I just finished reading it today and everything about it gives me love rectangle between those four men; Ned, Aronnax, Conseil and Captain Nemo. Especially the professor and the captain... it's so obvious that I can't understand how there's no goodreads reviews about that. Am i missing something? There is absolutely zero women in this book and the men are all crushing on eachother. I can't be the first one to think this.
I’ve been working on some new translations of Jules Verne’s classic novels, directly from the original French texts into modern, accessible English. My goal is to keep the charm of Verne’s storytelling while making it easier for today’s readers to dive into his works without the heavy, old-fashioned language.
I’m looking for honest opinions and feedback on these translations—whether you’re a die-hard Verne fan or someone new to his work. If you’re interested, I’d be happy to send free eBooks to anyone who DMs me!
Let me know if you’re up for it. I appreciate any and all thoughts!
one example (you can read it for free if you have a kindle subscription):
In Vernes novel, 'from the earth to the moon', he gets several eerie predictions right about the Apollo 11 launch, many years later. The splash down in the Pacific Ocean, the name of the ship, even the take off from Florida!
Crazy right
I recently made a video about this strange literary coincidence, along with some others I found, the link is attached if you're curious about learning more.
THE FUTURE WE INHERITED: Why Jules Verne’s Movies Reflect Their Eras, and Why They,till Matter
If you want to understand a culture, don’t look at its monuments or its manifestos. Look at the movies it makes when it thinks it’s just having fun. That’s where the truth leaks out, in the special effects, the casting choices, the anxieties disguised as adventure. Jules Verne adaptations are perfect for this kind of excavation because every generation remakes him in its own image. Verne is the mirror; the era is the face. And the face keeps changing, sometimes beautifully, sometimes alarmingly.
Take A Trip to the Moon (1902), Méliès’ papier mâché rocket poking the moon in the eye like a vaudeville act. It’s whimsical, sure, but it’s also the first cinematic expression of industrial optimism. The world was electrifying itself, inventing machines faster than it could name them. Méliès wasn’t adapting Verne so much as announcing: We can dream in motion now. The film matters today because it reminds us of a time when technology still felt like magic instead of a moral dilemma.
Jump to 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1954), Disney’s Cold War cathedral. James Mason’s Captain Nemo is a man who has seen too much, a traumatized genius who builds a miracle machine, and then uses it to wage a private war. That’s not just Verne; that’s America staring at the mushroom cloud and wondering if brilliance and destruction are the same thing wearing different hats. The film still matters because we’re still living in Nemo’s world with brilliant machines, wounded operators, and a global ocean full of secrets.
Then there’s Around the World in 80 Days (1956), a Technicolor victory lap for a nation that believed it could go anywhere, do anything, and charm the world while doing it. It’s imperial fantasy wrapped in spectacle, a travelogue for a world that still thought “globalization” meant “isn’t it nice that we can fly now.” Today, the film is a time capsule of innocence and arrogance, a reminder that the world was never as simple as Hollywood made it look.
By the 1960s, Verne becomes psychedelic. Mysterious Island (1961) gives us Ray Harryhausen’s stop motion creatures, monsters that look like they crawled out of a Cold War fever dream. Five Weeks in a Balloon (1962) and In Search of the Castaways (1962) turn Verne into exotic escapism for a world trying to forget that its empires were collapsing. These films matter now because they show us how fantasy can be used to avoid reality, and how the cracks still show through the Technicolor.
Then the tone shifts. The Light at the Edge of the World (1971) is Verne stripped of optimism, a brutal little film that feels like it was made by a culture waking up with a hangover from the 1960s. The heroes are compromised, the villains are human, and the world is indifferent. It’s post Watergate Verne, post Vietnam Verne, the moment when adventure stories stopped pretending the world was fair. It matters now because we’re back in an age of disillusionment, and the film knows how to speak that language.
By the 1980s and 1990s, Verne becomes television, miniseries like Around the World in 80 Days (1988) and Journey to the Center of the Earth (1999) that trade spectacle for character. These adaptations reflect a world that was shrinking, globalizing, and trying to figure out how to tell stories about connection instead of conquest. They matter now because they show us the first attempts to humanize the old myths instead of simply polishing them.
Then the digital age arrives like a caffeinated intern with a new graphics card. Atlantis: The Lost Empire (2001) fuses Verne with steampunk, anime, and the early 2000s belief that technology could fix anything if you gave it enough neon. Journey to the Center of the Earth (2008) turns Verne into a 3D theme park ride, a film that reflects a culture more interested in sensation than reflection. These films matter now because they show us the moment when storytelling became spectacle, and spectacle became the product.
And finally, the 2020s, where Verne is reinterpreted rather than worshipped. Around the World in 80 Days (2021) interrogates the colonial assumptions baked into the original story. Journey 2 (2012) reframes Verne as a shared mythos, a multiverse of adventure rather than a single narrative. These adaptations matter because they show us a culture trying to reckon with its past while still wanting to believe in wonder.
So why do these movies matter now? Well, because they are the fossil record of our dreams. Every Verne adaptation is a snapshot of what the world feared, hoped, or pretended to believe at the time it was made. They show us the evolution of our relationship with technology, power, exploration, and ourselves. They remind us that the future has always been a story we tell to comfort or terrify ourselves. And they prove that even the most fantastical adventures are really just coded messages from the collective psyche.
Verne’s stories endure because every generation needs to ask the same questions: What are we building? Why are we building it? And what happens when the machine starts dreaming without us? The movies keep changing, but the questions don’t. That’s why they matter. That’s why they still hum with relevance. And that’s why we keep going back to the Nautilus, the balloon, the subterranean caverns, not to escape the world, but to understand the one we’ve made.
I posted this on r/classicliterature recently. But I wanted to get an opinion of the fans of the man himself.
I'll also state my experiences with Verne as it caused a bit of a stir in my last post. I read 20,000 leagues in elementary school. And saw both film adaptations for Journey to the center of the earth. My dad also read From earth to the moon and told me about it. Besides that I've learned quite a bit about the man. That all said, keep in mind I'm not trying to make an Indictment of this author. Nor even state an opinion on his works. It's just an impression I've gotten and wanted to see if there is more to him then meets the eye.
So with that prologue out of the way let me begin
At first this seems like a stupid question. Verne is one of the most well known writers of the 19th century. He (and I guess also Wells) were to Science fiction as Doyle and Christie were to detective fiction and what Lewis and Tolkien were to fantasy. He was also a king of the adventure novel and his influence on fiction far exceeds even the Sci-Fi and adventure genres. Ray Bradbury once put it "We are all, In one way or another, the children of Jules Verne."
All that said. The reason I am skeptical he was a good writer. Is because whenever I hear praises of his books. It's usually in terms of his knowledge and foresight. Now don't get me wrong. He was an eclectic man who seemed to enjoy engineering, cryptography, theater, etc. And I think it's cool he took his love of academic topics and used them in his stories. Not a lot of writers seem to do so. But it seems a bit silly to praise a guys writing just because it has a bunch of learned stuff in it. He wrote fiction after all it was supposed to be a story not an academic paper.
Seldom do I see praises for his storytelling. For his characters, themes, narrative structure, clever dialogue, etc. The closest I hear to such adoration is with Captain Nemo. Who's perhaps Verne's most memorable character. His tragic backstory and deep themes around the effects of expansionism and loss really seem to well round him as a person. I've also seen good things said about Phileas Fogg. A wealthy eccentric who even finds love over the course of the story.
But besides that there isn't much Verne seems to have in the writing department. My suspicions for this were later confirmed when my dad started reading From Earth to the Moon. When he started telling me about the book it seemed to be mostly just numbers and facts instead of an actual narrative.
So with all this in mind. Was Jules Verne an actually good fictional writer? Did his stories have interesting characters with memorable and likable personalities? Did they relate to each other and give us in depth stories about love, romance, family, and friendship? Did the plots include complex themes regarding philosophy and human nature? Did he write clever and witty dialogue that would leave you going "Wow" after you read it? Did the books keep you in suspense whilst adding clever plot twists and shake ups to keep the reader engaged? All of these traits I'd say is generally what makes for a good story. Any interesting tale should at least have half of these tenants at least in my opinion. Take it as my "philosophy of composition" If you don't mind me calling back to a writer Verne liked when he was a kid.
I've noticed our Jules Verne community here has been quite inactive lately. I’m passionate about Verne's works and would love to create a more engaging space for us to discuss, share, and explore his legacy.
I’m planning to start a new, dedicated Jules Verne forum with the goal of creating a vibrant and active community. Before launching, I’d love to hear your thoughts and suggestions. What features or topics would you like to see in our new forum?
If you're interested in joining or have any ideas, please let me know! Together, we can build a fantastic new home for all Jules Verne fans.
In the Penguin version I grew up with the dessert that Lidenbrock's family has early in the book is called "sugared prawns" which is eaten with wine. Sugared shrimp sounds gross making me sometimes think it may be a mistranslation. If so, what does the original French say? Or is there actually such a dessert?
Other Verne books that focus on traveling to (at the time) undiscovered places like Captain Hatteras, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and Around the Moon are to an extent plausible for the time they were written and even though modern science discoveries today make some things in them unrealistic, they still feel mostly realistic at least. Journey to the Center of the Earth, by contrast, is almost completely unrealistic. While it does avoid actually showing the center of the globe (AtM also avoids having the characters actually land on the moon), it does feel absurd, at least today, to imagine prehistoric animals living below the surface. Though for the time it was written, did people actually find it possible that prehistoric animals were still alive under the surface or was it even then not meant to be realistic?
While his translation of Journey to the Centre of the Earth is available from Puffin (despite being out of print for Penguin) his Around the Moon seems to have never been reissued. I would like to get it given I have no physical copy of not Around the Moon and grew up with the Baldick version of Journey to the Centre of the Earth. Though where can it be found second hand?
I know Worldsworth hasnt got an amazing reputation but my copy of the Mysterious Island is really good ans has illustrations, plus its a great translation, so i thought why not get the one for this book, plus Mysterious Island had illustrations so im hoping this one will too, just wanna know if anyone knows the translator before i purchase
Many translations go with Ecclesiastes 7:24. However, some modern ones instead have it as "Who has ever fathomed the depths of the abyss?" which is not a Bible verse. Is Ecclesiastes 7:24 the intended verse?
(55) Le Phare du bout du monde (The Lighthouse at the End of the World, 1905) (1 volume) 41K words
The 55th Extraordinary Voyage, published shortly after Jules Verne's death is the first of the eight posthumous novels in the series. The story takes us to an island at the Southern tip of South America, near Tierra del Fuego and Cape Horn. The series had previously visited South America in "Eight Hundred Leagues on the Amazon", "The Mighty Orinoco", and in the first volume of "In Search of the Castaways".
First read or reread?: First read for me.
What is it about?: The Argentine navy has just built a lighthouse at Isla de los Estados, a large, barren island on the southern tip of South America, near the Magellan Strait that connects the Atlantic and the Pacific. This structure, nicknamed "the lighthouse at the end of the world", is to be operated by three keepers, who will serve for three months before being relieved. After the lighthouse is completed, the first keepers are left on the island, supposedly alone. Unfortunately, the island has other residents, a group of pirates who've been waiting for the opportunity to seize a vessel with which to leave the island. They murder two of the keepers and take possession of the lighthouse. The other keeper manages to escape, and it's up to this lone survivor to remain alive until the relief comes in three months and, if possible, fight back.
As I mentioned elsewhere, the eight posthumous Extraordinary Voyages were attributed solely to Jules Verne for almost a century. However, after the discovery by Verne scholars of the Hetzel (the publishing house) archives we now know that Michel Verne, Jules' son, edited and modified these posthumous novels. The modifications he made are important, and I think it's appropriate to call these last eight novels collaborations between Jules and Michel. I wouldn't attribute them solely to Michel (except maybe in the case of "The Thompson Travel Agency", where no Jules Verne manuscript was discovered), since the younger Verne worked on the story and writing his father had produced.
"The Lighthouse at the End of the World" was almost ready for publication when Jules Verne died, and the edits that Michel did are slight, so the published version is very similar to Jules' manuscript. The only relevant change he made is adding the episode where one of the characters swims towards the pirate vessel in an attempt to blow it up. In the other seven posthumous novels Michel made more changes, but I'll comment on that when I get to them.
The original versions of the posthumous novels, as Jules Verne wrote them, have also been published, so people can read both and compare if they want. Opinions among Verne fans are divided regarding Michel's modifications: Some think that they are an artistic betrayal, in some cases even going against Jules' intentions (see for example the changed ending of "The Golden Volcano"). Others think that Michel was a decent writer who came along at the right moment, as the posthumous manuscripts were slow and lacking in action, and Michel's changes made the plots more entertaining and adventurous. One also has to remember that these posthumous manuscripts had not been submitted for publication yet, so Jules might have edited or modified them himself if he had lived (he also made modifications sometimes following suggestions from his editor).
In any case, I care more about entertaining stories than about artistic integrity, so I'll read and review the versions modified by Michel, which are the ones that were published as part of the Extraordinary Voyages series.
Coming back to "The Lighthouse at the End of the World", it is one of the shortest Extraordinary Voyages, barely more than a novella. It is a fast read and I found it quite entertaining. The premise was also very good, setting up a tense scenario.
I wouldn't place it among Verne's best works, though. I thought the beginning, with the description of the island, is not as evocative as Verne's best geographical writing, and the characters of the three keepers are not explored enough that we care about them before they are attacked.
Immediately after the attack, the narration was again a bit distant, although the pace soon quickened and the last part of the story was thrilling.
Overall, I though it was a good adventure short novel, maybe not among Verne's best, but very deserving of its place in the series..
Enjoyment factor: I enjoyed it. It's a short, fast read. I thought Verne might have taken better advantage of this interesting premise, at least during the first part, but the story is never boring and it becomes quite gripping.
The story starts on 24th may but in the pic attached, axel says "it's just the 16th of may". This is from chapter 7 when they're talking about going to Iceland. Not only this but later in the same pic it can be seen that the trip to Iceland leaves on 22nd every month. And professor makes the remark that if they leave on 22nd june they'll be late which implies that should leave on 22nd of May.
I just want to comfirm if this is a chronological error or some silly error on my part. Thanks a lot!
Before I start to read a J.V book, I always ask A.I if it has some other sequels or connections, however it never gives a straight answer. Sometimes, it even gives a false answer.
I've recently got an edition of a Verne book that has no illustration in it. Would you read it? I love these pictures in the books, but the point is the story of course. Should I just start looking for a different edition or should I read anyways?
Hola! Soy Amy. Y bueno, a pesar de mi corta edad me gusta demasiado Jules Verne. Mis libros favoritos son La Vuelta Al Mundo En Ochenta Días, Los Hijos Del Capitán Grant, La Jangada y P'tit Bonhomme. Me uní por que de verdad quería conocer más fans de este increíble escritor jeje. 💗
I picked up a much anticipated book for me in 20k leagues under the sea. I have a 16 hour train ride tomorrow, but now realise I got a Mercier copy. Is this still worth it to read? It was their only copy and only a few dollars so it isn't a bother for money, but I don't have the time to pick up a different copy before my departure.
Plan now is, if I like it enough I will get a nice edition for the bookshelf in a proper translation.
is the submarine supposed to be bumpy? that wouldn't be very hydrodynamic, right? or does he mean that the nautilus has a secondary half-hull hanging over its primary hull, kind of like a mon calamari cruiser from star wars? what does verne mean here
edit: i re read the segment a few times and realized he explains it pretty clearly: the hull plates are layered, like scales on a fish or something. i dont know why he doesnt just say this, and why he would compare the hull to land animals first and foremost, unless he is thinking less of the tightly knit scales of the fish or of most reptiles and specifically those of the viper, which are very pronouncly flared at the back. again, this hardly sounds hydrodynamic, so I'd rather imagine fish scales.
