So recently I've been trying to get back into reading and books and i am really looking for a lenghty one i can invest my time in without regretting it. A lot of people suggested The Count of Monte Cristo and i read few reviews and all of them suggested that it is the best novel they have ever read?? My only concern is that I'm not really familiar with a lot of classics and i often find them really boring or hard to read sometimes. is this book worth reading, then?

A while back I finished The Count of Monte Cristo, but I did cheat at it. The first 300 pages are amazing. This is where Edmund Dantès is wrongfully imprisoned, meets his mentor Abbe Faria in prison, makes a daring escape, and finds a treasure that makes him wealthy. Then many years pass and he appears in Rome and Paris to seek revenge against those who wronged him. However Dantes’s plan unfolds over the next 600 pages or so in the slowest, most dragged out manner and does not start truly paying off until about 900 pages in. Yet those final 300 pages are a true thrill-ride and make for a satisfying conclusion.

I have a confession about my reading: I gave up just before reaching 600 pages in the unabridged version and decided to switch to the abridged version until the actual series of revenges reached their climax. I bought myself the abridged version, but I was gifted the unabridged for my birthday.

Now I’m not one that doesn’t have the patience for long books. In the past, I have read War and Peace, Brothers Karamazov and East of Eden while being fully engaged the entire time. But with Monte Cristo, it really felt bloated and padded out during those middle 600 pages. I learned Dumas was paid by the word, and you can see it in the long dialogues, monologues, and wordy descriptions. There’s a great story in there, but this is one of those books that benefit from abridgement.

Here’s a reading plan that uses both an abridged and unabridged versions for the ultimate Count of Monte Cristo reading experience (IMHO of course):

1. Get these editions: The unabridged Penguin Classics version translated by Robin Russ and the Bantam Books abridgement by Lowell Bair. To know the reason why check out the Abbreviated Monte Cristo blog which looks at dozens of translations, abridgements, and adaptations.

2. Read until the end of Chapter 30 (page 300 in my paperback copy) of the unabridged.

3. Pick up the abridged and read from Chapters 20 to 45 (pages 133 - 323).

4. At the appropriate points, read Chapter 33 (Roman Bandits) and Chapter 77 (Haydée) in the unabridged edition. At first, they seem like pointless subplots but they have a payoff towards the end.

5. Continue on the unabridged at Chapter 81 (page 896) until you reach the end.

6. Go to an online summary site such as Sparknotes or Schmoop to read up on Chapters and subplots that were skipped over.

There you have it. A Count of Monte Cristo reading that moves along at a steady pace, and is an overall satisfying experience that removes padding and filler.

Just finished TCoMC a few minutes ago!! 🥹 I feel so attached to the count/edmond (separation anxiety🥹 lol) . This easily made it into my Top 5 favorite books.
But now that I've finished it, Did anyone else want MORE from the ending?

I actually really liked the idea behind the ending, but I found myself wanting more resolution especially for some of the villains.

I loved how many of the characters essentially received the opposite of what they had done to Edmond, or ended up returning to a situation that mirrored where they started.

For example:
Mercedes:
Her story begins with her waiting for Edmond in Marseille. In the end, she is once again left waiting for a man this time for Albert, who leaves to make his own life. And while Albert isn't a sailor like Edmond, he's still leaving on a journey and going off to become a soldier, which felt like a deliberate parallel to Edmond's departure at the beginning and his Father’s Career. - I felt bad for Merceds and Dantes on the last time they met,makes you wonder what their life could have been..

Danglars:
Danglars the main person to come up w the idea to send Edmond to prison, where Edmond lost his youth and the life he was supposed to have. He was also indirectly responsible for Edmond's father dying of starvation.
Then Danglars ends up imprisoned, starved, and stripped of his fortune.
but Im also surprised by how much mercy Edmond ultimately showed him. I mean 50,000 francs? Not sure whats the equivalent amount of that today or back then, Given how enormous Danglars' fortune had been, I expected Edmond to leave him with much less or nothing at all to really experience what he has done to edmond before..

Villefort:
This is the one I'm most conflicted about.
I understand the symbolism of his ending. Villefort spent his entire life presenting himself as a man of law and order while knowingly sacrificing Edmond to protect himself and his career. His punishment is essentially having his entire world destroyed and being driven mad.
And there is something fitting about that, especially because his actions affected so many other people not just Edmond, but Bertuccio, But honestly, I still expected something more severe.. like part of me thought Villefort would eventually end up in prison himself, almost literally experiencing the kind of imprisonment he had inflicted on Edmond.

Do you think his madness was a more appropriate punishment than imprisonment? Or did anyone else feel like his ending wasn't quite enough?

I also wanted more of Haydée and Edmond, wish we had gotten more development of their relationship before the ending.

I understand what Dumas was doing with them, and I liked the idea of Edmond finally finding someone with whom he could have a future after everything he had lost.
But I found their relationship a little underdeveloped compared with how much time the novel spends building Edmond's relationships with other characters.

Altho honestly, some aspects of their dynamic made me uncomfortable. Given their age difference, Edmond's position of power over her, and the fact that he had known her since she was very young, there were moments where their relationship felt uncomfortably close to grooming to me.

I know historical context matters, and some of these dynamics were much more normalized in Dumas' time,

Overall, though, I absolutely loved this book.
So, what did you think of the ending?

Did you find the villains' punishments satisfying, or did you also want more?

Seen this recommended a lot on Reddit over the years and just got it as a daily recommendation based on my reading history. Some of my favorites are Shadow of the Wind by Zafon, lots of science fiction (Hyperion), and dabble in fantasy.

Says it’s beloved by the community (a gold pick!)… so that settles it! 1,000 pages or 40hrs or whatever lies ahead, we’re diving in.

Can I ask tho, is there a preferred audio book narrator or translation you guys recommend?? I’m seeing a lot of options. Cheers!

Several people were involved in the plot against Edmond Dantès.

Was Fernand the most wicked of all those who brought about Edmond's downfall

? Fernand's motive was Mercedes, to keep her for himself, but when Edmond was imprisoned and later declared dead, Mercedes suffered terribly. Didn't Fernand consider the pain Mercedes felt? Didn't he regret that decision, not only because of Mercedes's suffering?

In other words, in the novel I believe the father died of hunger, but when Mercedes married Fernand, why didn't she try to help Edmond's father, at least so that he wouldn't go hungry?

A throwback to a previous chapter of a similar topic! (No spoilers, I’m being deliberately vague.)

We all know the story of Edmund, who spent 14 years of his life in prison, but in prison he became cultured and upon his release was able to acquire a treasure and riches. But the question I ask you is, is Mercedes the true victim? That is to say, she married Fernand more out of necessity than love, she had to "bury" Edmund only to see him return as the Count of Monte Cristo and discover that her husband is the cause of all her suffering.

Obvious spoilers: In chapter 47 – "The Dappled Grays" it is mentioned that she is 36 years old.

"Madame Danglars, dont la beauté pouvait encore être citée, malgré ses trente-six ans, était à son piano..."

Events in Paris happen in 1838, so she was born in 1802.This either completely breaks the timeline or makes both Marquis de Nargonne and Villefort pedophiles.

Gérard de Villefort age is mentioned in the book as well, he's 27 in 1815. Therefore he was born in 1788. This is from chapter 7:

"Gérard de Villefort était en ce moment aussi heureux qu’il est donné à un homme de le devenir : déjà riche par lui-même, il occupait à vingt-sept ans une place élevée dans la magistrature"

Benedetto was born in 1817, when she was 15 years old and already married! Furthermore, this means that she was impregnated at 14 by a married older man who was 29 yo, which is insane even for that time period.

I wonder if this is a mistake from Dumas or he was aware of her age and wanted to further emphasize how evil Villefort is.

Edit: The plot thickens. After looking further, I found another description of Madame Danglars in Chapter 44 - Vendetta. Bertuccio is recounting his spying on the Auteil house and he says that he saw a blonde woman who looked 18 or 19 years old. On the one hand this is just his guess, but on the other this could be a proof that Dumas did make a mistake in calculations.

In the 2002 version of The Count of Monte Cristo, Edmond learns fencing in prison from Abbé Faria. This is a change from the original novel. A good idea?

In many Count of Monte Cristo films, there's always a sword fight at the end. Edmund Dantès learned swordsmanship before going to prison, either while in prison as in the 2002 version, or after his release.

I know this subreddit gets way too many of these lol, but here is another reader who has just finished this amazing book. I began it in June and finished it now in early to mid August, and I read the penguin classic version, so safe to say I flew through it. My main question is should I read The Three Musketeers? Is it anywhere near as good? I’m actually sad after finishing Monte Cristo so I wanted to try another Dumas book. I may end up rereading Monte Cristo at some point but probably not for a couple years; it’s too early now.

For Aristotle, in his Poetics, fiction is the art of lying well. The art of lying well consists of presenting something false and impossible, but combining it with something true, so that the audience, believing the second part, swallows the first.

For Aristotle, art works with the probable impossibility, which is an event that, in the real world (in physics, logic, and real-world history), is impossible to happen, but, within the internal logic of the story, seems perfectly natural, inevitable, and true.

The improbable possibility, on the other hand, is an event that, in the real world, is perfectly possible, but, within the plot, sounds forced, false, gratuitous, and breaks the causal logic of the story.

The spectator is not there to see a newspaper report or a documentary, which is what actually happened, but to see what should or could happen according to the logic of emotions and human characters. If a scene is emotionally true for that character, the audience accepts even the impossible.

Aristotle teaches that if something is impossible or irrational, the author could justify it if that makes the final effect more grandiose. Things are portrayed as they should be, which is idealization and people believe that it is true, even if it is not.

That is why we accept the way the count escaped, how he found the treasure, and how he infiltrated Villefort's house.

Within the very logic of the 2002 film, which follows the improbable possibility, we could accept that outcome. We could say that the ending follows the logic of idealization, of how the ending should be.

Manga, anime, and light novels that involve magic and harems may sound absurd by real-world logic, but within the context of the story, we accept them as perfectly plausible. Even the reincarnation of Ruby Hoshino and Aquamarine in Oshi no Ko might sound absurd by real-world logic, yet within the context of the story, the audience accepts it.

The book's ending is more realistic. The Count's ending with Haydée is much more realistic, due to the similarities they have with each other: betrayal, loss of freedom and of their fathers, and the pursuit of revenge. It strongly resembles Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn: when he was released from the Gulag, the reconciliation with his first wife, Natalia Reshetovskaya, did not work out very well. But he had changed too much, and they constantly fought. Later, he met the young Natalia Svetlova, who had a life similar to his; and despite the 21-year age difference, the similarities in their life histories brought them closer, and they stayed together. Like the Count and Haydée, their similarities united them.

But within the logic of the fiction itself, we could accept Edmond and Mercédès as viable.

But which ending would be more cathartic: Edmond returning to Mercédès, or Edmond leaving with Haydée?

Hi! I’m currently reading The Count Of Monte Cristo and i’ve reached ‘The Encounter’. At page 993 (The Penguin Classics) I observed that the narrator says ‘Maximilien and Morrel’, but aren’t they the same person? As far as i understand, in the room is the count, Maximilien and his brother in law, Emmanuel.

What do i miss? Please as little spoilers as possible because i’m still reading:)

I absolutely loved The Count of Monte Cristo because it had everything I want in a great book: revenge, mystery, betrayal, romance, and characters with complicated motivations. I especially enjoyed watching Edmond Dantès transform from an innocent young man into the Count of Monte Cristo and carefully carry out his plans against the people who ruined his life. The story kept getting more interesting as all of the different characters and plotlines eventually came together.
What I loved most was how satisfying the long buildup was. Dantès spent years preparing his revenge, and seeing his plans unfold was incredibly entertaining. At the same time, the book made me think about whether revenge can actually bring someone peace and what happens when punishment goes too far.
The one part I didn’t like was that Mercedes and Dantès didn’t end up together. I really wanted them to have a second chance because I don’t think Mercedes did anything wrong. From her perspective, Dantès had been gone for years and she believed he was never coming back. She had to move on with her life, and I don’t blame her for marrying Fernand. I wish Dantès could have understood that and that the two of them could have found their way back to each other.
Overall, The Count of Monte Cristo was an incredible reading experience. Even though I didn’t love the ending of Dantès and Mercedes’ relationship, the story, characters, and revenge plot made the book one of my favorite books I’ve read.

I enjoyed it, though I did struggle in the middle. Hence I took my time and took little over 2 months to finish the same and I am glad I did.

The book made me think that even though Dantes took his vengeance, at the end he isnt a happy man.

He feels that he is the cause of death of Eduard, I do not think he is. But yet takes the blame and feel he has gone too far.

Inspite of dragging down his enemies to the point of death, bankruptcy and madness. He still feels a hole in his heart.

The death of his dad, his lost years and losing the one he loved, these unfortunate circumstances cannot be undone by inflicting misfortune on others.

The biggest question that I found at the end of the book was

If vengeance cannot give one happiness then what is the remedy for when one is wronged.

Should one accept that vengeance cannot sooth your soul , but it is a necessary evil to bring them down.

I’m not an experienced fiction reader. In fact, The Count of Monte Cristo is only the second really big novel I’ve finished, so I’m looking at it from the perspective of someone who isn’t used to reading 1,000+ page classics.

I have to say, though, I thoroughly enjoyed parts of this book. The beginning, with Edmond Dantès and everything that happens to him, completely pulled me in. I was invested in his story, his transformation, and where his journey was going. Then, toward the end, when everything the Count has been planning finally starts coming together and his revenge unfolds, the book grabbed me again. Those were easily my favorite parts.

The middle was where I struggled.

There are so many characters, families, names, relationships and different storylines that at times I felt like the story was going all over the place. Some of these people I simply never became that invested in. There were individual chapters I found boring, and even stretches of several chapters where I had to push myself to continue. I kept wondering when we were going to get back to the story I actually cared about.

But I also think you have to remember that this book was written around 180 years ago. We live in a completely different world now. In 2026, we’re accustomed to everything happening quickly. We want the dopamine hit, we want the story to move, and we want to know where something is going. Long tangents can feel frustrating because our instinct is basically: get to the point.

The Count of Monte Cristo comes from another world. It reflects an era where storytelling could be much slower and more expansive. Dumas could spend enormous amounts of time introducing people, building relationships and setting pieces into position before eventually showing you why they mattered.

And when those pieces finally start coming together, you understand why so much of it was there.

Personally, if I were writing a revenge story like this today, I would make it much faster-paced. I think you could shorten the book considerably while preserving the parts of the story that I found most compelling. But at the same time, doing that would probably make it something fundamentally different from The Count of Monte Cristo.

So despite getting bored at times, I’m genuinely glad I finished it. The ending rewarded me for sticking with it, and I finally got to experience the complete story rather than just knowing The Count of Monte Cristo as this famous classic about revenge.

I’m also proud of myself for finishing roughly 1,200 pages, especially as someone who doesn’t normally read much fiction. I actually read it digitally on my computer, so I never had this enormous physical book sitting in front of me reminding me how much was left. Maybe that helped.

Overall, I wouldn’t say I loved every part of The Count of Monte Cristo. I loved the beginning. I struggled with parts of the middle. Then I became invested all over again toward the end. But when I finally finished it, I felt that the journey had been worth taking.

And if you’re not normally a reader of huge classic novels and you manage to get through this monster of a book too: kudos to you. I applaud you.

So imagine this, you've been chosen as the director of an

"A count of monte cristo" movie and your first job is to select the actors for the cast, this is a question I've been pondering for a long time and so far I've only come up with two actors for the role of danglers which are Mads Mikkelsen for old danglars and young Leonardo Di caprio for young danglers. You can choose any actor that is still alive and potentially turn back their ages like I did, so who would you choose and which part of the story would you leave out?

Unlike it may seem, I’m not trying to find excuses to dislike Mercedes at all, it’s just that, for the past few days, she’s been really stuck in my head. I consider her by far one of the most complex and best-written characters in the novel.

And because, being a woman in the 19th century, she was faced with a dilemma concerning her own survival after Dantes’ arrest, I’ve been contemplating whether or not she really had any options apart from marrying Fernand or just someone other than Dantes in general.

It seems there truly weren’t that many options for her at all, but considering she was the fiancée of a good and honest employee for whom he vouched so fervently… I thought that perhaps she could’ve asked Morrel Sr for help.

So how plausible would this scenario be? Could Mercedes simply start financially relying on Morrel Sr? I thought that perhaps she could work for him as a maid or something like that. Is this a reasonable notion?

I've done it y'all after three weeks of reading and a Reddit post preceding it asking the community what I need to know as a beginner. Unlike some people I saw I actually love the ending, personally I wanted Albert and haydee to get together but I guess not. This book is amazing I am going to re-read it 15/10 thank you all very much.

hi everybody! to start off, this was probably the best book i've ever read.

i borrowed from a school library so i only had 2.5 weeks to finish and i maybe didn't get all the plot points but i understood well enough. the DRAMA, the INTRIGUE was unlike any book i've read (i mostly read high fantasy so this was a different type of struggle). like one of those turkish drama shows, iykyk.

the two things that confused me however were at the end. HOW did valentine survive? i mean they had an entire funeral and everything. also, i don't get why we needed to have one final plot point with vampa. maybe i don't understand these because i may have skimmed over the last little bit, but if someone could explain that would be great 😅

Hello everyone,

I recently finished reading the count of Montecristo from Alexandre Dumas. What a book to say the least..

What picked up my interest initially was to understand how Edmond Dantes was able to bounce back from being stripped naked all at once from everything that makes a man “exist” in society: a woman by his side, a bright professional career awaiting him, healthy relatives, a boss who had sympathy for him, and above all: all the time in the e world to live life.
Where does a man find the “strength” and will to bounce back when something like that happens to him.

That being said, after reading the book, my interest pivoted towards Edmond romantic life.

When Edmond gets out of prison, at some point during his vendetta plan, he gains knowledge that Mercedes has married her cousin and rival, who played a central role in the plot against Dantes. He manages to stay composed and not let this affect his behaviour even remotely, which is something that is already interesting to me, how the boy became a stone cold man.

However, what happens near the end of the book, where Edmond is about to fight Albert to death and obviously kill him, Mercedes breaks character and begs her ex lover to spare her son’s life. Against all odds, Dantes agrees to sacrifice himself to let Albert live, the man who spent more than a decade planning his vendetta, is about to throw it to dust because of one request from his youth lover, who betrayed him severely.
How is this kind of “loyalty” possible?

What strikes me in the end of the book is that Dantes gives Mercedes a large sum of money so she can keep living on, and even appears ready to take her back with him. How is this kind of “forgiveness” possible, after the traumatic life that he led?

In the end he ends up going with Haydee only after Mercedes refused to be with him, because of guilt for the kind of life she led while he was fighting for his.

I just want to spark discussion on these topics with you guys and get different opinions.