As I said in my Reading list, this year’s starting book has been The Count of Monte Christo by Alexandre Dumas. When I told Diana, she asked me to write down my opinions of it – so here we go. 

First of all, I guess most people know the story of The Count of Monte Christo – I mean even the Simpsons already had it as part of an episode. So, when I started, I knew what to expect. A young man being cheated on, spending years in prison and, upon on getting out, getting rich and seeking revenge on those who wronged him. This is the plot of the book in short. I liked the book. It wasn’t the first book of Dumas which I read (that would have been The Three Musketeers somewhere in Corona, running out of books) so I knew I would get along with his writing. In the end I was fascinated how much I wanted to read it – I stayed up, past my normal bed-time just to keep reading another chapter (and then another one, and another one… short chapters are something tricky if the book is great). I was through with the book in early January already. 

Given that most people knew the storyline and that I already mentioned that I like the book, I want to focus on something else in this review: Is Edmond Dantes a real hero or basically as bad as the people he is taking revenge on? 

We start the book with Edmond being a young man of 19 years, about to get a big promotion and getting married to a beautiful woman. This creates jealousy among others (namely Danglers and Ferdinand, although I wouldn’t put Carderousse of that list) that then get him arrested on his wedding day. While meeting his judge, Villefort, he carries a letter that would incriminate Villefort more than it would Edmond and therefore he gets thrown in jail. In this part of the story Dantes is definitely a hero, a tragic one indeed. 

In the beginning of his imprisonment he keeps the role of the tragic hero, losing all sense of life, trying to end his life, being happy about meeting the Abbé in the prison and trying to escape with him. However you see his evil already coming through when lying to the Abbé about his revenge. That is, when in my eyes, Edmond starts to lose the “way of heroes”. 

Although, that is also when we see his genius. His escape from imprisonment is genius (although he could have thought about where the graveyard might be a little longer and the truth might have come to mind) and after becoming the Count of Monte Christo his evil genius becomes obvious. The way he orchestrates events and people is horrible, as he seemingly considers the people around him “toys” he can play with, but brilliant nonetheless. He comes to the people in various personalities, somehow influencing them so they bend to his will. It is admirable, but it stays evil as he does not differentiate whom he makes to pieces in his evil chess game – for example his steward in Paris is also forced to suffer through the horrors of his past although he never wronged the Count (admittingly, one could argue that Bertuccio wasn’t the best of people but he never wronged Dantes). So while playing the Count of Monte Christo, Edmond Dantes is remarkable – but in my eyes not a hero anymore (as he also sees himself more as a god). 

In the end the Count even starts to realize that he isn’t the hero he believed to be when his plans start to destroy innocent people – he finally realizes that his action have consequences. While he shows remorse, he is also really taking care that his soul is pampered, he asks Valentine to praise him, he still plays with Maximilian (although claiming, it is for his own good). Finally, he gives a lot of his fortune to the young lovers but yet it is still with the feeling that he wants the gratefulness for this. Therefore, although he shows improvement in his behaviour, I don’t think he really deserves the role of the hero again. 

And something else I want to address while I am on it: Was there a deeper sense to the existence of d’Epinay? The whole time I had been reading it, I was wondering because the story would not have changed without him. He is first introduced as a visitor to the island of Monte Christo, then he meets the Count in Rome and asks him to save his friend Morcerf (this is really shortened), later we get to know that he is the designated husband of Valentine. Nothing would have changed if he wouldn’t have been there – the Count and Morcerf could have still met in Rome (as they were in the same hotel, which I doubt was coincidental given the Counts planning skills), the Count could still have saved Morcerf (there would have been different ways on how the Count would have gotten word of it, and again I believe the kidnapping of Morcerf was orchestrated by the Count) and there would have been other reasons why Maximilian and Valentine couldn’t have been together in the beginning of their story, that wouldn’t have included d’Epinay. I think that was the only character that could have been excluded from the book – the rest are well done and fit in like pieces to a puzzle with all their little secrets and intrigues. 

So, what do you think about the characters in The Count of Monte Christo? And if you have not yet read the book and therefore cannot judge – change that, the book is a good read.