The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion

Welcome back after our break. I see that some of you used the time to catch up. The story picks up right after the more savvy ladies in waiting claimed everything overheard at the tree was a trick. The king is angry and insulted by this, but tries not to let it show. He is also miffed that Madame seems to no longer prefer him.

I was astounded that Louise writes him a letter. I thought she was much too timid to do such a thing, and wondered if it was written by someone else! She requests an audience and he decides to go to the (officially forbidden) rooms of the ladies. She insists that she meant everything she said and loves Louis. This apparently is all he he needs to fall in love with her. My memory of this book was that Louis seduced or forced Louise, but she is actually the one instigating everything. Poor Raoul!

Then we have the stroll through the woods that ends up with the young lovers under a tree and the king sacrificing his comfort for his new love - and everyone seeing them. They also overlap with the other ongoing storyline, Aramis and Fouquet trying to stay ahead of the king's demands for money. Apparently Aramis' new secret position gives him access to unlimited funds, without any oversight. The invitation from Fouquet to the king to his party did happen. It was after he saw Fouquet's mansion that Louis decided to build Versailles to outdo it.

At this point I'm listening to the audio book at 1.75 speed.
How did Dumas manage to stretch such a simple plot into so many chapters?

Now I remember why I never liked Louise. She is so boring and so fake. I hate how she pretends to be innocent and naive, but then shamelessly goes after the king. It is a very silly move on her part. She should have married Raoul (or someone else) first and then started her affair. I'm sure all of this will end badly.

I think by now everyone can guess what Aramis is planning to do.
He is my favorite, but it's sad that he is the only original character still part of this plot. We have not seen Athos, Porthos or D'Artagnan in a long time.

Robin, have you seen the movie "The Man in the Iron Mask"?
If you have, it might be the reason why you remembered Louis as the aggressor. The film takes some liberties with the plot, but it is the only musketeer related adaptation I like.
With the first 2 books I felt like no movie does them justice, but this third book is so boring that the movie might actually be better.
What do you think?

I did see that movie but I don't remember the details!

I have just finished this section.
It seems a little like chewing gum dragging on and on. However, when Aramis and a potential plot against the king emerge, the whole story becomes a little more interesting again. I wonder what the plan is and whether there might have been such a plot in reality, too. Who would have been a substitute for the king?
Or is this a follow-up of the Fronde?
I had to think of the War of the Roses in England and the important role some of the courtiers played in the fight for power and institutionalization of a certain person as the king. Even Margaret Beaufort as a woman was plotting and using her stations to install her son Henry VII on the throne. (I saw a documentary about her on the History Channel this week - I guess that is why I am comparing these scenes in the book with that period in English history).

Good point, the English and French dynasties were interrelated for centuries and influenced each other.

My understanding is that the plots in this book are a combination of historical fact, gossip, legends, and imagination.

It is almost like the books of Philippa Gregory, which have been criticized for a lack of historical authenticity. And I feel more and more with this, too.
I think the problem with historical fiction is that you can often mistake it for reality. You have to remind yourself that it is all fiction and that it is often difficult to distinguish the factual parts from the fictional ones, at least for the average reader.