02 June 2013

Around the World in Eighty Days by Jules Verne

When I was a child who had not long learned how to read, I found I had not patience for the books my cohort was supposed to be reading at that age because a) I thought they were simple and childish, and b) I preferred non-fiction - just the facts, m'am, just the facts. 

Then I discovered Jules Verne.  Journey to the Centre of the Earth, it was.  I'm sorry, but bears and piglets and magic puddings couldn't compete with Iceland and volcanoes and storms and dinosaurs, not to mention trusty chronometers.  I so wanted to be Professor Lidenbrock, with his amazing learning and resources.

One Verne novel led to another, and so it was that Around the World in Eighty Days was the second fiction book I read that I actually liked, all those years ago.  And this weekend, all these years later, I had a copy of the book and an afternoon and evening free in which to race down Memory Lane.

I reacquainted myself with the story of Phileas Fogg, a fastidious and punctual man of habit, who abruptly departs London because of a wager: twenty thousand pounds will he win if he can circumnavigate the globe in eighty days or less.  Fogg takes with him Passepartout (his newly hired man-servant) and a carpetbag stuffed with newly printed pound notes.  Everything goes well for master and man until they are intercepted in Port Said by a plain-clothes police detective called Fix who suspects Fogg of being a fugitive bank robber.  And that is when the true adventure begins.

I liked this book on second reading for what it is: a ripping yarn from bygone days.  It was much as I remembered it.  I also remembered the little boy who read this book.  Yes, I can still remember being as inflamed as Passepartout when we - he and I together  - discovered the plight of poor Aouda in the jungles of India.  On the other hand, while I remembered the leg of the journey across the United States of America, I had no recollection that both the writing and the sentiment of this part of the story were so bad.  In this respect, at least, both the reader and the times have changed, mercifully.

All in all, I spent an enjoyable evening with this short book: one that takes less time to read than to watch the 1956 film adaptation.  Well, almost less time.

No comments:

Post a Comment