First published in April 1969, Henri Charrière's autobiographical novel Papillon covers the writer's imprisonment (and eventual escape from) a French penal colony in French Guiana.
The story was immortalised in a largely excellent cinema adaptation starring Steve McQueen and Dustin Hoffman. That launched in late 1973.
Charrière's book was a huge hit and instant bestseller. It spent 21 weeks at the top of the charts in France, with now over 239 editions available worldwide. Is the read worth it? Well, let's shackle up, break the law, and incarcerate ourselves.
Themes of Survival, Escape, and Redemption in Papillon
"I must prove that I can be, that I am and will be, a normal person. Perhaps no better, but certainly no worse than the rest."
Papillon is a novel about extended suffering. It follows in the grand tradition of prison novels such as The Count of Monte Cristo (1844), Dumas' often cited masterpiece.
Modern examples include Stephen King's excellent novella Rita Heyworth and Shawshank Redemption (1982). The atter two are all fiction, of course, the difference here is Charrière (1906-1973) claimed his experience was real. We should imagine there were various embellishments throughout the narrative, but that doesn't detract from what's a very affecting read.
Yet it's every bit as bleak as the eventual '73 film. The book covers 14 years of the writer's life, beginning with a wrongful conviction for murder. Papillon (butterfly, in French) is sent to the brutal Bagne de Cayenne region known as Devil's Island. There he's imprisoned and forced to work manual labour.
Amongst the brutality of the prison system he makes friends, mainly Louis Dega (in jail for counterfeiting money). He agrees to protect the slight Dega, but this blossoms into a strong partnership.
But in classic prison novel form, the reader gets to enter this horrible world of being trapped. Stuck in one place with nothing to do except curse your bad luck (or whatever else).
To his credit, Charrière was a fine writer. We'd certainly prefer to read the work in his native language, but we don't speak French. Instead we take paragraphs like this as translated into English.
"We have too much technological progress, life is too hectic, and our society has only one goal: to invent still more technological marvels to make life even easier and better. The craving for every new scientific discovery breeds a hunger for greater comfort and the constant struggle to achieve it. All that kills the soul, kills compassion, understanding, nobility. It leaves no time for caring what happens to other people, least of all criminals. Even the officials in Venezuela's remote areas are better for they're also concerned with public peace. It gives them many headaches, but they seem to believe that bringing about a man's salvation is worth the effort. I find that magnificent."
Amongst the prison breaks and solitary confined, the writer finds continuous solace n different aspects of his experiences.
"It was worth having made this break for the people, the human beings it had brought me into contact with. Although it had failed, my escape had been a victory, merely by having enriched my heart with the friendship of these wonderful people. No, I was not sorry. I had done it."
And the narrative arc leads to the inevitable liberation—even if the novel ends differently to the 1973 film. Papillon is simply released and heads to Venezeala.
There, as true to life, Charrière became a local celebrity for his history and tales of derring-do. As what these men went through was indeed very real, very horrible—a prison system so brutal it's since been wiped out.
Charrière was one of the few men to come out of this system shining.
He was awarded total liberty in 1945. Charrière then went on to run restaurants and appear on local TV shows in Venezuela. The French justice system also totally pardoned him in 1970 of any wronging.
As for the book, should you read it? Yes, if you fancy tormenting yourself in this way for a month or so. It's a fine read, if on the bleak side of things. As is the nature of prison.
Notes on Papillon's Two Film Adaptations
The famous 1973 adaptation of Papillon is merciless in its bleakness. It features an incredibly impressive performance from McQueen on career high form. Really, he should get more credit for this.
The guy portrays some serious stuff throughout, including enormous mental collapse and personal suffering. But as you an see, the author turned up on set to oversee production.
Sadly, he died shortly before the film's official release in late 1973.
As great as the film often is throughout its running time, this is not popcorn fodder. It's a film you sit, contemplate, and feel miserable about after (in a good way). But you won't have a spring in your step after watching it.
In 2017 there was a modernised adaptation (for some reason).
To be fair, we haven't seen this one yet. But it just strikes us as a bit of a pointless remake, given how many other projects could have been pursued over this one. The film met with middling reviews.
Culture is at it again, though, because a 2024 adaptation of The Count of Monte Cristo launched this year. It's actually met with strong reviews! So, hunt that one down of the 2017 Papillon thing.
No comments:
Post a Comment