Nothing makes time pass or shortens the way like a thought that absorbs in itself all the faculties of the one who is thinking. External existence is then like a sleep of which this thought is the dream. Under its influence, time has no more measure, space has no more distance.

Published in 1844 within a completely different milieu, about the distinct historical backdrop of 1627 France, this novel cannot be judged by our modern ideas of societal mores and appropriate behavior. I know some would judge it harshly. (D’artagnan behaves as a cad, who supposedly falls in love with women as the wind shifts direction. Yeah, he is a jerk, but he is also romantic and loving.) That is all I will say regarding morality and its historical distinction from a modernist worldview. This classic, historical narrative is brilliantly engaging with action scenes that are cinematic and repartee that is witty and sharp. The musketeers are larger than life and as such the reader is pulling for them throughout even at times where morality seems to gray. This is a fictionalized history, and it is entirely captivating even in the use of antiquated language. Balancing the modernist critique with the romantic adventure aspects, I would call this 4 and a half Grey Geeks, but for Goodreads, I will decrease the rating by a half a Grey Geek to 4 stars.

سه تفنگدار جزو رمان هاي اسطوره اي و جاویدان است.داستان پهلوانانی كه براي هر ماجراجويي سرشان حسابي درد مي كند.در هر جايي باشند و در هر جبهه اي، اولين چيزي كه به فكرشان مي رسد دوستی و نجات جان یکدیگر است

وقايع كتاب در فرانسه و در زماني اتفاق مي افتد كه هنوز با شمشير مي توان گليم خود را از آب كشيد
لويي سيزدهم پادشاه جواني است كه هنوز قدرت زيادي ندارد و برعكس وي صدراعظم او يعني كاردينال ريشيلو پادشاه بدون تاج كشور است .دو دسته نظامي در كشور وجود دارد يك دسته تفنگداران پادشاه و دسته ديگري سربازان صدراعظم.این دو دسته طاقت دیدن روی همدیگر را ندارند و نزاع هاي زیادی بین آنها صورت مي گيرد
جواني دارتانيان نام كه اهل ايالت گاسكون فرانسه است و شمشيربازي و روش نبرد كردن را از پدرش آموخته، براي كسب افتخار و ثروت عازم پاريس مي شود
او می رود که به تفنگداران پادشاه ملحق شود.هنگام خداحافظي ،پدرش به او مي گويد: از مخاطره و درگيري نترس و هرجا آنرا ديدي، به سوي آن برو
اين بهترين نصيحت براي يك سرباز ناشناخته و تازه وارد در پاريس است تا زودتر پیشرفت کند ولی برای یک فرد اهل گاسکونی- که معروف به غرور و لاف زنی هستند و خود ماجرا می سازند و زیاد نیاز به گشتن دنبال ماجرا ندارند- اضافی است

خواندن 20 صفحه از این کتاب طوری مرا به خودش جذب کرد که تا 10 جلد را تمام نکردم نتوانستم آرام بگیرم
آتوس و آرامیس و پورتوس و دارتانیان قهرمان اواخر نوجوانی ام بودند
بیشتر از همه عاشق شخصیت آتوس بودم

Note, March 5, 2025: I edited one sentence just now, to clarify the intended meaning.

Note: I read this in a different edition than the above, a 1952 printing by World Publishing Co. with a serviceable four-page introduction by a Thomas Layman. It gives no information on the date or provenance of its translation.

Until this month, my acquaintance with Dumas' classic, like most people's, came strictly from our popular culture (where the musketeer motif appears everywhere from movies to candy bars!) --principally from movie adaptations of this novel and spin-offs from it. Since I've been an avid fan of these, I approached this novel with pretty high expectations. Unfortunately, it proved to be a disappointment; my rating wasn't nearly as high as I expected it to be (nor as high as those of virtually any of my Goodreads friends who've rated it); and if I could give half stars, it would slip down to two and a half. Part of the disappointment no doubt stems from the inaccurate expectations formed by the movies, and part from qualities inherent in the book itself.

The Gascon swordsman D'Artagnan apparently was a real person, though according to Layman his published Memoirs, with which Dumas was familiar, were actually written by one Courtils de Sandras. "Athos," "Porthos" and "Aramis" appear there as well, though Dumas believed (and states in the novel) that these were aliases disguising their real names. Some other characters and situations come from this source as well, though others derive from other sources or from pure imagination (Buckingham's romantic infatuation with King Louis' wife is in the latter category). The novel's rivalry between the king's musketeers and the cardinal's guards is drawn from the Memoirs; but the movies sharpen it and make it into a moral/ideological struggle between the minions of an evil prelate who's trying to seize power for selfish purposes vs. the devoted servants of a king who are supposedly fighting for a vaguely-defined nobler set of social goals. I always knew this couldn't have been a historically accurate picture; Richelieu had all the real power as it was, with no reason to want more nor to be dissatisfied with his puppet king, and his policies were aimed singlemindedly at strengthening the French state, not at his own interests personally. But it's a premise that did make for exciting and dramatic conflicts, and I always supposed it came from Dumas. In the Memoirs and the novel, however, the plot is much more grounded in reality; the two swaggering groups of sword-boys don't have policy differences as such, just a petty team rivalry and animosity like that between two rival high schools (except that these bunches of juveniles have swords and lethal combat training). So the novel doesn't have a broad social good vs. social evil framework.

Related to the above, the four main characters are much less heroic moral exemplars in the book than in the movie versions (where they're quite whitewashed), and significantly less likeable --though, to be fair, they also have their good qualities. In the book, the character Constance is married (though her husband is a contemptible louse); but that doesn't stop D'Artagnan from amorously pursuing her. While he's supposedly deeply "in love" with her, however, he's also bedding two other women, one whose favors he gets by a trick he admits was "unworthy of a gentleman," and the other whose love for him he shabbily exploits to deliberately use her as a tool. (Porthos, not to be outdone, is a gigolo with an unattractive mistress whom he strings along just to wheedle sums of her husband's money out of her from time to time.) Their attitude (and Dumas') towards their servants stinks. Athos affects a self-imposed silence on himself and his servant, so that they communicate only by hand signs; but if the young man happens to misunderstand the master's wishes (which he can't verbally ask about!), Athos beats him. When he can't afford to pay his "lackey" anymore, D'Artagnan, on the advice of his buddies, beats up the unfortunate servant and forbids him to quit; this supposedly wins him the impressed underling's undying loyalty. (As you may have guessed, Dumas himself never worked as a servant. :-( ) Novelist Norah Lofts once has a character say that people reveal much of their character by how they treat helpless animals. When the young man is about to set out for Paris, D'Artagnan's father gifts him with an old and faithful (though unattractive) horse, and charges him never to sell the animal, but to let it retire in peace to pasture. As soon as he hits town, practically his first act is to sell the poor beast and pocket the cash. He also avows his willingness, at one point when he's in a hurry to get somewhere, to ride a horse or two to death or maiming, since he has the money to replace them. (I hoped one would give him a good hard kick in a tender part of his anatomy, but alas, it didn't happen. :-( )

Overall, the novel has a number of other features that weaken it as compared to the film tradition. It's much less compact in time, spanning the years 1625-1628, with a 19th-century style epilogue telling us the subsequent fates of the characters. (Though in Dumas' hands, 1626 apparently just vanishes down the memory hole in a chronological slip; and after Buckingham's assassination --that's a "spoiler" only for people who slept through British history class!-- on Aug. 23, 1628, the author somehow flips the calendar of subsequent events back to Aug. 15.) The plot is a bit jerry-built, with the intrigue and danger involving the recovery of the queen's diamond studs given to Buckingham occupying only the first part of it. Much of the last part revolves around the historical siege of La Rochelle, Buckingham's assassination (in which Milady De Winter is involved, in Dumas' version), and Milady's sinister schemes for personal vengeance against our hero. In between, we have a fair amount of filler involving the reunion of the friends and their efforts to pay for equipping themselves properly for the La Rochelle campaign. (Some of this is intended to be comic relief, and some of it actually is, though it's not always as comic as Dumas thought it.) There are some cases of wildly unlikely coincidence or of unlikely knowledge on a character's part. Dumas doesn't develop the religious theme that could have been built around Aramis' struggle between his felt call to the priesthood and his more secular or carnal impulses (probably because the author himself didn't have the degree of spiritual interest or insight needed to do that). And for readers who put a premium on sword-fighting action, that motif is much less prominent here than it typically is in the movies. Rebecca De Mornay's Milady in the Disney movie is a much more round and nuanced character than the one here. (Though Dumas' Richelieu is a much more believable and realistic approximation of the real one than the Disney version's caricature; and Rochefort is much less a consummate villain here than he's drawn in the movies.) And the characters' readiness to engage in duels to the death over nothing, or over minor slights to their "honor" (usually confused with overbearing, chip-on-the-shoulder pride) gets old quickly.

On the plus side --and it has one, since I finished the book and gave it three stars!-- the last part of the novel (more so than the first) is a tense, gripping page-turner. Dumas' has a dry wit at times that can be appealing. His prose reads well; even though it can have some long sentences and complex sentence structure, and big words, it isn't as daunting as it looks, and could usually be understood easily enough by most intelligent modern readers if they'd give it a chance. (The exceptions are French terminology in several places --and, in this translation, occasional untranslated French words apparently retained for flavor-- but I was able to simply read around these, or deduce an approximated meaning from context.) For anyone who's seen the movies, comparing the two art forms can be fascinating (there are a number of details that are paralleled in the Disney version especially). Some passages are genuinely moving; and Milady's character, like a cobra in a glass case, fascinates even while it repels. (As the title character of the old Get Smart TV series might have remarked, "If only she'd used her talents for niceness instead of evil!")

In summary, this was, for me, a read that fell short of expectations; I'll always prefer the movie versions, and won't be searching out much of the author's other work (though I still want to read The Count of Monte Cristo). But it has an undeniable historical interest, and isn't without its merits; and others have liked it better than I did --you might, as well!

This book is a journey, literally. Not only did it take me around Europe, it's also gave me the highs, lows, exhaustion and jubilation that only a journey can produce.

I'm glad I've read this, it's taken me almost two months as while some parts were interesting and readable, other parts were an uphill struggle.

Talking of struggles, I do find translations of classics pretty hard going. While the actual dialogue came across quite campy and amusing, the narrative was dense and dry.

Would i read the rest of this series? No, I've had my fill of Musketeers, reading this one was an achievement and I'm happy to leave things there.

Two stars, I feel the only thing that will prove memorable for me with this book is the pain and length of time of reading it.

كل انسان يُفضل نفسه اولا
لذلك يستهان بالحب؛و الصداقةو القرابة
لهذا عندما هتفوا: الواحد للكل و الكل لواحد .. توقفنا عند الفرسان الثلاثة طويلا؛ لإنهم عاشوها و نفذوها

يقال ان دوماس اقتبس قصتهم من مذكرات فارس يدعي تشارلز باتزا و المشهور باسم كونت دارتانيان و كان له باع في التجسس لصالح لويس الثالث عشر و وقعت مذكراته في ايدي الكسندر دوماس؛ اقوي حكاء في القرن التاسع عشر

الطريف ان بطل رواية الفرسان التلاتة هو فارس رابع دارتانيان فنري :علاقة محبة بعد عداوة تنشأ بينه و بين اثوس و اراميس و بورثوس
و ايضا تنجح محاولته المستميتة للالتحاق بفرسان الملك
و تكثر الدسائس في البلاط و يحاول البعض تلويث سمعة الملكة ؛ و تتوالى بطولات الفرسان المخلصين بلا حدود لملكهم الضعيف

تحقق الفرسان الثلاثة نجاحا غير مسبوق و يصدر لها جزئين
رواية تاريخية كلاسيكية بسيطة بلا رموز او دلالات غامضة..بل هو الحكي القديم الذي يؤكد لنا ان صديقك هو الذي يصونك و يظل على العهد عند الخلاف

"I Tre Moschettieri" è uno dei romanzi più famosi di Alexandre Dumas.
La trama si svolge in una Francia del XVII secolo con a capo re di re Luigi XIII (e il
Cardinale Richelieu) e comincia con un giovane guascone di nome D'Artagnan che parte alla volta di Parigi per fare fortuna e divenire moschettiere (suo sogno più grande).
Durante le sue nuove peripezie avrà un incontro con tre moschettieri del re, il quale approccio non sarà proprio amichevole, ma porterà inevitabilmente e superbamente alla famosa frase "Tutti per uno, uno per tutti".
Così vedremo D'Artagnan confrontarsi con sfide mortali, amori complessi e prove di fedeltà non solo per conto della regina/re, ma anche di amicizia che porteranno uno sviluppo alla sua crescita ed esperienza.
Dopo aver letto "Il Conte di Montecristo", ero impaziente di leggere "I Tre Moschettieri" e posso dire di essere rimasta soddisfatta della lettura al mille per cento.
Nessuna delusione.
Dumas ha l'eccezionale capacità di tenere il lettore incollato alle righe dei suoi romanzi.
Non ci fa mancare mai niente. Ci sono dai discorsi più "inutili" a quelli più "gloriosi".
Ogni personaggio è strutturato bene e segue fedelmente la sua logica.
La scrittura è fluida e coinvolgente.
Io personalmente non riuscivo a staccare gli occhi dalle pagine. Ero letteralmente ipnotizzata. Leggevo incurante del tempo che passava e riuscire a fermarmi. Dovevo sapere come proseguiva ad ogni costo.
Gli intrighi, i misteri, gli intrecci tra i personaggi e le loro storie/quotidianità, i colpi di scena che trovavi a ogni angolo di pagina (capitela) li ho trovati studiati a tavolino e resi egregiamente.
Per D'artagnan ho sviluppato un amore - odio, odio amore, amore - odio e poi ancora odio - amore scombussolanti.
Ci sono stati momenti in cui non ho condiviso le ragioni delle sue scelte e ragionamenti e il "Ma che stronzo" è partito come un fiume in piena. Tante altre volte e la maggior parte però sono stata conquistata dal suo personaggio.
Ma quello che mi ha frastornato maggiormente è che quello di Athos mi ha avvinto con più interesse. Il suo dolore dissimulato, la sua aria misteriosa, i suoi modi nobili e le geniali tattiche
mi hanno fatto sviluppare un affetto e ammirazione come quelli di D'artagnan per lui.
Certo alcune volte (loro quattro) erano di una rudezza infantile indescrivibile, ma la loro amicizia (ovvero il fulcro del romanzo) mi è arrivata fortemente chiara ed è questo il fattore che bisogna considerare.
Avrei fatto a meno di quei capitoli dedicati a Milady e la sua prigionia che mi hanno annoiato fino allo sfinimento. Sinceramente il suo personaggio è stato un cattivo da copione dall'inizio alla fine e ha meritato la condanna che gli è spettata. Non mi è dispiaciuto neanche. E ci tengo ad aggiungere che mi ha inquietato la maniera in cui riusciva a fare cadere ai suoi piedi tutti quanti. D'artagnan compreso che pendeva dalle sue labbra (una delusione). Menomale che ha avuto la sagacia di risavirsi.
Con questo romanzo ho imparato qualcosa di più sulla storia della Francia che in parte già sapevo e ritrovare dei personaggi che ne hanno fatto realmente parte è stato esilarante e insieme pittorescamente interessante.
Confesso che avevo immaginato una fine diversa, ma non per questo quella da lui scritta non l'ho promossa. Anzi, succedendo quello che non avevo previsto l'ho promossa a pieni voti.
Beh, cos'altro dire dopo questa mia recensione se non un: leggetelo? Ebbene si, se non l'avete ancora fatto vi consiglio di farlo alla prima occasione perché questo classico immortale vi avvincerà come ha fatto con me e con tanti altri.

I look at the episode of Wishbone focused on The Three Musketeers over on Booktube!

Cuando el río suena, agua lleva; que vendría a decir que, cuando tanta gente con buen criterio recomendaba esta obra, era porque el resultado lo merecía. Ha sido así: 5 estrellas como soles. Creo que la hubiese disfrutado o apreciado más si cabe de haberla leído en francés, pero no ha sido el caso, porque me tocaría aprender francés primero, y no tengo tanto tiempo. Mi lectura ha sido en español y en una edición comentada en la que, además de un sutil pero desafortunado destripe, se dan explicaciones sobre quién era tal o cual persona, se detalla alguna incoherencia en el texto original, o se descubre algún anacronismo (como la numeración de las casas en las calles de París de la época).

A día de hoy dudo que alguien no haya oído hablar de D'Artagnan y los Tres Mosqueteros. Las aventuras que han de correr los cuatro compañeros y sus pobres sirvientes a causa de las intrigas del Cardenal Richelieu y Milady de Winter son legendarias y ahora puedo afirmar que también son sumamente entretenidas. A caballo entre la realidad y la ficción, pues el personaje de D'Artagnan está basado en un personaje real que vivió durante los años del reinado de Luis XIV, Alejandro Dumas teje con ritmo ágil y nunca aburrido una serie de tramas que son consecuencia directa de la enemistad del Cardenal Richelieu y Ana de Austria. Como tampoco quiero destripar la historia, pues distan bastante de la de los Mosqueperros (grande Dartacán…), sólo diré que es una novela de aventuras de espada, caballo, amor y honor… mucho honor.

Si he de hablar de los personajes, creo que Dumas hizo un trabajo excepcional, pues rápido me imaginé a cada uno de ellos hasta un nivel de detalle físico y mental excepcional. Uno llega a querer y a odiar a diversos protagonistas, lo que siempre habla bien del trabajo del autor. En cuanto a la ambientación, creo que me metí en ella no por las grandes descripciones de la vida, la sociedad y las escenas donde transcurre todo, pues aunque las hay, son bastante sucintas y generales, sino por el cine y por lo que ya sabía de la época. En ese aspecto, Don Pérez Reverte, salvando las distancias temporales, creo que hace un papel mucho más digno a la hora de meterte de patas en el fango de las ciudades, en el olor de los barrios…

Pero bueno, en definitiva, es un clásico que había que leer y del que he quedado mucho más que satisfecho. Me alegro mucho de haberlo leído.


(El ratón no sale en el libro)

"I tre moschettieri" è una delle opere più conosciute, sia come romanzo che come adattamenti cinematografici. Io mi sono sempre tenuto alla larga, non mi ha mai ispirato.
Poi un giorno di qualche annetto fa, mi capitò tra le mani, in una bella edizione con alcune illustrazioni ed allora me lo accaparrai. Così, qualche settimana fa, con il pretesto di una lettura condivisa, l'ho iniziato senza sapere davvero cosa aspettarmi, ma conoscendo la scrittura di Dumas, avendo già letto un paio di libri, tra i suoi meno conosciuti e considerandola un'ottima scrittura, ricca di suspense e di caratterizzazione dei personaggi.
L'avventura, narrata in questo libro, parte subito a spron battuto. Con un incastro magistrale tra narrazione esterna e dialoghi, la storia mette i suoi pilastri, ben interrati nel fondo, poi i personaggi crescono sempre più, come fiori in primavera, per contro: gli intrighi, gli inganni e le infamie si insinuano, infide e taglienti fra i protagonisti, come farebbe il vento di tempesta in una notte invernale buia e tetra.
La domanda fatidica è: perchè mai ho aspettato così tanto e soprattutto perchè io lo abbia sempre schernito e denigrato a tal punto?
Un classico della letturatura, intramontabile, con quel suo fascino di avventure, di atmosfere, di sentimenti, di voglia per la vita, che ormai si son perse da moltissimo tempo.
Letture di tale coinvolgimento sono rare e come tale debbono essere custodite in nostri ipotetici "musei" della nostra memoria culturale e sociale.
Consigliatissimo!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oaIc...

It has took me longer than usual to get through this book, but hell, there are so many amazing books to be devoured!
The Three Musketeers is an exquisite adventure story, with the "Fun" element on overdrive! I mean, this is classic literature with a twist. I just loved the sword fights and the utter sarcasm. The writing style Dumas uses flows with such ease, and is very humorous. I found myself howling a lot more than I thought I would!
I loved the relationship between the Musketeers and how very different each one is. We definitely have a bromance here!
I see enjoyed the fact that the Musketeers just kicked ass, and in a highly debonair fashion.

My favourite excerpt;


"D'Artagnan, in a state of fury, crossed the antechamber at three bounds, and was darting towards the stairs, which he reckoned upon descending four at a time, when, in his heedless course, he ran head foremost against a Musketeer who was coming out of one of M. De Treville's private rooms, and striking his shoulder violently, made him utter a cry, or rather a howl."

Difatti quattro uomini come loro, quattro uomini devoti gli uni agli altri dalla borsa sino alla vita, quattro uomini che si sostenevano sempre, che non indietreggiavano mai, che eseguivano individualmente o insieme le risoluzioni prese in comune; quattro braccia che minacciavano i quattro punti cardinali o convergevano verso un unico punto, dovevano inevitabilmente, in maniera sotterranea o alla luce del sole, con le mine o con le trincee, con l’astuzia o con la forza, aprirsi un varco verso la meta che volevano raggiungere, per quanto ben difesa o lontana fosse.


Rimasero Athos e d’Artagnan.
“Sono proprio contento di aver ucciso quel furfante, ragazzo mio, giacché ammazzare un inglese è cosa buona, ma se avessi intascato le sue pistole mi sarebbero pesate come un rimorso.”
“Suvvia, mio caro Athos! Avete idee davvero inconcepibili.���
“Sorvoliamo, sorvoliamo! Cosa mi diceva, piuttosto, monsieur de Treville, che ieri mi fece l’onore di venirmi a trovare, che voi bazzicate degli inglesi sospetti protetti dal cardinale?”
“Sarebbe a dire che rendo visita a un’inglese, colei di cui vi ho parlato.”
“Ah! Sì, la donna bionda sulla quale vi ho dato consigli che naturalmente vi siete guardato bene dal seguire.”
“Vi ho spiegato le mie ragioni.”
“Sì; mi pare che vediate in lei il vostro equipaggiamento, a quanto mi avete detto.”
“Nient’affatto! Ormai ho la certezza che quella donna era coinvolta nel rapimento di madame Bonacieux.”
“Sì, capisco; per ritrovare una donna, fate la corte a un’altra: è la strada più lunga, ma la più divertente.”