The Song of Achilles

This is a great story and a very enjoyable read. Madeline Miller has made ancient Greece and the battle for Troy to be accessible, believable and fun. The story is told in the first person by Patroclus, Achilles friend and companion.

It is hard to believe, in the opening chapters, that anything good can happen in Patroclus' life. Motherless, a disappointment to his father, a natural victim, he fights back against one of his tormentors, who falls, hitting his head and dies. Patroclus is exiled to Phthia, and has every reason to hate Phthia's prince Achilles, who has taken for himself Patroclus' only possession, his mother's lyre.

But Achilles has chosen Patroclus as his companion, his therapon, his brother-in-arms. The friendship grows in childhood, through their education by Chiron the centaur, in hiding on the Isle of Scyros, and eventually what Achilles was born for, the battle for Troy.

It is a strange world, Greece in the age of heroes, where the gods have children with mortals, take sides in battles, and men value honour and reputation more than happiness or friendship. Men fight in mortal combat all day but shake hands at dusk when the heralds say it is time to stop.

What makes it such an enjoyable read is Miller's handling of the psychology. Whether it is a boy's feelings about change, a father's hope for his children, a woman's choice in difficult circumstances, or a prince's reaction to not being honoured as he expects; it is all very believable and real.

It would be a rare book to have no sex, and this one includes homosexual love, but it is understated and not overly emphasised.  The battle lust is much more vividly portrayed.

What turns the book from an absorbing experience to the thrilling page turner in the final chapters is not sex, or battlefield. Nor is it medicine or Patroclus' bravery, or the loyalty of the slave girl Briseis,  though they deserve mentioning.  It is the relationship between the Greek princes.  

It is their petty jealousies, their blind pride, the perceived insults and failure to back down which cause the calamities, and gives the story its momentum.  The book is a wonderful introduction to the world of Homer, and much more easy to read.

http://www.madelinemiller.com/the-song-of-achilles/

I, Claudius

This is the story of an intelligent, quick-witted, resourceful man surviving in a brutal and capricious age. Regarded as an idiot by many on account of his stammer and his limp, he was despised by many and the butt of  cruel jokes. But partly because of this he survived to become ruler of the Roman world, at a time when many in his imperial family met untimely deaths, with foul play strongly suspected.
The action takes place during the reigns of Augustus, Tiberius and Caligula. Augustus ruled very ably, but as far Claudius was concerned his wife (and Claudius grandmother) was the evil power behind the throne. Tiberius ruled fairly ably, except in Rome, where he did not have the qualities to be an inspiring leader. Claudius' brother Germanicus would have made a better Emperor,  and Tiberius knew it, making him more insecure and malicious. Caligula was completely of the page.  As Claudius said, all the members of his family were either very good, or very bad. There are not many shades of gray.
It is written in the first person, as if Claudius' autobiography had been lost for 1,900 years and suddenly discovered in the 1930s. Most of the major events are a matter of public record, and if the gaps are filled in with speculation, Robert Graves was given a head start from all the speculation that was around in Roman times.  There is an amusing incident where the young Claudius engaged in a conversation in a library between two eminent historians, one writes attested truth, the other writes readable speculation.  We get all the speculation, with unlikely explanations of how Claudius got to know real truth.
It is an enjoyable read. There were several amusing incidents or well written paragraphs you want to share, but there was a problem. After a while I stopped being as offended by Caligula's outrages, and caught some of the black humour of it. It is fun to read in its context but difficult to share.
At the end of the day you forget the injustice and outrage, and remember the inspiring stories. Many people despised Claudius and treated him shamefully, but he had a few, very few, friends and family who appreciated him and were very loyal. An old professor, a soldier, the daughter of a prostitute, a servant, a cousin, a brother (and great general); these are the noble characters.
The final page opens a new chapter, with Claudius as Emperor. Whether Graves does as good a job of persuading us of Claudius' virtues in that book remains to be seen, but I Claudius was certainly a good read.

The White Queen

I usually enjoy a historical novel, and I was pleased to learn about the Yorkist Kings, as I knew very little about the War of the Roses before I started.

One of the good things about historical novels is that they can give a credible, if some what conjectural view of why people behaved the way they did. Nobody knows why Edward IV, the first and longest reigning of the Yorkist Kings did not marry a European princess as his powerful uncle Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick "Kingmaker" wanted him to.  Philippa Gregory has a rather unsatisfactory answer as to how Elizabeth Woodville, daughter of a mere knight was able to make such a fine catch - she was a witch!
To be fair, having read a little more widely, nobody seems to have a better explanation and seem to agree that she bewitched him. Not only so, but Elizabeth herself believed herself to have the powers of a witch and be descended from the water goddess Melusina. However I still felt a little cheated that instead of a plausible explanation of character's motivations what we got was an invitation to believe in witchcraft.
Another good feature of historical novels is that you can absorb a vivid picture of what life was like while simply enjoying the story.  Here again I felt slightly short changed, coming away with little idea what life and society was like. I may be wrong, but I felt it was only after finishing the novel that I read that her brother Anthony knew William Caxton and was the author of the first book to be printed in the English language.
Having said all that it was an enjoyable story and a good read. Its just that I expected more. Of course she had to skirt round one the greatest historical unknowns of all time. Who killed her two sons King Edward V and  Richard, Duke of York - the princes in the tower?  Well it remains a mystery - but the story does convey a couple of twists that are unexpected but certainly within the bounds of possibility.
Now I did come away from the story with more respect for the Yorkist kings than I had when I started, but the book is by no means pro Yorkist. In fact it is quite open about how dishonourable they were at times.
The story is much more about Edward IV than Richard III, but Richard comes over in quite a good light, especially compared to how we see him from Shakespeare's writings.  Calculating, decisive, yes, but cruel vindictive, no, and quite personable and an attractive character.   Elizabeth herself, the central character, is the more scheming and vindictive.
So there you have it, turbulent times, vividly portrayed, families at war, danger hatred and revenge, witchcraft but still accurate historically, loyalty and hope.  Not a great read but certainly a good one.

The Other Queen

The Other Queen by Philippa Gregory.

I usually enjoy Historical Novels, and I was not disappointed with this one. It covers the first three years of Mary Queen of Scots captivity in England, and it is full of plots and intrigue.
It follows three central characters; the Earl of Shrewsbury, one of the old aristocracy who is charged with guarding Mary; Bess of Hardwick, his newly married wife; and Mary herself. Each chapter is told in the first person by one of these three.  They give us three very different personal takes on the action, and on each other.
These are momentous times for nations; Will the Spanish King invade to restore Mary to the Scottish throne, or to overthrow Elizabeth, and make Mary Queen of England as well?; Will England continue in the protestant faith or will the old familiar faith be restored?  The story that unfolds is also a very personal one; a queen who longs to be free; a noble faithful to his Queen, and to the woman he has married, yet attracted to this beautiful queen it is his duty to guard; and a woman whose household is disrupted by this unwelcome rival for her new husband's attention.
The very lines of English Society are laid bare. For Shrewsbury, his duty is to his Monarch, as it had been with his family for 500 years. His loyalty is with his brother peers, who resent that a commoner such as William Cecil should be advising the Queen rather than themselves. His wife Bess has more in common with Cecil, born in poverty, advancing in society by her own abilities, enjoying wealth that used to belong to the church, she has everything to lose if Roman religion is restored. During the few years of this story, the very future of England, as well as the the other Queen, and their own household hangs in the balance.
The story is not particularly kind to Elizabeth, and much less so to William Cecil. Then again, the three central characters are also portrayed with all their weaknesses, either in their own thinking or that of each other.
A good story well told.