César

Rating:
Summary: Tremendously biased view of history
Review: ... As anybody who's ever actually read about TRUE ancient history will tell you, she makes glaring mistakes throughout this story,especially with concerns to the Druids and the Celtic peoples. This is not history; this is McCullough's version of it,with Caeser as some arrogant, vainglorious conquistador(megalomaniacal to boot!)that somehow is still loved and worshipped by all....please! Let us not forget that it is the winner in war that always writes history, much distorted to fit his own viewpoint. Caeser brought some "progress" (but what was that really? certainly not moral nor societal, merely economic-to a point) but he enslaved whole nations, agressed against peoples who were in their own rightful territories, set women back for countless centuries(shame on you,Colleen-you should know better-a roman patrician matron was never a citizen of Rome, yet the lowest Celtic female was by right of birth) and set about teaching slavery and moral corruption to Hairy Gaul. As for Romans not ascribing to human sacrifice....wrong again. They willingly sent thousands to their deaths in the coliseums,and all for the sake of "sport",not even as messengers to the spirit world,which was the usual reason for Druidic human sacrifice, which did not occur,we all know now, nearly as much as the lying Caeser made out in his writings about the Celts. Of course,he had to turn them into less than human for the Senate and the easily gullible back in Rome. No; there was much wrong with Rome and with Julius Caeser,just as there is much wrong with the fawning, overly-sentimentalized version of him this author would like to feed us! Caeser the man has been wrought into a sort of demi-God in her hands, which, rest assured,he most definitely was not. Caeser seemingly can do no wrong, which in fact makes him a rather dull and boring topic for a book. ...

Rating:
Summary: Another flawed, but worthwhile McCullough opus...
Review: As a lifelong student and fan of Roman history, I enthusiastically dive into every Colleen McCullough "Masters of Rome" novel, only to come up floundering and gasping for air after a few dozen pages. "Caesar," which is in most respects the climax of the series, is no exception: A grand story with riveting characters, expertly plotted, but weighed down by some of the worst prose this side of "it was a dark and stormy night." McCullough doesn't seem to think normal rules of fiction writing apply to her. Long, dense paragraphs of exposition containing dozens of names and mountains of historical minutia serve no real purpose other than to show off the depths of her research (which is considerable, although she still gets odd details wrong-- i.e. references to a "gold denarius" [the denarius was strictly a silver coin; a gold piece was termed an "aureus"] or Roman officers in "leather armor" [there is no evidence Roman armor was made of anything but iron or bronze]). Even more irritating are long passages of extremly verbose dialogue that start and stop with no indication of setting-- i.e. we have no idea where her characters are or what they are doing when they speak these words. Other reviewers praise her battle scenes. I can't imagine why, since the actual battles are given only the most perfunctory treatment, although the groundwork for each clash is meticlulously laid. She describes each battle in a sterile, academic fashion. Never do you experience the actual blood, sweat, grime, the horrendous physical exertion, the searing pain, the awful disorientation, the screams, and the stink of hand-to-hand combat. This is particularly true of the last great battle, Pharsalus-- the maneuvers leading up to the clash take up perhaps 50 pages, while the actual battle itself occupies two paragraphs. Still, what McCullough lacks as a wordsmith, she makes up for with strong plotting and characterization. Caesar, as been noted elsewhere, comes off as too perfect an embodiement of all the Roman virtues, but his allies and enemies-- studly Anthony, dynamic Curio, dogmatic Cato, longsuffering Cicero, and always the likeable, naively egotistical Pompey-- are all compelling and immensely human. Of the women, Fulvia, Porcia and Servilia are all strikingly drawn and memorable. So, yes, despite the hard work necessary to finish reading this novel, it ended up being (barely) worth the effort. I will no doubt read the "October Horse," but only after taking a long breather and steeling myself for another tough slog.

Rating:
Summary: A Worthy Member (Though Not the Best) of the Series
Review: Caesar: Let the Dice Fly is a worthy member of McCullough's Masters of Rome series, and therefore essential reading to any of the avid readers of those books.

McCullough makes ancient history real and beleivable; she shows us the very human people behind the cardboard historical facades. We all know Caesar was great, but WHY was he great? McCullough shows us why--not just his through his achievements as a general, but through a realistic (albeit fictional) picture of the man.

In her notes at the end of the novel, McCullough comments on her publishers' requiring her to deal with a great deal of recorded history in a limited number of pages. This she does very well, but not as well as the previous books. Many of the most significant battles are described with astonishing brevity. This makes some of the events in the book seem forced and rushed. Perhaps her publishers should allow her more lassitude--none of her fans would object to longer books, or more of them!

While Caesar is not the strongest book in the Masters of Rome series, I still found it an engrossing read, as would anyone else reading these exceptional books.

Rating:
Summary: caesar
Review: Caesar
The book Caesar is great, its violent and compelling. This book really pulled me into the long treacherous history of ancient Rome. Colleen McCullough does a great job of describing the toilsome adventures of Gaius Julius Caesar and his legions crossing over into enemy lands where very few can be trusted for people like brutus can be the real enemy. This book is as McCollough describes it: "Never was there one more adored yet feared than Gaius Julius Caesar, invincible on the battle field, he commands the love and loyalty of those who fight at his side and would gladly give there lives for his glory, but only ill fortune can come to the good men who underestimate him. For Rome is his glorious destiny - one that will impel him reluctantly to the banks of the rubicon...and beyond into triumphant legend". Now just listen to those wonderful words from Colleen McCollough wouldn't that make you want to read this book. I would recommend this book to teen and adult readers not that it's not great but the vocabulary and context are immense and suggestive. Overall it's a great book.

Tom C.

Rating:
Summary: Alternative history
Review: Irene Frain ,a French novelist,recently has noticed a tendency to disparage the images of the ancient world and its people.And she is right.Also Colleen Mccullough is following this tendency.Some reviewers have already interceded for Cato,Cicero,Brutus,Pompey,Antony.All they,with the exception of Julius Caesar,had lost in the novel their many-sided personalities.Perhaps it is only a reaction to their previous excessive romanticization,perhaps it is difficult to believe that such gifted and brilliant individuals did really exist.Of course "Caesar" is merely a novel.Still an author however fertile his fantasy may be cannot show us a cowardly Nelson,a good-hearted Hitler,an ugly Princess Diana without inevitably entering the domain of the alternative history.In this novel history may take an alternative course when young Pompey and Antony ,exactly those who in reality had admired the Egyptian Princess,find her appearance provoking nothing but mockery.We know how highly beauty was estimated in the Ancient world.Were Cleopatra such as represented in the novel,she would never become an object of the legend,her subjects would have given her an insulting nickname,the enemies would have used her deformity in their propaganda.Caesar and Antony were not only ambitious men of large scale but also very vain.Never would they tolerate such a mistress.Their attitude to the Queen perhaps would have been restricted merely to a political and financial alliance .Egypt was already a Roman ally and was obliged to support every enterprise of Rome.Were there on the throne of Egypt instead of Cleopatra a man,a child,an old woman,an unattractive woman the politics of Caesar and Antony would have been the same but their fate could turn out differently.Octavian would have lost the trump card of his propaganda.There exist only symbolic pictures of the Egyptian Queen.On the tiny coins her profile is engraved almost identical to the profile of Marc Antony,thus symbolizing their political,spiritual and family unity.These images have nothing to do with the appearance of the real Cleopatra.Only few historians perceive their symbolic./Prof.Paul Martin,Prof.Manfred Clauss,Irene Frain,Mary Hamer,Susan Walker/.The heroine of Colleen Mccullough is a plain girl dreaming of a love for a god.It is a very interesting conception but it has nothing in common with the real Queen of Egypt.We may believe Plutarch.He does not give us the evidence of the court flatterers.All these doctors ,cooks and Roman militaries gossipping of their lords were simply incapable to become creators of myths.

Rating:
Summary: McCullough puts oomph back into the Masters of Rome series
Review: Just when I was losing faith in the Masters of Rome series, Colleen McCullough throws in some oomph. Caesar brings the ancient battles to life, and shows Gaius Julius Caesar at his most powerful. I think McCullough's strength is in her battle scenes. Even when there is little bloodshed, she does a wonderful job of describing military strategy and tactics. The book is worth reading if only for this.

Caesar shows the return of a writing technique McCullough hasn't shown since The Grass Crown: she includes the point of view of a foreign enemy. In this case, it is Vercingetorix, king of "united Gaul." Although I knew he was doomed from the beginning, I couldn't help but admire his valour and tenacity. It would have been nice if equal attention had been paid to Cathbad, the chief Druid.

The main problem I have with Caesar is the blatant worship of the title character. In McCullough's writings, he can do no wrong. Although I enjoy reading about his great military achievements, it would be awfully nice if he was humanized a tad more. He's just too perfect, and a thin head of hair isn't nearly enough to bring him down to our level. I'm afraid he's become some sort of mortal Superman, and none of the villains happen to have a vial of Kryptonite.

The other problem I have with the book is related to Caesar's hero-worship. Where Caesar and his supporters are portrayed in a in overtly positive ways, his detractors are seen as peevish, jealous, and frankly, rather dumb. I have a difficult time believing the enemies of Caesar were so lacking in positive traits. By the end of the novel, Pompeius Magnus, who started out as a likeable and able general (albeit very temperamental), becomes a whingeing and bullied fool. I think this is a shame. It is also a shame that Cato receives so little personal attention. I think he could be a very sympathetic character if only the attention was paid to him.

Rating:
Summary: The Penultimate novel the ultimate in series?
Review: Ms. McCullough's penultimate entry in her republic of Rome series tracks Caesar's exploits in Italian Gaul and Long haired Gaul as he wars with gallic tribes united. Meanwhile in Rome his enemies the boni seduce his former colleague Pompeius Magnus (Pompey) after the death of Caesar's daughter and Pompey's wife dissolves their familial and political connections.
McCullough, if nothing else breathes live into the ancient Romans that populate her series. Throughout reading these books I almost felt as if I stood beside such greats as Cicero, Pompey, Cato and of course Caesar as her characters renacted ancient history. This must be a challenging thing to do, as she herself stated her subject matter hadn't been written to death by previous authors, so she had to really research to write credibly. Ms. McCullough succeeded as far as I am concerned, painting the crossing of the Rubicon with the splendour history suggests it deserves, and bringing Caesar from legend into this entertaining tome.

Rating:
Summary: Alternative history
Review: This is a novel, written in the syle of Bill Safire's "Freedom". It allows Colleen McCullough the opportunity to make history come alive. For me, the Italian and Latin names were hard to keep up with, especially since people often were referred to using their full names and titles. The use of maps of the time are fascinating. It is definitely about warfare and reminds one of the truism that "war is politics by another means." What is most effective about this book is that in reading it, I was struck by the fact that I could have been reading about the Civil War, World War I, Churchill's writings about "The Gathering Storm", or even the Middle East. The Roman Empire lasted for multiple centuries, but it took on many faces. It was not always totalitarian, dictatorial, and cruel. Caesar's time was a time of intrigue. This story describes the desperate struggle of politicians and militarists trying to find out about themselves, asking of their civilization whether they were overwhelming armies, a republic, following in the Platonic tradition, or a little bit of all the above. Outstanding.

STEVEN TRAVERS
AUTHOR OF "BARRY BONDS: BASEBALL'S SUPERMAN"
[e-mail]

Rating:
Summary: Hail Caesar
Review: This novel typical of Colleen's writing style starts slowly, as she introduces to the reader The Plot and Characters. The plot is intriguing as it unfolds. The Characters are richly fleshed out in loving details, warts and all.

The length of the Story may be a little bit long for most readers' comfort. However, the length is necessary to do the plot justice as Colleen takes the reader on a helter-skelter forced march from the British Isles to Germany and Greece. The battles are numerous with sufficient detail on Caesar's strategy.

All in all, Colleen paints and overly generous picture of Caesar. Here in this novel Caesar towers and dominates above his peers in every aspect. Pompey Magnus was reduced to a whimpering, diffident and incompetent adversary. Doesn't Caesar have any weakness at all?

I would like to suggest for better understanding and enjoyment that the reader reads the earlier 4 novels, starting with The First Man in Rome prior to reading Caesar. In my opinion Colleen writes wonderful novels and Caesar adds another feather to her cap.

Hail Caesar!

Rating:
Summary: Best of the series!
Review: This was the first Colleen McCullough novel I've ever tried to read. I remember saying to my girlfriend about 120 pages in "I think I've found another great one" -- and I meant that I've finally found another contemporary novelist who's intensity level was as focused and whose storytelling power was as solid as just about any other contemporary writer. However, Caesar is *not* a place to start with McCullough. It is too complicated. I'm aware that writing this review will not win any "helpful" votes, but I've got to speak my mind.

I thought McCullough's description of Caesar was the best physical and emotional description of a character I've ever read. Her description of his eyes may have been worth the 8 bucks alone. And if I'd have been an early editor, I would have suggested she stay with his character like a bloodhound on a perfumed fugitive. The novel is at its best when her imagination is on and she's just describing a character or a scene or writing dialogue. *That* is when McCullough is without peer.

My beef with this book is that she simply tries to do way too much. I got lost when she moved the story back to Rome around pages 150-200 while Caesar was not there. On one page alone I counted 17 different character names, and ultimately this is what did in this novel for me. Way too many characters who just appear for seemingly no reason, and then dissappear. It is just too difficult to follow. Indeed, the initial heft of a 900 page novel isn't exactly a welcome mat into a novel. I imagine those of you who read McCullough will say that it's easy to follow. And fun! And exciting! And I'll not argue that McCullough has the inate ability to tell a story as well as anyone. And *that* is rare.

Ultimately, I gave up on this novel at page 277. But it's a strange "giving up." I think I'll try another McCullough novel in the future. Her storytelling ability is that good. I think she could make the reading world spin on its head if she turned her immense talent to telling a more simple story, and kept one or two characters right in the forefront of each chapter (I'm imagining Alfred Hitchcock taking on the "B"-type movie in Psycho and forever changing the landscape of American cinema). Let the imagination do the work for you, McCullough. Give us a simple story. You're that good! You are! You really, truly are!

Stacey