<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Good coverage of a very interesting topic
Review: Beacham provides an excellent narrative regarding the relationship between spectacle entertainment (e.g., chariot races, theatre, gladiator shows) and the reigns of several of Rome's most famous emperors, including Julius Caesar, Caligula, and Nero. I thought that the way he traced the simultaneous evoultion of the Roman Empire and its spectacle entertainment was fascinating, especially given the way our culture today embraces various types of spectacles. My main complaint of the book is that Beacham does not synthesize the material into some type of detailed conclusion. He presents the information in basically an emperor by emperor format, without really integrating the material as a whole. A final chapter that accomplished this task would have been a welcome addition. I also urge readers who have no prior knowledge of Roman history to not read this book (at least as their first exposure to the topic), as he seems to assume that the reader has some knowlege. All in all, though, I found the work to be informative and enjoyable to read.
Rating: 
Summary: Rehashed Material
Review: Beacham's first book was okay--The Roman Theater and its Audience. But this book seems largely a rehash of it. There's changes in focus of course. Nothing really original though. For a really GREAT, well-researched book on Roman theater, search for the title "Roman Theater and Society." It's still in print, and available here through Amazon.
Rating:
Summary: Snoozefest
Review: If you're looking for something worthwhile on Roman entertainment, search for "Paul Plass."If you're looking for something on Roman theaters, search for "Margaret Bieber." If you want a book that scrambles together the research of a horde of other scholars along with untrustworthy translations and a poor understanding of them, then by all means buy this book. No wait, don't do that. Look for it in your local library, then you'll thank me.
Rating:
Summary: good book--misleading title
Review: If you've seen The Learning Channel's ROME: POWER & GLORY you've watched an academic talking head downgrade the sophistication of Roman electioneering under the Republic, and of Roman political sophistication in general. True, no one wrote texts of political theory through Roman eyes, but Roman politicians could draw on centuries of election experience. This book, though nothing at all political is even hinted in its title, is actually about Roman usage of spectacle for propaganda and other political purposes, and without even trying refutes the talking head.
What Beacham does NOT do is offer hoked up, sensationalized anecdotes about gladiators and frenzied women, lust or brutality. What you read is a well written, academic enquiry into the political use of religious and historical symbolism involved in the "spectaculi" (gladiatorial games, chariot races, triumphal pageantry, what we today would call theater, and so forth) by a professor of theatrical history.
He describes the entertainments pretty minimally, their venues carefully because where could be almost as important as what was presented, and explores fully how religious and historical symbols worked. In the process, you come to understand how rivals pitted symbolism against symbolism and strove to undercut each other's investments in lavish public entertainments, how Augustus used performances to unify diverse groups and cement imperial rule, and how his successors through Nero used and abused them.
Professor Beacham appears to have read and reflected on every ancient source available. He can be witty when he feels like it, but much of his most interesting stuff is buried in the footnote section. He can tell a fascinating colorful story, but the book is not a swift, bright read. Nor is it dull, but it is not for readers whose interest is simply casual. He wears his scholarship lightly. (Sometimes too lightly. For example, he doesn't discriminate details about Nero found in Dio Cassius from details found in Tacitus who wrote a century closer to the subject. Hence Tacitus should be the more reliable source. Nor does he express even the suspicion that the drama of Nero's matricide might--at least in its climactic scene--be without a solid basis for its "eyewitness only" details. Did Agrippina, at bay facing the naked blades of swords really cry, "Strike here, here," pointing to her womb,"for this bore Nero?" Tacitus lived more than a generation past the event. Nero was an intimidating, murderous emperor who denied the crime and allowed no enquiries. What was the source for this detail? Common sense says that rumor and legend are real probabilities for this "punchline" too poetically good to be true.) Nonspecialists who are really into the subject should love it. For scholars his would be a valuable tangential viewpoint, and for those with a general interest in Roman political history it will, oddly enough, provide a solid introduction , not systematic, into the practical day-to-day world of how it worked relevant to the unwashed masses. A fine book which resists pigeonholing.
Rating: 
Summary: The Glory that was Rome
Review: This is a superb book. Well-informed, dealing with fascinating material, and handled with a deft (but never heavy-handed) scholarly understanding.The spectacles of the Roman world have an uncanny similarity to much modern propaganda and advertsing techniques, as well as, of course, contemporary political practices. There is no other comprehensive book on this important subject, and Beacham brings it to life, magnificently. It really is a wonderful book, informative and also highly entertaining.
Rating: 
Summary: Well researched but not spectacular look at Roman spectacle
Review: While a useful resource for any student of Rome and her history, this book is disappointing. After claiming to focus on spectacle entertainment, Beacham proceeds to discuss at length the history of theatrical entertainment in ancient Rome, from Pompey to Nero. And while some of this discussion is useful to understanding the political context of entertainment, it consumes far too much of the book. The reader, too, is consumed... through erratic writing -- sometimes quick and witty, other times slow and plodding -- and constantly having to flip to the back of the book to read the footnotes (which are often the most interesting bits to learn and so plenty that they could almost be a book themselves) is particularly distracting. Overall, it is an information-laden book that lacks an interesting narrative and never quite develops a point of view beyond simply "lecturing" about the history of Roman theater.
<< 1 >>
|
