Scan barcode
agrinczel's review against another edition
2.0
This was actually pretty good, but REALLY, REALLY wordy... I would recommend the abridged version
dyno8426's review against another edition
5.0
The Three Musketeers is almost universally known as a classic example of friendship, loyalty and comradeship, even by those who haven't read it. We have the protagonist d'Artgnan and the trio of Athos-Porthos-Aramis who serve under the king as musketeers in his guard and their adventures consist of thwarting the attempts of the cardinal, the political mastermind working to gain power in the king's regime. I liked the historical placement of the story in the mid-1700s, during the conflict between England and France. Our heroes are shown fighting with bravery, patriotism and swordsmanship, always loyal to the kind and ruthless on any force which can assist the cardinal in any manner. With the narrative style and English typical of classics around this time, and filled with witty humor, it is a pleasure to read. But reading it what struck me was that how this story is a perfect example of romance in literature. The characters from this story are the original, model "romantics". Romance is an amalgamation of both love/devotion and pursuit. Without pursuit, love degenerates from romance to the whims of chance/fate, one-sided obsession, or temporary attraction. Romance gives dynamism and an active character to the dimensions of what is considered as love. It generally bases itself on a relentless pursuit towards some aim, the path to which is conventionally never trivial and full of the worldly challenges, manifested mainly by powers higher than the participants of love. And the characters of this book here are infected by romanticism in their own peculiar ways. Our musketeers are constantly pursuing the missions assigned to them in their omnipresent loyalty to their nation and its royalty who are material of its honor, they do so without any care whatsoever to the dangers it contain, neither do they think twice before plunging into odds thousands to one against them. Their gentlemanly honor and lifestyle defines their thoughts and actions, and even in areas like expenditure and appearance, practicality is abandoned with pleasure to maintain character. Then comes the political powers which are fighting against each other - to the cardinal and the Duke of England, no end is extreme enough to display/avenge their love for the queen of France; the wars which will cause thousands to die appear trivial on the personal romantic affairs of the two leaders. And finally, Milady, the memorable villain, is in constant service to the cardinal. What she worships above all is the evil that commands her, so much so that even the cardinal occasionally ends up fearing her. Her pursuits are super-human in their extremes and the she craves from the pleasure that performing vileness inspires in her. In all our romantic characters, whatever comes in the way, is an obstruction to be handled and cared for the least, whereas they bask in the future pleasure of achieving their desired aim. Their characters then start getting idealized due to the purity of their passions and become exemplary with beauty and glory. A good romance makes the readers engrossed in the same passion which uplifts their characters. It takes no time when the extremities of duels, wounds and death become commonplace in front of the characters and the challenges they are required to scale. This book is very enjoyable and leaves you with the satisfaction characteristic of a classic read.
lancefestivalen's review against another edition
3.0
Jodå, det var ändå 700-ish ganska lättläsa sidor, även om de var översatta till ett lite ålderdomligt språk.
Jag hade dock hela tiden filmatiseringarna från början av 70-talet i huvudet, så förutom att jag såg alla karaktärer klart och tydligt framför mig, kände jag igen mig i alla de miljöer som beskrevs (som överlevde bearbetningen till film, vill säga). Sedan blev det förstås lite error i huvudet när karaktärer inte gjorde som jag förväntade mig - av just anledningen att de inte genomgått förvandligen från roman till filmmanus till färdig film.
Det är en lagom intressant story som är både lagom spännande och rolig, och intrigen är allt annat än komplicerad, så läsningen kräver inte särskilt mycket av läsaren - aspekter som jag vanligtvis kanske skulle hålla som negativa, men som i det här fallet fungerar jättebra.
Den stora frågan nu är om jag ska ge mig på uppföljaren direkt, eller om jag ska varva med något annat?
Jag hade dock hela tiden filmatiseringarna från början av 70-talet i huvudet, så förutom att jag såg alla karaktärer klart och tydligt framför mig, kände jag igen mig i alla de miljöer som beskrevs (som överlevde bearbetningen till film, vill säga). Sedan blev det förstås lite error i huvudet när karaktärer inte gjorde som jag förväntade mig - av just anledningen att de inte genomgått förvandligen från roman till filmmanus till färdig film.
Det är en lagom intressant story som är både lagom spännande och rolig, och intrigen är allt annat än komplicerad, så läsningen kräver inte särskilt mycket av läsaren - aspekter som jag vanligtvis kanske skulle hålla som negativa, men som i det här fallet fungerar jättebra.
Den stora frågan nu är om jag ska ge mig på uppföljaren direkt, eller om jag ska varva med något annat?
loyaultemelie's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
funny
lighthearted
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.5
I had a bit of trouble trying to rate this book. In terms of readability Dumas deserves every laurel he ever received. This book is so eminently readable it's almost ridiculous. Twice I read 200 pages in two days. As the story progressed the pace only picked up, so at times it felt the reader - like the musketeers themselves - was on a horse riding towards some exciting destination.
Dumas is also superb in balancing comedy and seriousness. I thought that the tone would be the biggest problem of the novel. I found myself pleasantly surprised, it did not seem too much of a problem. Though perhaps this is because, by my interpretation, I think Dumas means for us to laugh at the musketeers more often than not. Even Athos, a character that I loved, felt the subject of satire on more than a few accounts. Still Dumas obviously loves these characters he has created, and it is this love that manages to make the ups and downs of emotion not nearly as jarring as they might have been. That and undeniable skill as a writer.
So why isn't this five stars, since I have so much praise for it? I do think that the Three Musketeers is not necessarily a book that changes a person in the way that heavier books like Les Mis does. I don't think the Dumas was going for that either. I find this book hard to rate because I think for what it set out to do it did it masterfully. Not only is it incredibly entertaining, but it has quite the scope of history, and a wonderful ear for drama. I was not unmoved by our characters - ridiculous though they are. I shuddered at Milady de Winter, and I genuinely felt D'Artagnan's excitement and naivete, all without irony. But I do not know if this book has really changed me in a way that I think five star fiction should. This rating may change if I feel the story stick with me for a while - I think five star books are mostly rated by their longevity than anything else - so for now I will stick to four.
I will say, I have rarely had so much fun reading a book and talking about a book to others. And evil and despicable and even disgusting as Milady de Winter was sometimes, boy did she girlboss.
Also shoutout to Aramis for either being in love or considering the convent. Me too buddy. Me too...
Dumas is also superb in balancing comedy and seriousness. I thought that the tone would be the biggest problem of the novel. I found myself pleasantly surprised, it did not seem too much of a problem. Though perhaps this is because, by my interpretation, I think Dumas means for us to laugh at the musketeers more often than not. Even Athos, a character that I loved, felt the subject of satire on more than a few accounts. Still Dumas obviously loves these characters he has created, and it is this love that manages to make the ups and downs of emotion not nearly as jarring as they might have been. That and undeniable skill as a writer.
So why isn't this five stars, since I have so much praise for it? I do think that the Three Musketeers is not necessarily a book that changes a person in the way that heavier books like Les Mis does. I don't think the Dumas was going for that either. I find this book hard to rate because I think for what it set out to do it did it masterfully. Not only is it incredibly entertaining, but it has quite the scope of history, and a wonderful ear for drama. I was not unmoved by our characters - ridiculous though they are. I shuddered at Milady de Winter, and I genuinely felt D'Artagnan's excitement and naivete, all without irony. But I do not know if this book has really changed me in a way that I think five star fiction should. This rating may change if I feel the story stick with me for a while - I think five star books are mostly rated by their longevity than anything else - so for now I will stick to four.
I will say, I have rarely had so much fun reading a book and talking about a book to others. And evil and despicable and even disgusting as Milady de Winter was sometimes, boy did she girlboss.
Also shoutout to Aramis for either being in love or considering the convent. Me too buddy. Me too...
Content Warnings
Graphic: Sexual assault, Death, and Murder
mithrandir57's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
Part 1: 4.5 stars
Part 2: 3 stars
Part 2: 3 stars
happylilkt's review against another edition
4.0
Ah...my third attempt to read this book and I finally finished it, with the bulk of it read in one day! I like this so much more than the Count of Monte Cristo—swashbuckling, full of intrigue, it's hard to pick a favorite of this crew, but most will have a special love for the intrepid Gascon d'Artagnan and the diffident, tortured Athos. Obviously, I did. I'm sorry to say goodbye and will definitely read this again.
libraryofdreaming's review against another edition
2.0
I may or may not have read this book already as a kid. The beginning was very familiar to me so I very well might have just given up in the middle and never finished. But now I can finally say for sure that I've read it! And... I kind of have mixed feelings? It is a fun adventure novel with a really interesting historical background (that is actually quite relevant to my studies about French absolutism right now). But the pacing was a little bit uneven and, how do I put it, the main characters are kind of all jerks! :P
I think I got a little too comfortable with the characters as they are portrayed in the BBC's The Musketeers. Porthos, Aramis, Athos, and, to a lesser extent d'Artagnan are all my babies on that show and it is hard to reconcile that with some of the straight up douchebaggery (that's a technical term right? :P) they pull in the book.
I did find some of the characterization very interesting to compare with the show. Louis' character was much more commanding and also cruel rather than the buffoon they portray him as onscreen. Also I'm sure there's some interesting meta to be gleaned from the difference in Anne and Louis' marriage from page to screen. I wonder if we will get a Duke of Buckingham character at all in season three...
Anyway, I'm glad I managed to make it all the way through this even if it was a slog at times. Dumas' writing style was interesting and I am intrigued to know more about him. Not sure I will be attacking another one of his works immediately though!
Now I need season three of The Musketeers ASAP!
I think I got a little too comfortable with the characters as they are portrayed in the BBC's The Musketeers. Porthos, Aramis, Athos, and, to a lesser extent d'Artagnan are all my babies on that show and it is hard to reconcile that with some of the straight up douchebaggery (that's a technical term right? :P) they pull in the book.
I did find some of the characterization very interesting to compare with the show. Louis' character was much more commanding and also cruel rather than the buffoon they portray him as onscreen. Also I'm sure there's some interesting meta to be gleaned from the difference in Anne and Louis' marriage from page to screen. I wonder if we will get a Duke of Buckingham character at all in season three...
Anyway, I'm glad I managed to make it all the way through this even if it was a slog at times. Dumas' writing style was interesting and I am intrigued to know more about him. Not sure I will be attacking another one of his works immediately though!
Now I need season three of The Musketeers ASAP!
ppprmntptty's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
5.0
napping_muse's review against another edition
5.0
Somethings just don’t need to be read analytically - I love my 4 idiots