16/6 - Knowing nothing about this book or Charrière, only knowing the word papillon and it's English translation through the fact that there's a dog breed that's called papillon because the dog's fluffy ears (vaguely) resemble a butterfly's wings, I picked this up off the 'new and recently returned' shelf because the blurb on the back described it as "A classic memoir of prison breaks and adventure". And 'adventure' sounded like the right genre for me at that moment in time. I read the translator's introduction last night and I'm looking forward to reading a big chunk of it tonight. To be continued...19/6 - I don't recommend reading this book if you have a strong sense of injustice, you may get the near-uncontrollable need to stab something. I like to midnight-snack while I do my nightly reading and in a number of places over the last hundred pages I found myself rage-eating my chips - just shovelling them in, too angry with the injustice of Henri's situation to enjoy them. Usually I eat them slowly, one or two per page, savouring them so that I don't accidentally eat a whole bag in one night, something which I could easily have done while reading this book last night. To be continued...Later - I'm a bit disappointed with Charrière's description of his encounter with the lepers. He talks about a man who hands him a cup of coffee and then exclaims "Oh, where's my finger gone?". Henri finds it stuck to the outside of his cup and hands it back to him. According to Wikipedia this sequence is impossible, leprosy, despite all the old wives' tales, does not lead to body parts falling off here, there and everywhere. This next passage is taken straight from Wikipedia's page on leprosy"Initially, infections are without symptoms and typically remain this way for 5 to as long as 20 years. Symptoms that develop include granulomas (loosely described as 'a small nodule') of the nerves, respiratory tract, skin, and eyes. This may result in a lack of ability to feel pain and thus loss of parts of extremities due to repeated injuries. Weakness and poor eyesight may also be present.To reiterate, the loss of body parts happens because of repeated injuries to these body parts, which have become numbed due to granulomas of the nerves. There is no "Oh, my finger just fell off.", it's more like "Oops, I just accidentally chopped my finger off while chopping the carrots, but due to the granulomas it doesn't actually hurt." Below is a second passage taken straight from Wikipedia rephrasing what I've just written, only coming from a more official source."Leprosy is primarily a granulomatous disease of the peripheral nerves and mucosa of the upper respiratory tract; skin lesions (light or dark patches) are the primary external sign. If untreated, leprosy can progress and cause permanent damage to the skin, nerves, limbs, and eyes. Contrary to folklore, leprosy does not cause body parts to fall off, although they can become numb or diseased as a result of secondary infections; these occur as a result of the body's defences being compromised by the primary disease. Secondary infections, in turn, can result in tissue loss causing fingers and toes to become shortened and deformed, as cartilage is absorbed into the body."So, therefore that part of the scene must be a figment of Charrière's imagination as that man's finger cannot have just come off without some kind of trauma happening to it first. Silly little exaggerations (possibly playing to the public's horrified fascination with the disease and the people who suffer from it) like that could lead to a reader doubting half of what Charrière has written in this book (some of it is pretty fantastical). I don't like feeling that what Charrière has written isn't completely true. I want it all to be true, not because I want anyone to have been through what Charrière went through (and I'm only 21% of the way through), but because I want to know that it's not all made up. That his main motive for writing this tale of injustice wasn't to make a pile of cash, but to let the world know of what he went through. To be continued...20/6 - Why oh why, Henri, did you leave those lovely Goajira 'Indians'? You had everything you needed, not one but two loving wives both pregnant with your child (not a comment on the fact that one of the wives was not much more than 12, or that the two girls were sisters, just a comment on what he had and what he left behind); you had a community who accepted and revered you. You had an idyllic island paradise life, what more could you want? Deciding not to go back for revenge doesn't make you weak, it just means you've found something more important, something worth living for, which you didn't have when you first visualised getting your revenge on all the people who were involved in your imprisonment. Now look what's happened, you've been recaptured and as you pointed out that mistake will cost you seven years of your life. Imagine how your life could have gone if you had just stayed with Lali and Zoraima. To be continued...24/6 - This is such a dense book! There are so many words per page, with so few paragraphs that it's really slowing down my normal reading speed. Normally, when I'm enjoying a book as much as I'm enjoying this one I look down and am amazed to have read 50 pages in half an hour, with this book I look down and find I've only read 10 pages. Like I said, I'm enjoying the story, but I don't want to be reading it for the rest of my life, I do have other books that I want to get to that I may well enjoy even more than this (plus library due dates are looming). To be continued...25/6 - Deceptions and misleading blurbs are the name of the day today. First it turns out that GR has been fudging the page count, it's not 688 as I was originally led to believe it's 560 followed by numerous pages of 'extras' including an 'exclusive essay by Howard Marks'. I think I'm pleased that I've only got 120 pages to go instead of 240 as I'm feeling the pressure from my other books' library due dates and this really is taking a long while to read.The blurb on the back of my book reads as follows:"Condemned for a murder he did not commit, Henri Charrière, known as Papillon, was sent to the penal colony of French Guiana. Forty-two days after his arrival he made his first break, travelling a thousand gruelling miles in an open boat. Recaptured, his spirit remained untamed - in thirteen years he made nine amazingly daring escapes, including one from the notorious Devil's Island.An immediate sensation upon its 1969 publication, Papillon is one of the greatest adventure stories ever told, a true tale of courage, resilience and an unbreakable will.""...Nine amazingly daring escapes..." That is a very misleading statement. From what the blurb says I was expecting Papillon to escape (by which I mean, and thought everyone else meant, leave his jail/cage/penal colony for at least 24 hours before being recaptured) on nine different occasions. What the blurb really means is that he attempts to escape nine times, he only succeeds twice, the first attempt when he managed to stay out for 11 months and the final, which I'm currently in the middle of. To be continued...26/6 - Finally finished it! *relieved sigh* I've currently got this shelved as an autobiography/biography, but I hesitate to leave it there. Modern researchers don't believe Charrière's continual claims of complete honesty regarding his book. They now say that it's very likely the book is a combination of other inmate's adventures and Charrière's imagination. According to all available records Charrière never spent any time on Devil's Island, and like with the leprosy situation I described above he got a number of pertinent details regarding the geography of Devil's Island wrong (he describes the shore of the island as rocky, when in fact it is a gently sloping sand beach, it's not like that's something that he could 'forget'). A French journalist maintains that only "10% of Papillon represents the truth".Learning that a book like this is pretty much just a well-imagined adventure story in the vein of Robinson Crusoe or Treasure Island takes a bit of the shine off story. It's no longer as fantastically amazing because it's not real. I went into the reading of this book believing that it was a true story and I am certainly disappointed to come to the conclusion that there's very little truth to be found anywhere in the book. After reading all that back to check for errors before posting I realise that I can't leave it on the autobiography/biography shelf, I know it's not one so it doesn't belong next to my biographies of Katherine Parr or Jamie Oliver. It's moving to the historical fiction shelf.
"Papillon" este cel mai captivant roman de aventură citit vreodată... Autobiografie romanțată fiind, autorul ne spune că a fost condamnat la închisoare de către curtea cu juri. La începutul secolului XX, în Franța colonialista, oamenii făcuți vinovați de delicte grave, erau trimiși la ocnă în teritorii îndepărtate (Guyana franceză, în cazul de față, "un loc din care nimeni nu a ieșit vreodată viu"). El, autorul, ne mărturisește că, deși în tinerețe a fost un golan, a fost condamnat la închisoare pe nedrept, deoarece nu a săvârșit niciun delict (dar -repet- este AUTOBIOGRAFIE). Ajuns în închisoare, primul lucru care-i încolțește în minte este evadarea. Toate inchisoarile de maximă siguranță fiind, se înțelege că planurile sale -deși absolut geniale- întâmpină greutăți și dau greș. Dacă reușește să evadeze din spitalul unei închisori (prefăcându-se că era bolnav), este înhățat în timp ce își construiește luntrea de evadare, în cimitir. Apar, de asemenea, diferite personaje de diferite nații cu diferite caractere și diferite stiluri de viață. Unul din miile de detalii ar fi acela conform căruia deținuții care primeau bani din exterior erau nevoiți să uzeze de diferite mijloace pentru a-i pune în siguranță. Papillon al nostru (da -uitasem să menționez- Papillon este porecla autorului) folosește o metodă destul de des întâlnită în a două jumătate a secolului XX: pune banii într-un tub de dimensiuni mici și și-l bagă în anus (deci nu mai are dimensiuni mici, ci considerabile :D). Cred că elaborează vreo 15-20 de planuri de evadare, fiind transferat -din pricina eșuării lor- la diferite închisori mai aspre. A fost și la Recluziune (un fel de carceră a timpurilor moderne, numai că muuuuuuuuuult mai aspră) unde Papillon al nostru a stat în două rânduri (când spun că a stat, vorbesc în ani :) ). Replici de genul "mă simt stânjenit să vorbesc despre asta..." în mijlocul confesiunii sale lăuntrice denotă faptul că, dacă a ascuns anumite detalii, nu le-a ascuns pe toate. Ba chiar, în tot eroismul său descris în roman, introduce pe alocuri fapte mai puțin "onorabile". Dar uite că îi reușește un plan de evadare... Ajunge în Venezuela unde este primit cu căldură (având în vedere relațiile politice din contextul respectiv și ostilitatea dintre marile imperii). Cunoscând și Franța, coloniile franceze, dar și Venezuela (un popor sărac din punct de vedere material, dar bogat cu duhul), Henri Charriere ne povestește cum -prin prisma lui- popoarele așa-zis civilizate sunt net inferioare rudimentarismului: "Acești pescari aproape analfabeți din gloful Paria, la capătul lumii, pierduți în acel imens estuar al Orenocului, au un umanism filosofic care lipsește multora dintre compatrioții noștri. Prea mult progres mecanic, o viață agitată, o societate însuflețită de un singur ideal: noi invenții, o viață tot mai lesnicioasă și mai îndestulată. Tot savurând descoperirile științifice așa cum lingi un șerbet, devii însetat de un confort tot mai desăvârșit și lupți fără încetare să-l obții. Toate acestea ucid sufletul, mila, înțelegerea, mărinimia."Andrei Tamaş,28 august 2015
What do You think about Papillon (2006)?
Its my favorite book till date. One word for it - WOW..Its just amazing and the way the author has described the life of a man in the prisons is amazing. Its wonderful how he tells this man's story spanning so many years. I saw this movie as a kid..I must be very young then maybe class 5 or younger..and ever since then I had a desire in me to read this book whenever I get a chance. Papillon means butterfly and it symbolises the protagonists' desire to get free from the clutches of jail. The vivid description is just too good to miss and the book too good to be put down. I also like it because I am great fan of escape stories, prison accounts, prisoner of war and other war stories.
—Nidhi
I read this book in the mid 70's, as a teenager. Then I read it again. And then, a little while later, I saw the film. The three events have subsequently blended into one and I certainly now have difficulty differentiating the book from the film. But that's no big deal as I know the film followed the written narrative pretty closely. It's a true story of one man's battle against injustice and the terrible personal consequences that transpired.It left a big impression on me. It was a big story. A huge adventure which I believed in entirely, though I now know some doubt has subsequently been levelled at the detail. It was also the largest book I'd taken on at this point - by far. Not only did it convince me of the power of a story, it also demonstrated to me that I could be transfixed by a tome so large it seemed impossible it would hold my interest long enough for me to finish it. When I look back to early 'adult' books I've read it's this one that stands out - read as I laid on my bed with a Rod Stewart cassette (Atlantic Crossing) playing in the background.When the film was released I know I doubted it could match the power of the book, but in my memory it came close. I loved Hoffman and McQueen in the lead roles and the scenes of solitary confinement seemed a perfect reflection of what I'd conjured up in my mind.I'm not sure if I'll ever re-visit this tale of a Frenchman shipped off to a prison in French Guiana for a crime he claimed he didn't commit, as I wouldn't want to be disappointed by a second re-read. I think I'll just continue to treasure the untainted memory of my first memorable reading experience.
—Andrew Smith
Lucas Pires MoraisMs.WhiteIndependent Reading6th October 12PapillonBy Henri Charriere, Classic Biography, 544 PagesThis book follows the story of Henry Charriere, more commonly known as “Papillon”, for the butterfly tattoo he has on his chest. Papillon was wrongly accused of murdering a pimp in France and was sentenced to life in prison. He requested that he would be sent to the French Guiana prison, called the Bagne. Although conditions of life were much harsher there, Papillon knew this was the only place that he could really plot an escape from, as it had been done before. As soon as he arrived at the penal colony, Papillon claimed he was ill and was sent to the hospital wing, where he met and plotted his escape with two men called Clousiot and Maturrete. On a sailboat, the men managed to escape as far as to Colombia, but they were sighted there and caught. This was PApillon’s first escape failure out of many to come. After successfully escaping from the Colombian prison, Papillon settled in a small Pearl Diving village and married two teenage sisters. Life was perfect for him until he decided to try to escape again and live as a completely free man. That did not work and eventually he was sent back to French Guiana and put into solitary confinement. Since this was during the WWII period, the prison decided to follow Vichy France’s new Nazi terms and escape attempts would result in instant death. Papillon realized this and pretended to be mentally ill so he could be justified when escaping yet failing again. After the last escape attempt, Papillon was transferred to Devil’s island and managed to finally escpae from there(which was highly unlikable) and after days of wandering, he found his way to Venezuela, where at first he was captured and made to work in an mine. Later on Papillon was eventually released and obtained Venezuelan citizenship. He lived a simple yet lovable life in Venezuela and was very thankful to the people there.
—Lucas
