chriscarpenter's profile picture

chriscarpenter's review

3.0
adventurous medium-paced

It’s not written by Dumas, that was a pseudonym by a later 19th century writer. Of the original four, only Aramis survives. But the story is focused on the titular son. It’s not bad. It doesn’t have Dumas’s flair. But it is worth reading to consider the character of Aramis. Does he continue down the path of corruption brought on by the acquisition of power in the last canonical Dumas story? Or is the Aramis presented here a corruption of the character in the hands of an inept writer masquerading badly as the great Dumas?

rjaxon7525's review

2.0

Nowhere near the same level as the other Musketeer books and it is clear it was written by someone else (other than Dumas). The ending is tragically abrupt and seemingly incomplete so the reader is left with what feels like a book that is missing 100 more pages.

This book, the final (?) of the many Musketeer sequels might as well have been written by Alexandre Dumas himself. The same world is dusted off and brought to life once more... only much if not all the luster is gone at this point. That is not to say that the book is not an enjoyable one, by no means. Plus, it ties up that one loose end left over from The Man in The Iron Mask: Whatever happened to old Aramis?

Beware spoilers ahead!

Now I know how and why Aramis finally meets his end and color me disappointed. I am going to happily and ignorantly pretend he dropped out of the story sometime after his sad escape from Belle-Ille en Mer in the previous book. All that we are shown of him after that is absolutely not to my taste.

For that matter, neither are the rest of the familiar characters from The Son of Porthos. With the exception of little Friquet, everyone we used to know is old or older, corrupt to the marrow and embittered. Louis XIV and his court seem like a vile viper's nest with the chief poisoner among them all being the previously charming Athenais de Tonnay-Charente. There is no more charm to be found among these nobles, only lust, betrayal, backstabbing and murder. While it is probably a far more realistic rendition of the period than the romanticized version presented by Dumas, it still rankles a little.

In the midst of this all, there is the ray of sunshine and delight in the shape of Joel, the unknown and unknowing son of the mighty Porthos. Only, he seems to be made from parts of Porthos (stature, open and trusting nature), parts of Athos (immovable moral standards and striking noblesse) and parts of D'Artagnan (charm, wit, humor). His love story is lukewarm but a fresh change from the sighing and the hand-wringing of the heroes that preceded him. Joel doesn't go about muttering 'Woe is me'. He makes things happen. Including when it comes to taking a whole fortified city by virtue of his wits and strength. D'Artagnan would have been proud.

But alas for Aramis! My favorite of them all and he ends so very poorly after living so big and scheming so grandly. I suppose he got what he deserved after he continued to plot even after losing Porthos to his own folly. Still, I think he was done a great injustice in being finished off as an all-out villain. Throughout the entire book I taped my foot in impatience to get to the part where Aramis and Joel would discover one another and Aramis in his old age would take care of his friend's son. How lovely the reunion would have been and how much good it would have done Aramis if he could have had something more to keep living for than his lofty ambitions. But no. Instead we have satanist crazy ladies, a hare-brained plot to fool a buffoon of a king and Aramis dying a disgraceful, utterly pointless death. *sigh*

At the end of it all, though, I would still say that lovers of these books should read this one as well.