You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.96 AVERAGE
3.96 AVERAGE
I was surprised by how much more I enjoyed this than the Count of Monte Cristo. I liked the characters a lot more, and the political intrigue is really interesting.
adventurous
challenging
emotional
funny
hopeful
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
full of ups and downs, yet very realistic and hopeful. The camaraderie between D’Artagnan and the three musketeers is joyous and very touching. It is unpredictable yet full of comfort. The antagonist have a full formed character and its really a very adventurous book which connect to the reader.
I look at the episode of Wishbone focused on The Three Musketeers over on Booktube!
Four men gallop around France and England picking fights with people, chasing after married women, and drinking wine.
adventurous
funny
lighthearted
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
4.5 stars... Not on par with The Count of Monte Cristo, but not much is. I found this to be a delightful read. With Dumas, you need to understand that he was paid by the word at the time. So it’s overlong by a bit. But it’s funny and adventurous in all the right ways.
adventurous
mysterious
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
While this classic tale certainly has some wonderful intrigue and adventure, it is a slog to get through. There were plenty of times I was excited to come back and keep reading. But other times it felt like a chore, and unfortunately, much of this was in the last quarter of the book. The intrigues and adventures of the first half slow way down by the second and it becomes tedious at times to continue. As soon as Dumas focuses on the Siege of La Rochelle, the fast-paced adventures become mired in the political dealings of the time. The heroes spend too much time waiting around which grows tiresome (even if this was the reality for the soldiers at La Rochelle). And while Milady is an intriguing character, I did not like the focus on her chapter after chapter. I quickly lost interest, wishing we could get back to the Musketeers. Overall I think it was a good book for those who can get through the archaic phrasing and mannerisms (there are some troubling points if it were judged by today's standards), but it does slow down to the point where it becomes hard to pick up if you have a fairly short attention span like me.
adventurous
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
for the entire first half, i thought this would be an easy five-star read. unfortunately... well. the second half shifts from charming musketeer hijinks to over-serious history drama, for one, and it's also where milady comes to the fore.
the thing is: yes, milady did a lot of shit wrong. but if she's a monster, she's one that society created, through class and gender stratification. because she's clearly brilliant, but as a poor woman she doesn't have a path to advancement except ruthless opportunism. the number of times the narration says "she had the heart of a man", or whatever, and then immediately makes a derogatory comment about her? insane. and i think what's most frustrating is, she's the kernel of a REALLY cool character... in a text that's largely unsympathetic to her.
she steals church relics so she and her lover can make a life for themselves, she lies her way into marrying a count, she changes identities at will and is an extremely astute observer of human behaviour? she seduces her way out of every trouble, because that's the tool she has? and like okay SURE she killed people etc etc etc but like. she's the synpathetic one, imo, not athos. she kinda rules. i actually feel like, in another book, she'd be the morally grey protag? where's my gay feminist retelling of THAT.
d'artagnan still a better protag than dantes though
the thing is: yes, milady did a lot of shit wrong. but if she's a monster, she's one that society created, through class and gender stratification. because she's clearly brilliant, but as a poor woman she doesn't have a path to advancement except ruthless opportunism. the number of times the narration says "she had the heart of a man", or whatever, and then immediately makes a derogatory comment about her? insane. and i think what's most frustrating is, she's the kernel of a REALLY cool character... in a text that's largely unsympathetic to her.
d'artagnan still a better protag than dantes though