Mari
asked:
I never quite got how he was innocent. I mean sure the gang conspired to turn him in, but he broke the law all on his own. He CHOSE TO TAKE THE COMPLETELY ILLEGAL LETTER FROM A TRAITOR TO HIS GOVERNMENT! If someone had a letter from Osama Bin Laden to a bunch of ISIS sympathizers, I would make sure the government knew he was a traitor too! Even if they did it because they were jealous, he still broke the law. So?
To answer questions about
The Count of Monte Cristo,
please sign up.
Autumn
I think I can answer this question, if you’ll forgive me for answering a question 3 years old.
The reason Edmond is innocent is because he did not know that the package he dropped off in Elba was for Napoleon and that the letter he took receipt of was from Napoleon as well. Edmond was charged to go to Elba and see the grand-marshal. That is who he went to see and who, gave him the letter bound for Paris.
Yes, Edmond did see Napoleon, who made himself present at this exchange, but there was no reason for Edmond (maybe a bit naïvely) to believe that Napoleon was behind the letter.
That is why Edmond is innocent. Because he truly did nothing wrong, but follow his dying captain’s orders—who was a staunch Bonapartist. This is also why Villefort was going to release Edmond until he learned the letter was bound to his father. Then self preservation kicked in and the treachery came full circle.
The reason Edmond is innocent is because he did not know that the package he dropped off in Elba was for Napoleon and that the letter he took receipt of was from Napoleon as well. Edmond was charged to go to Elba and see the grand-marshal. That is who he went to see and who, gave him the letter bound for Paris.
Yes, Edmond did see Napoleon, who made himself present at this exchange, but there was no reason for Edmond (maybe a bit naïvely) to believe that Napoleon was behind the letter.
That is why Edmond is innocent. Because he truly did nothing wrong, but follow his dying captain’s orders—who was a staunch Bonapartist. This is also why Villefort was going to release Edmond until he learned the letter was bound to his father. Then self preservation kicked in and the treachery came full circle.
James Spencer
I don't think he knew that what he was doing was illegal. His captain did but he didn't tell him what the letter was when he asked Edmond to deliver it.
Grace
Well, Villefort and Danglars and Fernand were not innocent, anyway. All three ended up being very selfish and money hungry men. Villefort knew that Edmond was innocent, his only crime being fulfilling his captain's wishes, and Villefort locked him away forever, to cover up his own father's crimes that were much worse than whatever crime Edmond did. Regardless of whether Edmond was deserving of his crime, I mean, what, 14 years in prison, for a crime without any real trial? Is that fair? He would've had a life sentence had he not escaped. I suppose his crime was ignorance. But Fernand was the one who sent the letter, purely because he wanted Edmond's fiancee, and Danglars was no better in aiding Fernand. And the story itself is one of a good man who turns bitter with vengeance, so the scale of whether he is rightfully plotting vengeance is not fully one-sided.
Veronica
I think the main thing is that he received an order from his captain, he had to follow it. To me, that was the main reason for his innocence. Moreover, he didn't even know what it was about.
joyce marceau
Once the government changed hands and the ship owner tried to have the prison sentence overturned, he should have been released. His sentence would have been weeks not years. But that wouldn't have made such a good story, would it?!
Mari
So why does he keep on saying that he is innocent, when he is NOT innocent. He KNEW he was not supposed to do it, and he did it anyhow. Even if he felt that he did it for the "right" reason, he still should be prepared to pay the price for knowingly doing illegal things. He may not have known what was in the letter, but he knew that Napoloeon was not allowed any unregulated letters of any kind, and for good reason. So, why doesn't he blame himself? And why blame Villefort, simply because Villefort decided for his own reasons not to give him the benefit of the doubt? If you do the crime, you do the time, and he DID the crime, even if he did it because of loyalty to his captain, it doesn't much matter.
About Goodreads Q&A
Ask and answer questions about books!
You can pose questions to the Goodreads community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.
See Featured Authors Answering Questions
Learn more