Ao chegar ao fim de quase 900 páginas de aventuras de capa e espada, dou-me conta de quão diferente era a ideia dos mosqueteiros que me foi transmitida ao longo dos anos através de livros juvenis, BDs e desenhos animados, daquilo que é a obra original.

Os nobres espadachins do meu imaginário, revelaram-se (exceção feita a Athos, o meu favorito) uns jovens impulsivos, inconstantes, bastante gabarolas, comilões, bebedolas, vingativos e… surpresa das surpresas, uns verdadeiros gigolôs. Mais surpreendente ainda, é o cunho de normalidade que Alexandre Dumas dá a toda esta situação, e a forma como este livro se tornou um clássico juvenil.

OK, os rapazes também têm qualidades: são corajosos, fieis às amizades, erh… já disse que eram corajosos? E fieis às amizades? Pois, é basicamente isso. Pronto, o Athos destaca-se também pela ponderação, inteligência e sangue frio e - justiça lhe seja feita - não se prostitui a troco de dinheiro, não persegue mulheres casadas, nem promete amor eterno a cada rapariga bonita com que se cruza, para em seguida a desprezar e trocar por outra. Mas afoga as mágoas em vinho, o que também não é propriamente um exemplo a seguir.

Não quero cair na armadilha de julgar um livro escrito no séc. XIX pelos padrões do séc. XXI, o que seria injusto e imbecil. Ainda assim, não consigo deixar de encontrar contradições nestas personagens, ora defensoras da honra e capazes de atos valorosos, ora prontos a ir contra princípios muito básicos de honestidade e respeito por si próprio. As mulheres, como seria de esperar, não são particularmente bem tratadas...

A história, essa, é empolgante, cheia de intrigas, mistério e suspense e lê-se muito rapidamente e com agrado, apesar do grande número de páginas. Por outro lado, isto é feito à custa da caracterização das personagens, que é bastante superficial, eu diria mesmo quase uma caricatura.

Um elemento interessante, é o relato de alguns acontecimentos históricos (como o cerco de La Rochelle) e o facto de a história se basear em várias personagens reais (a começar pelos próprios mosqueteiros), embora o autor tenha dado largas à imaginação e inventado quase tudo...

São três estrelas e meia, arredondadas para baixo, porque foi uma leitura agradável, mas com muitos senãos.

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’ The Count of Monte Cristo had become one of my favorite novels of all time and I couldn’t 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’Artagnan, Athos, Porthos and Aramis are absolute shit-heads; so much so that I simply couldn’t root for them at all. But before we get into it, let’s 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’s honor. Well, it didn’t turn out this way. When actually reading the book, it becomes crystal clear that our supposed heroes—Athos, Porthos, Aramis, and D’Artagnan—are 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’s legitimate military and peacekeeping forces for petty reasons.

And to top it all of, D’Artagnan, 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’ classic have glossed over and altered this scene. However, when you look at the source material it becomes clear that d’Artagnan (in that one fateful scene) pretended to be Milady’s lover, the Count de Wardes, to coerce her into sleeping with him. [If you’re 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 “heroes”, 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—this 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 Fère. But he eventually discovered it, and then tried to hang her (I know … 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’s 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’t recognise d’Artagnan in the dark … it’s 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’s so sad, I’m 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 “heroes” and therefore, they have to outsmart her, even though that’s kinda illogical, since Milady has been portrayed as this demonic mastermind all along. It’s just a little too convenient. And if you, like me, didn’t fall into the trap of thinking of the musketeers as “heroes”, 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’s prison break is admittedly more iconic, Milady’s 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’m 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’re 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’Artagnan and his crew as heroes, simply because we’re 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’s 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’s 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’Artagnan 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’s 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.

That's a captivating story, masterfully led by Alexandre Dumas, who perfectly knows how to manage the twists and turns so that the story does not identify any lengths. So, we dive into this novel and are fine until the end.

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.

This is one of my favorites, and I just re-read it as I'm in France and we started listening to it on a family road trip to Brittany, where we visited the Ile de Ré, where the siege of Rochelle happens in the book.

And I have to say, Mon dieu! It remains just as good as I remembered! I love the over brashness of the young garcon, D'Argtagnan, and the richness of the backgrounds of each of the four musketeers.

I loved the politics of the King vs the Cardinal too, I hadn't appreciated there was such division there before. And of course, the perspective that nations went to war for the love of a single woman.

“Yes,” said he, “yes, Anne of Austria is my true queen. Upon a word from her, I would betray my country, I would betray my king, I would betray my God. She asked me not to send the Protestants of Rochelle the assistance I promised them; I have not done so. I broke my word, it is true; but what signifies that? I obeyed my love; and have I not been richly paid for that obedience? It was to that obedience I owe her portrait.” D’Artagnan was amazed to note by what fragile and unknown threads the destinies of nations and the lives of men are suspended.

Travolgente, spumeggiante, insuperabile Dumas!

Quando i personaggi di un romanzo, assieme alle loro storie, superano le barriere della letteratura e diventano patrimonio condiviso dell'umanità, archetipi universali, canovaccio per centinaia di altre opere derivate, vuol dire che in quel romanzo, magari sotto una scrittura grezza e imperfetta o una narrazione farraginosa, sono racchiuse grandi invenzioni letterarie, capaci di sopravvivere al tempo, anche quando, col passare dei secoli, l'opera originaria invecchia e cade nell'oblio (in quanti, oggidì, conoscono nel dettaglio le avventure di Gulliver, Robinson Crusoe, Sandokan, Tarzan, Zorro e del Capitano Nemo, pur senza aver mai letto uno solo di questi libri?)

Tuttavia, quando il romanzo generatore di un immaginario collettivo continua a essere ancora letto e amato nonostante il trascorrere del tempo, non cessando mai di librarsi in una nuvola di leggera, immortale freschezza, sempre contemporaneo e sempre palpitante, oltretutto rinnovando la meraviglia ad ogni rilettura, allora quel romanzo non è più un semplice romanzo, è un capolavoro letterario.

Per troppo tempo si è fatto presto a liquidare I tre moschettieri come narrativa di genere, svilendone il testo originario in riduzioni destinate all'infanzia, quasi a volerlo defraudare del posto che giustamente gli spetta fra i grandi romanzi; perché è vero, fra queste pagine c’è l'avventura, c’è l'azione, c’è lo spasso, ma sotto questa scorza superficiale c’è anche molto, molto altro.

Sotto una macchina narrativa d’irresistibile potenza, c’è un romanzo che si nutre, e tanto, del Romanticismo ottocentesco; il motore di tutta la storia non sono i tre moschettieri del titolo, ma tre dame, senza le quali le avventure dei nostri eroi non sarebbero nemmeno cominciate: Madame Bonacieux, l'amore puro, che inizia d'Artagnan agli intrighi di corte affidandogli il recupero dei puntali di diamanti e che  pagherà con la vita l'aver troppo amato il suo d'Artagnan; la Regina, l'amore idealizzato e sacro (Buckingham ne conserva il ritratto nella cappella privata della sua alcova, con tanto d'inginocchiatoio), le cui grazie saranno causa dell'odio del Cardinale, dell'amore di Buckingham e dell'inevitabile guerra fra i due primi ministri; e infine Milady, l'amore carnale e invincibile, che tutto può e a cui tutti si piegano, ma pure l'amore corrotto che si trasforma presto in odio, non è un caso se Milady si rivelerà essere la grande antagonista del romanzo, ben più del Duca Rosso, e nei capitoli finali  diventerà il vero perno di tutte le vicende narrate, fino all'orrorifico epilogo dai toni foschi e raccapriccianti..

Ci sono altresì tre eroi romantici fatti e finiti: in primis Buckingham, disposto a dare fondo a tutto il suo immenso potere, fino a piegare gli interessi dell'Inghilterra e mandare il proprio popolo alla guerra solo per amore di una donna, il quale, come Constance, pagherà con la vita questa sua follia amorosa ; d'Artagnan che, pur non disponendo dei mezzi di Buckingham, è pronto ad inimicarsi e sfidare l'uomo più potente di Francia per la sua amata, e finirà nell'unico modo possibile, il più tragico ; e infine Athos, il più romantico di tutti, in cui il conflitto non è rivolto verso qualcun altro, ma è tutto interiore, e solo affrontando i propri demoni riuscirà, lui solo fra i tre, ad uscirne vittorioso, seppur ad un amaro prezzo, rimanendone segnato per tutta la vita e non liberandosi più della sua struggente inquietudine. .

E non bisogna scordare l'intento principale di Dumas (dopo il vil danaro, beninteso): il voler mettere in scena la Storia (ulteriore tema caro ai Romantici), altro elemento preminente di tutta la vicenda -in questo certamente aiutato dal fido Auguste Maquet-, Storia che qui è solo in parte adombrata dalle avventure dei moschettieri, ma che ritrova la sua dimensione più alta se si analizza la trilogia di d'Artagnan per intero. Con questo primo volume, dedicato alla giovinezza dei nostri eroi, Dumas fa rivivere davanti ai nostri occhi i fasti barocchi della Francia del Grand Siècle descrivendo l’ultima grande epoca di libertà (secondo lui), nonché l'epoca dello strapotere dei primi ministri: Richelieu in Francia, Buckingham in Inghilterra e (anche se non viene mai citato direttamente nel romanzo) il duca conte de Olivares in Spagna; uomini di Stato che plasmarono il mondo prima dell’avvento delle monarchie assolute, vicenda che Dumas ci racconterà nei seguiti di questo immarcescibile romanzo.


Un ultimo plauso, infine, alla nuova traduzione di Camilla Diez condotta sul testo francese stabilito da Claude Schopp: superlativa; speriamo che traduca quanto prima anche il Visconte, completando così la trilogia.

"Los jóvenes no saben beber -dijo Athos mirándole con piedad-, ¡y sin embargo éste es de los mejores...!"

Bueno, yo estaba muy influenciado por las películas que había visto de los Tres Mosqueteros y obviamente toda su historia adaptada en todo el mundo, incluso en dibujos animados, referencias, Etc.
Es sin lugar a dudas la historia contada por Dumas truculenta y menos moral digamos de lo que pensaba, cosa que la verdad me hizo un poco considerarla menos agradable aunque el final arregló gran parte de las cosas.
Es cierto, la historia de los Tres Mosqueteros es una historia de la Amistad, una amistad que considero es lo que el libro puede superar a cualquier adaptación cinematográfica, en lo demás mi juicio es dudoso. El tema de la amistad se ve a lo largo de la obra mezclado obviamente de una caballerosidad, frases y galanteo, propia de aquella época, por lo que ciertas palabras o actitudes pueden parecer ridículas a lectores modernos, pero situándonos en la época no tiene nada de raro y al contrario el estar dispuesto a cruzar un sablazo con el primer desconocido que nos caiga mal o estar con mujeres infieles y casadas era propio de lo que se llamaba el "amor cortés", en efecto muchos hombres de la época al parecer encontraban más placer en tener a una amante que a una muchacha soltera y libre de compromiso. Es en todas estas circunstancias por las que pasan que se puede comprender en su verdadera extensión los sacrificios, la abnegación, la confianza y la gran unión que existe entre Athos, Porthos, Aramis y D'Artagnan.
Es una relación especial la que surge entre D'Artagnan y Athos, quien desde luego compite por el protagonismo en la obra, con su carácter tan reservado y sus maneras tan aristocráticas (valoradas en la época como lo más importante) y su inteligencia tan desbordante.
D'Artagnan que viene para servir a los mosqueteros del Sr. Tréville viene de su provincia al gran París, allí conocerá a los otros tres que ya son mosqueteros. El cuerpo de mosqueteros está formado para proteger a la persona del rey, el dubitativo e inexperto Luis XIII, mientras que la otra facción del reino de Francia lo constituye los guardias del Cardenal que protegen al gran Richelieu, personaje oscuro y temible.
La reina Ana de Austria parece haber tenido una gran amistad con el Duque de Buckingham, francés al servicio de Inglaterra que conspirará contra Francia hasta crear una guerra en la Rochelle.
Milady, una francesa temible, hábil y muy hermosa será casi desde principio a fin la gran enemiga a vencer pues logra con sus artimañas la ruina de muchas personas. Es por supuesto, un gran personaje de la novela de Dumas, aunque considero que se le mantuvo muy relegada gran parte de la historia, teniendo digamos al último la importancia que yo había pensado que tenía por las películas. Así mismo considero muy interesante los últimos capítulos por tener la mayor cantidad de acción y reveses inesperados. Es en verdad también una gran obra de intrigas y planes malévolos.
Al inicio pensé con toda justicia un 4 estrellas, considero buena parte de los primeros capítulos no tan intensa y un poco aburrida, pero por muchas cosas entre ellas el final no escatimo una estrella más.

| |  blog |  tumblr | ko-fi | |

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 “was a very prudent youth”. 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 “to thrash Planchet provisionally; which he did with the conscientiousness that D’Artagnan carried into everything. After having well beaten him, he forbade him to leave his service without his permission”. 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—for reasons unknown to me—is 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 “he was an honorable man”. 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.

Read more reviews on my blog / / / View all my reviews on Goodreads

Edit. Releitura Nov. 2023

A vida é um pequeno rosário misérias, que o filósofo passa a rir. Sejam filósofos como eu, venham para a mesa e bebamos. Nada há que faça parecer o futuro cor-de-rosa como olhar através de um copo de Chambertin.

Releitura (porque alguém percebeu que não se ia deitar à empresa de ler a sequela sem recordar o original). E, surpresa das surpresas, Os três mosqueteiroscontinua a não ter nada daquilo que me faz gostar de um livro... e ainda assim foi tão bom de ler da primeira vez. Cada um tem as suas fraquezas...

n  n
D'Artagnan e os Três Mosqueteiros, ilustração por Maurice Leloir

__________


1° leitura: Jan. 2023


"Naquele tempo, eram muito frequentes os motins e poucos dias decorriam sem que uma ou outra cidade registasse nos seus arquivos algum acontecimento deste género. Havia os fidalgos. que guerreavam uns com os outros; havia o rei, que fazia guerra ao cardeal havia o espanhol, que fazia guerra ao rei."

Neste último natal, a árvore ficou estacionada defronte a uma estante onde se guardam os volumes de capa dura que já eram gente antes de eu vir ao mundo, e que foram dos primeiros livros a que deitei mão. Retirada a árvore, dei com este Dumas, mais recente e desirmanado e, não é tarde nem é cedo, peguei nele para ver se recuperava de um início de ano com leituras atípicas, lentas e pouco interessantes. E se temia acabar por abandoná-lo a um terço do início (O Conde de Monte Cristo ainda deita chispas quando passo por ele...), isso não aconteceu.

"...nem por isso deixara de lhe perguntar como Sua Majestade passara de saúde. - Muito mal, Senhor, muito mal respondeu o rei. - Estou aborrecido.
Era com efeito a pior doença de Luís XIII, que muitas vezes se dirigia com um dos seus cortesãos para o vão de uma janela, onde lhe dizia: aborreçamo-nos ambos."

Verdade que os três mosqueteiros - ou melhor, quatro, mas como o Dumas era mais dado às letras e eu também sou, está desculpado - são uma espécie de mito da minha infância: pouco me interessava que tivessem cabeça de cão, adorava os bonecos e criei um mundo muito próprio onde, depois de desligada a TV, eles continuavam a existir e a lutar "um por todos e todos por um".
Os mosqueteiros de Dumas, por sua vez, não têm cabeça de cão, e às vezes parece até que não têm nada na cabeça, são uns arruaceiros a soldo do rei que vivem aventuras cheias de perigos e sobrevivem apenas porque a sua amizade é mais forte do que qualquer contratempo. E esse é o verdadeiro atrativo da sua mitologia. Estes mosqueteiros são estóicos, epicuristas, uns valentes apaixonados pelas emoções fortes, pela bebida e pelo jogo que vivem cada dia, uns pelos outros, como se fora o último.

"A vida vale lá a pena de que por ela se façam tantas perguntas?"

Raras vezes se perdem em constatações filosóficas, sendo movidos por um cego sentimento de honra e apenas se interessando por defender aquilo em que acreditam e nos intervalos gozar os prazeres da vida, lembrando ao leitor que essa vida é curta, e o melhor é correr lá para fora e fazer qualquer coisa emocionante, tipo... já!

"(...)dando um último lance de olhos ao belo moço, que tinha vinte e cinco anos apenas e que ele deixava ali por terra, sem sentidos e talvez morto, soltou um suspiro pelo destino que leva os homens a destruírem-se uns aos outros, por interesses de pessoas que não lhes são nada e que as mais das vezes nem sabem se eles existem."

Há alguma coisa, em todos nós, que jamais envelhece, se o permitirmos, e que não perde uma oportunidade de fantasiar com uma vida aventurosa e sem obrigações. No meu caso, essas fantasias estão ligadas às histórias de cavaleiros, sejam eles os homens do rei Artur ou os mosqueteiros de Luís XIII, e a expressão "adoro uma boa espadeirada" sai, para minha própria desgraça, demasiadas vezes da minha boca. Mas que importa isso quando temos uma oportunidade de revisitar momentos bons da nossa infância ou juventude (para aqueles que tiveram a sorte de uma juventude pouco acidentada)?
Os Três Mosqueteiros é uma daquelas narrativas de aventura com momentos absolutamente desnecessários de intriga política palaciana, com demasiada violência sem justificação, convalescenças miraculosas e cortes amorosas ridiculamente cómicas para o leitor atual. Ainda assim, as incongruências, as hipérboles e o inverosímil passaram por mim como passavam quando, depois de ver um episódio do Dartacão e os Três Moscãoteiros, eu subia ao muro mais alto que encontrava e de lá, escondida pela folhagem, onde ninguém esperava que uma pirralha chegasse, espiava a vizinhança, fazia desenhos e arquitetava planos de vir a ser mosqueteira um dia...
E gosto de pensar que ainda vou a tempo.

"Faríamos mal em ajuizar das acções de uma época sob o ponto de vista de outra época."

After nearly 5 years of owning this book, I've finally read it (thanks to Rincey hosting the readalong this month that gave me the motivation). I can't say I loved the book, but it was fun and had its moments. It's sort of a bunch of vignettes, especially at the beginning, to acquaint you with the characters. And then the real plot sort of develops later on in the novel. It has all those follies and foibles of classics, with misdirection, confusion, deus ex machinas galore, and is, at times, a tad ridiculous. But I can see the appeal and would definitely love to watch an adaptation of this story! Cheers to tackling behemoth books that sit on your shelf for ages.

Un romanzo di avventura ricco di duelli, intrighi, complotti e misteri assolutamente avvincente e con personaggi iconici. Forse un po’ prolisso in alcune parti ma assolutamente consigliato!

Personaggi preferiti in assoluto: M.Athos, Sua Eminenza il cardinale, Milady.