OMG, you're a DUNNETT FAN? Totally! Crazily madly in love with Niccolo. You never read Gemini?! Eee, you need to re-read! *tugs arm* King Hereafter is absolutely magnificent--her most accomplished novel, I think. And I do love Lymond, but my love for him/the series pales before Niccolo. Apart from the desire to slap him (huge!), I found the female characters weaker and the world less fully realised. I'm one of those rare weird people that prefers Niccolo... I wish there were more of us. 'Tis lonely!
Pullo is sort of oafish about politics, but he's actually a pretty astute judge of human character Right! That's been shown already in the scene where he's injured and he draws Vorenus's wife (name?) out about her feelings. And it shines in their banter as well.
he complements Vorenus's absolutely inability to understand people behaving in less than idealized ways, while having a good understanding of politics*nods* I suspect that's why I like Vorenus already--his flip out about being a 'traitor' was completely adorable, and he is so
( ... )
Sounds great! Don't be spoiling me on the finale though--me spoilerphobic to the max! ;-) Is Rome season 2 out on DVD yet? I could only find season one here...
I adore Dunnett's Lymond books! I've always meant to read the Niccolo series but haven't gotten around to it yet. They shall rejoin the ever-growing queue of books I would like to read over the summer. Although between teaching and taking classes over the summer I'm not sure how much time I will actually have to read books for fun. :(
I've watched the first season of Rome and enjoyed it. As a classicist, however, it's hard not to focus on the inaccuracies. Do you really need to make imperial Rome MORE salacious?
I'm among a minority of Dunnett fans that prefer Niccolo to Lymond. Lymond is great (slashy) fun, but I find her Niccolo novels far richer: the world's more fully developed, the female characters are stronger, and the plotting is raised to a whole new level. They have their own flaws, but I'm still madly crazily in love with them. That series contains my OTP-to-end-all-OTPs, as well as my all-time favourite character.
As a classicist, however, it's hard not to focus on the inaccuracies. Do you really need to make imperial Rome MORE salacious? Hee! Thankfully people had warned me on that score so I'm just riding it out... my boy did ask if I'd mistakenly bought porn though. ;-) I'm sure it would be a hard show for classicists to watch. If HBO ever deliver on their 'Crusades' series I will totally be nitpicking it to pieces since that was my period.
Yeah, really. The stories we already have are juicy enough! Oh well.
I feel compelled to add, though, that classicists can be fangirls and fanboys over the show too. :D We get meta on classics in pop culture all the time. (It makes us feel Relevant, somehow. Ha!) At our Big Serious Annual Meeting there was a panel just on this show.
I thought you'd dig getting to see the description of the panel made by the professor in charge of organizing it:
Rome in Prime Time"In fall 2005 the television cable network HBO broadcast a lavishly produced series called Rome. The twelve episodes, which focused on events from 52 to 44 BCE, featured both historical figures and invented characters. After Gladiator (2000) and Troy (2004), Rome is the latest in a surge of popular representations of the ancient Mediterranean world. This panel aims to help classicists familiarize ourselves with appropriations of 'our' field and the ideological purposes to which they are being put, as well as to think about how participation in our own culture affects
( ... )
Heeee!! *loves* Yeah, the classicists I've known before now were Xena fans... ;-p And I totally 'get' the ability to be both a history nerd and a fanboy/fangirl of anachronistic period drama. I have HUGE LOVE for bad medieval period pieces, since that was what I did honours in (Edward the Confessor and Margaret of Scotland actually, but with a fair serve of Crusades-related research on the side).
I love this bit: 'aims to help classicists familiarize ourselves with appropriations of 'our' field and the ideological purposes to which they are being put'. How very generous of them!
It's wonderful but I would definitely listen to what bitterlatinist said. I'm such a Greek and Roman history nerd that it took me a while to get over it. Shouting at the TV doesn't really help. :-)
Hee hee! Yeah, I'm lucky it's not my period at all. I greatly enjoy anachronistic medieval pieces though... but yeah I tend to do a lot of screaming around about inaccuracies. It's half the fun!
I loved Rome. I hope you will too. It has some highs and lows, but the season one finale was one of the best hours of television I've ever watched. The friendship between Vorenus and Pullo is terrific, and the actors are all excellent.
Comments 53
(The comment has been removed)
Totally! Crazily madly in love with Niccolo. You never read Gemini?! Eee, you need to re-read! *tugs arm* King Hereafter is absolutely magnificent--her most accomplished novel, I think. And I do love Lymond, but my love for him/the series pales before Niccolo. Apart from the desire to slap him (huge!), I found the female characters weaker and the world less fully realised. I'm one of those rare weird people that prefers Niccolo... I wish there were more of us. 'Tis lonely!
Pullo is sort of oafish about politics, but he's actually a pretty astute judge of human character
Right! That's been shown already in the scene where he's injured and he draws Vorenus's wife (name?) out about her feelings. And it shines in their banter as well.
he complements Vorenus's absolutely inability to understand people behaving in less than idealized ways, while having a good understanding of politics*nods* I suspect that's why I like Vorenus already--his flip out about being a 'traitor' was completely adorable, and he is so ( ... )
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
also, definitely congratulated :D i am jealous.
Reply
Reply
I've watched the first season of Rome and enjoyed it. As a classicist, however, it's hard not to focus on the inaccuracies. Do you really need to make imperial Rome MORE salacious?
Reply
As a classicist, however, it's hard not to focus on the inaccuracies. Do you really need to make imperial Rome MORE salacious?
Hee! Thankfully people had warned me on that score so I'm just riding it out... my boy did ask if I'd mistakenly bought porn though. ;-) I'm sure it would be a hard show for classicists to watch. If HBO ever deliver on their 'Crusades' series I will totally be nitpicking it to pieces since that was my period.
Reply
I feel compelled to add, though, that classicists can be fangirls and fanboys over the show too. :D We get meta on classics in pop culture all the time. (It makes us feel Relevant, somehow. Ha!) At our Big Serious Annual Meeting there was a panel just on this show.
I thought you'd dig getting to see the description of the panel made by the professor in charge of organizing it:
Rome in Prime Time"In fall 2005 the television cable network HBO broadcast a lavishly produced series called Rome. The twelve episodes, which focused on events from 52 to 44 BCE, featured both historical figures and invented characters. After Gladiator (2000) and Troy (2004), Rome is the latest in a surge of popular representations of the ancient Mediterranean world. This panel aims to help classicists familiarize ourselves with appropriations of 'our' field and the ideological purposes to which they are being put, as well as to think about how participation in our own culture affects ( ... )
Reply
I love this bit: 'aims to help classicists familiarize ourselves with appropriations of 'our' field and the ideological purposes to which they are being put'. How very generous of them!
I would totally go to that panel! :-D
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment