongs to the handsome Lord Buckingham. To keep the story bubbling, Dumas invents some more people, who play key roles in this complicated game. One of Richelieu's main agents is the psychotic blonde temptress, Milady; her opposite number in the Queen's camp is the ambitious young swordsman, D'Artagnan. Needless to say, both of them are involved in their own intersecting webs of romantic intrigue.
The startling thing to me is that the Dumas formula is still going strong, nearly 200 years later. The immeasurably popular SAS series, which you can buy at any French airport bookstall, is written to almost exactly the same specification. The central figure, Malko, is a modern D'Artagnan: vaguely on the side of the Good Guys, each episode sees him dispatched to a currently topical destination, where he's charged with some weighty task. For example, in Bagdad-Express
Malko's assignment is to prevent the Iraq war by kidnapping Saddam Hussein. He and one of Saddam's sons (I think Qusay) get involved with the same woman, there's a lot of random sex and violence, and, of course, the deal falls through. A still clearer example is Djihad
A Chechen rebel group gets hold of a Russian nuclear warhead, and they pass it on to an Islamicist faction led by a sexy blonde woman. (I know what you're going to say. In the SAS world, Islamicist factions can be led by sexy blondes). This time, after the usual toing and froing, Malko shoots down the blonde when she's just a few seconds away from detonating the bomb in New York. It's all remarkably similar to D'Artagnan's battle against the nefarious Milady.
So what is it that makes this formula so incredibly effective? It's fun to see history rewritten so that politics and economics are less important than who's sleeping with whom. The camaraderie displayed by the Musketeers has become proverbial, and that's also inspiring. But, really, it's Milady who makes the book, and she's the character who's been copied most often in modern trash fiction. (Look at those girls on the covers of the SAS novels. Miladies, every one of them). Although D'Artagnan is a sympathetic hero, she effortlessly steals the show every time she appears, just as easily as Sharon Stone upstages Michael Douglas in Basic Instinct.
What a shame Stone never got to play Milady in a serious adaptation of Les Trois Mousquetaires! Now that would have been worth watching.
Quite apart from being a terrific read - I just couldn't put it down - Les Trois Mousquetaires is a remarkably interesting book for anyone who's fond of French literature. The merest glance at will show you that I like both so-called serious novels and trash - as everyone knows, the French write the best trashy novels in the world. But what do these two literary traditions have to do with each other? I feel like a paleontologist who's discovered one of those missing links in the fossil record. A kind of literary coelocanth, it's exactly halfway between the two genres. Too well-written to be dismissed as trash, it still has so many of the defining characteristics of the modern French trash novel that it can't possibly be anything but a direct ancestor.
I'd hate to give away any of the plot - there's a twist every other chapter - but let me explain in terms of generalities. Dumas is firmly in the great French tradition of Tragic Love. People in his world are divided into two classes: those who are motivated by Love and Honour, and those who want Money and Power. To be a superior person means belonging to the first group. Unfortunately, living only for Love and Honour isn't very practical, so these superior people generally have rather tragic lives; a theme you see over and over again in mainstream French literature. A particularly clear 20th century example is Belle du Seigneur.
Ariane's husband is only interested in Money and Power, and his dreary monologues about his prospects of being promoted bore her to tears. Naturally, she's drawn to the dashing Solal, who never misses a chance to show how much he despises money (it helps that he's very rich). Equally naturally, it all ends up very tragically indeed.
But let's get back to Les Trois Mousquetaires. Dumas takes real historical events, and reinterprets them through the prism of his ultra-romantic world-view. On his account, the political events of 1625-27 were all about a complicated tangle of love affairs. The beautiful Anne of Austria is Queen of France, but she has at best lukewarm feelings for her husband, the pathetic Louis XIII. Cardinal Richelieu, the true ruler of the country, has made advances towards her, but been rebuffed; he's eaten up by jealousy and spite, especially since he knows through his network of informers that Anne's heart in fact belongs to the handsome Lord Buckingham. To keep the story bubbling, Dumas invents some more people, who play key roles in this complicated game. One of Richelieu's main agents is the psychotic blonde temptress, Milady; her opposite number in the Queen's camp is the ambitious young swordsman, D'Artagnan. Needless to say, both of them are involved in their own intersecting webs of romantic intrigue.
The startling thing to me is that the Dumas formula is still going strong, nearly 200 years later. The immeasurably popular SAS series, which you can buy at any French airport bookstall, is written to almost exactly the same specification. The central figure, Malko, is a modern D'Artagnan: vaguely on the side of the Good Guys, each episode sees him dispatched to a currently topical destination, where he's charged with some weighty task. For example, in Bagdad-Express
Malko's assignment is to prevent the Iraq war by kidnapping Saddam Hussein. He and one of Saddam's sons (I think Qusay) get involved with the same woman, there's a lot of random sex and violence, and, of course, the deal falls through. A still clearer example is Djihad
A Chechen rebel group gets hold of a Russian nuclear warhead, and they pass it on to an Islamicist faction led by a sexy blonde woman. (I know what you're going to say. In the SAS world, Islamicist factions can be led by sexy blondes). This time, after the usual toing and froing, Malko shoots down the blonde when she's just a few seconds away from detonating the bomb in New York. It's all remarkably similar to D'Artagnan's battle against the nefarious Milady.
So what is it that makes this formula so incredibly effective? It's fun to see history rewritten so that politics and economics are less important than who's sleeping with whom. The camaraderie displayed by the Musketeers has become proverbial, and that's also inspiring. But, really, it's Milady who makes the book, and she's the character who's been copied most often in modern trash fiction. (Look at those girls on the covers of the SAS novels. Miladies, every one of them). Although D'Artagnan is a sympathetic hero, she effortlessly steals the show every time she appears, just as easily as Sharon Stone upstages Michael Douglas in Basic Instinct.
What a shame Stone never got to play Milady in a serious adaptation of Les Trois Mousquetaires! Now that would have been worth watching.
April 28, 2023
5* printr-o judecat膬 intens afectiv膬 :)
Din p膬cate, cititorii de ast膬zi nici nu vor s膬 aud膬 de Alexandre Dumas. Romanele de cap膬 葯i spad膬 au ie葯it din mod膬. Citim altceva. Sau nimic. E 葯i asta o solu葲ie. 鈥濩ititul e o form膬 de lene鈥�, a spus 卯ntr-o pagin膬 de jurnal prozatorul Julien Green. Nimic mai adev膬rat...
Cei trei muschetari, deci. Muscheta (cu s) era un soi de flint膬 / pu葯c膬 (de aici numele eroilor), dar adev膬ra葲ii muschetari (ai Regelui, bine卯n葲eles) foloseau 卯n primul r卯nd spada, eschiva 葯i fandarea. Rivalii lor de moarte erau mercenarii cardinalului Richelieu. Un perfid! Fire葯te, romanul celor 3 muschetari este, 卯n realitate, povestea celui de-al patrulea, un t卯n膬r gascon pe nume d'Artagnan, care nici m膬car nu e muschetar la propriu, va deveni abia la sf卯r葯it. Povestea o 葯ti葲i. 葮i mai 葯ti葲i c膬 frumoasa (葯i malefica) Milady are un semn pe um膬r, un crin. 葮i mai 葯ti葲i c膬 muschetarii prefer膬 s膬 m膬n卯nce claponi bine rumeni葲i. 葮i mai 葯ti葲i c膬 gustosul clapon este, 卯n realitate, un coco葯 castrat. 葮i mai 葯ti葲i c膬 Aramis a scris un poem de dragoste 卯n versuri de o silab膬, care se cite葯te 卯n numai dou膬 minute. 葮i mai 葯ti葲i deviza 鈥濽n pour tous, tous pour un!鈥�. Gata.
葮i totu葯i. Oare 卯nsu葯i Alexandre Dumas a scris acest roman? Nu-i nici un secret, prozatorul a lucrat cu o echip膬 de 鈥瀗egri鈥�, mul葲i autori de ast膬zi procedeaz膬 la fel. Dumas a semnat 650 de c膬r葲i, un singur om nu poate scrie at卯t de mult dec卯t dac膬 a avut soarta lui Ahasverus...
Nu am loc s膬 dezvolt subiectul. Trimit la c膬r葲ile lui Bernard Fillaire, Alexandre Dumas et associ茅s (2002) 葯i Alexandre Dumas, Auguste Maquet et associ茅s (2010). S-a p膬strat o scrisoare care ar fi trebuit pierdut膬. Numitul Auguste Maquet, pensionar (se retr膬sese din echip膬), voia s膬 intre 卯n Societatea oamenilor de litere 葯i avea nevoie de o recomandare. I-a scris Patronului. A fost admis, dar numai cu titlul de 鈥瀋olaborator鈥�. 脦n epistola amintit膬, Maquet 卯i mul葲ume葯te smerit lui Dumas 葯i adaug膬 am膬nuntul (nu lipsit de 卯nsemn膬tate) c膬 renun葲膬 la toate drepturile asupra romanului Cei trei muschetari.
E o problem膬 intern膬 a francezilor, s-o rezolve Macron, eu nu m膬 bag...
P. S. S膬 nu uit. A mai fost, p卯n膬 la urm膬, 葯i un proces. Alexandre Dumas a fost obligat de judec膬tori s膬-i pl膬teasc膬 lui Auguste Maquet o sum膬 considerabil膬. N-a s膬r膬cit...
Din p膬cate, cititorii de ast膬zi nici nu vor s膬 aud膬 de Alexandre Dumas. Romanele de cap膬 葯i spad膬 au ie葯it din mod膬. Citim altceva. Sau nimic. E 葯i asta o solu葲ie. 鈥濩ititul e o form膬 de lene鈥�, a spus 卯ntr-o pagin膬 de jurnal prozatorul Julien Green. Nimic mai adev膬rat...
Cei trei muschetari, deci. Muscheta (cu s) era un soi de flint膬 / pu葯c膬 (de aici numele eroilor), dar adev膬ra葲ii muschetari (ai Regelui, bine卯n葲eles) foloseau 卯n primul r卯nd spada, eschiva 葯i fandarea. Rivalii lor de moarte erau mercenarii cardinalului Richelieu. Un perfid! Fire葯te, romanul celor 3 muschetari este, 卯n realitate, povestea celui de-al patrulea, un t卯n膬r gascon pe nume d'Artagnan, care nici m膬car nu e muschetar la propriu, va deveni abia la sf卯r葯it. Povestea o 葯ti葲i. 葮i mai 葯ti葲i c膬 frumoasa (葯i malefica) Milady are un semn pe um膬r, un crin. 葮i mai 葯ti葲i c膬 muschetarii prefer膬 s膬 m膬n卯nce claponi bine rumeni葲i. 葮i mai 葯ti葲i c膬 gustosul clapon este, 卯n realitate, un coco葯 castrat. 葮i mai 葯ti葲i c膬 Aramis a scris un poem de dragoste 卯n versuri de o silab膬, care se cite葯te 卯n numai dou膬 minute. 葮i mai 葯ti葲i deviza 鈥濽n pour tous, tous pour un!鈥�. Gata.
葮i totu葯i. Oare 卯nsu葯i Alexandre Dumas a scris acest roman? Nu-i nici un secret, prozatorul a lucrat cu o echip膬 de 鈥瀗egri鈥�, mul葲i autori de ast膬zi procedeaz膬 la fel. Dumas a semnat 650 de c膬r葲i, un singur om nu poate scrie at卯t de mult dec卯t dac膬 a avut soarta lui Ahasverus...
Nu am loc s膬 dezvolt subiectul. Trimit la c膬r葲ile lui Bernard Fillaire, Alexandre Dumas et associ茅s (2002) 葯i Alexandre Dumas, Auguste Maquet et associ茅s (2010). S-a p膬strat o scrisoare care ar fi trebuit pierdut膬. Numitul Auguste Maquet, pensionar (se retr膬sese din echip膬), voia s膬 intre 卯n Societatea oamenilor de litere 葯i avea nevoie de o recomandare. I-a scris Patronului. A fost admis, dar numai cu titlul de 鈥瀋olaborator鈥�. 脦n epistola amintit膬, Maquet 卯i mul葲ume葯te smerit lui Dumas 葯i adaug膬 am膬nuntul (nu lipsit de 卯nsemn膬tate) c膬 renun葲膬 la toate drepturile asupra romanului Cei trei muschetari.
E o problem膬 intern膬 a francezilor, s-o rezolve Macron, eu nu m膬 bag...
P. S. S膬 nu uit. A mai fost, p卯n膬 la urm膬, 葯i un proces. Alexandre Dumas a fost obligat de judec膬tori s膬-i pl膬teasc膬 lui Auguste Maquet o sum膬 considerabil膬. N-a s膬r膬cit...
March 30, 2020
Un eterno pendiente al que por fin pude darle oportunidad y solo puedo decir que nada se compara con el libro. Las aventuras de Porthos, Athos, Aramis y D鈥橝rtagnan son una delicia, las intrigas en la corte, cada detalle de esta historia lo hacen ser lo que es, un cl谩sico extraordinario.
November 16, 2024
This is going to take some explaining, but my guiltiest pleasure when it comes to books is ' The Three Musketeers.
I hear you saying, "How on Earth can that be a guilty pleasure?" I know. It's a recognized classic. It has far reaching pop culture impact.It's considered one of the greatest adventures ever written. It has two of the most memorable "villains" in literature; it has four kick ass action heroes. It has sword fights, romance, intrigue, and most people think it has big laughs (it doesn't, which is the thing that pisses me off most about its pop culture adaptations). Even if people haven't read the book they know the Three Musketeers. Hell, most people even know that D'Artagnan, the main "hero" of the book, is not one of the eponymous "Three". So how could this book be a guilty pleasure? The answer is simple at first, then its complex.
Simple answer: Milady de Winter.
Complex answer: Milady de Winter.
From the accepted perspective, Milady is an unrepentant, nasty, evil, femme fatale. She is an agent for the "villainous" Cardinal Richelieu, spying on, plotting against and battling our Musketeers at every turn. She foments marital unrest between the King and Queen. She plots the assassination of the Englishman, the Duke of Buckingham, to stop him from aiding the Huguenots at La Rochelle. She tries to kill D'Artagnan and later poisons his mistress, Constance Bonacieux. She corrupts a fine, upstanding Puritan man. And once upon a time, she made a fool of the Comte de La F猫re.
She is the accepted villain, even worse than her master the Cardinal, for whom and under whose auspices she commits her evil acts. She is the villain, and D'Artagnan, Athos, Porthos and Aramis are the heroes.
Here's the problem, though, from another perspective she isn't and they aren't.
You see, Milady de Winter was a poor young woman who did what she must to survive. Forced into a convent for want of food, a priest fell in love with her and the pair stole some church property to start a life together. They were caught, and both were "branded" with the fleur-de-lys -- the mark of criminals. Alone again, she fell in love with the Comte de La F猫re. They were married, and she hid her crimes from him. Then one afternoon the Comte discovered her brand. He felt betrayed and strung her up by her neck, leaving her to die.
She lived and entered the service of the Cardinal. Under his direction, she became a powerful agent, doing exactly what it is that agents do. The Cardinal -- the right hand of the King, connected to the Pope, a man waging a war in the King's name, the most powerful man in France -- has Milady undermine the King's Queen, Anne of Austria, a woman having an affair with the man (Duke of Buckingham) who is helping the rebels within her husband's kingdom. She is also asked to keep tabs on a troublesome young guard, D'Artagnan, who seems to be thwarting the Cardinal's plans through sheer luck and Gascon audacity. She complies.
Then the man she is spying on kills her lover, the Comte de Wardes. And if that isn't bad enough, the man she's spying on turns up in her bedchamber posing as the Comte and proceeds to "make love" to Milady. The "lovemaking" is so "wonderful" that D'Artagnan decides to come clean and reveal his true identity. Milady loses her temper -- with some cause, I think -- and tries to stab D'Artagnan (which he doesn't seem to understand). From then on, Milady wants vengeance against the murderer of her lover, who also happens to be her rapist (for that is what he is, surely?).
Next, she is charged with assassinating the Duke of Buckingham, for which she is issued a carte blanche by the Cardinal, but her enemy, D'Artagnan -- committing treason against his own King and country -- warns the Duke, and she is banished to a tower while the Duke sails off to aid the Huguenots. Well, she isn't about to languish in prison, so she seduces a Puritan and makes her escape, winding up in a convent in France where she can hide out. Lucky for her, D'Artagnan's mistress, a married woman whom he was bedding while he was raping Milady, is also hiding out in the convent, so Milady de Winter takes the portion of vengeance at her disposal and kills D'Artagnan's lover as he killed hers.
And for all of this, the Four Musketeers, now in possession of her carte blanche, hold their own little court, pass judgement on Milady and have her head separated from her shoulders. And they get away with it because they have the Cardinal's signature -- on Milady's carte blanche which allows the bearer to do whatever they do for the good of the kingdom.
It seems to me that Alexandre Dumas knew that perspective would dictate how we saw his heroes and villains, and that he was okay with his muddied good and evil waters. He was writing from the Musketeers' perspective, and he knew that his readers would side with them against the Cardinal and Milady. But he also wrote in a way that complicated his Musketeers. So much so that we accept when D'Artagnan receives and accepts a commission to the Musketeers from the Cardinal himself. He wanted his characters to be grey, and they were.
So why is this a guilty pleasure (especially if the guilt doesn't come from Dumas' writing)? I am finally getting there.
The weight of popular culture has changed the way we see this story so thoroughly, has morphed the Musketeers so completely into righteous heroes, turned D'Artagnan into such a loveable heartthrob and his companions into the most likeable of heroes, that it is nearly impossible for people to see the things that make them grey.
But I see them for who they are. I see the grey.
So here comes the guilt: I see the Four Musketeers crimes -- treason, rape, murder, theft -- and all their flaws -- cruelty, greed, hypocrisy, entitlement, adulterousness (to name but a few) -- and I still love them. I love them, and I enjoy reading their adventures, and I cheer for them from beginning to end.
I shouldn't, but I do, and that's why The Three Musketeers is my guiltiest of pleasures. So there.
p.s. I love Milady de Winter too. For all the things she is.
I hear you saying, "How on Earth can that be a guilty pleasure?" I know. It's a recognized classic. It has far reaching pop culture impact.It's considered one of the greatest adventures ever written. It has two of the most memorable "villains" in literature; it has four kick ass action heroes. It has sword fights, romance, intrigue, and most people think it has big laughs (it doesn't, which is the thing that pisses me off most about its pop culture adaptations). Even if people haven't read the book they know the Three Musketeers. Hell, most people even know that D'Artagnan, the main "hero" of the book, is not one of the eponymous "Three". So how could this book be a guilty pleasure? The answer is simple at first, then its complex.
Simple answer: Milady de Winter.
Complex answer: Milady de Winter.
From the accepted perspective, Milady is an unrepentant, nasty, evil, femme fatale. She is an agent for the "villainous" Cardinal Richelieu, spying on, plotting against and battling our Musketeers at every turn. She foments marital unrest between the King and Queen. She plots the assassination of the Englishman, the Duke of Buckingham, to stop him from aiding the Huguenots at La Rochelle. She tries to kill D'Artagnan and later poisons his mistress, Constance Bonacieux. She corrupts a fine, upstanding Puritan man. And once upon a time, she made a fool of the Comte de La F猫re.
She is the accepted villain, even worse than her master the Cardinal, for whom and under whose auspices she commits her evil acts. She is the villain, and D'Artagnan, Athos, Porthos and Aramis are the heroes.
Here's the problem, though, from another perspective she isn't and they aren't.
You see, Milady de Winter was a poor young woman who did what she must to survive. Forced into a convent for want of food, a priest fell in love with her and the pair stole some church property to start a life together. They were caught, and both were "branded" with the fleur-de-lys -- the mark of criminals. Alone again, she fell in love with the Comte de La F猫re. They were married, and she hid her crimes from him. Then one afternoon the Comte discovered her brand. He felt betrayed and strung her up by her neck, leaving her to die.
She lived and entered the service of the Cardinal. Under his direction, she became a powerful agent, doing exactly what it is that agents do. The Cardinal -- the right hand of the King, connected to the Pope, a man waging a war in the King's name, the most powerful man in France -- has Milady undermine the King's Queen, Anne of Austria, a woman having an affair with the man (Duke of Buckingham) who is helping the rebels within her husband's kingdom. She is also asked to keep tabs on a troublesome young guard, D'Artagnan, who seems to be thwarting the Cardinal's plans through sheer luck and Gascon audacity. She complies.
Then the man she is spying on kills her lover, the Comte de Wardes. And if that isn't bad enough, the man she's spying on turns up in her bedchamber posing as the Comte and proceeds to "make love" to Milady. The "lovemaking" is so "wonderful" that D'Artagnan decides to come clean and reveal his true identity. Milady loses her temper -- with some cause, I think -- and tries to stab D'Artagnan (which he doesn't seem to understand). From then on, Milady wants vengeance against the murderer of her lover, who also happens to be her rapist (for that is what he is, surely?).
Next, she is charged with assassinating the Duke of Buckingham, for which she is issued a carte blanche by the Cardinal, but her enemy, D'Artagnan -- committing treason against his own King and country -- warns the Duke, and she is banished to a tower while the Duke sails off to aid the Huguenots. Well, she isn't about to languish in prison, so she seduces a Puritan and makes her escape, winding up in a convent in France where she can hide out. Lucky for her, D'Artagnan's mistress, a married woman whom he was bedding while he was raping Milady, is also hiding out in the convent, so Milady de Winter takes the portion of vengeance at her disposal and kills D'Artagnan's lover as he killed hers.
And for all of this, the Four Musketeers, now in possession of her carte blanche, hold their own little court, pass judgement on Milady and have her head separated from her shoulders. And they get away with it because they have the Cardinal's signature -- on Milady's carte blanche which allows the bearer to do whatever they do for the good of the kingdom.
It seems to me that Alexandre Dumas knew that perspective would dictate how we saw his heroes and villains, and that he was okay with his muddied good and evil waters. He was writing from the Musketeers' perspective, and he knew that his readers would side with them against the Cardinal and Milady. But he also wrote in a way that complicated his Musketeers. So much so that we accept when D'Artagnan receives and accepts a commission to the Musketeers from the Cardinal himself. He wanted his characters to be grey, and they were.
So why is this a guilty pleasure (especially if the guilt doesn't come from Dumas' writing)? I am finally getting there.
The weight of popular culture has changed the way we see this story so thoroughly, has morphed the Musketeers so completely into righteous heroes, turned D'Artagnan into such a loveable heartthrob and his companions into the most likeable of heroes, that it is nearly impossible for people to see the things that make them grey.
But I see them for who they are. I see the grey.
So here comes the guilt: I see the Four Musketeers crimes -- treason, rape, murder, theft -- and all their flaws -- cruelty, greed, hypocrisy, entitlement, adulterousness (to name but a few) -- and I still love them. I love them, and I enjoy reading their adventures, and I cheer for them from beginning to end.
I shouldn't, but I do, and that's why The Three Musketeers is my guiltiest of pleasures. So there.
p.s. I love Milady de Winter too. For all the things she is.
Want to read
November 11, 2023for someone as obsessed with short books as i am, i sure do enjoy pretending i'm going to read long books
April 9, 2022
(Book 908 from 1001 books) - Les Trois Mousquetaires = The Three Musketeers, Alexandre Dumas
The Three Musketeers is a historical adventure novel written in 1844 by French author Alexandre Dumas. Set in 1625鈥�1628, it recounts the adventures of a young man named D'Artagnan after he leaves home to travel to Paris, to join the Musketeers of the Guard. Although D'Artagnan is not able to join this elite corps immediately, he befriends the three most formidable musketeers of the age鈥擜thos, Porthos and Aramis鈥攁nd gets involved in affairs of the state and court. ...
In 1625 France, d'Artagnan leaves his family in Gascony and travels to Paris to join the Musketeers of the Guard. At a house in Meung-sur-Loire, an older man derides d'Artagnan's horse. Insulted, d'Artagnan demands a duel. But the older man's companions instead beat d'Artagnan unconscious with a cooking pot and a metal tong that breaks his sword. His letter of introduction to Monsieur de Tr茅ville, the commander of the musketeers, is also stolen. D'Artagnan resolves to avenge himself upon the older man, who is later revealed to be the Comte de Rochefort, an agent of Cardinal Richelieu, who is passing orders from the cardinal to his spy, Lady de Winter, usually called Milady de Winter or simply "Milady".
In Paris, d'Artagnan visits Monsieur de Tr茅ville at the headquarters of the musketeers, but without the letter, Tr茅ville politely refuses his application. He does, however, write a letter of introduction to an academy for young gentlemen which may prepare his visitor for recruitment at a later time.
From Tr茅ville's window, d'Artagnan sees Rochefort passing in the street below and rushes out of the building to confront him, but in doing so he offends three musketeers, Athos, Porthos and Aramis, who each demand satisfaction; d'Artagnan must fight a duel with all of them that afternoon. As d'Artagnan prepares himself for the first duel, he realizes that Athos's seconds are Porthos and Aramis, who are astonished that the young Gascon intends to duel them all.
As d'Artagnan and Athos begin, Cardinal Richelieu's guards appear and attempt to arrest d'Artagnan and the three musketeers for illegal dueling. Although they are outnumbered four to five, the four men win the battle. D'Artagnan seriously wounds Jussac, one of the cardinal's officers and a renowned fighter. After learning of this, King Louis XIII appoints d'Artagnan to Des Essart's company of the King's Guards and gives him forty pistoles. ...
爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 - 丕賱讴爻丕賳丿乇 丿賵賲丕 (賴乇賲爻 / 夭乇蹖賳貙 诏賵鬲賳亘乇诏 賵 ...) 丕丿亘蹖丕鬲 賮乇丕賳爻賴
毓賳賵丕賳: 爻鈥嵸団€� 鬲鈥嵸佲€嵸嗏€嵹€嵷ж必� 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴: 丕賱鈥嵹┾€嵷斥€嵷з嗏€嵷� 丿賵賲鈥嵷ж� 賲鬲鈥嵷必€嵸� 賲鈥嵷€嵸呪€嵷坟з団€嵷辟呪€嵺屸€嵷必藏� 丕爻鈥嵹┾€嵸嗏€嵷臂屸€� (賲丨賲丿胤丕賴乇 賯丕噩丕乇)貨 趩丕倬 賳禺爻鬲 爻賳诏蹖 亘丕 鬲丕乇蹖禺 賳丕賲毓賱賵賲 丿乇 丿賵乇丕賳 賳丕氐乇丕賱丿蹖賳 卮丕賴 賯丕噩丕乇貨 趩丕倬 丿蹖诏乇貙 鬲賴乇丕賳 爻丕賱 1340貙 趩丕倬 丿蹖诏乇 丕賱爻鬲 賮乇丿丕貙 1383貨 丿乇 丿賵 噩賱丿貨 趩丕倬 丿蹖诏乇 鬲賴乇丕賳貙 卮賴乇 讴鬲丕亘 賴乇賲爻貙 爻丕賱 1383貨 丿乇1666氐貨 卮丕亘讴9789647100816貨 趩丕倬 丿賵賲 1388貨 趩丕倬 賴賮鬲賲 1399貨 趩丕倬 丿蹖诏乇貙 鬲賴乇丕賳貙 丕賲蹖乇讴亘蹖乇貙 1394貙 丿乇 倬賳噩 噩賱丿貨 卮丕亘讴 丿賵乇賴9789640015933貨 卮丕亘讴 噩賱丿 蹖讴9789640015940貨 卮丕亘讴 噩賱丿 丿賵9789640015957貨 卮丕亘讴 噩賱丿 爻賴9789640015964貨 卮丕亘讴 噩賱丿 趩賴丕乇9789640015971貨 卮丕亘讴 噩賱丿 倬賳噩9789640015988貨 賲賵囟賵毓: 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴丕蹖 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 賮乇丕賳爻賴 - 爻丿賴 19賲
毓賳賵丕賳: 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 丿乇 丿賴 噩賱丿貨 丕孬乇: 丕賱讴爻丕賳丿乇 丿賵賲丕貨 賲鬲乇噩賲: 匕亘蹖丨 丕賱賱賴 賲賳氐賵乇蹖貨 鬲賴乇丕賳貙 夭乇蹖賳貙 诏賵鬲賳亘乇诏貙 爻丕賱1378貨 丿乇10噩賱丿貨 卮丕亘讴 丿賵乇賴9644072227貨 趩丕倬 丿賵賲 1382貨 趩丕倬 賴卮鬲賲 鬲賴乇丕賳貙 賳诏丕乇爻鬲丕賳 讴鬲丕亘 爻丕賱1388貨 丿乇 丿賴 噩賱丿貨 卮丕亘讴 丿賵乇賴9786005541397貨 賲賵囟賵毓 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴丕蹖 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 賮乇丕賳爻賴 - 爻丿賴19賲
賲鬲乇噩賲賴丕蹖 丿蹖诏乇: 禺丕賳賲賴丕 賵 丌賯丕蹖丕賳: 賮乇夭丕賳賴 卮蹖禺鈥屫з勜ж迟勜з呟屫� 丨鈥嵷斥€嵸嗏€� 卮鈥嵷光€嵷ㄢ€嵷з嗏€嵺屸€嵷з嗏€屫� 卮鈥嵹┾€嵸堎佲€嵸団€� 丕禺鈥嵸堌з嗏€屫� 丕賲鈥嵺屸€嵷� 丕爻鈥嵸呪€嵷ж光€嵺屸€嵸勨€嵺屸€屫� 賳鈥嵷ж屸€嵷� 夭毓鈥嵺屸€嵸呪€屫� 丨賲蹖丿賴 噩爻賵乇貨 爻賵丿賴 讴乇蹖賲蹖貨 爻倬賴乇 丨丕噩鬲蹖貨 賲丨賲丿鬲賯蹖 丿丕賳蹖丕貨 賲蹖孬賲 丕賲蹖賳蹖貨 賴丕丿蹖 賲毓鬲賲丿賳蹖丕貨 賲蹖鬲乇丕 亘賱禺丕乇蹖貨 亘賴丕乇讴 賯賴乇賲丕賳貨 賲毓氐賵賲賴 賲賵爻賵蹖貨 倬乇爻鬲賵 毓賵囟鈥屫藏ж囏� 賲丨賲丿 賯氐丕毓貨 爻蹖丿賴鈥屫⒇必з� 乇囟賵蹖貙 噩賱丕賱 趩丕賵卮蹖鈥屫藏з囏� 賱蹖賱丕 爻亘丨丕賳蹖貨
爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 丕孬乇 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 蹖 賮乇丕賳爻賵蹖 芦丕賱讴爻丕賳丿乇 丿賵賲丕蹖 倬丿乇禄 丕爻鬲貨 丕蹖賳 乇賲丕賳 賯賴乇賲丕賳蹖鈥屬囏� 賵 丿賱丕賵乇蹖鈥屬囏й� 爻賴 鬲賳 丕夭 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇丕賳 芦賱賵蹖蹖 爻蹖夭丿賴賲禄 亘賴 賳丕賲賴丕蹖 芦丌鬲賵爻禄貙 芦倬賵乇鬲賵爻禄貙 芦丌乇丕賲蹖爻禄貙 賵 賴賲趩賳蹖賳 噩賵丕賳蹖 丿賱蹖乇 賵 亘丕賴賵卮 亘賴 賳丕賲 芦丿丕乇鬲賳鈥屰屫з喡� 乇丕貙 讴賴 丿乇 胤賵賱 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 毓囟賵 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇丕賳 爻賱胤賳鬲蹖 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 亘丕夭诏賵 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 丕蹖賳 趩賴丕乇 鬲賳 亘丕 賴賲 倬蹖賲丕賳 丿賵爻鬲蹖 賲蹖亘賳丿賳丿貙 鬲丕 丿乇 賴賲賴 蹖 乇禺丿丕丿賴丕貙 賵 诏乇賮鬲丕乇蹖賴丕 讴賳丕乇 蹖讴丿蹖诏乇 亘丕卮賳丿貨 芦丕賱讴爻丕賳丿乇 丿賵賲丕禄 丿乇 丕蹖賳 乇賲丕賳 丕卮禺丕氐貙 夭賳丿诏蹖貙 賵 亘禺卮 讴賵趩讴蹖 丕夭 鬲丕乇蹖禺 芦賮乇丕賳爻賴禄 乇丕貙 亘丕 賲賴丕乇鬲蹖 賵蹖跇賴貙 亘賴 禺賵丕賳卮诏乇丕賳 賲蹖鈥屬嗁呚й屫з嗀� 賳禺爻鬲 趩讴蹖丿賴 蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 乇丕 禺賵丕賳丿賴 亘賵丿賲貙 亘丕 鬲賱禺蹖氐 芦乇賵賲丕卮賱禄貙 賵 鬲乇噩賲賴 蹖 噩賳丕亘 芦賲丨賲丿鬲賯蹖 丿丕賳蹖丕禄貙 丿乇 爻丕賱1352賴噩乇蹖 禺賵乇卮蹖丿蹖貨 爻倬爻 蹖讴 賲噩賲賵毓賴 爻賴 噩賱丿蹖 乇丕 禺賵丕賳丿賲貙 丕夭 丕賳鬲卮丕乇丕鬲 芦賲蹖乇禄貙 賵 丕夭 賴賲蹖賳 賲鬲乇噩賲 倬乇讴丕乇 噩賳丕亘 芦賲賳氐賵乇蹖禄貙 讴賴 乇賵丕賳卮 賴賲丕乇賴 卮丕丿賲丕賳 亘丕丿
爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 賳禺爻鬲蹖賳 亘丕乇 丿乇 爻丕賱1844賲蹖賱丕丿蹖 亘賴 氐賵乇鬲 丿賳亘丕賱賴鈥� 丿丕乇 丿乇 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 賲噩賱丕鬲 芦賮乇丕賳爻賵蹖禄 賲賳鬲卮乇 賲蹖卮丿貙 丿乇 芦丕蹖乇丕賳禄 賳禺爻鬲蹖賳鈥� 亘丕乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 鬲賵爻胤 芦賲丨賲丿 胤丕賴乇 賲蹖乇夭丕 賯丕噩丕乇 (賲丨賲丿 胤丕賴乇 賲蹖乇夭丕 丕爻讴賳丿乇蹖)禄 丿乇 夭賲丕賳 爻賱胤賳鬲 芦賳丕氐乇丕賱丿蹖賳 卮丕賴 賯丕噩丕乇禄 亘賴 賮丕乇爻蹖 亘乇诏乇丿丕賳 卮丿貙 賵 亘賴 氐賵乇鬲 趩丕倬 爻賳诏蹖 賲賳鬲卮乇 卮丿貙 爻丕賱鈥屬囏� 诏匕卮鬲 鬲丕 鬲乇噩賲賴 丕蹖 丕夭 讴鬲丕亘貙 鬲賵爻胤 芦匕亘蹖丨鈥� 丕賱賱賴 賲賳氐賵乇蹖禄 蹖夭 氐賵乇鬲 诏乇賮鬲 賵 爻倬爻 鬲乇噩賲賴 賴丕蹖 亘爻蹖丕乇 丿蹖诏乇 鬲丕 亘賲丕賳丿 蹖丕丿诏丕乇
鬲丕乇蹖禺 亘賴賳诏丕賲 乇爻丕賳蹖 19/01/1401賴噩乇蹖 禺賵乇卮蹖丿蹖貨 丕. 卮乇亘蹖丕賳蹖
The Three Musketeers is a historical adventure novel written in 1844 by French author Alexandre Dumas. Set in 1625鈥�1628, it recounts the adventures of a young man named D'Artagnan after he leaves home to travel to Paris, to join the Musketeers of the Guard. Although D'Artagnan is not able to join this elite corps immediately, he befriends the three most formidable musketeers of the age鈥擜thos, Porthos and Aramis鈥攁nd gets involved in affairs of the state and court. ...
In 1625 France, d'Artagnan leaves his family in Gascony and travels to Paris to join the Musketeers of the Guard. At a house in Meung-sur-Loire, an older man derides d'Artagnan's horse. Insulted, d'Artagnan demands a duel. But the older man's companions instead beat d'Artagnan unconscious with a cooking pot and a metal tong that breaks his sword. His letter of introduction to Monsieur de Tr茅ville, the commander of the musketeers, is also stolen. D'Artagnan resolves to avenge himself upon the older man, who is later revealed to be the Comte de Rochefort, an agent of Cardinal Richelieu, who is passing orders from the cardinal to his spy, Lady de Winter, usually called Milady de Winter or simply "Milady".
In Paris, d'Artagnan visits Monsieur de Tr茅ville at the headquarters of the musketeers, but without the letter, Tr茅ville politely refuses his application. He does, however, write a letter of introduction to an academy for young gentlemen which may prepare his visitor for recruitment at a later time.
From Tr茅ville's window, d'Artagnan sees Rochefort passing in the street below and rushes out of the building to confront him, but in doing so he offends three musketeers, Athos, Porthos and Aramis, who each demand satisfaction; d'Artagnan must fight a duel with all of them that afternoon. As d'Artagnan prepares himself for the first duel, he realizes that Athos's seconds are Porthos and Aramis, who are astonished that the young Gascon intends to duel them all.
As d'Artagnan and Athos begin, Cardinal Richelieu's guards appear and attempt to arrest d'Artagnan and the three musketeers for illegal dueling. Although they are outnumbered four to five, the four men win the battle. D'Artagnan seriously wounds Jussac, one of the cardinal's officers and a renowned fighter. After learning of this, King Louis XIII appoints d'Artagnan to Des Essart's company of the King's Guards and gives him forty pistoles. ...
爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 - 丕賱讴爻丕賳丿乇 丿賵賲丕 (賴乇賲爻 / 夭乇蹖賳貙 诏賵鬲賳亘乇诏 賵 ...) 丕丿亘蹖丕鬲 賮乇丕賳爻賴
毓賳賵丕賳: 爻鈥嵸団€� 鬲鈥嵸佲€嵸嗏€嵹€嵷ж必� 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴: 丕賱鈥嵹┾€嵷斥€嵷з嗏€嵷� 丿賵賲鈥嵷ж� 賲鬲鈥嵷必€嵸� 賲鈥嵷€嵸呪€嵷坟з団€嵷辟呪€嵺屸€嵷必藏� 丕爻鈥嵹┾€嵸嗏€嵷臂屸€� (賲丨賲丿胤丕賴乇 賯丕噩丕乇)貨 趩丕倬 賳禺爻鬲 爻賳诏蹖 亘丕 鬲丕乇蹖禺 賳丕賲毓賱賵賲 丿乇 丿賵乇丕賳 賳丕氐乇丕賱丿蹖賳 卮丕賴 賯丕噩丕乇貨 趩丕倬 丿蹖诏乇貙 鬲賴乇丕賳 爻丕賱 1340貙 趩丕倬 丿蹖诏乇 丕賱爻鬲 賮乇丿丕貙 1383貨 丿乇 丿賵 噩賱丿貨 趩丕倬 丿蹖诏乇 鬲賴乇丕賳貙 卮賴乇 讴鬲丕亘 賴乇賲爻貙 爻丕賱 1383貨 丿乇1666氐貨 卮丕亘讴9789647100816貨 趩丕倬 丿賵賲 1388貨 趩丕倬 賴賮鬲賲 1399貨 趩丕倬 丿蹖诏乇貙 鬲賴乇丕賳貙 丕賲蹖乇讴亘蹖乇貙 1394貙 丿乇 倬賳噩 噩賱丿貨 卮丕亘讴 丿賵乇賴9789640015933貨 卮丕亘讴 噩賱丿 蹖讴9789640015940貨 卮丕亘讴 噩賱丿 丿賵9789640015957貨 卮丕亘讴 噩賱丿 爻賴9789640015964貨 卮丕亘讴 噩賱丿 趩賴丕乇9789640015971貨 卮丕亘讴 噩賱丿 倬賳噩9789640015988貨 賲賵囟賵毓: 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴丕蹖 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 賮乇丕賳爻賴 - 爻丿賴 19賲
毓賳賵丕賳: 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 丿乇 丿賴 噩賱丿貨 丕孬乇: 丕賱讴爻丕賳丿乇 丿賵賲丕貨 賲鬲乇噩賲: 匕亘蹖丨 丕賱賱賴 賲賳氐賵乇蹖貨 鬲賴乇丕賳貙 夭乇蹖賳貙 诏賵鬲賳亘乇诏貙 爻丕賱1378貨 丿乇10噩賱丿貨 卮丕亘讴 丿賵乇賴9644072227貨 趩丕倬 丿賵賲 1382貨 趩丕倬 賴卮鬲賲 鬲賴乇丕賳貙 賳诏丕乇爻鬲丕賳 讴鬲丕亘 爻丕賱1388貨 丿乇 丿賴 噩賱丿貨 卮丕亘讴 丿賵乇賴9786005541397貨 賲賵囟賵毓 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴丕蹖 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 賮乇丕賳爻賴 - 爻丿賴19賲
賲鬲乇噩賲賴丕蹖 丿蹖诏乇: 禺丕賳賲賴丕 賵 丌賯丕蹖丕賳: 賮乇夭丕賳賴 卮蹖禺鈥屫з勜ж迟勜з呟屫� 丨鈥嵷斥€嵸嗏€� 卮鈥嵷光€嵷ㄢ€嵷з嗏€嵺屸€嵷з嗏€屫� 卮鈥嵹┾€嵸堎佲€嵸団€� 丕禺鈥嵸堌з嗏€屫� 丕賲鈥嵺屸€嵷� 丕爻鈥嵸呪€嵷ж光€嵺屸€嵸勨€嵺屸€屫� 賳鈥嵷ж屸€嵷� 夭毓鈥嵺屸€嵸呪€屫� 丨賲蹖丿賴 噩爻賵乇貨 爻賵丿賴 讴乇蹖賲蹖貨 爻倬賴乇 丨丕噩鬲蹖貨 賲丨賲丿鬲賯蹖 丿丕賳蹖丕貨 賲蹖孬賲 丕賲蹖賳蹖貨 賴丕丿蹖 賲毓鬲賲丿賳蹖丕貨 賲蹖鬲乇丕 亘賱禺丕乇蹖貨 亘賴丕乇讴 賯賴乇賲丕賳貨 賲毓氐賵賲賴 賲賵爻賵蹖貨 倬乇爻鬲賵 毓賵囟鈥屫藏ж囏� 賲丨賲丿 賯氐丕毓貨 爻蹖丿賴鈥屫⒇必з� 乇囟賵蹖貙 噩賱丕賱 趩丕賵卮蹖鈥屫藏з囏� 賱蹖賱丕 爻亘丨丕賳蹖貨
爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 丕孬乇 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 蹖 賮乇丕賳爻賵蹖 芦丕賱讴爻丕賳丿乇 丿賵賲丕蹖 倬丿乇禄 丕爻鬲貨 丕蹖賳 乇賲丕賳 賯賴乇賲丕賳蹖鈥屬囏� 賵 丿賱丕賵乇蹖鈥屬囏й� 爻賴 鬲賳 丕夭 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇丕賳 芦賱賵蹖蹖 爻蹖夭丿賴賲禄 亘賴 賳丕賲賴丕蹖 芦丌鬲賵爻禄貙 芦倬賵乇鬲賵爻禄貙 芦丌乇丕賲蹖爻禄貙 賵 賴賲趩賳蹖賳 噩賵丕賳蹖 丿賱蹖乇 賵 亘丕賴賵卮 亘賴 賳丕賲 芦丿丕乇鬲賳鈥屰屫з喡� 乇丕貙 讴賴 丿乇 胤賵賱 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 毓囟賵 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇丕賳 爻賱胤賳鬲蹖 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 亘丕夭诏賵 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 丕蹖賳 趩賴丕乇 鬲賳 亘丕 賴賲 倬蹖賲丕賳 丿賵爻鬲蹖 賲蹖亘賳丿賳丿貙 鬲丕 丿乇 賴賲賴 蹖 乇禺丿丕丿賴丕貙 賵 诏乇賮鬲丕乇蹖賴丕 讴賳丕乇 蹖讴丿蹖诏乇 亘丕卮賳丿貨 芦丕賱讴爻丕賳丿乇 丿賵賲丕禄 丿乇 丕蹖賳 乇賲丕賳 丕卮禺丕氐貙 夭賳丿诏蹖貙 賵 亘禺卮 讴賵趩讴蹖 丕夭 鬲丕乇蹖禺 芦賮乇丕賳爻賴禄 乇丕貙 亘丕 賲賴丕乇鬲蹖 賵蹖跇賴貙 亘賴 禺賵丕賳卮诏乇丕賳 賲蹖鈥屬嗁呚й屫з嗀� 賳禺爻鬲 趩讴蹖丿賴 蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 乇丕 禺賵丕賳丿賴 亘賵丿賲貙 亘丕 鬲賱禺蹖氐 芦乇賵賲丕卮賱禄貙 賵 鬲乇噩賲賴 蹖 噩賳丕亘 芦賲丨賲丿鬲賯蹖 丿丕賳蹖丕禄貙 丿乇 爻丕賱1352賴噩乇蹖 禺賵乇卮蹖丿蹖貨 爻倬爻 蹖讴 賲噩賲賵毓賴 爻賴 噩賱丿蹖 乇丕 禺賵丕賳丿賲貙 丕夭 丕賳鬲卮丕乇丕鬲 芦賲蹖乇禄貙 賵 丕夭 賴賲蹖賳 賲鬲乇噩賲 倬乇讴丕乇 噩賳丕亘 芦賲賳氐賵乇蹖禄貙 讴賴 乇賵丕賳卮 賴賲丕乇賴 卮丕丿賲丕賳 亘丕丿
爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 賳禺爻鬲蹖賳 亘丕乇 丿乇 爻丕賱1844賲蹖賱丕丿蹖 亘賴 氐賵乇鬲 丿賳亘丕賱賴鈥� 丿丕乇 丿乇 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 賲噩賱丕鬲 芦賮乇丕賳爻賵蹖禄 賲賳鬲卮乇 賲蹖卮丿貙 丿乇 芦丕蹖乇丕賳禄 賳禺爻鬲蹖賳鈥� 亘丕乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 鬲賵爻胤 芦賲丨賲丿 胤丕賴乇 賲蹖乇夭丕 賯丕噩丕乇 (賲丨賲丿 胤丕賴乇 賲蹖乇夭丕 丕爻讴賳丿乇蹖)禄 丿乇 夭賲丕賳 爻賱胤賳鬲 芦賳丕氐乇丕賱丿蹖賳 卮丕賴 賯丕噩丕乇禄 亘賴 賮丕乇爻蹖 亘乇诏乇丿丕賳 卮丿貙 賵 亘賴 氐賵乇鬲 趩丕倬 爻賳诏蹖 賲賳鬲卮乇 卮丿貙 爻丕賱鈥屬囏� 诏匕卮鬲 鬲丕 鬲乇噩賲賴 丕蹖 丕夭 讴鬲丕亘貙 鬲賵爻胤 芦匕亘蹖丨鈥� 丕賱賱賴 賲賳氐賵乇蹖禄 蹖夭 氐賵乇鬲 诏乇賮鬲 賵 爻倬爻 鬲乇噩賲賴 賴丕蹖 亘爻蹖丕乇 丿蹖诏乇 鬲丕 亘賲丕賳丿 蹖丕丿诏丕乇
鬲丕乇蹖禺 亘賴賳诏丕賲 乇爻丕賳蹖 19/01/1401賴噩乇蹖 禺賵乇卮蹖丿蹖貨 丕. 卮乇亘蹖丕賳蹖
February 26, 2017
I am a drama addict. I admit it. I don鈥檛 generally go for comedy. I will pick a movie that makes me cry over one that makes me laugh every time, and it is pretty much the same with my books. But when I do read something humorous, I love satire, wit, subtle humor. Mark Twain, Oscar Wilde or Will Rogers are my style. Imagine my surprise that Alexander Dumas has made me laugh aloud in The Three Musketeers. They are so over-the-top, while written as if he is endeavoring to take them seriously. I have long adored The Count of Monte Cristo, and so I have never thought of Monsieur Dumas as a humorist, but I have been sadly mistaken.
Every time you think D鈥橝rtagnan and company have landed themselves in an impossible situation, they miraculously find their way out. It is Don Quixote without any of the moral overtones. These men are heroic figures only in a comedic manner. Taken literally they would be abject cads. They are self-absorbed, misogynistic, and amoral, but it little matters since the world they inhabit is villainous and petty and corrupt. The King who is the head of the state is a buffoon, the Queen a philanderer, and the Cardinal, leader of the church, a man without ethics or morals. Any wonder that their men are less than stellar examples of knighthood?
So, without any reason to admire anyone in this fictional world, we are able to enjoy the escapades of these men and even cheer them on toward their conquests of women, rivals, and the world of French politics. In fact, they are more often fighting other Frenchmen than the English, whom they profess to hate but for whom they seem to have great respect and admiration.
I can imagine reading this in serialized form and waiting impatiently to find out what happens to Milady and the Musketeers. There are cliffhangers at almost every chapter ending and the pace is fast and furious. I felt somewhat like a kid again while reading this. I remember that joy in reading just for the thrill of the story...a sensation I don鈥檛 always get with my reading these days.
Every time you think D鈥橝rtagnan and company have landed themselves in an impossible situation, they miraculously find their way out. It is Don Quixote without any of the moral overtones. These men are heroic figures only in a comedic manner. Taken literally they would be abject cads. They are self-absorbed, misogynistic, and amoral, but it little matters since the world they inhabit is villainous and petty and corrupt. The King who is the head of the state is a buffoon, the Queen a philanderer, and the Cardinal, leader of the church, a man without ethics or morals. Any wonder that their men are less than stellar examples of knighthood?
So, without any reason to admire anyone in this fictional world, we are able to enjoy the escapades of these men and even cheer them on toward their conquests of women, rivals, and the world of French politics. In fact, they are more often fighting other Frenchmen than the English, whom they profess to hate but for whom they seem to have great respect and admiration.
I can imagine reading this in serialized form and waiting impatiently to find out what happens to Milady and the Musketeers. There are cliffhangers at almost every chapter ending and the pace is fast and furious. I felt somewhat like a kid again while reading this. I remember that joy in reading just for the thrill of the story...a sensation I don鈥檛 always get with my reading these days.
June 2, 2020
Random thoughts on
(because my brain refuses to write a full review)
鈥� Reading was long overdue. The truth is, it was the very first story I loved as a child. I was four years old, and my favorite game was riding my imaginary steed in a desperate race to save Constance from evil Cardinal Richelieu. I grew up swallowing tales of the valiant Musketeers, and they became a part of my soul.
鈥� Apparently there is a literary genre called swashbuckler that focuses on swordfighting and adventurous heroic characters, and is the most prominent example. Live and learn, my friends, live and learn.
鈥� Plotwise, it was everything I expected, and some more. Scheming, fights, bravery, romanticism, dangerous affairs, loyalty, revenge, surely knew how to write a compelling and entertaining story, with a great insight on historical figures and events, while occassionally inserting a sarcastic comment or two. Well played, sir, well played.
鈥� My world crumbled when I realised that Cardinal Richelieu was not that bad (cue the violins). An antagonist, sure, but he admired D'Artagnan, Aramis, Porthos and Athos, and that contradicted the demon I had in mind. Milady de Winter, though, was the devil incarnate. She managed to seduce and misguide every single unfortunate man she encountered, that was a superpower, if you ask me. She managed to discover her victim's weakness and exploit it to her benefit. Goosebumps.
鈥� As regards the characters, I must admit that D'Artagnan was rather fickle in his affections, being an advocate for insta-love. However, D'Artagnan and Constance were GOALS in my childish fantasies (which were encouraged by BBC's The Musketeers - go watch it people) and I am not going to shed them. Setting aside his enthusiastic romantic nature, D'Artagnan had a sharp mind that verified my need to idolize him (cut me some slack, he was my first love).
鈥� Athos must-be-protected-at-all-costs.
鈥� The last chapters were really upsetting, and totally unexpected. The death toll was HIGH (the most heart-breaking death caused by naivety / stupidity), and I made the mature, adult decision to pretend that it didn't happen. Sue me.
(because my brain refuses to write a full review)
鈥� Reading was long overdue. The truth is, it was the very first story I loved as a child. I was four years old, and my favorite game was riding my imaginary steed in a desperate race to save Constance from evil Cardinal Richelieu. I grew up swallowing tales of the valiant Musketeers, and they became a part of my soul.
鈥� Apparently there is a literary genre called swashbuckler that focuses on swordfighting and adventurous heroic characters, and is the most prominent example. Live and learn, my friends, live and learn.
鈥� Plotwise, it was everything I expected, and some more. Scheming, fights, bravery, romanticism, dangerous affairs, loyalty, revenge, surely knew how to write a compelling and entertaining story, with a great insight on historical figures and events, while occassionally inserting a sarcastic comment or two. Well played, sir, well played.
鈥� My world crumbled when I realised that Cardinal Richelieu was not that bad (cue the violins). An antagonist, sure, but he admired D'Artagnan, Aramis, Porthos and Athos, and that contradicted the demon I had in mind. Milady de Winter, though, was the devil incarnate. She managed to seduce and misguide every single unfortunate man she encountered, that was a superpower, if you ask me. She managed to discover her victim's weakness and exploit it to her benefit. Goosebumps.
鈥� As regards the characters, I must admit that D'Artagnan was rather fickle in his affections, being an advocate for insta-love. However, D'Artagnan and Constance were GOALS in my childish fantasies (which were encouraged by BBC's The Musketeers - go watch it people) and I am not going to shed them. Setting aside his enthusiastic romantic nature, D'Artagnan had a sharp mind that verified my need to idolize him (cut me some slack, he was my first love).
鈥� Athos must-be-protected-at-all-costs.
鈥� The last chapters were really upsetting, and totally unexpected. The death toll was HIGH (the most heart-breaking death caused by naivety / stupidity), and I made the mature, adult decision to pretend that it didn't happen. Sue me.
April 23, 2015
Did you know there were 4 musketeers? Did you also know they were not very nice guys? One guy won't let his servant ever speak. One is having an affair with a married woman, and ridicules her for gifts she buys him. Another can't decide whether to have an affair or be a priest, but constantly pinches his ears to make them a more attractive color. Since they don't seem to be paid much to be musketeers they are constantly grifting off of other people. One of their brave deeds is to have breakfast in the middle of a battle field just to prove that they aren't scared of the English.
I really detested the musketeers, which means I didn't find much to enjoy in the book.
I really detested the musketeers, which means I didn't find much to enjoy in the book.
July 14, 2017
爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 噩夭賵 乇賲丕賳 賴丕賷 丕爻胤賵乇賴 丕賷 賵 噩丕賵蹖丿丕賳 丕爻鬲.丿丕爻鬲丕賳 倬賴賱賵丕賳丕賳蹖 賰賴 亘乇丕賷 賴乇 賲丕噩乇丕噩賵賷賷 爻乇卮丕賳 丨爻丕亘賷 丿乇丿 賲賷 賰賳丿.丿乇 賴乇 噩丕賷賷 亘丕卮賳丿 賵 丿乇 賴乇 噩亘賴賴 丕賷貙 丕賵賱賷賳 趩賷夭賷 賰賴 亘賴 賮賰乇卮丕賳 賲賷 乇爻丿 丿賵爻鬲蹖 賵 賳噩丕鬲 噩丕賳 蹖讴丿蹖诏乇 丕爻鬲
賵賯丕賷毓 賰鬲丕亘 丿乇 賮乇丕賳爻賴 賵 丿乇 夭賲丕賳賷 丕鬲賮丕賯 賲賷 丕賮鬲丿 賰賴 賴賳賵夭 亘丕 卮賲卮賷乇 賲賷 鬲賵丕賳 诏賱賷賲 禺賵丿 乇丕 丕夭 丌亘 賰卮賷丿
賱賵賷賷 爻賷夭丿賴賲 倬丕丿卮丕賴 噩賵丕賳賷 丕爻鬲 賰賴 賴賳賵夭 賯丿乇鬲 夭賷丕丿賷 賳丿丕乇丿 賵 亘乇毓賰爻 賵賷 氐丿乇丕毓馗賲 丕賵 賷毓賳賷 賰丕乇丿賷賳丕賱 乇賷卮賷賱賵 倬丕丿卮丕賴 亘丿賵賳 鬲丕噩 賰卮賵乇 丕爻鬲 .丿賵 丿爻鬲賴 賳馗丕賲賷 丿乇 賰卮賵乇 賵噩賵丿 丿丕乇丿 賷賰 丿爻鬲賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇丕賳 倬丕丿卮丕賴 賵 丿爻鬲賴 丿賷诏乇賷 爻乇亘丕夭丕賳 氐丿乇丕毓馗賲.丕蹖賳 丿賵 丿爻鬲賴 胤丕賯鬲 丿蹖丿賳 乇賵蹖 賴賲丿蹖诏乇 乇丕 賳丿丕乇賳丿 賵 賳夭丕毓 賴丕賷 夭蹖丕丿蹖 亘蹖賳 丌賳賴丕 氐賵乇鬲 賲賷 诏賷乇丿
噩賵丕賳賷 丿丕乇鬲丕賳賷丕賳 賳丕賲 賰賴 丕賴賱 丕賷丕賱鬲 诏丕爻賰賵賳 賮乇丕賳爻賴 丕爻鬲 賵 卮賲卮賷乇亘丕夭賷 賵 乇賵卮 賳亘乇丿 賰乇丿賳 乇丕 丕夭 倬丿乇卮 丌賲賵禺鬲賴貙 亘乇丕賷 賰爻亘 丕賮鬲禺丕乇 賵 孬乇賵鬲 毓丕夭賲 倬丕乇賷爻 賲賷 卮賵丿
丕賵 賲蹖 乇賵丿 讴賴 亘賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇丕賳 倬丕丿卮丕賴 賲賱丨賯 卮賵丿.賴賳诏丕賲 禺丿丕丨丕賮馗賷 貙倬丿乇卮 亘賴 丕賵 賲賷 诏賵賷丿: 丕夭 賲禺丕胤乇賴 賵 丿乇诏賷乇賷 賳鬲乇爻 賵 賴乇噩丕 丌賳乇丕 丿賷丿賷貙 亘賴 爻賵賷 丌賳 亘乇賵
丕賷賳 亘賴鬲乇賷賳 賳氐賷丨鬲 亘乇丕賷 賷賰 爻乇亘丕夭 賳丕卮賳丕禺鬲賴 賵 鬲丕夭賴 賵丕乇丿 丿乇 倬丕乇賷爻 丕爻鬲 鬲丕 夭賵丿鬲乇 倬蹖卮乇賮鬲 讴賳丿 賵賱蹖 亘乇丕蹖 蹖讴 賮乇丿 丕賴賱 诏丕爻讴賵賳蹖- 讴賴 賲毓乇賵賮 亘賴 睾乇賵乇 賵 賱丕賮 夭賳蹖 賴爻鬲賳丿 賵 禺賵丿 賲丕噩乇丕 賲蹖 爻丕夭賳丿 賵 夭蹖丕丿 賳蹖丕夭 亘賴 诏卮鬲賳 丿賳亘丕賱 賲丕噩乇丕 賳丿丕乇賳丿- 丕囟丕賮蹖 丕爻鬲
禺賵丕賳丿賳 20 氐賮丨賴 丕夭 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 胤賵乇蹖 賲乇丕 亘賴 禺賵丿卮 噩匕亘 讴乇丿 讴賴 鬲丕 10 噩賱丿 乇丕 鬲賲丕賲 賳讴乇丿賲 賳鬲賵丕賳爻鬲賲 丌乇丕賲 亘诏蹖乇賲
丌鬲賵爻 賵 丌乇丕賲蹖爻 賵 倬賵乇鬲賵爻 賵 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 賯賴乇賲丕賳 丕賵丕禺乇 賳賵噩賵丕賳蹖 丕賲 亘賵丿賳丿
亘蹖卮鬲乇 丕夭 賴賲賴 毓丕卮賯 卮禺氐蹖鬲 丌鬲賵爻 亘賵丿賲
賵賯丕賷毓 賰鬲丕亘 丿乇 賮乇丕賳爻賴 賵 丿乇 夭賲丕賳賷 丕鬲賮丕賯 賲賷 丕賮鬲丿 賰賴 賴賳賵夭 亘丕 卮賲卮賷乇 賲賷 鬲賵丕賳 诏賱賷賲 禺賵丿 乇丕 丕夭 丌亘 賰卮賷丿
賱賵賷賷 爻賷夭丿賴賲 倬丕丿卮丕賴 噩賵丕賳賷 丕爻鬲 賰賴 賴賳賵夭 賯丿乇鬲 夭賷丕丿賷 賳丿丕乇丿 賵 亘乇毓賰爻 賵賷 氐丿乇丕毓馗賲 丕賵 賷毓賳賷 賰丕乇丿賷賳丕賱 乇賷卮賷賱賵 倬丕丿卮丕賴 亘丿賵賳 鬲丕噩 賰卮賵乇 丕爻鬲 .丿賵 丿爻鬲賴 賳馗丕賲賷 丿乇 賰卮賵乇 賵噩賵丿 丿丕乇丿 賷賰 丿爻鬲賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇丕賳 倬丕丿卮丕賴 賵 丿爻鬲賴 丿賷诏乇賷 爻乇亘丕夭丕賳 氐丿乇丕毓馗賲.丕蹖賳 丿賵 丿爻鬲賴 胤丕賯鬲 丿蹖丿賳 乇賵蹖 賴賲丿蹖诏乇 乇丕 賳丿丕乇賳丿 賵 賳夭丕毓 賴丕賷 夭蹖丕丿蹖 亘蹖賳 丌賳賴丕 氐賵乇鬲 賲賷 诏賷乇丿
噩賵丕賳賷 丿丕乇鬲丕賳賷丕賳 賳丕賲 賰賴 丕賴賱 丕賷丕賱鬲 诏丕爻賰賵賳 賮乇丕賳爻賴 丕爻鬲 賵 卮賲卮賷乇亘丕夭賷 賵 乇賵卮 賳亘乇丿 賰乇丿賳 乇丕 丕夭 倬丿乇卮 丌賲賵禺鬲賴貙 亘乇丕賷 賰爻亘 丕賮鬲禺丕乇 賵 孬乇賵鬲 毓丕夭賲 倬丕乇賷爻 賲賷 卮賵丿
丕賵 賲蹖 乇賵丿 讴賴 亘賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇丕賳 倬丕丿卮丕賴 賲賱丨賯 卮賵丿.賴賳诏丕賲 禺丿丕丨丕賮馗賷 貙倬丿乇卮 亘賴 丕賵 賲賷 诏賵賷丿: 丕夭 賲禺丕胤乇賴 賵 丿乇诏賷乇賷 賳鬲乇爻 賵 賴乇噩丕 丌賳乇丕 丿賷丿賷貙 亘賴 爻賵賷 丌賳 亘乇賵
丕賷賳 亘賴鬲乇賷賳 賳氐賷丨鬲 亘乇丕賷 賷賰 爻乇亘丕夭 賳丕卮賳丕禺鬲賴 賵 鬲丕夭賴 賵丕乇丿 丿乇 倬丕乇賷爻 丕爻鬲 鬲丕 夭賵丿鬲乇 倬蹖卮乇賮鬲 讴賳丿 賵賱蹖 亘乇丕蹖 蹖讴 賮乇丿 丕賴賱 诏丕爻讴賵賳蹖- 讴賴 賲毓乇賵賮 亘賴 睾乇賵乇 賵 賱丕賮 夭賳蹖 賴爻鬲賳丿 賵 禺賵丿 賲丕噩乇丕 賲蹖 爻丕夭賳丿 賵 夭蹖丕丿 賳蹖丕夭 亘賴 诏卮鬲賳 丿賳亘丕賱 賲丕噩乇丕 賳丿丕乇賳丿- 丕囟丕賮蹖 丕爻鬲
禺賵丕賳丿賳 20 氐賮丨賴 丕夭 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 胤賵乇蹖 賲乇丕 亘賴 禺賵丿卮 噩匕亘 讴乇丿 讴賴 鬲丕 10 噩賱丿 乇丕 鬲賲丕賲 賳讴乇丿賲 賳鬲賵丕賳爻鬲賲 丌乇丕賲 亘诏蹖乇賲
丌鬲賵爻 賵 丌乇丕賲蹖爻 賵 倬賵乇鬲賵爻 賵 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 賯賴乇賲丕賳 丕賵丕禺乇 賳賵噩賵丕賳蹖 丕賲 亘賵丿賳丿
亘蹖卮鬲乇 丕夭 賴賲賴 毓丕卮賯 卮禺氐蹖鬲 丌鬲賵爻 亘賵丿賲
June 18, 2022
賰賱 丕賳爻丕賳 賷購賮囟賱 賳賮爻賴 丕賵賱丕
賱匕賱賰 賷爻鬲賴丕賳 亘丕賱丨亘貨賵 丕賱氐丿丕賯丞賵 丕賱賯乇丕亘丞
賱賴匕丕 毓賳丿賲丕 賴鬲賮賵丕: 丕賱賵丕丨丿 賱賱賰賱 賵 丕賱賰賱 賱賵丕丨丿 .. 鬲賵賯賮賳丕 毓賳丿 丕賱賮乇爻丕賳 丕賱孬賱丕孬丞 胤賵賷賱丕貨 賱廿賳賴賲 毓丕卮賵賴丕 賵 賳賮匕賵賴丕
賷賯丕賱 丕賳 丿賵賲丕爻 丕賯鬲亘爻 賯氐鬲賴賲 賲賳 賲匕賰乇丕鬲 賮丕乇爻 賷丿毓賷 鬲卮丕乇賱夭 亘丕鬲夭丕 賵 丕賱賲卮賴賵乇 亘丕爻賲 賰賵賳鬲 丿丕乇鬲丕賳賷丕賳 賵 賰丕賳 賱賴 亘丕毓 賮賷 丕賱鬲噩爻爻 賱氐丕賱丨 賱賵賷爻 丕賱孬丕賱孬 毓卮乇 賵 賵賯毓鬲 賲匕賰乇丕鬲賴 賮賷 丕賷丿賷 丕賱賰爻賳丿乇 丿賵賲丕爻貨 丕賯賵賷 丨賰丕亍 賮賷 丕賱賯乇賳 丕賱鬲丕爻毓 毓卮乇
丕賱胤乇賷賮 丕賳 亘胤賱 乇賵丕賷丞 丕賱賮乇爻丕賳 丕賱鬲賱丕鬲丞 賴賵 賮丕乇爻 乇丕亘毓 丿丕乇鬲丕賳賷丕賳 賮賳乇賷 :毓賱丕賯丞 賲丨亘丞 亘毓丿 毓丿丕賵丞 鬲賳卮兀 亘賷賳賴 賵 亘賷賳 丕孬賵爻 賵 丕乇丕賲賷爻 賵 亘賵乇孬賵爻
賵 丕賷囟丕 鬲賳噩丨 賲丨丕賵賱鬲賴 丕賱賲爻鬲賲賷鬲丞 賱賱丕賱鬲丨丕賯 亘賮乇爻丕賳 丕賱賲賱賰
賵 鬲賰孬乇 丕賱丿爻丕卅爻 賮賷 丕賱亘賱丕胤 賵 賷丨丕賵賱 丕賱亘毓囟 鬲賱賵賷孬 爻賲毓丞 丕賱賲賱賰丞 貨 賵 鬲鬲賵丕賱賶 亘胤賵賱丕鬲 丕賱賮乇爻丕賳 丕賱賲禺賱氐賷賳 亘賱丕 丨丿賵丿 賱賲賱賰賴賲 丕賱囟毓賷賮
鬲丨賯賯 丕賱賮乇爻丕賳 丕賱孬賱丕孬丞 賳噩丕丨丕 睾賷乇 賲爻亘賵賯 賵 賷氐丿乇 賱賴丕 噩夭卅賷賳
乇賵丕賷丞 鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞 賰賱丕爻賷賰賷丞 亘爻賷胤丞 亘賱丕 乇賲賵夭 丕賵 丿賱丕賱丕鬲 睾丕賲囟丞..亘賱 賴賵 丕賱丨賰賷 丕賱賯丿賷賲 丕賱匕賷 賷丐賰丿 賱賳丕 丕賳 氐丿賷賯賰 賴賵 丕賱匕賷 賷氐賵賳賰 賵 賷馗賱 毓賱賶 丕賱毓賴丿 毓賳丿 丕賱禺賱丕賮
賱匕賱賰 賷爻鬲賴丕賳 亘丕賱丨亘貨賵 丕賱氐丿丕賯丞賵 丕賱賯乇丕亘丞
賱賴匕丕 毓賳丿賲丕 賴鬲賮賵丕: 丕賱賵丕丨丿 賱賱賰賱 賵 丕賱賰賱 賱賵丕丨丿 .. 鬲賵賯賮賳丕 毓賳丿 丕賱賮乇爻丕賳 丕賱孬賱丕孬丞 胤賵賷賱丕貨 賱廿賳賴賲 毓丕卮賵賴丕 賵 賳賮匕賵賴丕
賷賯丕賱 丕賳 丿賵賲丕爻 丕賯鬲亘爻 賯氐鬲賴賲 賲賳 賲匕賰乇丕鬲 賮丕乇爻 賷丿毓賷 鬲卮丕乇賱夭 亘丕鬲夭丕 賵 丕賱賲卮賴賵乇 亘丕爻賲 賰賵賳鬲 丿丕乇鬲丕賳賷丕賳 賵 賰丕賳 賱賴 亘丕毓 賮賷 丕賱鬲噩爻爻 賱氐丕賱丨 賱賵賷爻 丕賱孬丕賱孬 毓卮乇 賵 賵賯毓鬲 賲匕賰乇丕鬲賴 賮賷 丕賷丿賷 丕賱賰爻賳丿乇 丿賵賲丕爻貨 丕賯賵賷 丨賰丕亍 賮賷 丕賱賯乇賳 丕賱鬲丕爻毓 毓卮乇
丕賱胤乇賷賮 丕賳 亘胤賱 乇賵丕賷丞 丕賱賮乇爻丕賳 丕賱鬲賱丕鬲丞 賴賵 賮丕乇爻 乇丕亘毓 丿丕乇鬲丕賳賷丕賳 賮賳乇賷 :毓賱丕賯丞 賲丨亘丞 亘毓丿 毓丿丕賵丞 鬲賳卮兀 亘賷賳賴 賵 亘賷賳 丕孬賵爻 賵 丕乇丕賲賷爻 賵 亘賵乇孬賵爻
賵 丕賷囟丕 鬲賳噩丨 賲丨丕賵賱鬲賴 丕賱賲爻鬲賲賷鬲丞 賱賱丕賱鬲丨丕賯 亘賮乇爻丕賳 丕賱賲賱賰
賵 鬲賰孬乇 丕賱丿爻丕卅爻 賮賷 丕賱亘賱丕胤 賵 賷丨丕賵賱 丕賱亘毓囟 鬲賱賵賷孬 爻賲毓丞 丕賱賲賱賰丞 貨 賵 鬲鬲賵丕賱賶 亘胤賵賱丕鬲 丕賱賮乇爻丕賳 丕賱賲禺賱氐賷賳 亘賱丕 丨丿賵丿 賱賲賱賰賴賲 丕賱囟毓賷賮
鬲丨賯賯 丕賱賮乇爻丕賳 丕賱孬賱丕孬丞 賳噩丕丨丕 睾賷乇 賲爻亘賵賯 賵 賷氐丿乇 賱賴丕 噩夭卅賷賳
乇賵丕賷丞 鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞 賰賱丕爻賷賰賷丞 亘爻賷胤丞 亘賱丕 乇賲賵夭 丕賵 丿賱丕賱丕鬲 睾丕賲囟丞..亘賱 賴賵 丕賱丨賰賷 丕賱賯丿賷賲 丕賱匕賷 賷丐賰丿 賱賳丕 丕賳 氐丿賷賯賰 賴賵 丕賱匕賷 賷氐賵賳賰 賵 賷馗賱 毓賱賶 丕賱毓賴丿 毓賳丿 丕賱禺賱丕賮
March 30, 2017
I'm not going to waste more time than necessary for this classic. The problem seems to come from me, since I couldn't follow a lot of the dialog. I couldn't make any sense of what transpired here, especially in the last third of the book.
I liked the intrigue with the royal couple of LouisXIII and Anne d'Autruche. And as soon as these historical characters disappeared from the book did my enjoyment evaporate as well. Like I said, I don't want to dwell on this one starred book too much(one for all, and all for one).
Having said that, I read the book in French and I think if I hadn't, if I'd read it in English I wouldn't have been able to finish the book. The French language was a novelty which kept me going. I simply cannot enjoy most classics. Now, to move onwards as soon as I'm able to.
I liked the intrigue with the royal couple of LouisXIII and Anne d'Autruche. And as soon as these historical characters disappeared from the book did my enjoyment evaporate as well. Like I said, I don't want to dwell on this one starred book too much(one for all, and all for one).
Having said that, I read the book in French and I think if I hadn't, if I'd read it in English I wouldn't have been able to finish the book. The French language was a novelty which kept me going. I simply cannot enjoy most classics. Now, to move onwards as soon as I'm able to.
April 18, 2023
I鈥檓 on now! =)
鈥滱ll for one, one for all.鈥�
I honestly don鈥檛 even know where to start with my review of 鈥淭he Three Musketeers鈥� because the book was so very different to what I expected it to be. When we watch the movies, the three musketeers and d鈥橝rtagnan are always made out to be those honourable and noble heroes that save the day and serve their country and whilst the latter description is true, I can鈥檛 really say that the former one is as well. Or more directly, there is barely anything noble or honourable about them aside of the fact that they always feel offended in their honour and therefore get into plenty of trouble and fights. There I said it. Am I already drawing a pack with pitchforks? Well, I鈥檓 sorry, but it won鈥檛 get any better. XD
鈥漀ever fear quarrels, but seek adventures. I have taught you how to handle a sword; you have thews of iron, a wrist of steel. Fight on all occasions. Fight the more for duels being forbidden, since consequently there is twice as much courage in fighting. I have nothing to give you, my son, but fifteen crowns, my horse, and the counsel you have just heard.鈥�
Considering that鈥檚 the advice d鈥橝rtagnan鈥檚 father gave him before he went out to 鈥渟eek adventures鈥� I鈥檓 not surprised he spent about 75% of the book getting himself in life threatening situations and drew problems like a dungheap draws flies. Me being salty? Oh boy, I barely even started. You might continue to read my review or if you love this book with all your heart like about 76% of goodreads seems to do (I actually recalculated that, I鈥檓 nothing but thorough), just stop reading and abort this mission. Fair warning. I won鈥檛 blame you. ;-P
鈥漃eople, in general,鈥� he said, 鈥渙nly ask advice not to follow it; or if they do follow it, it is for the sake of having someone to blame for having given it.鈥�
Athos was a clever one, you might head his advice or blame me for not taking my warning seriously. Whatever floats your boat. I鈥檒l just continue saying my piece. I know this book is beloved by so many and I鈥檇 be lying if I鈥檇 say I didn鈥檛 enjoy some parts of it. I did. It wasn鈥檛 all bad, but it wasn鈥檛 all good either and I鈥檓 too much of a 21st century person to let some things slide. So this said let鈥檚 get down to business.
鈥漌hat have I to fear,鈥� replied d鈥橝rtagnan, 鈥渁s long as I shall have the luck to enjoy the favour of their Majesties?鈥�
鈥淓verything, believe me. The cardinal is not the man to forget a mystification until he has settled account with the mystifier; and the mystifier appears to me to have the air of being a certain young Gascon of my acquaintance.鈥�
I think by now everyone knows about the main plot of 鈥淭he Three Musketeers鈥�. A young Gascon named d鈥橝rtagnan arrives in Paris to become a Musketeer in the King鈥檚 service. But right after he arrives he already offends 3 musketeers and challenges all of them to a duel that is interrupted by the Cardinal鈥檚 men. The four men bond over their mutual adversaries and become friends that help the Queen regain her diamond ear studs she gave to her English lover Buckingham before she has to wear them on a ball. Another one of the Cardinals malicious schemes against the queen is thwarted and the three musketeers saved the day. So far so good. What鈥檚 interesting is that this only makes about 200 pages of this 560+ pages book. Where all the movies usually end the actual book continues for 350 more pages. So what happens in those pages?!
鈥滳apital! Adieu, Chevalier.鈥�
鈥淎dieu, Countess.鈥�
鈥淐ommend me to the cardinal.鈥�
鈥淐ommend me to Satan.鈥�
Milady and Rochefort exchanged a smile and separated.
Enter Milady one of the Cardinal鈥檚 most trusted and valuable assets. Truth be told, for me Milady was probably the most interesting character in the entire book because she was multi-layered, cunning, as beautiful as resourceful and had absolutely no scruples to do what she had to do in order to get what she wanted. We love a woman that is manipulative af. *lol* Honestly, the way she cheated her way through this book was really admirable and I had to grin when she spent about 6 chapters seducing a man by claiming she was a Protestant only to 鈥渃onvert鈥� to being a Catholic as soon as it served her purpose.
鈥漌ho - - I?鈥� cried Milady; 鈥淚 a Protestant? Oh, no! I call to witness the God who hears us, that on the contrary I am a fervent Catholic!鈥�
Fervent Catholic? Yeah, bet Felton turned in his gave when he heard that coming from her lips. *shakes head* Yet despite being one of the most intelligent pieces on the board she still seemed to be very na茂ve when it came to certain things. I mean how did she even mistake d鈥橝rtagnan for her lover? (Not one of d鈥橝rtagnan鈥檚 best moments btw. He basically raped an unknowing and averse woman. If she鈥檇 known it was d鈥橝rtagnan she would have never even considered to sleep with him. But it was dark. Oh what a plot device. Seriously, Dumas, are you kidding me?!) Which brings me right to d鈥橝rtagnan and the three musketeers.
鈥滵鈥橝rtagnan and Athos put themselves into saddle with their companions, and all four set forward; Athos upon a horse he owed to a woman, Aramis on a horse he owed to his mistress, Porthos on a horse he owed his procurator鈥檚 wife, and d鈥橝rtagnan on a horse he owed to his good fortune 鈥� the best mistress possible.鈥�
I think that sentence and short description is the 鈥渇our musketeers鈥� in a nutshell and I can鈥檛 really say that I鈥檓 a huge fan of them. I used to love Aramis the most and I think of all of them he鈥檚 still my favourite because he might have the same flaws as the others but he is more or less tame in comparison to them. Yes, he has an affair with a woman even though he wants to become a priest but him yielding to this temptation only makes him more human. Plus he isn鈥檛 as hot-headed as the others. Still, when it comes down to it I can鈥檛 really be a fan of either of them because I just can鈥檛 condone their actions.
I mean they basically only drink, gamble and fight their way through the entire book. They have affairs with married women, can鈥檛 seem to be able to hold on to a single coin and treat their hosts as well as their servants poorly. I honestly don鈥檛 get why their servants stuck with them because they didn鈥檛 get paid for most of the book. Either the musketeers were too stupid to keep money and gave it away like it was nothing (and this even though they were always broke) or they gambled with the little they had and lost it again. Well, and if their servants demanded pay they just hit them and the thing was settled. Talk about real role-models right there. I stopped counting the moments I rolled my eyes or facepalmed myself. Also d鈥橝rtagnan literally falls in love with every woman that鈥檚 pretty and talks to him and they all suffer because of it. One way or another giving d鈥橝rtagnan their affection never ends well. XD If you鈥檙e a woman you better stay away from that young Gascon, he鈥檚 trouble. ;-)
鈥漈ake my wealth, my fortune, my glory, all the days I have to live, for such an instant, for a night like that. For that night, madame, that night you loved me, I will swear it.鈥�
As for the other players in the game. I think there wasn鈥檛 enough of the cardinal and we barely found out anything about him. Lord de Winter was okay, I suppose? Buckingham was probably the only truly honourable man in the entire story which is almost comical because him being an English man automatically makes him the enemy of France and therefore of the musketeers. Yet his love and devotion to the Queen was unyielding and he didn鈥檛 even think of another woman like a certain someone *cough* d鈥橝rtagnan *cough* who changed them like his underwear. Yes, I just said that. You can quote me if you want to. I stand by it. *lol*
I personally think that Milady was the most intriguing character of the entire book, yet at the same time, she was limited by being a woman. No matter how cunning or cruel she was, she could only move in certain patterns and the fact she even got arrested speaks volumes about how women were treated back then. This is a theme that鈥檚 running like a thread through the entire book, while the men have all the opportunity in the world and never have to fear any consequences, the same can鈥檛 be said for the women in the story. Well, and the way it all ends? Let鈥檚 just say the only woman that comes out of it in a good way is actually the Queen and she鈥檚 the Queen so I think that says A LOT.
All told, I came out of 鈥淭he Three Musketeers鈥� feeling quite disenchanted. The heroes I loved as a kid aren鈥檛 the heroes I read about. In the movies they were honourable and courageous, fighting against everything that was thrown their way and charmed their way into the beds of their love interests. In the book we get to see an entirely different side of them and I guess that only proves that Hollywood knew what it was doing when it adapted the book into a movie. XD I never thought I鈥檇 say this but I think I鈥檒l stick with the movies this time around. I know 鈥淭he Three Musketeers鈥� is a classic and beloved by many. It has its merits and interesting, whimsical and funny parts, I鈥檒l give you that, but it ultimately wasn鈥檛 for me.
____________________________
Ha! I said I鈥檇 finish this book until the end of March and I did it!
I mean, okay it鈥檚 the 31.st of March but it鈥檚 still March! ;-P
I can鈥檛 believe I finally made it through 鈥淭he Three Musketeers鈥�! I鈥檝e been reading this book since the beginning of February and it was HUGE. *lol*
As for my opinion? Well, I鈥檒l have to think about it.
Full RTC soon! ;-)
_____________________________
I dunno about you but I鈥檝e never read 鈥淭he Three Musketeers鈥� as a book. I watched countless movie adaptations but the book, nope. Never read it.
So when Beki @ Teacup the Storyteller decided to go for a readalong on her BookTube channel in February 2023 my immediate answer was: 鈥淵es, I鈥檓 down for it!鈥�
It鈥檚 been a while I last read a classic so this is going to be fun! *lol*
Have you read 鈥淭he Three Musketeers鈥� as a book or did you only watch the movies too? =)
P.S: I bought this version for my kindle and it only cost EUR 0,49. So that鈥檚 a very good deal right there. Just in case you鈥檙e interested to read it too. Even to borrow it from my library would have been more expensive because I鈥檇 have had to preorder it and that always comes with a fee. XD
Find me on:
鈥滱ll for one, one for all.鈥�
I honestly don鈥檛 even know where to start with my review of 鈥淭he Three Musketeers鈥� because the book was so very different to what I expected it to be. When we watch the movies, the three musketeers and d鈥橝rtagnan are always made out to be those honourable and noble heroes that save the day and serve their country and whilst the latter description is true, I can鈥檛 really say that the former one is as well. Or more directly, there is barely anything noble or honourable about them aside of the fact that they always feel offended in their honour and therefore get into plenty of trouble and fights. There I said it. Am I already drawing a pack with pitchforks? Well, I鈥檓 sorry, but it won鈥檛 get any better. XD
鈥漀ever fear quarrels, but seek adventures. I have taught you how to handle a sword; you have thews of iron, a wrist of steel. Fight on all occasions. Fight the more for duels being forbidden, since consequently there is twice as much courage in fighting. I have nothing to give you, my son, but fifteen crowns, my horse, and the counsel you have just heard.鈥�
Considering that鈥檚 the advice d鈥橝rtagnan鈥檚 father gave him before he went out to 鈥渟eek adventures鈥� I鈥檓 not surprised he spent about 75% of the book getting himself in life threatening situations and drew problems like a dungheap draws flies. Me being salty? Oh boy, I barely even started. You might continue to read my review or if you love this book with all your heart like about 76% of goodreads seems to do (I actually recalculated that, I鈥檓 nothing but thorough), just stop reading and abort this mission. Fair warning. I won鈥檛 blame you. ;-P
鈥漃eople, in general,鈥� he said, 鈥渙nly ask advice not to follow it; or if they do follow it, it is for the sake of having someone to blame for having given it.鈥�
Athos was a clever one, you might head his advice or blame me for not taking my warning seriously. Whatever floats your boat. I鈥檒l just continue saying my piece. I know this book is beloved by so many and I鈥檇 be lying if I鈥檇 say I didn鈥檛 enjoy some parts of it. I did. It wasn鈥檛 all bad, but it wasn鈥檛 all good either and I鈥檓 too much of a 21st century person to let some things slide. So this said let鈥檚 get down to business.
鈥漌hat have I to fear,鈥� replied d鈥橝rtagnan, 鈥渁s long as I shall have the luck to enjoy the favour of their Majesties?鈥�
鈥淓verything, believe me. The cardinal is not the man to forget a mystification until he has settled account with the mystifier; and the mystifier appears to me to have the air of being a certain young Gascon of my acquaintance.鈥�
I think by now everyone knows about the main plot of 鈥淭he Three Musketeers鈥�. A young Gascon named d鈥橝rtagnan arrives in Paris to become a Musketeer in the King鈥檚 service. But right after he arrives he already offends 3 musketeers and challenges all of them to a duel that is interrupted by the Cardinal鈥檚 men. The four men bond over their mutual adversaries and become friends that help the Queen regain her diamond ear studs she gave to her English lover Buckingham before she has to wear them on a ball. Another one of the Cardinals malicious schemes against the queen is thwarted and the three musketeers saved the day. So far so good. What鈥檚 interesting is that this only makes about 200 pages of this 560+ pages book. Where all the movies usually end the actual book continues for 350 more pages. So what happens in those pages?!
鈥滳apital! Adieu, Chevalier.鈥�
鈥淎dieu, Countess.鈥�
鈥淐ommend me to the cardinal.鈥�
鈥淐ommend me to Satan.鈥�
Milady and Rochefort exchanged a smile and separated.
Enter Milady one of the Cardinal鈥檚 most trusted and valuable assets. Truth be told, for me Milady was probably the most interesting character in the entire book because she was multi-layered, cunning, as beautiful as resourceful and had absolutely no scruples to do what she had to do in order to get what she wanted. We love a woman that is manipulative af. *lol* Honestly, the way she cheated her way through this book was really admirable and I had to grin when she spent about 6 chapters seducing a man by claiming she was a Protestant only to 鈥渃onvert鈥� to being a Catholic as soon as it served her purpose.
鈥漌ho - - I?鈥� cried Milady; 鈥淚 a Protestant? Oh, no! I call to witness the God who hears us, that on the contrary I am a fervent Catholic!鈥�
Fervent Catholic? Yeah, bet Felton turned in his gave when he heard that coming from her lips. *shakes head* Yet despite being one of the most intelligent pieces on the board she still seemed to be very na茂ve when it came to certain things. I mean how did she even mistake d鈥橝rtagnan for her lover? (Not one of d鈥橝rtagnan鈥檚 best moments btw. He basically raped an unknowing and averse woman. If she鈥檇 known it was d鈥橝rtagnan she would have never even considered to sleep with him. But it was dark. Oh what a plot device. Seriously, Dumas, are you kidding me?!) Which brings me right to d鈥橝rtagnan and the three musketeers.
鈥滵鈥橝rtagnan and Athos put themselves into saddle with their companions, and all four set forward; Athos upon a horse he owed to a woman, Aramis on a horse he owed to his mistress, Porthos on a horse he owed his procurator鈥檚 wife, and d鈥橝rtagnan on a horse he owed to his good fortune 鈥� the best mistress possible.鈥�
I think that sentence and short description is the 鈥渇our musketeers鈥� in a nutshell and I can鈥檛 really say that I鈥檓 a huge fan of them. I used to love Aramis the most and I think of all of them he鈥檚 still my favourite because he might have the same flaws as the others but he is more or less tame in comparison to them. Yes, he has an affair with a woman even though he wants to become a priest but him yielding to this temptation only makes him more human. Plus he isn鈥檛 as hot-headed as the others. Still, when it comes down to it I can鈥檛 really be a fan of either of them because I just can鈥檛 condone their actions.
I mean they basically only drink, gamble and fight their way through the entire book. They have affairs with married women, can鈥檛 seem to be able to hold on to a single coin and treat their hosts as well as their servants poorly. I honestly don鈥檛 get why their servants stuck with them because they didn鈥檛 get paid for most of the book. Either the musketeers were too stupid to keep money and gave it away like it was nothing (and this even though they were always broke) or they gambled with the little they had and lost it again. Well, and if their servants demanded pay they just hit them and the thing was settled. Talk about real role-models right there. I stopped counting the moments I rolled my eyes or facepalmed myself. Also d鈥橝rtagnan literally falls in love with every woman that鈥檚 pretty and talks to him and they all suffer because of it. One way or another giving d鈥橝rtagnan their affection never ends well. XD If you鈥檙e a woman you better stay away from that young Gascon, he鈥檚 trouble. ;-)
鈥漈ake my wealth, my fortune, my glory, all the days I have to live, for such an instant, for a night like that. For that night, madame, that night you loved me, I will swear it.鈥�
As for the other players in the game. I think there wasn鈥檛 enough of the cardinal and we barely found out anything about him. Lord de Winter was okay, I suppose? Buckingham was probably the only truly honourable man in the entire story which is almost comical because him being an English man automatically makes him the enemy of France and therefore of the musketeers. Yet his love and devotion to the Queen was unyielding and he didn鈥檛 even think of another woman like a certain someone *cough* d鈥橝rtagnan *cough* who changed them like his underwear. Yes, I just said that. You can quote me if you want to. I stand by it. *lol*
I personally think that Milady was the most intriguing character of the entire book, yet at the same time, she was limited by being a woman. No matter how cunning or cruel she was, she could only move in certain patterns and the fact she even got arrested speaks volumes about how women were treated back then. This is a theme that鈥檚 running like a thread through the entire book, while the men have all the opportunity in the world and never have to fear any consequences, the same can鈥檛 be said for the women in the story. Well, and the way it all ends? Let鈥檚 just say the only woman that comes out of it in a good way is actually the Queen and she鈥檚 the Queen so I think that says A LOT.
All told, I came out of 鈥淭he Three Musketeers鈥� feeling quite disenchanted. The heroes I loved as a kid aren鈥檛 the heroes I read about. In the movies they were honourable and courageous, fighting against everything that was thrown their way and charmed their way into the beds of their love interests. In the book we get to see an entirely different side of them and I guess that only proves that Hollywood knew what it was doing when it adapted the book into a movie. XD I never thought I鈥檇 say this but I think I鈥檒l stick with the movies this time around. I know 鈥淭he Three Musketeers鈥� is a classic and beloved by many. It has its merits and interesting, whimsical and funny parts, I鈥檒l give you that, but it ultimately wasn鈥檛 for me.
____________________________
Ha! I said I鈥檇 finish this book until the end of March and I did it!
I mean, okay it鈥檚 the 31.st of March but it鈥檚 still March! ;-P
I can鈥檛 believe I finally made it through 鈥淭he Three Musketeers鈥�! I鈥檝e been reading this book since the beginning of February and it was HUGE. *lol*
As for my opinion? Well, I鈥檒l have to think about it.
Full RTC soon! ;-)
_____________________________
I dunno about you but I鈥檝e never read 鈥淭he Three Musketeers鈥� as a book. I watched countless movie adaptations but the book, nope. Never read it.
So when Beki @ Teacup the Storyteller decided to go for a readalong on her BookTube channel in February 2023 my immediate answer was: 鈥淵es, I鈥檓 down for it!鈥�
It鈥檚 been a while I last read a classic so this is going to be fun! *lol*
Have you read 鈥淭he Three Musketeers鈥� as a book or did you only watch the movies too? =)
P.S: I bought this version for my kindle and it only cost EUR 0,49. So that鈥檚 a very good deal right there. Just in case you鈥檙e interested to read it too. Even to borrow it from my library would have been more expensive because I鈥檇 have had to preorder it and that always comes with a fee. XD
Find me on:
October 25, 2024
I'm really at a loss as to how I should review this book. I'm burdened with mixed feelings, both positive and negative. They are equally strong that I'm not sure how I exactly feel about the book. I'll not venture to state the story or any part of it, for there cannot be many who have not read it, or if not, have watched a movie adaptation. I will only express what I felt for the story, the characters, and the writing.
First I'll begin with the writing. This is Dumas's forte. The exhibition of wit and humour coupled with his ability to create an intriguing tale, keeping the reader in suspense as to what would unfold, is amazing. Over and over he has displayed his mastery in writing, making him one of the widely read and popular French Classicists. Here too was no exception. There was wit, humour, and intrigue which held the reader鈥檚 attention and interest.
The story is a mixture of fiction with an actual historical account of the events that unfolded in the court of Louise XIII of France, and in England, focusing on George Villiers, 1st Duke of Buckingham, at the time of siege la Rochelle. The roles played by France and England in this siege, and the power struggle between these two great enemies (at the time) divided by religion are well portrayed. This allowed the reader to gain a good insight as to the history while enjoying the fictitious story. All these inclusions made the book an interesting read and a quick page-turner.
Now to the characters, and this is where I fell out with the book. However, to do justice to Dumas, I will admit that though some characters had been presented with favour, others have been presented neutrally, letting the readers be their judges. The favoured characters, as anybody would guess, are the three musketeers - Athos, Pothos, Aramis, and the young Gascon hero, D'Artagnan. While I accepted D'Artagnan in the favourable light in which he was portrayed, for the most part, I couldn't do the same for the three musketeers. If Cardinal Richelieu, Comte de Rochefort, and cardinal's guards were bad, the actions of the defending King's musketeers were equally bad. Though the author tried his best to justify them, he utterly failed before my tribunal. The only favoured character that Dumas and I could fully agree on was Madame Bonacieux, the truly loyal servant of the persecuted Anne of Austria, the Queen of France. Surprisingly, however, my interest was piqued and held by those characters Dumas has portrayed neutrally. Cardinal Richelieu is one. Though I wouldn't for the life of me sanction his actions and his persecution towards the Queen, he was not despicable as I expected him to be. My Lady De Winter is another story. She is a novelty to me in the history of classics. A heartless, vengeful woman with an evil disposition, she was the only character I found who roused my emotions. If I may say so, I despised her with passion and didn't feel any remorse at her tragic death.
Overall, however, keeping my perceptions of the characters at bay, I was able to enjoy it. The big question now is whether I would read the sequels? For the time being, the answer is "no". I'm not enamoured much with the musketeers to indulge myself immediately with the sequels. I have read the synopsis of the two and feel I might be able to enjoy them. But when may I lay my hands on them is a question for the future.
First I'll begin with the writing. This is Dumas's forte. The exhibition of wit and humour coupled with his ability to create an intriguing tale, keeping the reader in suspense as to what would unfold, is amazing. Over and over he has displayed his mastery in writing, making him one of the widely read and popular French Classicists. Here too was no exception. There was wit, humour, and intrigue which held the reader鈥檚 attention and interest.
The story is a mixture of fiction with an actual historical account of the events that unfolded in the court of Louise XIII of France, and in England, focusing on George Villiers, 1st Duke of Buckingham, at the time of siege la Rochelle. The roles played by France and England in this siege, and the power struggle between these two great enemies (at the time) divided by religion are well portrayed. This allowed the reader to gain a good insight as to the history while enjoying the fictitious story. All these inclusions made the book an interesting read and a quick page-turner.
Now to the characters, and this is where I fell out with the book. However, to do justice to Dumas, I will admit that though some characters had been presented with favour, others have been presented neutrally, letting the readers be their judges. The favoured characters, as anybody would guess, are the three musketeers - Athos, Pothos, Aramis, and the young Gascon hero, D'Artagnan. While I accepted D'Artagnan in the favourable light in which he was portrayed, for the most part, I couldn't do the same for the three musketeers. If Cardinal Richelieu, Comte de Rochefort, and cardinal's guards were bad, the actions of the defending King's musketeers were equally bad. Though the author tried his best to justify them, he utterly failed before my tribunal. The only favoured character that Dumas and I could fully agree on was Madame Bonacieux, the truly loyal servant of the persecuted Anne of Austria, the Queen of France. Surprisingly, however, my interest was piqued and held by those characters Dumas has portrayed neutrally. Cardinal Richelieu is one. Though I wouldn't for the life of me sanction his actions and his persecution towards the Queen, he was not despicable as I expected him to be. My Lady De Winter is another story. She is a novelty to me in the history of classics. A heartless, vengeful woman with an evil disposition, she was the only character I found who roused my emotions. If I may say so, I despised her with passion and didn't feel any remorse at her tragic death.
Overall, however, keeping my perceptions of the characters at bay, I was able to enjoy it. The big question now is whether I would read the sequels? For the time being, the answer is "no". I'm not enamoured much with the musketeers to indulge myself immediately with the sequels. I have read the synopsis of the two and feel I might be able to enjoy them. But when may I lay my hands on them is a question for the future.
September 26, 2018
I DID IT
See my video:
See my video:
March 6, 2018
Most people know the story. At the very least, they know about the story or they can quote that famous line. I was one of those peeps. I had never bothered to read the book because I saw an adaptation or two. lol
I'm so silly.
So I finally read the book and it was better! Surprise, surprise, right? There's even MORE pathos, chivalry, swordplay, hails of bullets, swooning maidens, and truly an evil Cardinal and a nasty Milady to butt heads against. At first, I honestly thought the over-the-top preoccupation with honor and revenge was the brilliant prelude to a great satire, but it never lets up and there's never a punchline.
So, no. It's just exciting and silly and crazy fluff. :) Yes. Fluff. Hell, the writing style is fast and could be as modern as they come, all the characters larger than life, the action and intrigue and plot points as funny as they are old-school.
It makes for a very entertaining ride. :) There's absolutely nothing stuffy about this. And now I know why it's a classic. :) Classic popcorn fiction. :)
I'm so silly.
So I finally read the book and it was better! Surprise, surprise, right? There's even MORE pathos, chivalry, swordplay, hails of bullets, swooning maidens, and truly an evil Cardinal and a nasty Milady to butt heads against. At first, I honestly thought the over-the-top preoccupation with honor and revenge was the brilliant prelude to a great satire, but it never lets up and there's never a punchline.
So, no. It's just exciting and silly and crazy fluff. :) Yes. Fluff. Hell, the writing style is fast and could be as modern as they come, all the characters larger than life, the action and intrigue and plot points as funny as they are old-school.
It makes for a very entertaining ride. :) There's absolutely nothing stuffy about this. And now I know why it's a classic. :) Classic popcorn fiction. :)
August 27, 2021
| | | | | |
While I understand historical context and I am quite able to appreciate classics without wanting them to reflect 'modern' sensibilities, I have 0 patience for books that glorify rapists.
SPOILERS BELOW
I don't mind reading books about terrible people. I read Nabokov's infamous Lolita and Highsmith's The Talented Mr. Ripley. I enjoy books by Agatha Christie and Shirley Jackson, which are often populated by entirely by horrible people. Unlike those authors, however, Alexandre Dumas goes to great lengths in order to establish that his musketeers are the 'good guys'. Their only flaw is that of being too daring. The omniscient narrator is rooting hard for these guys and most of what they say or do is cast in a favourable light and we are repeatedly reminded of their many positive or admirable character traits. If this book had been narrated by D'Artagnan himself, I could have sort of 'accepted' that he wouldn't think badly of himself or his actions...as things stand, it isn't. Not only does the omniscient narrator condone and heroicizes his behaviour, but the storyline too reinforces this view of D'Artagnan as honourable hero.
Our not so chivalrous heroes
What soon became apparent (to me) was that the narrator was totally off-the-mark when it came to describing what kind of qualities the musketeers demonstrate in their various adventures. For instance, early on in the narrative we are informed that D'Artagnan 鈥渨as a very prudent youth鈥�. Prudent? This is the same guy who picks a fight with every person who gives him a 'bad' look? And no, he doesn't back down, even when he knows that his opponent is more experienced than he is.
D'Artagnan is not only a hothead but a dickhead. The guy is aggressive, impetuous, rude to his elders and superiors, and cares nothing for his country. Yet, he's described as being devout to his King, a true gentleman, a good friend, a great fighter, basically an all-rounder!
I was willing to give D'Artagnan the benefit of the doubt. The story begins with him picking up fights left and right, for the flimsiest reasons. The perceived insults that drive him to 'duel' brought to mind
Ridley Scott's The Duellists, so I was temporarily amused. When I saw that his attitude did not change, he started to get on my nerves. Especially when the narrative kept insisting that he was a 'prudent' and 'smart' young man.
D'Artagnan's been in Paris for 5 minutes and he already struts around like the place as if he owned the streets. He hires a servant and soon decides 鈥渢o thrash Planchet provisionally; which he did with the conscientiousness that D鈥橝rtagnan carried into everything. After having well beaten him, he forbade him to leave his service without his permission鈥�. Soon after D'Artagnan is approached by his landlord who asks his help in finding his wife, Constance Bonacieux, who has been kidnapped...and D'Artagnan ends up falling in love at first sight with Constance (way to help your landlord!).
While Constance never gives any clear indication that she might reciprocate his feelings or attraction, as she is embroiled in some subterfuge and has little time for love, D'Artagnan speaks of her as his 'mistress'. Even when he becomes aware that Constance may be up to no good, as she repeatedly lies to him about her whereabouts and motives, D'Artagnan decides to help her because he has the hots for her. Our 'loyal' hero goes behind his King's back and helps Constance, who is the Queen's seamstress and confidante, hide the Queen's liaison with the Duke of Buckingham. Let me recap: D'Artagnan, our hero, who hates the Cardinal and his guards because they are rivals to the King and his musketeers, decides to help the Queen deceive their King and in doing so ends up helping an English Duke. Do I detect a hint of treachery? And make no mistake. D'Artagnan doesn't help the Queen because he's worried that knowledge of her disloyalty might 'hurt' the King's feelings nor is he doing this because of compassion for the Queen. He decides to betray his country because he's lusting after a woman he's met once or twice. Like, wtf man?
Anyway, he recruits his new friends, Athos, Porthos, and Aramis, to help him him out. Their plan involves travelling to England so the Duke can give to D'Artagnan the Queen's necklace (given to him as a token of her affection). Along the way the musketeers are intercepted by the Cardinal's minions (the Cardinal wants to expose the Queen's affair) and Athos, Porthos, and Aramis are either wounded or incapacitated. D'Artagnan completes his mission, he returns to Paris, caring little for his friends' whereabouts, and becomes once again obsessed by Constance. The Queen shows her gratitude by giving him a flashy ring.
Constance is kidnapped (again) and D'Artagnan remembers that his friends are MIA. He buys them some horses (what a great friend, right?) and rounds them up. He then forgets all about Constance and falls in love with Milady de Winter. He knows that Milady is in cahoots with the Cardinal but he's willing to ignore this. In order to learn Milady's secrets, D'Artagnan recruits her maid who鈥攆or reasons unknown to me鈥攊s in love with him. Our hero forces himself on the maid, and manipulates her into helping him trick Milady. He pretends to be Milady's lover and visits her room at night, breaking the maid's heart and putting her life at risk. He later on convinces Milady that her lover has renounced her and visits her once more at night and rapes Milady. D'Artagnan knows that Milady is in love with another man, but idiotically believes that forcing himself on her will have magically changed her feelings. When he reveals that her lover never called things off with her, and it was him who visited her room a few nights prior, well...she obviously goes ballistic. And D'Artagnan, who until that moment was happy to forget that she is a 'demon' and 'evil', discovers her secret identity.
D'Artagnan remembers that he's in love with Constance who is then killed off by Milady, just in case we needed to remember that Milady is diabolical...more stuff happens, D'Artagnan wants to save the Duke's live, just because it is the Cardinal who wants him dead. D'Artagnan, alongside his bros, plays judge, jury, and executioner and corners and condemns to death Milady.
In spite of our hero's stupidity (he goes to dubious meeting points, ignores other people's warnings, wears his new ring in front of the Cardinal) he wins. Hurray! Except...that he isn't a fucking hero. This guy is a menace. He abuses women, emotionally and physically, manipulates them into sleeping with him, forces himself on them, or makes them agree to do his bidding. Women are disposable for D'Artagnan. He uses them and throws them to the side.
But, you might say, the story is set in the 17th century. Things were different then. Women weren't people. Okay, sure. So let's have a look at the way in which our young D'Artagnan treats other men. He beats and verbally abuses his servant, he goes behind the King's back and commits treason, he forgets all about his friends unless he needs help in getting 'his' women.
The other musketeers are just as bad. Athos is a psychopath. At the age of 25 he forces himself on a 16-year-old girl, and then marries her because 鈥渉e was an honorable man鈥�. He later discovers that she has a fleur-de-lis branded on her shoulder, meaning that she was a criminal. Rather than having a conversation with her, asking what her crime was, he decides to hang her himself. Because he's the master of the land. Athos also treats men rather poorly as he forbids his servant from speaking (not kidding, his servant isn't allowed to talk). Porthos gaslights an older married woman, forcing her to give him money otherwise he will start seeing other women. Aramis also speaks poorly of women (but at least he isn't a rapist, so I guess we have a golden boy after all).
The so-called friendship between the musketeers was one of the novel's most disappointing aspects. These dicks don't give two shits about each other. D'Artagnan forgets all about his friends, and when he then decides to gift them horses as a 'sorry I left you for dead' present, Aramis, Athos, and Porthos end up gambling them or selling them away. What unites them is their idiocy, their arrogance, and their misogyny.
Our diabolical femme fatale and the dignified male villain
Milady is a demon. She's diabolical. She's evil. Both the narrative and the various characters corroborate this view of Milady. Much is made of her beauty and her ability to entice men. Sadly, we have very few sections from her perspective, and in those instances she's made to appear rather pathetic.
Our Cardinal on the other hand appears in a much more forgiving light. He's the 'mastermind', the 'brains', and he's a man, so he gets away with plotting against our heroes.
This book made me mad. I hate it, I hate that people view D'Artagnan & co as 'heroes', that the musketeers have become this emblem of friendship, and I absolutely hate the way women are portrayed (victims or vixens). I don't care if this is considered a classic. Fuck this book.
听/ / /听View all my reviews on 欧宝娱乐
While I understand historical context and I am quite able to appreciate classics without wanting them to reflect 'modern' sensibilities, I have 0 patience for books that glorify rapists.
SPOILERS BELOW
I don't mind reading books about terrible people. I read Nabokov's infamous Lolita and Highsmith's The Talented Mr. Ripley. I enjoy books by Agatha Christie and Shirley Jackson, which are often populated by entirely by horrible people. Unlike those authors, however, Alexandre Dumas goes to great lengths in order to establish that his musketeers are the 'good guys'. Their only flaw is that of being too daring. The omniscient narrator is rooting hard for these guys and most of what they say or do is cast in a favourable light and we are repeatedly reminded of their many positive or admirable character traits. If this book had been narrated by D'Artagnan himself, I could have sort of 'accepted' that he wouldn't think badly of himself or his actions...as things stand, it isn't. Not only does the omniscient narrator condone and heroicizes his behaviour, but the storyline too reinforces this view of D'Artagnan as honourable hero.
Our not so chivalrous heroes
What soon became apparent (to me) was that the narrator was totally off-the-mark when it came to describing what kind of qualities the musketeers demonstrate in their various adventures. For instance, early on in the narrative we are informed that D'Artagnan 鈥渨as a very prudent youth鈥�. Prudent? This is the same guy who picks a fight with every person who gives him a 'bad' look? And no, he doesn't back down, even when he knows that his opponent is more experienced than he is.
D'Artagnan is not only a hothead but a dickhead. The guy is aggressive, impetuous, rude to his elders and superiors, and cares nothing for his country. Yet, he's described as being devout to his King, a true gentleman, a good friend, a great fighter, basically an all-rounder!
I was willing to give D'Artagnan the benefit of the doubt. The story begins with him picking up fights left and right, for the flimsiest reasons. The perceived insults that drive him to 'duel' brought to mind
Ridley Scott's The Duellists, so I was temporarily amused. When I saw that his attitude did not change, he started to get on my nerves. Especially when the narrative kept insisting that he was a 'prudent' and 'smart' young man.
D'Artagnan's been in Paris for 5 minutes and he already struts around like the place as if he owned the streets. He hires a servant and soon decides 鈥渢o thrash Planchet provisionally; which he did with the conscientiousness that D鈥橝rtagnan carried into everything. After having well beaten him, he forbade him to leave his service without his permission鈥�. Soon after D'Artagnan is approached by his landlord who asks his help in finding his wife, Constance Bonacieux, who has been kidnapped...and D'Artagnan ends up falling in love at first sight with Constance (way to help your landlord!).
While Constance never gives any clear indication that she might reciprocate his feelings or attraction, as she is embroiled in some subterfuge and has little time for love, D'Artagnan speaks of her as his 'mistress'. Even when he becomes aware that Constance may be up to no good, as she repeatedly lies to him about her whereabouts and motives, D'Artagnan decides to help her because he has the hots for her. Our 'loyal' hero goes behind his King's back and helps Constance, who is the Queen's seamstress and confidante, hide the Queen's liaison with the Duke of Buckingham. Let me recap: D'Artagnan, our hero, who hates the Cardinal and his guards because they are rivals to the King and his musketeers, decides to help the Queen deceive their King and in doing so ends up helping an English Duke. Do I detect a hint of treachery? And make no mistake. D'Artagnan doesn't help the Queen because he's worried that knowledge of her disloyalty might 'hurt' the King's feelings nor is he doing this because of compassion for the Queen. He decides to betray his country because he's lusting after a woman he's met once or twice. Like, wtf man?
Anyway, he recruits his new friends, Athos, Porthos, and Aramis, to help him him out. Their plan involves travelling to England so the Duke can give to D'Artagnan the Queen's necklace (given to him as a token of her affection). Along the way the musketeers are intercepted by the Cardinal's minions (the Cardinal wants to expose the Queen's affair) and Athos, Porthos, and Aramis are either wounded or incapacitated. D'Artagnan completes his mission, he returns to Paris, caring little for his friends' whereabouts, and becomes once again obsessed by Constance. The Queen shows her gratitude by giving him a flashy ring.
Constance is kidnapped (again) and D'Artagnan remembers that his friends are MIA. He buys them some horses (what a great friend, right?) and rounds them up. He then forgets all about Constance and falls in love with Milady de Winter. He knows that Milady is in cahoots with the Cardinal but he's willing to ignore this. In order to learn Milady's secrets, D'Artagnan recruits her maid who鈥攆or reasons unknown to me鈥攊s in love with him. Our hero forces himself on the maid, and manipulates her into helping him trick Milady. He pretends to be Milady's lover and visits her room at night, breaking the maid's heart and putting her life at risk. He later on convinces Milady that her lover has renounced her and visits her once more at night and rapes Milady. D'Artagnan knows that Milady is in love with another man, but idiotically believes that forcing himself on her will have magically changed her feelings. When he reveals that her lover never called things off with her, and it was him who visited her room a few nights prior, well...she obviously goes ballistic. And D'Artagnan, who until that moment was happy to forget that she is a 'demon' and 'evil', discovers her secret identity.
D'Artagnan remembers that he's in love with Constance who is then killed off by Milady, just in case we needed to remember that Milady is diabolical...more stuff happens, D'Artagnan wants to save the Duke's live, just because it is the Cardinal who wants him dead. D'Artagnan, alongside his bros, plays judge, jury, and executioner and corners and condemns to death Milady.
In spite of our hero's stupidity (he goes to dubious meeting points, ignores other people's warnings, wears his new ring in front of the Cardinal) he wins. Hurray! Except...that he isn't a fucking hero. This guy is a menace. He abuses women, emotionally and physically, manipulates them into sleeping with him, forces himself on them, or makes them agree to do his bidding. Women are disposable for D'Artagnan. He uses them and throws them to the side.
But, you might say, the story is set in the 17th century. Things were different then. Women weren't people. Okay, sure. So let's have a look at the way in which our young D'Artagnan treats other men. He beats and verbally abuses his servant, he goes behind the King's back and commits treason, he forgets all about his friends unless he needs help in getting 'his' women.
The other musketeers are just as bad. Athos is a psychopath. At the age of 25 he forces himself on a 16-year-old girl, and then marries her because 鈥渉e was an honorable man鈥�. He later discovers that she has a fleur-de-lis branded on her shoulder, meaning that she was a criminal. Rather than having a conversation with her, asking what her crime was, he decides to hang her himself. Because he's the master of the land. Athos also treats men rather poorly as he forbids his servant from speaking (not kidding, his servant isn't allowed to talk). Porthos gaslights an older married woman, forcing her to give him money otherwise he will start seeing other women. Aramis also speaks poorly of women (but at least he isn't a rapist, so I guess we have a golden boy after all).
The so-called friendship between the musketeers was one of the novel's most disappointing aspects. These dicks don't give two shits about each other. D'Artagnan forgets all about his friends, and when he then decides to gift them horses as a 'sorry I left you for dead' present, Aramis, Athos, and Porthos end up gambling them or selling them away. What unites them is their idiocy, their arrogance, and their misogyny.
Our diabolical femme fatale and the dignified male villain
Milady is a demon. She's diabolical. She's evil. Both the narrative and the various characters corroborate this view of Milady. Much is made of her beauty and her ability to entice men. Sadly, we have very few sections from her perspective, and in those instances she's made to appear rather pathetic.
Our Cardinal on the other hand appears in a much more forgiving light. He's the 'mastermind', the 'brains', and he's a man, so he gets away with plotting against our heroes.
This book made me mad. I hate it, I hate that people view D'Artagnan & co as 'heroes', that the musketeers have become this emblem of friendship, and I absolutely hate the way women are portrayed (victims or vixens). I don't care if this is considered a classic. Fuck this book.
听/ / /听View all my reviews on 欧宝娱乐
December 15, 2023
To paraphrase a top reviewer here, Bill Kerwin, this may not be the most profound of novels, but it may be the most compelling. I would add that perhaps its profundity is discounted more than it is deserved. I might add too that it is possibly the most entertaining of novels.
Dumas was a bestselling author of his day. The Three Musketeers is not mentioned in the same breath as more literary 19th century works such as War and Peace or A Tale of Two Cities. In fact, I doubt I am not the only reader who suspected before opening the book that it might be a little lowbrow or even geared toward children.
From the first chapter to the last word, this novel puts contemporary bestsellers to shame. It would slay a thousand Kings, Rowlings, and Meyers. It is written in majestic prose, and even though there is plenty of swashbuckling and cloaks and daggers, one can find some high minded thought sprinkled throughout. There is much comaraderie and court intrigue. There is historical significance, though it is not meant to be historically accurate.
One of the title characters, Athos--a lover of wine (Spanish or French), has many thoughtful lines, such as: 鈥淟ife is a chaplet of little miseries which the philosopher counts with a smile. Be philosophers, as I am, gentlemen; sit down at the table and let us drink. Nothing makes the future look so bright as surveying it through a glass of chambertin,鈥� and, "In general, people only ask for advice that they may not follow it or if they should follow it that they may have somebody to blame for having given it.鈥�
The Cardinal, Richelieu, also tends to muse like a great thinker, albeit a rather deceitful one. Louis XIII is shown as a weak monarch who is frequently out-crafted by Richelieu. Lady d'Winter is an archetypal femme fatale. Aramis is a womanizer with noble aspirations aimed at the cloth and is one of the more interesting characters.
One weakness of the novel is its predictable nature. Dumas lingers a bit too long on Lady d'Winter's imprisonment and the seduction of her captor. But even here, there are enough twists, and things lead to such calamities and exciting scenes, that all is forgiven. Dumas must build up sufficient hatred for the dastardly characters and enough admiration for the honorable ones.
Dumas was a bestselling author of his day. The Three Musketeers is not mentioned in the same breath as more literary 19th century works such as War and Peace or A Tale of Two Cities. In fact, I doubt I am not the only reader who suspected before opening the book that it might be a little lowbrow or even geared toward children.
From the first chapter to the last word, this novel puts contemporary bestsellers to shame. It would slay a thousand Kings, Rowlings, and Meyers. It is written in majestic prose, and even though there is plenty of swashbuckling and cloaks and daggers, one can find some high minded thought sprinkled throughout. There is much comaraderie and court intrigue. There is historical significance, though it is not meant to be historically accurate.
One of the title characters, Athos--a lover of wine (Spanish or French), has many thoughtful lines, such as: 鈥淟ife is a chaplet of little miseries which the philosopher counts with a smile. Be philosophers, as I am, gentlemen; sit down at the table and let us drink. Nothing makes the future look so bright as surveying it through a glass of chambertin,鈥� and, "In general, people only ask for advice that they may not follow it or if they should follow it that they may have somebody to blame for having given it.鈥�
The Cardinal, Richelieu, also tends to muse like a great thinker, albeit a rather deceitful one. Louis XIII is shown as a weak monarch who is frequently out-crafted by Richelieu. Lady d'Winter is an archetypal femme fatale. Aramis is a womanizer with noble aspirations aimed at the cloth and is one of the more interesting characters.
One weakness of the novel is its predictable nature. Dumas lingers a bit too long on Lady d'Winter's imprisonment and the seduction of her captor. But even here, there are enough twists, and things lead to such calamities and exciting scenes, that all is forgiven. Dumas must build up sufficient hatred for the dastardly characters and enough admiration for the honorable ones.
February 6, 2018
The initial tale where d'Artagnon as a relatively poor, relationless noble arriving in Paris and making friends with the legendary Porthos, Athos and Artemis and subsequently participating in a big adventure is one of the most exhilarating books of the 19th C in French literature. While not a children's book (due to the difficulty of the French text), the story itself is of course widely known and a favourite for story tellers (using abridged or illustrated versions) and for movie makers. My advice is to read this one and savour it but then continue on to 20 Year Later which is the sequel and is a fantastic story as well...not to mention the crowning achievement (IMHO) of Dumas, The Vicomte de Bragelonne. This first volume takes place during the reign of Louis XIII and does present a nice portrait of life during this time of relative stability in French history.
This first volume is playful and light. Dumas uses this book to present four of his favorite protagonists: D'Artagnan, Portos, Athos, and Aramis (along with their comic-relief porters and so on) and the origins of their lifelong friendships.
Happy father note: I was super proud when my 10-year old son grabbed my copy off the bookshelf and read it cover to cover. He then went on to the second book but kind of pooped out after 300 pages, understandable...
This is one of my favorite French books but I would highly recommend reading the entire series - 20 Years Later, and the three Vicomte de Bragelonne books to get the full picture. Note that each book is set in a specific historical context:
3 Musketeers: reign Louis XIII
20 Years Later: Regence of Louis XIV and the Fronde
Vicomte de Bragelonne 1: Louis XIV early reign (conflict with Fouquet)
Vicomte de Bragelonne 2/Louse de Valiere: reign of Louis XIV and romantic intrigues at court
Vicomte de Bragelonne 3/Man in the Iron Mask: reign of Louis XIV and the fall of Fouquet
Despite adding some fictional elements (well, lots of fictional elements) and controversial interpretations (such as making the very real and still mysterious Man in the Iron Mask to be Louis XIV's twin brother Philippe for which there is zero historical evidence), the scenes, costumes, manners and overall atmosphere is painstakingly realistic for the periods in which these books are set. They are all extraordinary and among the works that Dumas put his own hand too (in other words, he relied less on ghost writers for this series than nearly any of his other books.)
This first volume is playful and light. Dumas uses this book to present four of his favorite protagonists: D'Artagnan, Portos, Athos, and Aramis (along with their comic-relief porters and so on) and the origins of their lifelong friendships.
Happy father note: I was super proud when my 10-year old son grabbed my copy off the bookshelf and read it cover to cover. He then went on to the second book but kind of pooped out after 300 pages, understandable...
This is one of my favorite French books but I would highly recommend reading the entire series - 20 Years Later, and the three Vicomte de Bragelonne books to get the full picture. Note that each book is set in a specific historical context:
3 Musketeers: reign Louis XIII
20 Years Later: Regence of Louis XIV and the Fronde
Vicomte de Bragelonne 1: Louis XIV early reign (conflict with Fouquet)
Vicomte de Bragelonne 2/Louse de Valiere: reign of Louis XIV and romantic intrigues at court
Vicomte de Bragelonne 3/Man in the Iron Mask: reign of Louis XIV and the fall of Fouquet
Despite adding some fictional elements (well, lots of fictional elements) and controversial interpretations (such as making the very real and still mysterious Man in the Iron Mask to be Louis XIV's twin brother Philippe for which there is zero historical evidence), the scenes, costumes, manners and overall atmosphere is painstakingly realistic for the periods in which these books are set. They are all extraordinary and among the works that Dumas put his own hand too (in other words, he relied less on ghost writers for this series than nearly any of his other books.)
December 11, 2023
爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 貙 乇賲丕賳蹖 丕蹖爻鬲 賳賵卮鬲賴 丌賱讴爻丕賳丿乇 丿賵賲丕 貙 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 賲卮賴賵乇 賮乇丕賳爻賵蹖 丿乇 跇丕賳乇 賲丕噩乇丕噩賵蹖丕賳賴 賵 鬲禺蹖賱蹖 讴賴 丿乇 亘爻鬲乇 鬲丕乇蹖禺 賮乇丕賳爻賴 丿乇 賯乇賳 賴賮丿賴 賲蹖 诏匕乇丿 . 讴鬲丕亘 丕賵賱 讴賴 賴賲丕賳 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 丕爻鬲 丿乇 爻丕賱1844 鬲賯乇蹖亘丕 丿乇 700 氐賮丨賴 賲賳鬲卮乇 卮丿 賵 丿乇 爻丕賱 亘毓丿 貙 亘丕 鬲賵噩賴 亘賴 丕爻鬲賯亘丕賱 賮乇丕賵丕賳蹖 讴賴 丕夭 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 卮丿 貙 丿賵賲丕 鬲氐賲蹖賲 诏乇賮鬲 讴賴 丕丿丕賲賴 丕蹖 亘乇 丌賳 亘賳賵蹖爻丿 貙 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 亘丕 毓賳賵丕賳 20 爻丕賱 亘毓丿 賵 鬲賯乇蹖亘丕 亘丕 800 氐賮丨賴 讴鬲丕亘 賲賳鬲卮乇 卮丿 . 噩賳丕亘 丿賵賲丕 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 乇丕 乇賴丕 賳讴乇丿 賵 趩賳丿 爻丕賱 亘毓丿 讴鬲丕亘 丿蹖诏乇蹖 亘賴 賳丕賲 賵蹖讴賳鬲 丿賵 亘乇丕跇賱賵賳 乇丕 賳賵卮鬲 讴賴 卮乇丨 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賮乇夭賳丿 賳丕賲卮乇賵毓 丌鬲賵爻 賵 丕賱亘鬲賴 丿賵乇丕賳 倬蹖乇蹖 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 亘賵丿 讴賴 丕賱亘鬲賴 丕蹖賳 乇賲丕賳 亘賴 賮丕乇爻蹖 鬲乇噩賲賴 賳卮丿賴 .
賳诏丕賴蹖 讴賵鬲丕賴 亘賴 鬲乇噩賲賴 賴丕蹖 賲賵噩賵丿 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 丿乇 丕蹖乇丕賳
亘蹖卮鬲乇 賳丕卮乇賴丕 鬲乇噩蹖丨 丿丕丿賴 丕賳丿 讴賴 禺賱丕氐賴 賵 鬲賱禺蹖氐 卮丿賴 讴鬲丕亘 毓馗蹖賲 丿賵賲丕 乇丕 賲賳鬲卮乇 讴賳賳丿 . 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賴丕蹖 禺賱丕氐賴 卮丿賴 賲毓賲賵賱丕 亘蹖賳 60 鬲丕 220 氐賮丨賴 丿丕乇賳丿 . 丕賲丕 賳卮乇 賴乇賲爻 賵 丕賲蹖乇讴亘蹖乇 賲鬲賳 讴丕賲賱丕 賵賮丕丿丕乇 亘賴 讴鬲丕亘 丕氐賱蹖 亘丕 鬲乇噩賲賴 賲丨賲賲丿 胤丕賴乇 賯丕噩丕乇 乇丕 賲賳鬲卮乇 讴乇丿賴 丕賳丿 讴賴 亘丕 鬲賵噩賴 亘賴 賮賵賳鬲 賵 賯胤毓 讴丕睾匕 貙讴鬲丕亘 亘蹖賳 1400 鬲丕 1660 氐賮丨賴 丿丕乇丿 . 賳卮乇 賳诏丕賴 賴賲 鬲乇噩賲賴 丿蹖诏乇蹖 丕夭 匕亘蹖丨 丕賱賱賴 賲賳氐賵乇蹖 賲賳鬲卮乇 讴乇丿賴 讴賴 鬲賯乇蹖亘丕 3 亘乇丕亘乇 讴鬲丕亘 丿賵賲丕 丨噩賲 丿丕乇丿 ! 讴鬲丕亘 賲賳氐賵乇蹖 讴賴 亘賴 噩丕蹖 丿賵 噩賱丿 讴鬲丕亘 丕氐賱蹖 倬賳噩 噩賱丿 丿丕乇丿 貙 賲丕賳賳丿 丿蹖诏乇 讴鬲丕亘 賴丕蹖 丕蹖卮丕賳 鬲丕 噩丕蹖 賲賲讴賳 丕賯鬲亘丕爻 賵 亘爻胤 丿丕丿賴 卮丿賴 賵 賳丕賲 讴鬲丕亘 賴乇 趩賴 亘丕卮丿 賲爻賱賲丕 鬲乇噩賲賴 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 賳蹖爻鬲 .
爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 賳卮乇 賴乇賲爻 亘丕 鬲乇噩賲賴 賲丨賲賲丿 胤丕賴乇 賯丕噩丕乇
賲丨賲丿 胤丕賴乇 賲蹖乇夭丕 讴賴 丕夭 賳賵丕丿诏丕賳 毓亘丕爻 賲蹖乇夭丕 賵 倬爻乇 毓賲賵蹖 爻賱胤丕賳 氐丕丨亘 賯乇丕賳 賵 鬲丨氐蹖賱 讴乇丿賴 賵 賮乇賳诏 乇賮鬲賴 亘賵丿賴 貙 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賵 讴賳鬲 賲賵賳鬲 讴乇蹖爻鬲賵 乇丕 丿乇夭賲丕賳 賳丕氐乇丕賱丿蹖賳 卮丕賴 亘賴 賮丕乇爻蹖 鬲乇噩賲賴 讴乇丿賴 . 賲丨賲丿 胤丕賴乇賯丕噩丕乇 卮禺氐蹖鬲 噩丕賱亘蹖 丿丕卮鬲賴 貙 丕賵 亘賴 噩丕蹖 丌賳讴賴 丿乇 丿乇亘丕乇 賯丕噩丕乇蹖 賲爻鬲賯乇 卮賵丿 賵賲丕賳賳丿 亘丕賯蹖 賯丕噩丕乇賴丕 亘賴 丿爻蹖爻賴 賵 鬲賵胤卅賴 賲卮睾賵賱 亘丕卮丿 亘賴 讴丕卮丕賳 乇賮鬲賴 賵 卮乇賵毓 亘賴 鬲乇噩賲賴 讴鬲丕亘 賴丕蹖 丿賵賲丕 讴乇丿 . 賳卮乇 賴乇賲爻 賴賲 丿乇 賲賯丿賲賴 讴鬲丕亘 賴賲 賳賵卮鬲賴 讴賴 丿乇 賲鬲賳 丕氐賱蹖 讴鬲丕亘 丿禺賱 賵 鬲氐乇賮 趩賳丿丕賳蹖 氐賵乇鬲 賳诏乇賮鬲賴 賵 鬲賳賴丕 丿乇 亘乇禺蹖 賲賵丕乇丿 丕氐賱丕丨丕鬲蹖 丕賳噩丕賲 卮丿賴 丕爻鬲 . 亘賳丕亘乇丕蹖賳 鬲乇噩賲賴 丕蹖 讴賴 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 丿乇 賯乇賳 21 賲蹖 禺賵丕賳丿 賴賲丕賳 鬲乇噩賲賴 賯乇賳 19 丕爻鬲 讴賴 賳丕氐乇丕賱丿蹖賳 卮丕賴 賴賲 丕丨鬲賲丕賱丕 賴賲丕賳 乇丕 禺賵丕賳丿賴 丕爻鬲 !
鬲乇噩賲賴 噩賳丕亘 賯丕噩丕乇 诏乇趩賴 丿乇 夭賲丕賳 禺賵丿 丕丨鬲賲丕賱丕 噩丕賱亘 賵 诏蹖乇丕 亘賵丿賴 丕賲丕 賳賴 鬲賳賴丕 賴蹖趩 噩匕丕亘蹖鬲蹖 丕賲乇賵夭賴 賳丿丕乇丿 亘賱讴賴 鬲賲丕賲 賵噩賴 胤賳夭 賵 丕賱亘鬲賴 賲丕噩乇丕噩賵蹖蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丿賵賲丕 乇丕 賴賲 丕夭 亘蹖賳 亘乇丿賴 丕爻鬲 . 丕爻鬲賮丕丿賴 賮乇丕賵丕賳 丕夭 賱睾丕鬲 賵 丕氐胤賱丕丨丕鬲 毓乇亘蹖 賲丕賳賳丿 丕賱賱賴 丕讴亘乇 讴賴 亘賴 噩丕蹖 鬲毓噩亘 亘賴 讴丕乇 乇賮鬲賴 賵 賮蹖 丕賱丨賯蹖賯賴 責 讴賴 賲毓丕丿賱 賴丕蹖 亘賴鬲乇蹖 賲丕賳賳丿 亘賴 乇丕爻鬲蹖 責 蹖丕 亘賴 丿乇爻鬲蹖 責 丿丕乇丿 貙 鬲賳賴丕 賳賲賵賳賴 讴賵趩讴蹖 丕夭 丕賳亘賵賴 賱睾丕鬲 賵 毓亘丕乇丕鬲 毓乇亘蹖 丕蹖爻鬲 讴賴 亘蹖卮鬲乇 賮囟丕蹖 讴鬲丕亘 乇丕 亘賴 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴丕蹖 毓乇亘蹖 鬲亘丿蹖賱 讴乇丿賴 鬲丕 蹖讴 乇賲丕賳 賮乇丕賳爻賵蹖 !
賲鬲賳 噩賳丕亘 賯丕噩丕乇 卮亘丕賴鬲蹖 趩卮賲诏蹖乇 亘賴 诏賱爻鬲丕賳 爻毓丿蹖 賴賲 丿丕乇丿 :
亘賳丕亘乇丕蹖賳 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 亘丕蹖丿 禺賵丿 乇丕 亘乇丕蹖 禺賵丕賳丿賳 1660 氐賮丨賴 賲丕賳賳丿 賲鬲賳 亘丕賱丕 丌賲丕丿賴 讴賳丿 !
賲丨鬲賵丕 賵 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 讴鬲丕亘 :
爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 丕賵賱蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 丕夭 爻賴 诏丕賳賴 丿賵賲丕 丿乇 夭賲丕賳 賱賵蹖蹖 爻蹖夭丿賴 賵氐丿乇丕毓馗賲 賲賯鬲丿乇 丕賵 讴丕乇丿蹖賳丕賱 乇蹖卮賱蹖賵 賲蹖 诏匕乇丿 貙 丌賳趩賴 丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賲蹖 亘蹖賳蹖賲 倬丕丿卮丕賴蹖 囟毓蹖賮 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕夭 鬲賮乇賯賴 賲蹖丕賳 賵夭蹖乇 禺賵丿 賵 賲賱讴賴 賵 亘乇禺賵乇丿 賲蹖丕賳 賴賵丕丿丕乇丕賳 丌賳賴丕 賵 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇丕賳 禺賵丿 賵 鬲賮鬲诏丿丕乇丕賳 禺賵丿 亘賴 卮讴賱蹖 丿蹖賵丕賳賴 賵丕乇 賱匕鬲 賲蹖 亘乇丿 . 丕賮夭賵賳 亘乇 乇賯丕亘鬲 賴丕蹖 爻蹖丕爻蹖 貙 噩賳丕亘 丿賵賲丕 賲丨丕氐乇賴 乇賵卮賱 賵 讴賲讴 丕賳诏賱蹖爻蹖 賴丕 賵 蹖丕 亘賴 賯賵賱 賲鬲乇噩賲 丕賳讴乇蹖夭蹖 賴丕 賵 讴賲讴 丿賵讴 丿賵亘賵讴蹖賳诏賴丕賲 亘賴 爻丕讴賳丕賳 賲丨丕氐乇賴 卮丿賴 卮賴乇 乇丕 賴賲 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 诏賳噩丕賳丿賴 鬲丕 丕蹖賳 诏賵賳賴 卮丕蹖丿 鬲賯丕亘賱 賲蹖丕賳 讴丕鬲賵賱蹖讴 賴丕 賵 倬乇賵鬲爻鬲丕賳 賴丕 乇丕 丿乇 賮乇丕賳爻賴 賳卮丕賳 丿丕丿賴 賵丕賱亘鬲賴 鬲毓丕丿賱 賴賲 賲蹖丕賳 鬲丕乇蹖禺 賵 鬲禺蹖賱 丨賮馗 卮賵丿 .
丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 丿賵賲 貙 賱賵蹖蹖 爻蹖夭丿賴賲 丿乇 诏匕卮鬲賴 賵 賱賵蹖蹖 趩賴丕乇丿賴賲 胤賮賱 讴賵趩讴蹖 丕蹖爻鬲 賵 賮乇丕賳爻賴 乇丕 賲賱讴賴 賵 亘丕夭 賴賲 賵夭蹖乇 賲賯鬲丿乇蹖 亘賴 賳丕賲 讴丕乇丿蹖賳丕賱 賲丕夭丕乇賳 丕丿丕乇賴 賲蹖 讴賳賳丿 . 丿賵賲丕 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 亘蹖爻鬲 爻丕賱 亘毓丿 亘賴 丿賵 賵丕賯毓賴 鬲丕乇蹖禺蹖 賲賴賲 丕卮丕乇賴 讴乇丿賴 : 丕賵賱 卮賵乇卮 讴乇丕賲賵賱 賵 丕毓丿丕賲 趩丕乇賱夭 丕賵賱 貙 倬丕丿卮丕賴 丕賳诏賱爻鬲丕賳 鬲賵爻胤 丕賵 賵 丨丕丿孬賴 鬲丕乇蹖禺蹖 丿賵賲 卮賵乇卮 賮賱丕禺賳 賵 鬲賱丕卮 丕卮乇丕賮 賵 賲乇丿賲 亘乇丕蹖 讴賳丕乇 夭丿賳 賲丕夭丕乇賳 .
卮禺氐蹖鬲 賴丕蹖 丕氐賱蹖 讴鬲丕亘 丿賵賲丕 貙 賴賲丕賳 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 賲毓乇賵賮 貙 蹖毓賳蹖 丌鬲賵爻 貙 倬乇賵鬲賵爻 賵 丌乇丕賲蹖爻 賴爻鬲賳丿 讴賴 丕夭 賴賲丕賳 丕亘鬲丿丕蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 貙 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 貙 噩賵丕賳 卮噩丕毓 貙 亘丕賴賵卮 賵 亘丕 讴賮丕蹖鬲 賴賲 亘賴 丌賳賴丕 丕囟丕賮賴 賲蹖 卮賵丿 . 丕蹖賳 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇丕賳 丿乇 丨賯蹖賯鬲 丕氐蹖賱 夭丕丿诏丕賳 亘蹖 倬賵賱蹖 賴爻鬲賳丿 讴賴 亘賴 丿賳亘丕賱 賲丕噩乇丕噩賵蹖蹖 貙 賱賯亘 賵 孬乇賵鬲 丿乇 賮乇丕賳爻賴 賯乇賳 賴賮丿賴 賴爻鬲賳丿 賵 丕爻丕賲蹖 丌賳賴丕 ( 亘賴 噩夭 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 ) 丕爻賲 丨賯蹖賯蹖 丌賳賴丕 賵 丿乇 亘乇诏蹖乇賳丿賴 毓賳賵丕賳 丿乇亘丕乇蹖 丌賳賴丕 賳蹖爻鬲 . 丿賵賲丕 丌乇丕賲蹖爻 乇丕 丌乇丕賲 賵 賲讴丕乇 貙 倬乇賵鬲賵爻 乇丕 賯賵蹖 賵 爻丕丿賴 丿賱 貙 丌鬲賵夭 乇丕 卮噩丕毓 賵 賲爻賱胤 亘賴 丕禺賱丕賯 賵 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 乇丕 亘爻蹖丕乇 亘丕賴賵卮 禺賱賯 讴乇丿賴 . 丿乇 丨賯蹖賯鬲 賴賵卮蹖 讴賴 丿賵賲丕 亘乇丕蹖 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 丌賮乇蹖丿賴 亘賴 賯丿乇蹖 丕蹖爻鬲 讴賴 丕夭 賴賲丕賳 丕亘鬲丿丕 丿蹖诏乇 丕毓囟丕蹖 诏乇賵賴 乇丕 鬲丨鬲 丕賱卮毓丕毓 禺賵丿 賯乇丕乇 丿丕丿賴 賵 亘賴 诏賵賳賴 丕蹖 亘丕 賵噩賵丿 爻賳 讴賲 貙 賳賯卮 乇賴亘乇 賵 胤乇丕丨 诏乇賵賴 乇丕 亘賴 丿爻鬲 賲蹖 诏蹖乇丿 . 丕蹖賳 賴賵卮 夭蹖丕丿 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 賲毓賲賵賱丕 禺賵丿 乇丕 亘賴 卮讴賱 讴丕乇賴丕蹖蹖 賲丕賳賳丿 爻讴賵鬲 貙 丕爻鬲賮丕丿賴 丕夭 鬲丕乇蹖讴蹖 貙 賲禺賮蹖丕賳賴 诏賵卮 丿丕丿賳 賵 鬲睾蹖蹖乇 賱亘丕爻 賳卮丕賳 賲蹖 丿賴丿 貙 讴丕乇賴丕蹖蹖 讴賴 丕賲乇賵夭賴 亘爻蹖丕乇 爻丕丿賴 賵 倬蹖卮 倬丕 丕賮鬲丕丿賴 亘賴 賳馗乇 賲蹖 乇爻賳丿 丕賲丕 亘乇丕蹖 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 賲毓乇賵賮蹖鬲 賵 卮賴乇鬲 賴賲乇丕賴 賲蹖 丌賵乇丿 .賲賵賮賯蹖鬲 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 鬲丕 丕賳丿丕夭賴 丕蹖 丕蹖爻鬲 讴賴 鬲賳賴丕 亘丕 爻讴賵鬲 賵 丕爻鬲賮丕丿賴 丕夭 鬲丕乇蹖讴蹖 賲賵賮賯 亘賴 賴賲 丌睾賵卮蹖 亘丕 夭賳蹖 亘爻蹖丕乇 夭蹖亘丕 賲蹖 卮賵丿 !
爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 亘丕 爻賮乇 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 丕夭 卮賴乇 禺賵丿 亘賴 倬丕乇蹖爻 貙 亘乇禺賵乇丿 丕賵 亘丕 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 賵 丿賵爻鬲蹖 賵 丕鬲丨丕丿 丌賳丕賳 丿乇 賲賯丕亘賱 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇賴丕蹖 讴丕乇丿蹖賳丕賱 卮乇賵毓 賲蹖 卮賵丿. 丌賳賴丕 賲丕賲賵乇蹖鬲 賴丕蹖 賲禺鬲賱賮 乇丕 亘丕 賴賲 丕賳噩丕賲 丿丕丿賴 賵 丿乇 鬲賲丕賲蹖 丌賳賴丕 賴賲 倬蹖乇賵夭 卮丿賴 賵 丿賵爻鬲蹖 丌賳賴丕 賴賲 鬲賯賵蹖鬲 賲蹖 卮賵丿 .丿賵賲丕 賲丨丕氐乇賴 卮賴乇 乇賵卮賱 鬲賵爻胤 讴丕乇丿蹖賳丕賱 賵 鬲賱丕卮 丿賵讴 丿賵亘賵讴蹖賳诏賴丕賲 亘乇丕蹖 乇爻丕賳丿賳 丌匕賵賯賴 賵 賲賴賲丕鬲 亘賴 卮賴乇 賲丨丕氐乇賴 卮丿賴 賵 賯鬲賱 丿賵讴 乇丕 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 卮乇丨 丿丕丿賴 賵 丕賱亘鬲賴 賳賯卮 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 賵 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 乇丕 賴賲 丿乇 丕蹖賳 賳亘乇丿 亘賴 卮讴賱蹖 丕睾乇丕賯 丌賲蹖夭 賳卮丕賳 丿丕丿賴 丕爻鬲 . 丿賵賲丕 讴鬲丕亘 乇丕 亘丕 丕賳鬲賯丕賲 亘賴 倬丕蹖丕賳 賲蹖 乇爻丕賳丿 .
亘蹖爻鬲 爻丕賱 亘毓丿 貙 讴鬲丕亘 丿賵賲 丿賵賲丕 貙 賴賲丕賳诏賵賳賴 讴賴 丕夭 賳丕賲卮 賲卮禺氐 丕爻鬲 亘蹖爻鬲 爻丕賱 亘毓丿 丕夭 丕賳鬲賯丕賲 乇禺 賲蹖 丿賴丿 貙 丿乇 丕蹖賳 夭賲丕賳 丕乇鬲亘丕胤 丿賵爻鬲丕賳 亘丕 賴賲 賯胤毓 卮丿賴 賵 鬲賯乇蹖亘丕 乇丕亘胤賴 丕蹖 亘丕 賴賲 賳丿丕乇賳丿 . 丕夭 賲蹖丕賳 丌賳賴丕 賮賯胤 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 賲丕賳丿賴 賵 亘丕賯蹖 夭賳丿诏蹖 賳爻亘鬲丕 丕卮乇丕賮蹖 丿丕乇賳丿 . 丿乇 丕蹖賳 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 禺亘乇蹖 丕夭 賱賵蹖蹖 爻蹖夭丿賴賲 賵 讴丕乇丿蹖賳丕賱 乇蹖卮賱蹖賵 賳蹖爻鬲 賵 賲丕夭丕乇賳 讴賴 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 卮丕诏乇丿丕賳 讴丕乇丿蹖賳丕賱 爻丕亘賯 丕爻鬲 噩丕蹖 丕賵 乇丕 诏乇賮鬲賴 .
讴鬲丕亘 丿乇 丿賵 賯爻賲鬲 亘賴 氐賵乇鬲 賲賵丕夭蹖 亘蹖丕賳 賲蹖 卮賵丿 貙 亘禺卮 丕賵賱 讴賴 賲乇亘賵胤 亘賴 丕賳賯賱丕亘 丿乇 丕賳诏賱爻鬲丕賳 貙 爻賯賵胤 趩丕乇賱夭 丕賵賱 亘賴 丿爻鬲 讴乇丕賲賵賱 賵 鬲賱丕卮 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 亘乇丕蹖 賳噩丕鬲 丕賵爻鬲 賵 亘禺卮 丿賵賲 貙 賯蹖丕賲 丿乇 賮乇丕賳爻賴 賵 亘賴 賵蹖跇賴 丿乇 倬丕乇蹖爻 亘乇丕蹖 毓夭賱 賲丕夭丕乇賳 . 噩賳丕亘 丿賵賲丕 亘丕夭 賴賲 賲丕賳賳丿 讴鬲丕亘 丕賵賱 貙 鬲丕乇蹖禺 賵 鬲禺蹖賱 乇丕 丿乇 賴賲 丌賲蹖禺鬲賴 賵 亘丕 丕囟丕賮賴 讴乇丿賳 趩賳丿蹖賳 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賮乇毓蹖 讴賴 丕賱亘鬲賴 亘蹖卮鬲乇 丨丕賱鬲 丕讴卮賳 丿丕乇賳丿 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 讴鬲丕亘 乇丕 倬蹖卮 賲蹖 亘乇丿 . 丕賵 丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賴賲 趩賳丿 卮禺氐蹖鬲 丌賮乇蹖丿賴 讴賴 乇丕賵賱 倬爻乇 賳丕賲卮乇賵毓 丌鬲賵爻 乇丕 亘丕蹖丿 賲賴賲鬲乇蹖賳 丌賳丕賳 丿丕賳爻鬲 . 卮乇丨 夭賳丿诏蹖 乇丕賵賱 亘賴 賴賲乇丕賴 丿賵乇丕賳 倬蹖乇蹖 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 倬丕蹖賴 賵 丕爻丕爻 丌禺乇蹖賳 噩賱丿 丕蹖賳 爻賴 诏丕賳賴 卮丿賴 丕爻鬲 .
賳鬲蹖噩賴 诏蹖乇蹖 賳賴丕蹖蹖 :
丨鬲蹖 亘丕 賵噩賵丿 鬲乇噩賲賴 賳賴 趩賳丿丕賳 賲賳丕爻亘 貙 禺賱丕賯蹖鬲 賵 賳賵丌賵乇蹖 貙 卮乇丨 鬲丕乇蹖禺 貙 鬲禺蹖賱 貙 胤賳夭 貙 爻亘讴 夭賳丿诏蹖 丕卮乇丕賮 賵 賳诏丕賴 丌賳丕賳 亘賴 賲乇丿賲 毓丕丿蹖 貙 夭賳丿诏蹖 丿乇亘丕乇蹖 貙 爻亘讴 夭賳丿诏蹖 胤亘賯賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 貙 賯賲丕乇 貙 賲卮乇賵亘 貙 毓卮賯 賵 毓丕卮賯蹖 貙 賯丿乇鬲 賲丨丿賵丿 卮丿賴 卮丕賴 丿乇 亘乇丕亘乇 氐丿乇丕毓馗賲 賵 丕卮乇丕賮 貙 鬲賱丕卮 賲乇丿賲 亘乇丕蹖 賳賮賵匕 蹖乇 倬丕乇賱賲丕賳 貙 鬲丕孬蹖乇 丕賳賯賱丕亘 噩賲賴賵乇蹖 禺賵丕賴丕賳 丕賳诏賱蹖爻蹖 丿乇 賮乇丕賳爻賴 乇丕 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳 丿蹖丿 貙 诏乇趩賴 讴賴 賲禺丕胤亘 賮丕乇爻蹖 夭亘丕賳 亘丕蹖丿 氐亘乇 讴賳丿 鬲丕 鬲乇噩賲賴 噩丿蹖丿蹖 丕夭 丌賳 賲賳鬲卮乇 卮賵丿 貙 诏乇趩賴 讴賴 亘賴 毓賱鬲 丕亘乇 鬲賵乇賲 賮夭丕蹖賳丿賴 貙 丕丨鬲賲丕賱丕 賯丕丿乇 亘賴 禺乇蹖丿 丌賳 賳禺賵丕賴丿 卮丿 ....
賳诏丕賴蹖 讴賵鬲丕賴 亘賴 鬲乇噩賲賴 賴丕蹖 賲賵噩賵丿 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 丿乇 丕蹖乇丕賳
亘蹖卮鬲乇 賳丕卮乇賴丕 鬲乇噩蹖丨 丿丕丿賴 丕賳丿 讴賴 禺賱丕氐賴 賵 鬲賱禺蹖氐 卮丿賴 讴鬲丕亘 毓馗蹖賲 丿賵賲丕 乇丕 賲賳鬲卮乇 讴賳賳丿 . 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賴丕蹖 禺賱丕氐賴 卮丿賴 賲毓賲賵賱丕 亘蹖賳 60 鬲丕 220 氐賮丨賴 丿丕乇賳丿 . 丕賲丕 賳卮乇 賴乇賲爻 賵 丕賲蹖乇讴亘蹖乇 賲鬲賳 讴丕賲賱丕 賵賮丕丿丕乇 亘賴 讴鬲丕亘 丕氐賱蹖 亘丕 鬲乇噩賲賴 賲丨賲賲丿 胤丕賴乇 賯丕噩丕乇 乇丕 賲賳鬲卮乇 讴乇丿賴 丕賳丿 讴賴 亘丕 鬲賵噩賴 亘賴 賮賵賳鬲 賵 賯胤毓 讴丕睾匕 貙讴鬲丕亘 亘蹖賳 1400 鬲丕 1660 氐賮丨賴 丿丕乇丿 . 賳卮乇 賳诏丕賴 賴賲 鬲乇噩賲賴 丿蹖诏乇蹖 丕夭 匕亘蹖丨 丕賱賱賴 賲賳氐賵乇蹖 賲賳鬲卮乇 讴乇丿賴 讴賴 鬲賯乇蹖亘丕 3 亘乇丕亘乇 讴鬲丕亘 丿賵賲丕 丨噩賲 丿丕乇丿 ! 讴鬲丕亘 賲賳氐賵乇蹖 讴賴 亘賴 噩丕蹖 丿賵 噩賱丿 讴鬲丕亘 丕氐賱蹖 倬賳噩 噩賱丿 丿丕乇丿 貙 賲丕賳賳丿 丿蹖诏乇 讴鬲丕亘 賴丕蹖 丕蹖卮丕賳 鬲丕 噩丕蹖 賲賲讴賳 丕賯鬲亘丕爻 賵 亘爻胤 丿丕丿賴 卮丿賴 賵 賳丕賲 讴鬲丕亘 賴乇 趩賴 亘丕卮丿 賲爻賱賲丕 鬲乇噩賲賴 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 賳蹖爻鬲 .
爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 賳卮乇 賴乇賲爻 亘丕 鬲乇噩賲賴 賲丨賲賲丿 胤丕賴乇 賯丕噩丕乇
賲丨賲丿 胤丕賴乇 賲蹖乇夭丕 讴賴 丕夭 賳賵丕丿诏丕賳 毓亘丕爻 賲蹖乇夭丕 賵 倬爻乇 毓賲賵蹖 爻賱胤丕賳 氐丕丨亘 賯乇丕賳 賵 鬲丨氐蹖賱 讴乇丿賴 賵 賮乇賳诏 乇賮鬲賴 亘賵丿賴 貙 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賵 讴賳鬲 賲賵賳鬲 讴乇蹖爻鬲賵 乇丕 丿乇夭賲丕賳 賳丕氐乇丕賱丿蹖賳 卮丕賴 亘賴 賮丕乇爻蹖 鬲乇噩賲賴 讴乇丿賴 . 賲丨賲丿 胤丕賴乇賯丕噩丕乇 卮禺氐蹖鬲 噩丕賱亘蹖 丿丕卮鬲賴 貙 丕賵 亘賴 噩丕蹖 丌賳讴賴 丿乇 丿乇亘丕乇 賯丕噩丕乇蹖 賲爻鬲賯乇 卮賵丿 賵賲丕賳賳丿 亘丕賯蹖 賯丕噩丕乇賴丕 亘賴 丿爻蹖爻賴 賵 鬲賵胤卅賴 賲卮睾賵賱 亘丕卮丿 亘賴 讴丕卮丕賳 乇賮鬲賴 賵 卮乇賵毓 亘賴 鬲乇噩賲賴 讴鬲丕亘 賴丕蹖 丿賵賲丕 讴乇丿 . 賳卮乇 賴乇賲爻 賴賲 丿乇 賲賯丿賲賴 讴鬲丕亘 賴賲 賳賵卮鬲賴 讴賴 丿乇 賲鬲賳 丕氐賱蹖 讴鬲丕亘 丿禺賱 賵 鬲氐乇賮 趩賳丿丕賳蹖 氐賵乇鬲 賳诏乇賮鬲賴 賵 鬲賳賴丕 丿乇 亘乇禺蹖 賲賵丕乇丿 丕氐賱丕丨丕鬲蹖 丕賳噩丕賲 卮丿賴 丕爻鬲 . 亘賳丕亘乇丕蹖賳 鬲乇噩賲賴 丕蹖 讴賴 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 丿乇 賯乇賳 21 賲蹖 禺賵丕賳丿 賴賲丕賳 鬲乇噩賲賴 賯乇賳 19 丕爻鬲 讴賴 賳丕氐乇丕賱丿蹖賳 卮丕賴 賴賲 丕丨鬲賲丕賱丕 賴賲丕賳 乇丕 禺賵丕賳丿賴 丕爻鬲 !
鬲乇噩賲賴 噩賳丕亘 賯丕噩丕乇 诏乇趩賴 丿乇 夭賲丕賳 禺賵丿 丕丨鬲賲丕賱丕 噩丕賱亘 賵 诏蹖乇丕 亘賵丿賴 丕賲丕 賳賴 鬲賳賴丕 賴蹖趩 噩匕丕亘蹖鬲蹖 丕賲乇賵夭賴 賳丿丕乇丿 亘賱讴賴 鬲賲丕賲 賵噩賴 胤賳夭 賵 丕賱亘鬲賴 賲丕噩乇丕噩賵蹖蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丿賵賲丕 乇丕 賴賲 丕夭 亘蹖賳 亘乇丿賴 丕爻鬲 . 丕爻鬲賮丕丿賴 賮乇丕賵丕賳 丕夭 賱睾丕鬲 賵 丕氐胤賱丕丨丕鬲 毓乇亘蹖 賲丕賳賳丿 丕賱賱賴 丕讴亘乇 讴賴 亘賴 噩丕蹖 鬲毓噩亘 亘賴 讴丕乇 乇賮鬲賴 賵 賮蹖 丕賱丨賯蹖賯賴 責 讴賴 賲毓丕丿賱 賴丕蹖 亘賴鬲乇蹖 賲丕賳賳丿 亘賴 乇丕爻鬲蹖 責 蹖丕 亘賴 丿乇爻鬲蹖 責 丿丕乇丿 貙 鬲賳賴丕 賳賲賵賳賴 讴賵趩讴蹖 丕夭 丕賳亘賵賴 賱睾丕鬲 賵 毓亘丕乇丕鬲 毓乇亘蹖 丕蹖爻鬲 讴賴 亘蹖卮鬲乇 賮囟丕蹖 讴鬲丕亘 乇丕 亘賴 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴丕蹖 毓乇亘蹖 鬲亘丿蹖賱 讴乇丿賴 鬲丕 蹖讴 乇賲丕賳 賮乇丕賳爻賵蹖 !
賲鬲賳 噩賳丕亘 賯丕噩丕乇 卮亘丕賴鬲蹖 趩卮賲诏蹖乇 亘賴 诏賱爻鬲丕賳 爻毓丿蹖 賴賲 丿丕乇丿 :
賲毓 賴匕丕 亘丕 丕蹖賳 胤亘毓 毓丕賱蹖 賵 丕蹖賳 賴賲賴 丿丕賳卮 賵賯鬲蹖 讴賴 亘賴鬲 賵 賮讴乇 亘乇 賵蹖 賲爻鬲賵賱蹖 卮丿蹖 賵 丕蹖賳 賳蹖夭 睾丕賱亘 丕賵賯丕鬲 亘賵丿蹖 亘丕賱賲乇賴 夭丕蹖賱 诏卮鬲蹖 . 爻丕毓鬲 賴丕蹖 胤賵賱丕賳蹖 賴賲丕賳 胤賵乇 亘乇 趩蹖夭蹖 賳馗乇 丕賮讴賳丿蹖 賵 賳诏乇丕賳 賲丕賳丿蹖 賵 賴蹖趩 賳诏賮鬲蹖 賵 賴蹖趩 賳賮賴賲蹖丿蹖 貙 賵 丕诏乇 丿乇 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 丕蹖賳 丨丕賱丕鬲 丕噩鬲賲丕毓 乇賮賯丕 丕鬲賮丕賯 丕賮鬲丕丿蹖 丌鬲賵夭 賴蹖趩 賳诏賮鬲蹖 賵 賲胤賱賯丕 丿丕禺賱 賲丨丕賵乇賴 賳卮丿蹖 丕賲丕 亘賴 毓賵囟 亘賴 賯丿乇 趩賴丕乇鬲丕蹖 丌賳 賴丕 卮乇丕亘 賳賵卮蹖丿蹖 賵 賲爻鬲蹖 丿乇 賵蹖 馗丕賴乇 賳卮丿蹖 丕賱丕 丕蹖賳讴賴 亘賴 丨丕賱鬲蹖 亘爻蹖丕乇 賲丨夭賵賳 丿丕禺賱 诏乇丿蹖丿蹖 賵 亘蹖 丕賳丿丕夭賴 賲賱賵賱 賳卮爻鬲蹖 .
亘賳丕亘乇丕蹖賳 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 亘丕蹖丿 禺賵丿 乇丕 亘乇丕蹖 禺賵丕賳丿賳 1660 氐賮丨賴 賲丕賳賳丿 賲鬲賳 亘丕賱丕 丌賲丕丿賴 讴賳丿 !
賲丨鬲賵丕 賵 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 讴鬲丕亘 :
爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 丕賵賱蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 丕夭 爻賴 诏丕賳賴 丿賵賲丕 丿乇 夭賲丕賳 賱賵蹖蹖 爻蹖夭丿賴 賵氐丿乇丕毓馗賲 賲賯鬲丿乇 丕賵 讴丕乇丿蹖賳丕賱 乇蹖卮賱蹖賵 賲蹖 诏匕乇丿 貙 丌賳趩賴 丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賲蹖 亘蹖賳蹖賲 倬丕丿卮丕賴蹖 囟毓蹖賮 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕夭 鬲賮乇賯賴 賲蹖丕賳 賵夭蹖乇 禺賵丿 賵 賲賱讴賴 賵 亘乇禺賵乇丿 賲蹖丕賳 賴賵丕丿丕乇丕賳 丌賳賴丕 賵 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇丕賳 禺賵丿 賵 鬲賮鬲诏丿丕乇丕賳 禺賵丿 亘賴 卮讴賱蹖 丿蹖賵丕賳賴 賵丕乇 賱匕鬲 賲蹖 亘乇丿 . 丕賮夭賵賳 亘乇 乇賯丕亘鬲 賴丕蹖 爻蹖丕爻蹖 貙 噩賳丕亘 丿賵賲丕 賲丨丕氐乇賴 乇賵卮賱 賵 讴賲讴 丕賳诏賱蹖爻蹖 賴丕 賵 蹖丕 亘賴 賯賵賱 賲鬲乇噩賲 丕賳讴乇蹖夭蹖 賴丕 賵 讴賲讴 丿賵讴 丿賵亘賵讴蹖賳诏賴丕賲 亘賴 爻丕讴賳丕賳 賲丨丕氐乇賴 卮丿賴 卮賴乇 乇丕 賴賲 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 诏賳噩丕賳丿賴 鬲丕 丕蹖賳 诏賵賳賴 卮丕蹖丿 鬲賯丕亘賱 賲蹖丕賳 讴丕鬲賵賱蹖讴 賴丕 賵 倬乇賵鬲爻鬲丕賳 賴丕 乇丕 丿乇 賮乇丕賳爻賴 賳卮丕賳 丿丕丿賴 賵丕賱亘鬲賴 鬲毓丕丿賱 賴賲 賲蹖丕賳 鬲丕乇蹖禺 賵 鬲禺蹖賱 丨賮馗 卮賵丿 .
丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 丿賵賲 貙 賱賵蹖蹖 爻蹖夭丿賴賲 丿乇 诏匕卮鬲賴 賵 賱賵蹖蹖 趩賴丕乇丿賴賲 胤賮賱 讴賵趩讴蹖 丕蹖爻鬲 賵 賮乇丕賳爻賴 乇丕 賲賱讴賴 賵 亘丕夭 賴賲 賵夭蹖乇 賲賯鬲丿乇蹖 亘賴 賳丕賲 讴丕乇丿蹖賳丕賱 賲丕夭丕乇賳 丕丿丕乇賴 賲蹖 讴賳賳丿 . 丿賵賲丕 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 亘蹖爻鬲 爻丕賱 亘毓丿 亘賴 丿賵 賵丕賯毓賴 鬲丕乇蹖禺蹖 賲賴賲 丕卮丕乇賴 讴乇丿賴 : 丕賵賱 卮賵乇卮 讴乇丕賲賵賱 賵 丕毓丿丕賲 趩丕乇賱夭 丕賵賱 貙 倬丕丿卮丕賴 丕賳诏賱爻鬲丕賳 鬲賵爻胤 丕賵 賵 丨丕丿孬賴 鬲丕乇蹖禺蹖 丿賵賲 卮賵乇卮 賮賱丕禺賳 賵 鬲賱丕卮 丕卮乇丕賮 賵 賲乇丿賲 亘乇丕蹖 讴賳丕乇 夭丿賳 賲丕夭丕乇賳 .
卮禺氐蹖鬲 賴丕蹖 丕氐賱蹖 讴鬲丕亘 丿賵賲丕 貙 賴賲丕賳 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 賲毓乇賵賮 貙 蹖毓賳蹖 丌鬲賵爻 貙 倬乇賵鬲賵爻 賵 丌乇丕賲蹖爻 賴爻鬲賳丿 讴賴 丕夭 賴賲丕賳 丕亘鬲丿丕蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 貙 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 貙 噩賵丕賳 卮噩丕毓 貙 亘丕賴賵卮 賵 亘丕 讴賮丕蹖鬲 賴賲 亘賴 丌賳賴丕 丕囟丕賮賴 賲蹖 卮賵丿 . 丕蹖賳 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇丕賳 丿乇 丨賯蹖賯鬲 丕氐蹖賱 夭丕丿诏丕賳 亘蹖 倬賵賱蹖 賴爻鬲賳丿 讴賴 亘賴 丿賳亘丕賱 賲丕噩乇丕噩賵蹖蹖 貙 賱賯亘 賵 孬乇賵鬲 丿乇 賮乇丕賳爻賴 賯乇賳 賴賮丿賴 賴爻鬲賳丿 賵 丕爻丕賲蹖 丌賳賴丕 ( 亘賴 噩夭 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 ) 丕爻賲 丨賯蹖賯蹖 丌賳賴丕 賵 丿乇 亘乇诏蹖乇賳丿賴 毓賳賵丕賳 丿乇亘丕乇蹖 丌賳賴丕 賳蹖爻鬲 . 丿賵賲丕 丌乇丕賲蹖爻 乇丕 丌乇丕賲 賵 賲讴丕乇 貙 倬乇賵鬲賵爻 乇丕 賯賵蹖 賵 爻丕丿賴 丿賱 貙 丌鬲賵夭 乇丕 卮噩丕毓 賵 賲爻賱胤 亘賴 丕禺賱丕賯 賵 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 乇丕 亘爻蹖丕乇 亘丕賴賵卮 禺賱賯 讴乇丿賴 . 丿乇 丨賯蹖賯鬲 賴賵卮蹖 讴賴 丿賵賲丕 亘乇丕蹖 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 丌賮乇蹖丿賴 亘賴 賯丿乇蹖 丕蹖爻鬲 讴賴 丕夭 賴賲丕賳 丕亘鬲丿丕 丿蹖诏乇 丕毓囟丕蹖 诏乇賵賴 乇丕 鬲丨鬲 丕賱卮毓丕毓 禺賵丿 賯乇丕乇 丿丕丿賴 賵 亘賴 诏賵賳賴 丕蹖 亘丕 賵噩賵丿 爻賳 讴賲 貙 賳賯卮 乇賴亘乇 賵 胤乇丕丨 诏乇賵賴 乇丕 亘賴 丿爻鬲 賲蹖 诏蹖乇丿 . 丕蹖賳 賴賵卮 夭蹖丕丿 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 賲毓賲賵賱丕 禺賵丿 乇丕 亘賴 卮讴賱 讴丕乇賴丕蹖蹖 賲丕賳賳丿 爻讴賵鬲 貙 丕爻鬲賮丕丿賴 丕夭 鬲丕乇蹖讴蹖 貙 賲禺賮蹖丕賳賴 诏賵卮 丿丕丿賳 賵 鬲睾蹖蹖乇 賱亘丕爻 賳卮丕賳 賲蹖 丿賴丿 貙 讴丕乇賴丕蹖蹖 讴賴 丕賲乇賵夭賴 亘爻蹖丕乇 爻丕丿賴 賵 倬蹖卮 倬丕 丕賮鬲丕丿賴 亘賴 賳馗乇 賲蹖 乇爻賳丿 丕賲丕 亘乇丕蹖 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 賲毓乇賵賮蹖鬲 賵 卮賴乇鬲 賴賲乇丕賴 賲蹖 丌賵乇丿 .賲賵賮賯蹖鬲 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 鬲丕 丕賳丿丕夭賴 丕蹖 丕蹖爻鬲 讴賴 鬲賳賴丕 亘丕 爻讴賵鬲 賵 丕爻鬲賮丕丿賴 丕夭 鬲丕乇蹖讴蹖 賲賵賮賯 亘賴 賴賲 丌睾賵卮蹖 亘丕 夭賳蹖 亘爻蹖丕乇 夭蹖亘丕 賲蹖 卮賵丿 !
爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 亘丕 爻賮乇 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 丕夭 卮賴乇 禺賵丿 亘賴 倬丕乇蹖爻 貙 亘乇禺賵乇丿 丕賵 亘丕 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 賵 丿賵爻鬲蹖 賵 丕鬲丨丕丿 丌賳丕賳 丿乇 賲賯丕亘賱 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇賴丕蹖 讴丕乇丿蹖賳丕賱 卮乇賵毓 賲蹖 卮賵丿. 丌賳賴丕 賲丕賲賵乇蹖鬲 賴丕蹖 賲禺鬲賱賮 乇丕 亘丕 賴賲 丕賳噩丕賲 丿丕丿賴 賵 丿乇 鬲賲丕賲蹖 丌賳賴丕 賴賲 倬蹖乇賵夭 卮丿賴 賵 丿賵爻鬲蹖 丌賳賴丕 賴賲 鬲賯賵蹖鬲 賲蹖 卮賵丿 .丿賵賲丕 賲丨丕氐乇賴 卮賴乇 乇賵卮賱 鬲賵爻胤 讴丕乇丿蹖賳丕賱 賵 鬲賱丕卮 丿賵讴 丿賵亘賵讴蹖賳诏賴丕賲 亘乇丕蹖 乇爻丕賳丿賳 丌匕賵賯賴 賵 賲賴賲丕鬲 亘賴 卮賴乇 賲丨丕氐乇賴 卮丿賴 賵 賯鬲賱 丿賵讴 乇丕 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 卮乇丨 丿丕丿賴 賵 丕賱亘鬲賴 賳賯卮 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 賵 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 乇丕 賴賲 丿乇 丕蹖賳 賳亘乇丿 亘賴 卮讴賱蹖 丕睾乇丕賯 丌賲蹖夭 賳卮丕賳 丿丕丿賴 丕爻鬲 . 丿賵賲丕 讴鬲丕亘 乇丕 亘丕 丕賳鬲賯丕賲 亘賴 倬丕蹖丕賳 賲蹖 乇爻丕賳丿 .
亘蹖爻鬲 爻丕賱 亘毓丿 貙 讴鬲丕亘 丿賵賲 丿賵賲丕 貙 賴賲丕賳诏賵賳賴 讴賴 丕夭 賳丕賲卮 賲卮禺氐 丕爻鬲 亘蹖爻鬲 爻丕賱 亘毓丿 丕夭 丕賳鬲賯丕賲 乇禺 賲蹖 丿賴丿 貙 丿乇 丕蹖賳 夭賲丕賳 丕乇鬲亘丕胤 丿賵爻鬲丕賳 亘丕 賴賲 賯胤毓 卮丿賴 賵 鬲賯乇蹖亘丕 乇丕亘胤賴 丕蹖 亘丕 賴賲 賳丿丕乇賳丿 . 丕夭 賲蹖丕賳 丌賳賴丕 賮賯胤 丿丕乇鬲丕賳蹖丕賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 賲丕賳丿賴 賵 亘丕賯蹖 夭賳丿诏蹖 賳爻亘鬲丕 丕卮乇丕賮蹖 丿丕乇賳丿 . 丿乇 丕蹖賳 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 禺亘乇蹖 丕夭 賱賵蹖蹖 爻蹖夭丿賴賲 賵 讴丕乇丿蹖賳丕賱 乇蹖卮賱蹖賵 賳蹖爻鬲 賵 賲丕夭丕乇賳 讴賴 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 卮丕诏乇丿丕賳 讴丕乇丿蹖賳丕賱 爻丕亘賯 丕爻鬲 噩丕蹖 丕賵 乇丕 诏乇賮鬲賴 .
讴鬲丕亘 丿乇 丿賵 賯爻賲鬲 亘賴 氐賵乇鬲 賲賵丕夭蹖 亘蹖丕賳 賲蹖 卮賵丿 貙 亘禺卮 丕賵賱 讴賴 賲乇亘賵胤 亘賴 丕賳賯賱丕亘 丿乇 丕賳诏賱爻鬲丕賳 貙 爻賯賵胤 趩丕乇賱夭 丕賵賱 亘賴 丿爻鬲 讴乇丕賲賵賱 賵 鬲賱丕卮 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 亘乇丕蹖 賳噩丕鬲 丕賵爻鬲 賵 亘禺卮 丿賵賲 貙 賯蹖丕賲 丿乇 賮乇丕賳爻賴 賵 亘賴 賵蹖跇賴 丿乇 倬丕乇蹖爻 亘乇丕蹖 毓夭賱 賲丕夭丕乇賳 . 噩賳丕亘 丿賵賲丕 亘丕夭 賴賲 賲丕賳賳丿 讴鬲丕亘 丕賵賱 貙 鬲丕乇蹖禺 賵 鬲禺蹖賱 乇丕 丿乇 賴賲 丌賲蹖禺鬲賴 賵 亘丕 丕囟丕賮賴 讴乇丿賳 趩賳丿蹖賳 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賮乇毓蹖 讴賴 丕賱亘鬲賴 亘蹖卮鬲乇 丨丕賱鬲 丕讴卮賳 丿丕乇賳丿 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 讴鬲丕亘 乇丕 倬蹖卮 賲蹖 亘乇丿 . 丕賵 丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賴賲 趩賳丿 卮禺氐蹖鬲 丌賮乇蹖丿賴 讴賴 乇丕賵賱 倬爻乇 賳丕賲卮乇賵毓 丌鬲賵爻 乇丕 亘丕蹖丿 賲賴賲鬲乇蹖賳 丌賳丕賳 丿丕賳爻鬲 . 卮乇丨 夭賳丿诏蹖 乇丕賵賱 亘賴 賴賲乇丕賴 丿賵乇丕賳 倬蹖乇蹖 爻賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 倬丕蹖賴 賵 丕爻丕爻 丌禺乇蹖賳 噩賱丿 丕蹖賳 爻賴 诏丕賳賴 卮丿賴 丕爻鬲 .
賳鬲蹖噩賴 诏蹖乇蹖 賳賴丕蹖蹖 :
丨鬲蹖 亘丕 賵噩賵丿 鬲乇噩賲賴 賳賴 趩賳丿丕賳 賲賳丕爻亘 貙 禺賱丕賯蹖鬲 賵 賳賵丌賵乇蹖 貙 卮乇丨 鬲丕乇蹖禺 貙 鬲禺蹖賱 貙 胤賳夭 貙 爻亘讴 夭賳丿诏蹖 丕卮乇丕賮 賵 賳诏丕賴 丌賳丕賳 亘賴 賲乇丿賲 毓丕丿蹖 貙 夭賳丿诏蹖 丿乇亘丕乇蹖 貙 爻亘讴 夭賳丿诏蹖 胤亘賯賴 鬲賮賳诏丿丕乇 貙 賯賲丕乇 貙 賲卮乇賵亘 貙 毓卮賯 賵 毓丕卮賯蹖 貙 賯丿乇鬲 賲丨丿賵丿 卮丿賴 卮丕賴 丿乇 亘乇丕亘乇 氐丿乇丕毓馗賲 賵 丕卮乇丕賮 貙 鬲賱丕卮 賲乇丿賲 亘乇丕蹖 賳賮賵匕 蹖乇 倬丕乇賱賲丕賳 貙 鬲丕孬蹖乇 丕賳賯賱丕亘 噩賲賴賵乇蹖 禺賵丕賴丕賳 丕賳诏賱蹖爻蹖 丿乇 賮乇丕賳爻賴 乇丕 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳 丿蹖丿 貙 诏乇趩賴 讴賴 賲禺丕胤亘 賮丕乇爻蹖 夭亘丕賳 亘丕蹖丿 氐亘乇 讴賳丿 鬲丕 鬲乇噩賲賴 噩丿蹖丿蹖 丕夭 丌賳 賲賳鬲卮乇 卮賵丿 貙 诏乇趩賴 讴賴 亘賴 毓賱鬲 丕亘乇 鬲賵乇賲 賮夭丕蹖賳丿賴 貙 丕丨鬲賲丕賱丕 賯丕丿乇 亘賴 禺乇蹖丿 丌賳 賳禺賵丕賴丿 卮丿 ....
February 25, 2013
Accept no substitutes! Movies cannot do it justice. Read it. Then read Ten Years Later, Twenty Years Afterward, and well, just read all the Dumas you can get your hands on. You won't regret it. And it will greatly enhance your pleasure when you read The Phoenix Guards by Steven Brust.
October 20, 2021
Every person prefers himself first
That is why love, friendship, and relativs are underestimated
That is why when they chanted: One听 for all, all for one .. We stared at the Three Musketeers for a long time; Because they lived and implemented it
Dumas is said to have borrowed their story from the diary of a knight named Charles Patza, better known as Count Dartanian, who had a practice of espionage for Louis XIII,
and his memoirs were in the hands of Alexandre Dumas; The strongest story in the nineteenth century
The funny thing is that the hero of the novel The Three Knights is the fourth knight of Dartanian, so we see a relationship of love after an enmity arises between him and Athos, Aramis and Porthos
His desperate attempt to join the King's Knights is also successful
Intrigue abounds in the court, and some try to tarnish the queen's reputation; Knights loyal to their weak king are successive heroics without limits
The Three Musketeers is achieving unprecedented success and it is issued in two parts
A simple classic historical novel without symbols or vague connotations ... Rather, it is the old narrative that confirms to us that your friend is the one who preserves you and stays on the covenant when in dispute
That is why love, friendship, and relativs are underestimated
That is why when they chanted: One听 for all, all for one .. We stared at the Three Musketeers for a long time; Because they lived and implemented it
Dumas is said to have borrowed their story from the diary of a knight named Charles Patza, better known as Count Dartanian, who had a practice of espionage for Louis XIII,
and his memoirs were in the hands of Alexandre Dumas; The strongest story in the nineteenth century
The funny thing is that the hero of the novel The Three Knights is the fourth knight of Dartanian, so we see a relationship of love after an enmity arises between him and Athos, Aramis and Porthos
His desperate attempt to join the King's Knights is also successful
Intrigue abounds in the court, and some try to tarnish the queen's reputation; Knights loyal to their weak king are successive heroics without limits
The Three Musketeers is achieving unprecedented success and it is issued in two parts
A simple classic historical novel without symbols or vague connotations ... Rather, it is the old narrative that confirms to us that your friend is the one who preserves you and stays on the covenant when in dispute
September 9, 2007
If I was a Physicist, I would explain it like this: Athos, Porthos and Aramis are like the protons in an atom. D'Artagnan the neutrons that stabilize it. Actually, this would mean they are Lithium. So, keep them away from water. Or else...unfortunately the King sends them on an expedition to the isles. Now, they would have to cross the channel to get there, would they not?
On their way, however, it shows that rivers and winecellars are no good either.
action - reaction. Everybody under their desks!
If I was a Musician, I would explain it like this: Athos, Porthos and Aramis are like the voices in a fugue. D'Artagnan is the rule that binds them. Actually, in their luckier Moments they are the Fugue No. 19, A major from the first book of das Wohltemperierte Klavier (the first note to be played fortissimo, their Subjects are condensed into that first note and unfurl accordingly in the course of the book). In the more tragic moments, however, they are the Fugue No. 18, G-Sharp minor. Watch out for the Tritone, Mylady strikes again!
If I was me, I would say, it is hard to describe how I love this. I have read it many times and I will re-read it forever probably. I will obsess about this one phrase about Myladys Lips forever probably. I will pity Fenton forever probably. I will pity Buckingham much less forever, probably. After all, he did not really retrieve the queen's honour, did he?
On their way, however, it shows that rivers and winecellars are no good either.
action - reaction. Everybody under their desks!
If I was a Musician, I would explain it like this: Athos, Porthos and Aramis are like the voices in a fugue. D'Artagnan is the rule that binds them. Actually, in their luckier Moments they are the Fugue No. 19, A major from the first book of das Wohltemperierte Klavier (the first note to be played fortissimo, their Subjects are condensed into that first note and unfurl accordingly in the course of the book). In the more tragic moments, however, they are the Fugue No. 18, G-Sharp minor. Watch out for the Tritone, Mylady strikes again!
If I was me, I would say, it is hard to describe how I love this. I have read it many times and I will re-read it forever probably. I will obsess about this one phrase about Myladys Lips forever probably. I will pity Fenton forever probably. I will pity Buckingham much less forever, probably. After all, he did not really retrieve the queen's honour, did he?
August 16, 2007
Remarkable book. I have been, on occasion, accused of some sort of self-set elitism which suffuses my opinions and critiques on literature. It seems people are often more likely to think one has an ulterior motive for liking or not liking a book rather than looking at the presented arguments. In any case, I would posit this book as the countermand to that sentencing. It is not a literary book, as such, as it does not place itself in a deep referential or metaphorical state. Though it is certainly influenced by many great works, it is, in its whole, no more nor less than the reigning king of the pulp adventures.
Built on the ridiculous, the humorous, the exciting, and deeply in the characters, this work creates a world of romance (in that oh-so-classic sense) and adventure which conscripts the reader and delivers him to the front lines. I am alway amazed by this book's ability to invoke lust, pity, wonder, respect, scorn, and hatred, all while driving along a plot filled with new events and characters.
Should there be any future for Fantasy, it lies not in the hands of Tolkien-copying machines, nor even in Moorecock's 'un-fantasy', but in whatever writer can capture , , , or and make a world which is exciting not because everything is magical and strange, but because everything is entirely recognizable, but much stranger. Of course, one may want to avoid going 's route with this, and take a lesson from the driving plot and carefree frivolity that Dumas Pere and his innumerable ghostwriters adhered to.
It is amusing here to note that Dumas has accredited to his name far more books than he is likely to have ever written. As he was paid for each book with his name on it, he made a sort of 'writing shop' where he would dictate plots, characters, or sometimes just titles to a series of hired writers and let them fill in the details.
So, praises be to Dumas or whichever of his unrecognized hirees wrote such a work.
Built on the ridiculous, the humorous, the exciting, and deeply in the characters, this work creates a world of romance (in that oh-so-classic sense) and adventure which conscripts the reader and delivers him to the front lines. I am alway amazed by this book's ability to invoke lust, pity, wonder, respect, scorn, and hatred, all while driving along a plot filled with new events and characters.
Should there be any future for Fantasy, it lies not in the hands of Tolkien-copying machines, nor even in Moorecock's 'un-fantasy', but in whatever writer can capture , , , or and make a world which is exciting not because everything is magical and strange, but because everything is entirely recognizable, but much stranger. Of course, one may want to avoid going 's route with this, and take a lesson from the driving plot and carefree frivolity that Dumas Pere and his innumerable ghostwriters adhered to.
It is amusing here to note that Dumas has accredited to his name far more books than he is likely to have ever written. As he was paid for each book with his name on it, he made a sort of 'writing shop' where he would dictate plots, characters, or sometimes just titles to a series of hired writers and let them fill in the details.
So, praises be to Dumas or whichever of his unrecognized hirees wrote such a work.
March 15, 2018
All for one and one for all.
Probably THE most well-known quote from any book in history. This is the tale of D鈥橝rtagnon, a young Gascon traveling to Paris to seek his fortune and finding the three Musketeers Athos, Porthos and Aramis upon his arrival.
From then on, it is a swashbuckling adventure full of intrigues, sword fights, heartbreak and much more.
The story has been adapted too many times to count them all, making the names of the Musketeers as immortal as those of their adversaries: cardinal Richelieu, count de Rochefort, Milady de Winter.
Alexandre Dumas has written what I call a true classic. It is a pure satire about all layers of society from the ruling nobility and the Church to the poorest farmer.
The author makes equal fun of what was supposedly honorable, how easily love was declared, how people were constantly in debt (the rich as much as the poor), about what useless and ridiculous topics clerics argued and philosophized, reasons for loyalty and so much more. There isn鈥檛 a single topic Alexandre Dumas did not address. Therefore, you have to read this adventure story with more than just one grain of salt.
However, considering the age of the tale, it is all the more remarkable how modern it is written. One very prominent example is the 鈥瀢eak womenfolk鈥�, who nevertheless hold their own against the liars and cheaters that call themselves their lovers, husbands and sovereigns. The queen against the cardinal and king, Constance against her idiot of a husband and even D鈥橝rtagnan to a certain degree, Milady against all of them.
They all have suffered from great injustice and make their own fates.
The queen, who is supposed to have such a blessed life but not only sits in a golden cage but is also beaten with a golden whip; Constance, who has the honor of serving the queen but is never taken seriously, only ever looked at as a plaything; Milady, who might not be a 鈥瀗ice鈥� person, but who spits social convention in the face anyway and does what she has to in order to survive and live well (OK, she really is the bad guy but a man doing the same would certainly not have been met with the same judgement).
They stand opposite men like Athos, who hung his wife simply for a brand, not even listening to the story of how it was given (it was given justly, for sure, but at the time he didn't know that!) and who doesn鈥檛 give the least bit of importance to an animal鈥檚 life and likes to gamble things away that aren鈥檛 even his; or D鈥橝rtagnan, who likes to beat his valet and lackay and just wants to have fun and damn who gets hurt; or Porthos, who hops from bed to bed so long as his mistress pays his way; or Aramis, who pretends to be oh so devout, but sees in women nothing but a mirror with which to admire himself; or the king, who might not be the fool he often is portrayed as in the movies, but who is simply not very interested in matters of state (which is probably even worse); or the cardinal, who is actually not a bad statesman per se, but simply a typical Catholic (though just).
We have the politics of the day nicely interwoven in this social critique. The Battle of La Rochelle, the ever changing loyalties of certain provinces and cities. These are but a few examples as there are many more people and aspects here. The people breathe life into an action-packed story of politics, religion, treachery, love, and friendship before a most intricately drawn background.
Dumas has an impeccable writing style as well. I have to point out how ageless the story is, but the engaging, colorful writing style that so perfectly conveys the scorn and mockery of the ways of life portrayed here makes it a delight to read and doesn't give away the book's age at all.
This was not the first time I鈥檝e read this book and I鈥檝e seen many adaptations, but it was the first time I listened to an audiobook version and the narrator did a great job linguistically (pronouncing the French terms correctly) as well as in conveying the sarcasm and ridicule.
January 30, 2021
Un romanzo di avventura ricco di duelli, intrighi, complotti e misteri assolutamente avvincente e con personaggi iconici. Forse un po鈥� prolisso in alcune parti ma assolutamente consigliato!
June 28, 2018
Remarkable book. Reading this novel was awesome and fun.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 10,419 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.