Rating: 2.5/5, Meh, it was average

I have been meaning to read this book for a long time so I decided to tackle the 600+ pages this week.
I loved the film and enjoyed the book almost as much. I have read that there is a debate as to how much of the story is Charriere's own experiences but nevertheless it makes a great read.
Even though some of the adventures do take a lot of believing he obviously lived an extraordinary life and this book is well worth reading.

Чи правдивими є події, описані в цій книжці, не може сказати ніхто – особливо, зважаючи на те, що сам автор помер ще понад пів століття тому. Вважаймо, що кістяк цієї історії наближений до правди. Інший суперечливий момент – ким вважати Шарр’єра? Французьким письменником – за народженням? Чи венесуельським: хоч він став громадянином цієї країни аж у 50 років, він зробив це тому, що був вдячний народу, який його прихистив, який дав йому шанс стати новою людиною. Принаймні так він стверджує в своїй белетризованій автобіографії.
Шарр’єр розповідає історію свого заслання: як його необґрунтовано засуджують на довічне, засилають на інший континент на каторгу, як він із самого початку постановив собі будь-що врятуватися втечею, численні невдалі спроби і заключна вдала, і неймовірна кількість незгод, які йому довелося пережити.

This book is interesting. Very interesting. To describe it in a sentence I would say - it is a handbook of really clever ideas by which one can break jail successfully.

A must read for all jail inmates and jail officials, also any one directly or indirectly connected with law enforcement like lawyers, judges, police, armed forces, ambitious unsocial elements.

It is also a chronicle of many interesting anecdotes of extreme jail torture. Also, it advises one how to cope in custody. This is a real helpful part. In one book thats a lot.

Somehow, the author hasn't dwelved much on the pain and misery and the emotional turmoil much while narrating this tale. It is not that it isn't mentioned at all... it is just that, he has mentioned it almost as if in passing or apologetically. Either, he is one extremely practical man, or, he is impatient with the emotional side of it all. He seems to be a complete man of action, with a single minded object of freedom.

The author also, seems to be a born leader. It satisfies him immensely when his co inmates hand over their life and liberty in his hands... even when he fails miserably in safeguarding either. Most times, he is only thinking of his sole freedom. Few times, he has consulted his friends, but not always.

I couldn't make up my mind whether Charrière is an Athiest or a Believer. He conveniently switches between the two stands all through this book. He has tried to wriggle out of openly claiming to be either, by citing his father's up bringing... but somehow, it seems like a poor eye wash. At other times, he has preached Christian values of integration and forgiveness while trying to justify his flight. He hasn't hesitated any where to grab the opportunity and help from the various people of God he met on his way. This again, shows him as a sly opportunist.

I still couldn't understand, like his fellow inmates (refer pg. 240 of this edition), what is he exactly after? Is he wanting revenge? That is a low reason to escape jail. Freedom? If freedom, then why leave Goajira tribe? Is he just restless? Seems more likely somehow. Is it just for another chance? Then why is he so critical of society? Or was is it just a personal challenge? I really couldn't make up my mind.

His behaviour towards the Goajiras is down right inhuman and selfish. As it seems by the end of the book, it was all lies that he promised the poor women who trusted him; I really don't think there is anything to justify his actions. All his ill luck later on, seems like a poor consolation for his utterly criminal act of abandoning not one, but two women AFTER making them pregnant. How responsible or just is that? How grateful?

Not just the Goajira wives, he also forgets his French wife (Nunette) and his Javanese Indian (Indara)! It does seem a bit insensitive. Of course, since he is not the one initiating intimacy with any of his four wives, it looks like they deserved what they got. But, he does come across as a thorough opportunist here too. Using the women completely, infact in case of the Javanese one, at the fag end of this book, he almost turned into a 'ponce' he was accused of killing in the first place!

I just couldn't feel for Henri Charrière. I Just Couldn't. There is no redeeming factor in him. Whatever honorable behaviour he attributes to himself, is just basic human consideration. For that too, if I am not mistaken, he later on shows that he suffered great loss and pain (got captured or lost boats and money). So, I really don't get this - is Charrière advocating selfishness and inconsiderate behaviour through this book?

His fellow inmates come across as much more better human beings. On quite a few places, he has felt ashamed for his lowly behaviour, as compared to their charitable and noble one. Even the lepers and the primitive Goajiras are much more noble.

Even with all this, he has been remarkably lucky all through the book. Some may say, he was sentenced for murder, how can that be lucky. Pray, he claims to be sentenced unfairly. But, he was arrested in a pub. He is suspiciously silent about the entire incident. No explanation given. Only his anger, his thoughts of revenge and false testimonies of the police.

When I was checking up the reviews before starting this book, I saw many 5 stars and some claiming this to be the best book they ever read! I wouldn't go that far. It is definitely interesting. It is worth being read once. But, I wouldn't call it a revolutionary book. Jail life is bad everywhere. The constant condemnation about French legal system as worse in the world was a bit premature, considering he knew nothing of jail life else where.

Towards the second half, ironically at his lowest point in the book, (pg.354 in this edition) he has touched fleetingly on the question of -"when do you have the right to kill?" This could have been a real deep analysis, but for Charrière again reverting to other memories and the story. I wonder, did he shy short of saying anything provocative or was it because he thought it would make the book boring and hence affect sales; or whether he really is the man who doesn't think much deep... preferring to think of just the practical issues and avoiding the moralistic ones.

To conclude, again I would say, a very interesting book. Worth a read for sure. If not for the protagonist, surely hundred times over, for the various characters he met on his journey.

If one chooses to read a tale of Hope, an inspiring "Will" to just do something & fixation towards achieving a Goal, there wouldn't be a book as better as Papillon by Henri Charrière!

Cavale, Cavale & many more Cavale's

I'd really like to applaud the way Henri aka Papillon stuck to his goal throughout his 13 year sentence - Cavale
Come what may, he'd always focus on Escaping and maybe that Will to escape was so strong that finally he achieved his Goal.

An innocent deliberately framed for the murder of a Pimp, Henri has described his stints with so much realism and innocence that it's almost difficult to stop turning pages. The book is very intriguing and never has Henri mentioned something which seems irrelevant or not upto the context but more than that I am amazed that Henri managed to remember so many details even after 13 years and 9 Escapes

There were a lot of amazing insights provided in the book hinting at the ill-treatment of Prisoners, goodwill of sailors or Civilians who without questions accepted the Escapees and treated them well too!

I believe Papillon himself was a Good hearted guy which led him to a lot of other people such as himself & by the end of the book I myself wished he gets the Freedom he expected.

This is the Best book I ever read.

I remember I started to read it when I was 14, and during long travels to sorocaba city I used to read a little of it, getting back in favourite parts.

Henri Charrière did something completally amazing. Not one, but two: First was the escaping itself, from Devil Island.. secound was to describle this with perfect details, something that makes us imagine each movement and each scene...

His passion for life made he survive to a unfair punishment and escape from many prisons, making friends and partners wherever he goes.

I have no more words to describle this book, I just want ask you all for read this. I bet you wont regret.

I finished this yesterday morning and I don't think I've read a book quite like it before. When it came out in the English translation in 1970, it sold a lot of copies, already having been very popular in France when it came out in 1969, and you can see why it was so big a hit. Henri Charriere, the author of the book, is the central focus of proceedings, the whole thing being about his time in a penal colony in French Guiana and elsewhere. He is otherwise known as Papillon, because of a butterfly tattoo on his chest (papillon being the French word for butterfly). The action starts off with a court case in France, and with Papillon's wrongful conviction of murder, which carries a long sentence in French Guiana, South America...
Obviously, I'll leave the plot description there, but basically it is a book all about the plucky Frenchman's overall sense of injustice, due to his wrongful conviction, and his subsequent determination not to let the system grind him down, and to escape the hell of the French penal colony. You follow Papillon, as he plots and schemes and attempts to escape time after time, and you end up being gripped by his plight and by the awful times he has to endure as a prisoner in steamy South America. There are plenty of interesting characters that he meets along the way also, and there is a real camaraderie between them, forged through their common hatred of the 'screws' who make their life so unbearable most of the time. Papillon's will to overcome his plight is really remarkable, and there is an unrelenting positive attitude displayed by him throughout the book, which permeates the whole thing and makes it a triumph-of-the-spirit type affair, and so ultimately uplifting in many ways...
Occasionally you wonder if absolutely everything happened exactly as he describes, and there are a few details which may be a little odd and fabricated perhaps, but even if most of it is true, it still ends up being a remarkable tale, and a very gripping read, that most people will find enormously engrossing and fascinating right to the last page.

I wanted to read this book so badly - I was in 7th grade, my sister wanted to take drivers education. She did not want to ride her bike alone, so she bribed me. Allowing me to read on the church steps while I waited for her lesson to be over. BUT I GOT TO READ THE BOOK! I really liked it. The descriptions were so vivid, the story so gripping. I do not know where my sister got the book, I seriously doubt she had read it. OMG Epiphany! It was my dad's book! He gave it to her to bribe me with so she did not go alone & I was basically occupied for the hours.... hmmmmm that is a really good theory.... :O

Beeindruckend - wie auch schon die Verfilmung

Although a bit tiring and super detailed at times, it was honestly amazing. Considering it was written by Charrière himself, who isn’t really a writer, it was surprisingly really good.

Tiesiog Robinzonas Kruzas,  lobių sala, jūrų vilkiūkštis, laivo sudužimas, likimo pirštas, kapitono Granto vaikai ir t.t. kartu sudėjus! :D  
Tikra istorija, pranokstanti vaizduotę šimtus kartų. 
Drugeliu vadinamas jaunas drąsuolis  Henri Charriere nuteistas iki gyvos galvos kalėti Prancūzijos Gvianoje. Jausdamasis nekaltas, visas jėgas atiduoda išsivadavimui iš nelaisvės, ir kadangi išmonės ir sumanumo jam netrūksta, prasideda nutrūktgalviški, neįtikėtini, kvapą gniaužiantys nuotykiai, lydimi permainingos sėkmės.
 Žavėjausi Drugelio atkaklumu, sugebėjimu neprarasti vilties, o labiausiai- ištverme ir optimizmu. 
Šią knygą galima būtų pavadinti vyriška-  veiksmas, kovos, klajonės, jūra,džiunglės, salos, pavojai, nuotykiai, visko čia yra. Ir mylimųjų, su kuriomis, mano supratimu, elgėsi ne taip jau ir garbingai- trūkumėlis teisingumo ir sąžinės šarvuose.
Taip pat yra sukurtas filmas.

Į knygą atkreipiau dėmesį dėl Facebook skaitytojų puikių atsiliepimų, nusprendžiau perskaityti ir aš.

Ir kaip gi? Visai ne mano skonio knyga. Nors pirmieji knygos skyriai skaitėsi visai lengvai, įtraukiančiai, pakankamai įdomiai, tačiau po truputį viskas išsivadėjo ir išblėso. Knyga -monotoniška, įvykiai sukasi ratu vieną, antrą, trečią ir dešimtą kartą.

Nejaučiau jokio literatūrinio skonio, o nuotykiai pasirodė nuobodūs ir netikroviški. Pasakos, mitai. Vėliau domėjausi autoriumi, atsiliepimais apie šią jo autobiografiją. Deja, jos autentiškumu abejoja ir istorikai, sklando visokių legendų ir gandų. Tai irgi nepridėjo patrauklumo knygai ir autoriui.

Didžiausias knygos minusas - emocinio užtaiso trūkumas. Įvykiai pasakojami sausai, jokio jausmingumo, savianalizės. Shallow. Tiesa, paskutiniuose puslapiuose atsiranda šiokių tokių pamąstymų, tačiau jie per seklūs ir banaloki. Again, neįtikino.

Labai nepatiko pagrindinis veikėjas. Man jis - atgrasus, pagyrūniškas, 'povas', narcizas, negerbiantis gyvybės, moterų, vaikų, santuokos, ištikimybės. Jį visi gerbia, jam visi padeda, jam visi lankstosi, jį idealizuoja. Oh, dear! Pats vardas-pravardė - Drugelis man taipogi ne prie širdies. Drugelis man asocijuojasi su lengvumu, švelnumu, minkštumu, pozityvumu, tai visiškai nerezonavo personažo asmenybės (apart noro ištrūkti į laisvę).

Daug kas pabrėžia, kaip šis žmogus mylėjo gyvenimą, kaip kovojo už laisvę, kiek kentė, kad pabėgtų. OK. Tebūnie. Tačiau man norisi atsakyti, jog žinot tokių herojų pilni kalėjimai. Visi jie nekalti, visi šventi, visi nori ištrūkti. Negaila, nejaudina. O jei norėčiau tikrų žmogaus išgyvenimo emocijų, rinkčiausi 'Žmogus ieško prasmės' ar tą patį 'Dievų mišką’ bei 'Lietuviai prie Laptevų jūros'. Taip aš suprantu, kančią, laisvės troškimą ir norą gyventi.

Manau mano problema su šia knyga ta, kad aš neradau su ja jokio ryšio, sąlyčio taškų. Jokio stimulo skaityti. Nepatiko, ne mano. Ir nors perskaičiau knygą iki pabaigos, užtruko.