Part 1 Hi, Fiona, thanks very much for this review. I only got the book this week and so far am only up to page 40, so I can only comment on this so far.
So far, I would disagree with you about the book presenting a convincing archaic world. There are some howling anachronisms - carpets and tapestries in Peleus's Bronze Age megaron? And lemon in the food (from India/China)? I thought Madeline Miller was a history teacher!There is very little description about every day items, about what the world looks like to bring it alive, apart from the food. I want to know what sort of clothes they are wearing, the chair Peleus is sitting on, the countryside, the quality of the light etc.
For this reason, I don't think the quality of the writing is that good either. For example, she has an irritating habit in one chapter of refering to 'our goddess', 'our dead' etc. that makes you wonder who the narrator is addressing - a foreigner who doesn't understand their culture? But if this is the case, why isn't it made clearer for whose benefit the story is being told? I suspect it's simply a momentary habit of the writing. Also, there is the issue of the narrator's mother. At first, we are told she is simple, several times in fact and I concluded that we were meant to think she was mentally deficient. We are then later told that she has a scar on her temple from where her father hit her with a sword hilt. This, although it means for a modern reader than her mental abilities are not genetic and have therefore not been passed on to her son, contradicts the earlier impression and seems like the author hadn't really made up her mind to start with. It looks like she had an idea later on and just dropped it in without revising her earlier writing - that isn't good writing craft.
D'you know, I did wonder about the lemons. I had a feeling they were one of the (many!) things Alexander is reputed to have introduced into Greece. I am glad you thought this too, and we shall put this down as an anachronism - not good! (But actually I think she teaches classics rather than history) Carpets and tapestries, I just don't know - I suppose I just thought that if they had woven clothes, they could have had woven stuff for the home, though now you mention it, tapestries does sound a bit too much. I see what you mean about the details of everyday items. I thought the 'our goddess', 'our dead' stuff was rather good, it seemed to be the voice of Patroclus coming from an impossible distance - perhaps beyond the grave - right from the start, and addressing himself to all, but you're right, it is vague. About the mother, that is an interesting point, that the blow from the sword hilt might have caused the mental deficiency and therefore it is not hereditary. That never even crossed my mind. I assumed she had been simple from birth and that the scar just showed what kind of a thug she had for a father, who could clout a mentally deficient daughter. It just shows how different readers will interpret things in quite different ways!
Hi, Fiona, thanks very much for this review. I only got the book this week and so far am only up to page 40, so I can only comment on this so far.
So far, I would disagree with you about the book presenting a convincing archaic world. There are some howling anachronisms - carpets and tapestries in Peleus's Bronze Age megaron? And lemon in the food (from India/China)? I thought Madeline Miller was a history teacher!There is very little description about every day items, about what the world looks like to bring it alive, apart from the food. I want to know what sort of clothes they are wearing, the chair Peleus is sitting on, the countryside, the quality of the light etc.
For this reason, I don't think the quality of the writing is that good either. For example, she has an irritating habit in one chapter of refering to 'our goddess', 'our dead' etc. that makes you wonder who the narrator is addressing - a foreigner who doesn't understand their culture? But if this is the case, why isn't it made clearer for whose benefit the story is being told? I suspect it's simply a momentary habit of the writing. Also, there is the issue of the narrator's mother. At first, we are told she is simple, several times in fact and I concluded that we were meant to think she was mentally deficient. We are then later told that she has a scar on her temple from where her father hit her with a sword hilt. This, although it means for a modern reader than her mental abilities are not genetic and have therefore not been passed on to her son, contradicts the earlier impression and seems like the author hadn't really made up her mind to start with. It looks like she had an idea later on and just dropped it in without revising her earlier writing - that isn't good writing craft.
Reply
I thought the 'our goddess', 'our dead' stuff was rather good, it seemed to be the voice of Patroclus coming from an impossible distance - perhaps beyond the grave - right from the start, and addressing himself to all, but you're right, it is vague. About the mother, that is an interesting point, that the blow from the sword hilt might have caused the mental deficiency and therefore it is not hereditary. That never even crossed my mind. I assumed she had been simple from birth and that the scar just showed what kind of a thug she had for a father, who could clout a mentally deficient daughter. It just shows how different readers will interpret things in quite different ways!
Reply
Leave a comment