The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion

Well, that plot certainly unraveled quickly. Maybe Aramis (and we) should have known that Fouquet was too noble to stand for Louis being attacked under his own roof. Aramis himself would do anything for power and persuaded himself and others that Louis was doing things wrong and needed to be replaced. Even though he had great cause for complaint, Athos would never have approved of a plan like this that attacked the king's person (just as he didn't approve of d'Artagnan kidnapping Monck). He might have gone along with what Fouquet first thought the plan was, using the knowledge of Philippe to influence/blackmail Louis into doing what they wanted. As for Porthos, he would do whatever his friends said, plus this was his natural mode - just grab the guy, no need to stand around talking!

Do you think Fouquet rescued Louis out of compunction or because he thought he could thus save himself? There is a moment when Fouquet sees Philippe and wonders if he made the right decision. But Louis and d'Artagnan come up with an obvious test, which Aramis should have thought of. Philippe was pale from being in the Bastille, even if he did get occasional walks outside. Louis may have tried to protect his complexion, but he did ride and hunt. Some of the movies based on this book show the musketeers or others strengthening and training Philippe before the substitution, which makes more sense. It's also quite convenient that Louis arrives when only the family is there, so there are no servants who would spread the news. And we never do get to find out if Louise would have seen the difference.

I’m not all the way caught up yet but
I remembered this part from my first reading.
12-13 year old me hated Fouquet with a passion for betraying Aramis. Especially given what happens later. 🤨
I blamed Fouquet for his fake loyalty and for pretending to care about Louis. I felt like he ruined everything.

I wonder if I will still feel this way when I read this part again.
I promise to catch up this week - now that the Olympics are over I have fewer distractions.

Robin P wrote: "Do you think Fouquet rescued Louis out of compunction or because he thought he could thus save himself? ..."

I think it is a little bit of both. I mean do you not expect to be rewarded for doing the right thing?

I am a little out of my rhythm now. I had read this section last week on Sunday already and had then a very busy week at work with business dinners and many topics. And since Thursday I am really shocked about the things that are happening in Ukraine so that I have not been in the mood to take up a book since, but am instead spending time watching the news.

Ana, you wrote something in the previous thread about maybe losing a little interest in the book. I think that along with so many distractions currently is a little the case for me. I cannot really focus on the book and am just trying to get through the pages. Thinking of me reading Les Miserables in 4 weeks time and me reading this - well it is a huge difference. I had less issues with The Mount of Monte Cristo, but sometimes it is just wrong time, wrong mood, wrong situation.
I will try to read the next chapters during the next days. In my edition these are only 32 pages, so it should not be too hard.

Hedi, I agree. I’ve definitely lost momentum and possibly interest. I was watching the Winter Olympics for a while and now I’ve watched the news 📰 a lot in the last few days. 🤯
I don’t know if it’s just me being distracted lately
or not in the mood for the story, but I’ve been reading the book more as a homework assignment than as a hobby.
I read the entire series really fast when I was 12/13 but mostly because I wanted to find out what happens next. Unfortunately now I know what happens and as I mentioned before I’m not a fan of the ending :/

I will still finish the project with the group but I’m less excited about it than I was about the 3 musketeers and 20 years later.

As always, thanks to Robin for keeping the discussion going even through the boring parts.

Loss of interest is totally understandable. This fall when the pandemic was bad in my area and I had health issues (now resolved), I put in a 2-week break just because I wanted one. I could add another break. but I think it will be better just to finish now that we are so close. It is always fine for people to read at their own pace and comment later.

You are right, Robin, I think we should finish this. As mentioned, this week’s section is not so long and I must admit, I might also need a little break of the news before going to sleep at night, even though I do not know whether I can really concentrate very much on it with the current world events. We thought we were just starting to get out of one crisis just to enter now a new one which could even be worse.

I finally finished reading this entire section. Some of the chapters were very long. I don’t like how Dumas rushed through the most interesting parts and prolonged all the boring parts.

I feel exactly the same way I did when I first read this book.
I absolutely hate Fouquet!
He only wants to free Louis out of some false sense of propriety.
And of course Louis despises him and is completely ungrateful.

Poor Philippe got to be king for less than a day before going back to prison and this time in much worse conditions.
I’m surprised his mother doesn’t care enough to try to help him.

What a sad turn of events for Aramis. The one time in the whole series that he’s completely honest with someone, he is betrayed. I suppose he was right not to fully trust anyone and be as secretive as he was up until now.
I don’t know why he let his guard down with Fouquet - it wasn’t necessary to let him in on the whole secret. He would have been better off trusting D’Artagnan.

In the end both Fouquet and D’Artagnan wonder whether Philippe would have been the better king.

This seems to be a signature Dumas twist - he lets us think everything is going according to plan and at the last minute everything unravels and ends terribly. 🤷🏻‍♀️

I think Dumas had to make the plot fail because the historical record is there, same as with the plot to save Charles I of England. But he gets just up to that point.

Interesting that you hate Fouquet, Ana. It seems to me that Dumas wanted us to admire Fouquet and dislike Colbert. Fouquet is a bit like Athos, too noble for his own good and the good of some of those around him. Of course, the whole concept of nobility was already outdated in Dumas' time. I have sometimes wondered why he puts in the sense that kings and nobles are somehow better than common people when in his own life, he supported a more democratic government.

I liked Fouquet better than Colbert.
Up until the point when he betrayed Aramis.
And it’s not just because I love Aramis, but also because I think it was a wrong to sacrifice a true friend in order to serve an ungrateful, entitled king.
Besides Philippe was not an ordinary usurper - he had an equal right to the throne.

Ana wrote: "I liked Fouquet better than Colbert.
Up until the point when he betrayed Aramis.
And it’s not just because I love Aramis, but also because I think it was a wrong to sacrifice a true friend in ord..."

Good points. And as it turned out, Louis XIV was a very egotistical and wasteful king, spending the country's money on his own projects, and wars.