To note two things before
I begin: 1) A third of my way through the novel I switched from the 1852
translation to the 1993 Robin Buss translation; 2) I will spoil a sizable
portion of the book’s first-half. The former consideration owes to my learning
that the 1852 edition, for reasons of mass appeal and (Victorian) morality,
altered the text, removing classical references and certain subtexts. The
latter stems from the book’s twelve-hundred page length. Hundreds of pages
comprise the narrative’s opening, as such, I must spoil hundreds of pages.
****
Edmond Dantès,
a man with too much going for him. His captain’s death sets him to command his
own ship, the trading-ship Pharaon, by age nineteen. Add to this his engagement
to the beautiful Mercédès, and even he fears a bad moon on the rise, musing
that ‘[m]an does not appear to me to be intended to enjoy felicity so unmixed’.
How right he is, for his seemingly unimpeded upward climb has fostered enemies.
Danglars, jealous career-wise, Fernand, jealous love-wise, and Caderousse, just
jealous, realise all it would take to topple their enemy is an anonymous
allegation calling Edmond a Bonapartist, a claim that would be supported by the
letter left him by the Pharoan’s late Bonapartist captain. Fernand sends the
accusation, leading to the arrest of Edmond on his wedding day.
His last hope for
salvation crashes against the public prosecutor, de Villefort. An ambitious
royalist, de Villefort realises the incriminating letter is addressed to his
father, a revelation which, if made public, would shatter any career hopes he
has and doom his father. Left no choice he burns the letter and condemns Edmond
to life imprisonment in the Chateau d’If.
Years pass with the
only thing keeping Edmond sane his teacher-pupil relationship with the abbé
Faria, who promises him a vast fortune if they ever get out. After fourteen
years Edmond escapes, making his way to the island of Monte Cristo where he
finds the treasure. Now armed with nigh-on unlimited funds, the patience of a
prisoner and the knowledge taught him by the abbé, he vows to hide in plain
sight among his malefactors, as the Count of Monte Cristo, so as to inflict on
them suffering equal to his own.
Having viewed a few
adaptations before reading this book, it is surprising how un-conspiratorial
the conspirators are. Many of the films play Edmond’s false imprisonment as a
planned act to service the goals of the villains. In the novel, while certainly
planned, it comes off almost by accident. They concoct their plan in a drunken
huff, on a whim writing a letter of accusation, which ultimately Danglars just
throws away. The novel would end there, had Fernand not bothered to retrieve
the letter to send anyway.
Here rises one of the
novel’s major themes, the conflict between chance and human will. Edmond might
have had a contented, if unremarkable, life had his captain not happened to be
a Bonapartist who would trust him with a vital letter, had Danglars, Fernand
and Caderousse not all happened to be drinking together, had Danglars happened
to burn the accusation rather than throw it in a corner, had Fernand not sent
it, and had the incriminating letter not been addressed to de Villefort’s
father. By the end none of them can admit what they’ve done. Danglars, Fernand
and Caderousse can do nothing because if the letter Edmond possesses is found
to be genuinely incriminating, then saying the accusation was fake would paint
them as Bonapartists as well. De Villefort can’t ever let Edmond free for fear
he’ll reveal that de Villefort burned a letter of national importance to save
his father.
Skew the events and the Coen’s could direct it.
Especially the arrest, when all involved, bewildered, think ‘a mere joke should
lead to such frightful consequences’. None of the ‘conspirators’ really intend
to destroy Edmond, but none of them would risk themselves to save him, given
his removal helps them up in the world.
Fortune’s fickleness, however, runs both ways.
How lucky was Edmond, locked in a prison allowing no inmate fraternisation, to
be housed in cell that the industrious abbé Faria would, by accident, burrow
into. How fortunate also that this man happens to have one of the world’s
greatest fortunes hidden away, untouched.
And yet, seizing on this event of infinitesimal
probability, he can, or at least aims to, remove himself from the battering of
the mad dictator Chance. Although he claims to have become an ‘emissary of God’
who has received that ‘which is finest, greatest and most sublime in the world
[which is the ability] to reward and to punish’, Dumas stresses the count’s
seeming omnipotence comes less from an unearthly presence, than from the
ultra-material resource of gold and jewels. God’s justice apparently requires a
cash-flow.
Around this point the novel enters a timeskip,
resuming when the count plans to make his way back into French society to enact
his vengeance. The novel doesn’t just shift in time and setting, but in type. The Count of Monte Cristo, one of the
archetypal adventure novels, switches one-third of the way through from salty
adventure to high society, psychological thriller. Even without sure knowledge
the reader dimly realises, from the novel’s implicit delineation, that Dumas
did not initially intend to include the early Edmond Dantès episodes. These
early parts, though essential and solid in their own right, do not match the
quality of the book’s latter two-thirds. Dumas, a dramatist primarily, does
best drawing rooms set his scenes. His climaxes rarely involve swordfights or chases,
rather his most gripping passages are dialogues where characters speak for
paragraphs on end. Albert’s abduction by the bandit emperor Luigi Vampa comes nowhere
near the energy of a debate between a father and daughter.
Not to say the count’s machinations of revenge
fall flat. Having had his old life robbed of him by fourteen years in the
Chateau d’If the count visit upon his enemies suffering as protracted as his
own. In film versions, for time constraints, the count’s revenge, though
carefully premeditated, is delivered for each enemy in one grand burst, laying
dynamite in their palaces’ foundations. But Dumas, with the serial novel’s
potentially endless canvas, can draw the villain’s demise out over hundreds of
pages, termites in their foundations. Like a skilled murderer the count puts
his arm over his victim’s shoulder to conceal the knife he inserts. As they
bleed out, desperately searching for a doctor, they cannot escape their looming
ruin, nor the smiling face of their ruiner.
Oddly for a revenge novel, and this is arguably
the revenge novel, it refrains from
making a definitive judgement on the matter. Adaptations generally push the
story to one side or the other, the 2002 one condemning revenge, the 1934 one supporting
it as an act of justice. Many revenge narratives, with any goals of moral
analysis, would end with the protagonist realising how empty their endeavours
have left them. But for the count, though occasionally he doubts his cause, all
he requires to renew his purpose is memory of those fourteen uprooted years. By
the end he is, if not fulfilled, satisfied. What adds complexity to this,
however, is that his enemies have set up more or less functional family lives.
Although the count would kill the father, both for himself and, in his view,
God, he must quash any compassion remaining in him to, by proxy, destroy the
lives of sons and daughters.
But though this is the count’s revenge tale
Dumas does well to switch viewpoints often. The novel centres on the count, but
he is not the central point of view. For the better, because after Edmond’s
transformation he borders on the realm of pulp anti-hero (a character-type the
count no doubt influenced) whose talents and resolution are bit too perfect. To
remain a compelling character through the novel’s latter parts, when his
purpose is clear, the reader must view him at a distance. Though Dumas does
return to the count’s viewpoint intermittently, most prominently and
effectively at the end of the novel, for the most part we see him as his
enemies and their families do.
Certain viewpoint digressions will wear on some
readers, where a character will spend an entire chapter(s) recounting their
history, revealing events that have only tangential bearing on the plot. The
reader can understand Dumas’ intention, to create a world outside the novel
with a past extending beyond the limits of the count’s narrative. That being
said, readers can, and most likely will, skip these sections. And, should
anything crucial be missed, any number of chapter-by-chapter summaries can
catch them up.
Any blemishes I could point to in this work
seem unfair targets, like criticising one atop Everest for coming short of the
stars. I could say Dumas’ descriptive passages run on too long, but a million
lesser writers would consider a work containing one of them their magnum opus.
I could point to how a certain plotline is wrapped up can seem skeevy to a
reader with twenty-first century values, but for a work written in the 1840s
this happens less than it might. To appropriate Shakespeare, ‘faults in [it]
seem as the spots of heaven, more fiery by night's blackness’.
Few
novels two hundred pages long deserve their paper, one in a thousand short
stories could earn their space on a kindle, but The Count of Monte Cristo, through twelve-hundred panoramic pages,
crafts a melodrama whose ambitions could be accomplished with no lesser length.
And if not every page serves the novel, then a good eleven of twelve do.
Despair and hope, chance and will, themes which countless writers have tried to
express in their extremities, here affect the reader in a way only the
heightened reality M. Dumas has crafted could.
As Robin Buss, the Penguin Black Classics translator,
said in his introduction, ‘For many of its readers, despite its length, it
seems all too short’. If there is any novel I wish the potential reader could
overcome their natural prejudice against doorstoppers for, it’s this one. A
meditation on revenge, Providence and human will, told as an
adventure-cum-psychological thriller that today can holds it popular appeal as
well as it did in 1845.
A modern, unabridged and uncensored translation
is available from Penguin, translated by Robin Buss: http://www.bookdepository.com/Count-Monte-Cristo-Alexandre-Dumas/9780140449266
****
On a separate note: I must recommend a few
adaptations of the work.
The
Count of Monte Cristo (1934): While
Americanised in every negative connotation of the word, it still accomplishes
the feat of fitting the basic plot into a 90 minute movie. Although not
terribly complex in either morality or direction, the film still weaves an epic.
Just a swashbuckling one rather than a psychological one.
Gankutsuou:
The Count of Monte Cristo
(2004-5): Perhaps one of the most effective adaptations because it not only has
24 episodes (9 hours) to work in, but because it also drops the entire first
third, leaving the count’s past a mystery to be solved. The result is a taught
series that can include far more subplots than were hitherto seen in
adaptations, most notably all of Albert’s young Parisian friends get
significant characterisation. I admit I watched this before I’d any idea of the
novel’s plot, so the mystery element was genuinely intriguing to me, as I
assume it was for the original Japanese audience. Despite being a science
fiction retelling of the story it is one of the most faithful adaptations, at
least until the end. What may be off-putting for some is the visuals. While as
a mash-up of mid-19th, early 20th century technology
passed through a sci-fi lens it is effective, the colouring technique, where
textures remain stationary while characters move, can seem obnoxious to some.
You’ll quickly know whether you’ll like the style or not. One criticism I must level is at the character of the count. In the
novel his amiability communicates to the reader, he adjusts his manner
depending of who he speaks to, speaking as one trained in the art of conversation
to most, and dropping his proto-Nietzschean philosophy on only those he feels
would be intrigued by it. In the anime he won’t stop with his macabre musings.
No one opposite him on a dinner table would think, ‘Oh, you singular example of
humanity,’ they’d just think he was a needlessly sombre bore. A bigger problem
with this adaptation is how it treats Eugenie. Proto-feminist no more, here
made passive and submissive, just another female character needing a man to
save her. Despite this, and quite a lot of the ending, it is still one of the
best adaptations, if only for its length.
The
Stars’ Tennis Balls, or Revenge in America (2000): Not an
adaptation but a modern day retelling. I’ve not read it yet, but it’s a
thriller by Stephen Fry, so it has something going for it.
Just finished your review: The Count of Monte Cristo, by Alexandre Dumas, as I have not read the novel, I could not have much to say. Yet, I have read The Three Musketeers, and I have not found any author who is able to contract dialogues for characterisation as brilliantly as Dumas is able to. However, I do find that his novel lacks depth and philosophical reflection, this may due to The Three Musketeers belongs to the D'Artagnan trilogy. Yet it ensures that his novel has more energy by comparison, and I shall try to read The Black Tulip before the Count of Monte Cristo.
ReplyDeleteHis son has written The Lady of Camellias, which is much shorter, but worth reading as well, and I favour the translation by David Coward of the Oxford Press.