The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion

At this point our story comes together and follows one plot. We meet again our great enemy, Mordaunt. I was questioning how such a young man could be an intimate of Cromwell, but then we saw the even younger Raoul at the right hand of a commander.

Do you admire Charles I? He is presented throughout as dignified, brave, calm, devoted to friends and family. And a bit later, when we meet Cromwell, he isn't a total monster, but seems to respect his enemies and regret some of the violence. On the other hand, Mordaunt is a crazed psychopath, as we know.

And at an unexpected moment, all our friends are together again. Ellsworth has d'Artagnan and Porthos utter the famous phrase "Place Royale" as a sort of password, but that isn't in my French version. The friends go through a series of negotiations about their loyalties and plans. D'Artagnan is perfectly willing to sacrifice King Charles, who is nothing to him, but of course he'll never give up his friends. We get to see several inventive ideas of the Gascon, who directs the escape and the reunion with the army.

It seems possible that with the four friends together, they can do anything. Yet even Dumas doesn't alter history in its largest form, so we know the future looks grim.

Ellsworth must have added that in - it’s not in any of my books. I think he takes too many creative liberties. 🤷🏻‍♀️

I do like King Charles - he seems like a nice guy.

This is a great section as a whole - our 4 friends finally meet again on the battlefield. It’s similar to the escape of Beaufort, but the forces have shifted - this time Athos & Aramis are on the losing side. Lord Winter becomes the first victim of Milady’s son.
I really like D’Artagnan in these chapters - he is loyal to his friends and risks his life to help them. The way he outsmarts Mordaunt is very entertaining.
Aramis describes him well - ‘superior intelligence and enterprising mind’.

Athos is always a bit too idealistic for me, but at this point in the book he takes it too far in supporting ‘the cause of misfortune, religion, royalty.’
I think he unfairly accuses D’Artagnan and Porthos and he is somewhat delusional when he insists they can save King Charles.


‘’perhaps you have done your duty as a soldier, but as a gentleman, I say that you are very culpable.”

D’Artagnan is much more practical and logical:


“Athos, your mission is ended, and ended nobly; return to France with us...Do not exaggerate your duty. In Heaven’s name, my dear Athos, do not make a useless sacrifice.”

The best part - no matter what happens, Porthos never loses his appetite. 😋

I don't think Athos ever lies, he just omits to say things or leads people in another direction, such as claiming Raoul is his ward. But d'Artagnan lies convincingly whenever it is helpful. He is often successful because he appeals to other people's baser instincts. For instance, when he was helping the queen escape, he said the carriage was closed because the carriage's owner got lucky with a woman. (I was amused that the original French actually uses that phrase that seems very modern to me.) D'Artagnan is also creative, using the truth as a joke, when he tells the Parisians that Mazarin is in the carriage, or using a deceptive wording, as in this section where the army captain thinks he is being saluted, but it is really the king.

In this section, he uses a story that Mordaunt will accept, that he wants his prisoners for ransom money. On the other hand, Mordaunt succeeds in lying to Cromwell by appealing to higher instincts, saying the prisoners are his friends.

Aramis lies regularly, that is why he & d'Artagnan were the two suspicious ones at the first meeting after Beaufort's escape. Porthos isn't clever enough to lie. When he exaggerated his wealth in the first book, everyone saw through it, but they liked him so much that they never challenged him.

Good point - about appealing to baser/higher instincts.
You’re right - Athos doesn’t lie and now that he doesn’t drink 🍷 he has no vices so he’s almost too perfect. Perfect is boring. 🤷🏻‍♀️
I find D’Artagnan and Aramis more relatable because they seem more real and their nature hasn’t changed too much over the years.

I like that there are fewer inconsistencies in this book, but the part about Athos and Aramis speaking English is funny. In the first book D’Artagnan was the one translating Lord Winter’s letter to them, now all of a sudden, he speaks no English, but Athos is fluent.
Also, I find it funny that Athos didn’t care about saving Buckingham in the first book - he thought that killing an Englishman is a great thing.
Now he’s accusing Porthos and D’Artagnan of helping capture King Charles. I don’t dislike Athos, I just find him difficult to understand.

I didn't think d'Artagnan was ever supposed to understand English, that's why it was weird in the first book that he relayed to his friends what Buckingham said to people in English. Probably just faults of "continuity", as it is called in movies.

It makes sense that Aramis would know languages, since he is a sort of diplomat/intriguer/spy. Didn't we see that d'Artagnan had learned some Italian and Spanish from his military career? But he would have had no opportunity to learn English. Dumas has several cracks against the English in parts of the saga - how bad the weather, food and drink are and how uncivilized the country is compared to France.

Great comments! 😊

I had to smile about Dumas’s attitude / prejudice of England regarding food, drink and weather. I myself do not like beer and prefer wine and have always called beer the Germanic drink vs. wine as the Roman drink within my family as a joke referring to the the times of the Roman Empire and to differentiate between base and sophistication. So this was definitely funny for me to read.

The claims/ prejudices about England made here have also sustained into our times complaining about the bad English weather and food. I remember these discussions especially before a school excursion to England about 32 years ago.

It also reminded me a little of Charles Dickens and his American claims in Martin Chuzzlewit.

I was a bit irritated about how Dumas let his story flow in the house of Parry’s brother. Our friends find the man trenched in blood, he tells them his story, Grimaud tends to his wounds and then he is totally forgotten. No goodbye, no hope of survival until the little hint by d’Artagnan when they are in the inn. Somehow it lacked something for me.

I cannot quite judge King Charles I or Oliver Cromwell as they are not shown very much and brief moments might not represent their real characters.
Ana, unlike you I like the idealistic Athos and do not think that he is boring. He tries to be good and make the world better. And he is the complete contrast to his former wife’s son, who seems to present pure evil and as you, Robin, mentioned a crazy psychopath.

I wonder what will happen in London. Despite historical mistakes Dumas is making we know probably all King Charles’s destiny. It will be interesting what story Dumas spins around it.

I agree with you - I’ll take wine 🍷 over beer 🍺 any day.