MobileRead Forums - View Single Post - New Leaf June 2018 Discussion • The Three Musketeers by Alexandre Dumas

latepaul · 06-15-2018, 08:33 PM

I finished it last night. In the end I found it a slog but not as much as I'd feared.

I think my biggest impression was how the tone varied throughout. I'd never read it before but had, of course, seen at least bits of various film adaptations. So I began the book expecting straight ahead swashbuckling adventure, slightly tongue-in-cheek perhaps but certainly not a parody or anything. And for about the first third or so I got what I expected.

Then about half way through it occurred to me - as I was getting a little annoyed at how casual the violence was and how cheap human life was held - that actually what this was was a farce (a french one no less!). That the violence and death was cartoonish on purpose. It was Tom-and-Jerry not to be taken seriously.

But then toward the final third it takes a shift again and becomes a dark revenge thriller.

Actually there were probably a few more styles than that but those were the main ones I noticed. I guess part of it was explained by the serial nature of the original.

Another thing I want to mention is the pace. I found it very slow. This is contrast to more than one person who has described it as 'rollicking'. I actually think there's a sense in which both are true. In many ways a lot happens fairly quickly, giving a sense of pace, of rollicking action. But a lot of that action feels like pointless business that doesn't advance the plot. For example there's a mission to England that the four friends set off on. It's important and urgent and has a deadline. Off they go and one by one the Musketeers get waylaid in different ways, leaving only D'Artagnan to make it across the channel to carry out the mission. Then he returns and one by one we pick up the Musketeers again and find out what had happened to them and resolve the issues holding them up.

So the mission succeeds and it's done in the timescale that was needed. So there's a sense in which this was 'fast paced' or 'action packed' but it feels slow because we pause to describe these incidents along the way. And back.

And that's before we get to all the talk about food, about wine, about possible duels and actual duels, and - a very big theme - who pays for what and how they get the money.

I think a lot of this comes down to different expectations of a different age, and serialisation. In fact if Dumas was getting paid per chapter I guess it made sense to pad out the book with extra scenes. As long as they had some element - humour, a favourite character, lifestyles of the rich and stupid - that the reader would enjoy, for that chapter, it wouldn't too much matter because no one was sitting down to read the thing as a whole. At least not until later.

I have other issues with the text but they are subservient to this question of tone really. Before debating the problematic nature of the main characters' supposed 'heroism' for example, it would be first useful to decide how seriously the book takes itself. If the whole thing is a farce or a parody then maybe we shouldn't worry over the fact that ordinary people went to war and died because these people played their little games of intrigue and jealousy.

Overally it comes out on the positive side - I gave it 6/10 - but it's too long, and too muddled in tone for me.

06-15-2018, 08:33 PM	#14
latepaul Wizard Posts: 1,270 Karma: 10468300 Join Date: Dec 2011 Device: a variety (mostly kindles and kobos)	I finished it last night. In the end I found it a slog but not as much as I'd feared. I think my biggest impression was how the tone varied throughout. I'd never read it before but had, of course, seen at least bits of various film adaptations. So I began the book expecting straight ahead swashbuckling adventure, slightly tongue-in-cheek perhaps but certainly not a parody or anything. And for about the first third or so I got what I expected. Then about half way through it occurred to me - as I was getting a little annoyed at how casual the violence was and how cheap human life was held - that actually what this was was a farce (a french one no less!). That the violence and death was cartoonish on purpose. It was Tom-and-Jerry not to be taken seriously. But then toward the final third it takes a shift again and becomes a dark revenge thriller. Actually there were probably a few more styles than that but those were the main ones I noticed. I guess part of it was explained by the serial nature of the original. Another thing I want to mention is the pace. I found it very slow. This is contrast to more than one person who has described it as 'rollicking'. I actually think there's a sense in which both are true. In many ways a lot happens fairly quickly, giving a sense of pace, of rollicking action. But a lot of that action feels like pointless business that doesn't advance the plot. For example there's a mission to England that the four friends set off on. It's important and urgent and has a deadline. Off they go and one by one the Musketeers get waylaid in different ways, leaving only D'Artagnan to make it across the channel to carry out the mission. Then he returns and one by one we pick up the Musketeers again and find out what had happened to them and resolve the issues holding them up. So the mission succeeds and it's done in the timescale that was needed. So there's a sense in which this was 'fast paced' or 'action packed' but it feels slow because we pause to describe these incidents along the way. And back. And that's before we get to all the talk about food, about wine, about possible duels and actual duels, and - a very big theme - who pays for what and how they get the money. I think a lot of this comes down to different expectations of a different age, and serialisation. In fact if Dumas was getting paid per chapter I guess it made sense to pad out the book with extra scenes. As long as they had some element - humour, a favourite character, lifestyles of the rich and stupid - that the reader would enjoy, for that chapter, it wouldn't too much matter because no one was sitting down to read the thing as a whole. At least not until later. I have other issues with the text but they are subservient to this question of tone really. Before debating the problematic nature of the main characters' supposed 'heroism' for example, it would be first useful to decide how seriously the book takes itself. If the whole thing is a farce or a parody then maybe we shouldn't worry over the fact that ordinary people went to war and died because these people played their little games of intrigue and jealousy. Overally it comes out on the positive side - I gave it 6/10 - but it's too long, and too muddled in tone for me.