I’m sorry I can’t help you directly, but I wanted to let you know that there’s another instance of Dumas sign language in The Count of Monte Cristo, which I am currently reading and listening to in French. The young woman Valentine uses a sign-based language with her grandfather M. Noirtier, who is paralysed from the neck down following an illness, but is able to blink to indicate yes and no. A lot of it seems based on using intuition and context to enable Valentine to frame the correct closed questions. For more abstract issues, a dictionary comes into play. There’s also a reasonably long scene describing how M. Noirtier is able to dictate his will to a notary using blinking and a dictionary. Valentine’s lover promises to learn her sign language so that he too can communicate with her grandfather and take an active role in caring for him. This really confirms Dumas’s interest in sign-based languages generally and how people can communicate when speech isn’t possible.
I love this! I have been reading the D'Artagnan romances this year, also, and really enjoyed this piece. Even if you never get to the bottom of it, I feel like my reading experience has been enriched.
I wonder if it might just or also be indicative of Athos' refinement, his aristocratic mien, that he is able to communicate such complexity with such subtlety, and indicative of Grimaud's "quality" as a lackey (not sure what translation you're reading - mine repeatedly refers to Grimaud, Bazin, et al as 'lackeys') that he is able to interpret it. They are beyond a marriage - the aristocrat and manservant. They don't finish each others sentences, they know them with out saying them. Additionally, I felt like the silent communication was being used to a comic effect; its so overdrawn (i.e., "we shall leave our skins there") that it might be meant to draw a laugh?
I would like more thoughts on The Three Musketeers, please.
So I do speak French fluently etc but the following is just un-substantiated opinion 😊
I’ve always assumed things like this, particularly in the context of Dumas enjoying pointing out social standing dissimilarities, and given the cloak and dagger of all his novels, are just ‘he made a gesture,’ not actual sign language. I can also attest from personal experience traveling in random places that I could 100% for sure successfully charades everything you’ve quoted to basically anyone on earth. Not to dissuade you from digging into this, I just suspect it’s more likely literary or plot device than Alex somehow being a master of 19th century deaf communication
Yes I’m definitely interested in general background too! But I’m especially interested in learning more about Dumas’ connection to these histories in particular…Here’s hoping we can snag an expert
This is an absolute delight. I’d always chalked the signing in The Three Musketeers up to Dumas’ flair for dramatic staging—part of the theatrical texture, like duels in moonlight and cloaks billowing in doorways. But you’ve made a compelling case that there’s something else humming underneath: a half-buried, possibly inherited sensitivity to non-verbal communication, or maybe even a lost thread of monastic or military signing systems repurposed for literary flair.
And now I need to reread Monte Cristo with M. Noirtier in mind as a kind of spiritual cousin to Athos and Grimaud. There’s something moving about these relationships where language collapses into gesture—where silence becomes a kind of intimacy rather than absence.
Also: “we shall leave our skins there” is such an absurdly perfect deadpan line. Feels like something that belongs in a Wes Anderson movie, delivered with great solemnity while everyone else just nods.
Thank you for dragging this mystery into the light. And please, more Musketeer musings!
I don't recall any mention of sign languages, and you might well have already heard of it, but I read the The Black Count a while ago and it was a quite good nonfiction account of Dumas (the Author) father's life (Dumas-the-General), including some fascinating aspects about the understanding of race through his life. If you're generally digging in to the background, check it out!
Yes, I understand what Grimaud was saying in that scene perfectly well — I’m sorry if it came across like I was asking for help understanding individual metaphors, rather than for further context of what particular signing traditions Dumas himself might have encountered at the time.
Is “leave our skins there” a French idiom? So if Grimaud simply looked scared or drew his finger across his throat and a person might say “he thinks we’ll leave our skins there” just like they might say “he thinks we’re going to die”?
I’m sorry I can’t help you directly, but I wanted to let you know that there’s another instance of Dumas sign language in The Count of Monte Cristo, which I am currently reading and listening to in French. The young woman Valentine uses a sign-based language with her grandfather M. Noirtier, who is paralysed from the neck down following an illness, but is able to blink to indicate yes and no. A lot of it seems based on using intuition and context to enable Valentine to frame the correct closed questions. For more abstract issues, a dictionary comes into play. There’s also a reasonably long scene describing how M. Noirtier is able to dictate his will to a notary using blinking and a dictionary. Valentine’s lover promises to learn her sign language so that he too can communicate with her grandfather and take an active role in caring for him. This really confirms Dumas’s interest in sign-based languages generally and how people can communicate when speech isn’t possible.
I love this! I have been reading the D'Artagnan romances this year, also, and really enjoyed this piece. Even if you never get to the bottom of it, I feel like my reading experience has been enriched.
I wonder if it might just or also be indicative of Athos' refinement, his aristocratic mien, that he is able to communicate such complexity with such subtlety, and indicative of Grimaud's "quality" as a lackey (not sure what translation you're reading - mine repeatedly refers to Grimaud, Bazin, et al as 'lackeys') that he is able to interpret it. They are beyond a marriage - the aristocrat and manservant. They don't finish each others sentences, they know them with out saying them. Additionally, I felt like the silent communication was being used to a comic effect; its so overdrawn (i.e., "we shall leave our skins there") that it might be meant to draw a laugh?
I would like more thoughts on The Three Musketeers, please.
I love Dumas, and I loved every word of this, Danny!
So I do speak French fluently etc but the following is just un-substantiated opinion 😊
I’ve always assumed things like this, particularly in the context of Dumas enjoying pointing out social standing dissimilarities, and given the cloak and dagger of all his novels, are just ‘he made a gesture,’ not actual sign language. I can also attest from personal experience traveling in random places that I could 100% for sure successfully charades everything you’ve quoted to basically anyone on earth. Not to dissuade you from digging into this, I just suspect it’s more likely literary or plot device than Alex somehow being a master of 19th century deaf communication
That’s fascinating! Let us know what you find out 😀
I'm a linguist, not a historian, and this isn't my area, but looking for "French deaf history" seems to pull up the books I'm familiar with.
some titles to search:
"Elements of French Deaf Heritage"
"Deafness, Gesture and Sign Language in the 18th Century French Philosophy"
"Deaf Identity and Social Images in Nineteenth-Century France"
Yes I’m definitely interested in general background too! But I’m especially interested in learning more about Dumas’ connection to these histories in particular…Here’s hoping we can snag an expert
This is an absolute delight. I’d always chalked the signing in The Three Musketeers up to Dumas’ flair for dramatic staging—part of the theatrical texture, like duels in moonlight and cloaks billowing in doorways. But you’ve made a compelling case that there’s something else humming underneath: a half-buried, possibly inherited sensitivity to non-verbal communication, or maybe even a lost thread of monastic or military signing systems repurposed for literary flair.
And now I need to reread Monte Cristo with M. Noirtier in mind as a kind of spiritual cousin to Athos and Grimaud. There’s something moving about these relationships where language collapses into gesture—where silence becomes a kind of intimacy rather than absence.
Also: “we shall leave our skins there” is such an absurdly perfect deadpan line. Feels like something that belongs in a Wes Anderson movie, delivered with great solemnity while everyone else just nods.
Thank you for dragging this mystery into the light. And please, more Musketeer musings!
I don't recall any mention of sign languages, and you might well have already heard of it, but I read the The Black Count a while ago and it was a quite good nonfiction account of Dumas (the Author) father's life (Dumas-the-General), including some fascinating aspects about the understanding of race through his life. If you're generally digging in to the background, check it out!
I don't know anything about this, but I found it fascinating!
Yes, I understand what Grimaud was saying in that scene perfectly well — I’m sorry if it came across like I was asking for help understanding individual metaphors, rather than for further context of what particular signing traditions Dumas himself might have encountered at the time.
Is “leave our skins there” a French idiom? So if Grimaud simply looked scared or drew his finger across his throat and a person might say “he thinks we’ll leave our skins there” just like they might say “he thinks we’re going to die”?