Rating: 
Summary: disappointing...
Review: Althought the plot was good, the characters very one-sided. The author tried too hard to make Alexander look like the heroic but human king. A good book will read itself, but when I was reading this one, I felt like I was being given a history lesson in which I had to remember lots of details and information. I hope the movie which they are making based on this book will not be so disappointing.
Rating:
Summary: disappointing...
Review: Althought the plot was good, the characters very one-sided. The author tried too hard to make Alexander look like the heroic but human king. A good book will read itself, but when I was reading this one, I felt like I was being given a history lesson in which I had to remember lots of details and information. I hope the movie which they are making based on this book will not be so disappointing.
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting
Review: Child of a Dream is the first volumen of the trilogy which tell us the first part of Alexander's life since his birth, offspring of Olympia of Epiro and Philip of Macedonia, his education under the philosopher Aristotle to the accession to the Macedonian throne after the misterious assessination of his father, giving to Alexander an absolute power used to become his conquering dreams in reality.
Rating: 
Summary: Alexander the 1-dimensional
Review: I have never before hated a book. Never. Until now.I forced myself to finish it, however, in the hopes that it would somehow redeem itself. I was not rewarded for my tenacity. Manfredi's work, unlike other books I've seen, has the standard motion picture disclaimer on the page with all the copyright info. You know, the "This is a work of fiction. No resemblance to persons alive or dead is either stated or implied" thing. And, I guess he's right. Any work of Historical Fiction is going to take some liberties, of course, and perhaps this one takes no more than any other in terms of how events transpired. The problem I had, however, is that this work transformed a man who conquered most of the known world by the time he was 32 into a flat, two dimensional shadow of what the real Alexander must have been. Perhaps it was Iain Halliday's translation from the original Italian, but the story itself read like a seventh grade history report. Major points of exposition happened in dialogue. People made random decisions for no apparent reason. There was no depth or feeling to the characters. You couldn't understand why these people changed in the way they did. One moment Olympias is pining for the comfort of her husband, but five chapters later she hates him with a passion worthy of Hera. There's no transition, little or no explanation of why things happened the way they did. And speaking of the translation, Halliday really shouldn't be allowed to translate anything other than family letters going forward. Speech patterns were, in his defense, framed in such a way that it sounded like formal court manner. However, when the King of the Macedonians suddenly bursts out with "Let's go lads!" you get the feeling that someone didn't do his homework and was just trying to get the job done. Manfredi also takes a 'safe' out in skirting the issue of Alexander's rumored homo/bisexuality. Almost. He would have been better off omitting references to it all together, but instead, it's touched upon only two or three times in a way that makes the entire thing seem dirty or possibly imagined. It's alluded to in such a way as to make it seem like Alexander was almost ashamed of it. Sorry, but in the world of that time, it happened. There were entire ARMIES made up homosexual lovers pledged to stay at each other's side until they were killed. Manfredi also goes so far as to have Aristotle claim that Phillip's affair with Pausanias, his assassin, was wrong or dangerous somehow--Aristotle, a Greek philosopher who was raised in a climate where relationships between men was widely accepted, especially in educational situations such as tutor and student. The book, on the whole, left me frustrated. Again, it was as if I was reading a seventh grade history report that barely scratched the surface of historical figures that have so much depth and richness to them... it's almost a shame.
Rating: 
Summary: not very good
Review: I picked this up hoping for something in the vein of I, Claudius. I suppose I was setting this up for a fall, but I didn't expect it to be so bad. It soon became clear that the author just isn't very good at dialogue. Some of the problem is undoubtably due to the translation, which is almost childish in places. Beyond that, I found it a bit unnecesary to have details about Olympia's cleavage included while important plot points were glossed over. I quickly started reading with only the thought of getting a light historical background to Alexander, and skimmed over the most embarassing parts of the prose.
Rating:
Summary: It's okay
Review: It is said that there aren't much record left on Alexander's childhood, except for a few episodes here and there. And with so little record at hand, one can only explore so much, and the rest is pure imagination. The first thing this book says is "this book is a fiction." And I would say you should read it as a fiction, not a book of historical facts. It starts out with Alexander's mysterious birth, and ends with his getting ready to go out to the world, to fight with Persians. The story moves fast enough with enough exciting events, as his life was full of events. So, you really can't go wrong about actions and events, and the author does it fairly well. You will be able to read it through quickly, if you like actions.
The trouble is, however, as some of the reviewers commented, Alexander's character seems to be pretty flat. In many cases, he looks as insignificant as any other ordinary teenagers. He doesn't seem to possess the kind of spell and charisma which he was famous for.
His famous friendship with Hephaistion is sort of pushed also and insignificant, not developed well. Whether it was homosexual or platonic friendship, doesn't matter, but it must have been a very important part of his life, and he committed his life for it, as his later life suggests. None of such deep bond is seen unfortunately, even though there is some kind of relationship.
The turn off was his sexual appetite. His famous continence falls apart so easily at the sight of a naked girl, who was sent by his parents, and he jumps at her, like a panting dog with a cookie in front of him. Even if he did fall, it is hard to imagine it happened this way as this book illustrates.
In the very end he meets a certain girl by a river, and swims across the river with her. If he did not know how to swim, as some historians say, this is very unlikely Alexander.
Over all, the characterizations are sadly shallow, and if you're looking for something in depth, you will probably be disappointed.
Rating: 
Summary: Fun Historical Read in a Novel Setting
Review: Let's face it - one of the problems with reading about history is that it can be a bit tedious. The trick is in fleshing out the "in-between" time as well as the great events. This is precisely the task ably undertaken by Manfredi in his Alexander Trilogy. In "Alexander, Child of a Dream", Manfredi introduces Alexander (destined to become quite possibly the most brilliant and most successful conqueror the Western world has ever known) at the knee of his father, the equally impressive King Phillip of Macedon. As Phillip forges ever onward to consolidate his power amongst the warring city-states of ancient Greece, he devotes equal resources toward training the young Alexander to become an equally able conqueror and even better statesman. Manfredi adds in very credible details to bring Alexander to life and make him something more than what we could learn from a straight biography. No, not all of it can be proven, but there is nothing that is not totally plausible. Manfredi also adroitly handles what might be considered to be "difficult issues" surrounding Alexander. For example, Manfredi pays no particular attention to Alexander's sexual preferences, much in the same way that it was not considered to be anything of particular import by the Greeks themselves. Another example is found in Manfredi's handling of the assassination of Phillip. In real life, Alexander and his mother Olympias, were widely suspected of complicity in the matter. While this may be fodder for Books II or III of the trilogy, Manfredi does not waste a great deal of time with the issue in Book I, as Alexander suddenly has more pressing matters, such as an empire to run. All in all, this is a very entertaining read. Manfredi might downplay the significance of some events (e.g. the Bucephalus incident, the deeper feelings of mistrust between Alexander and Phillip), but he keeps the story moving at a good clip and leaves enough uncertainty about Alexander to keep the reader wanting more.
Rating:
Summary: Hmmm...
Review: The first part in the trilogy, Alexander: Child of a Dream is possibly the best of the three, at least better than the second part.
You start with the circumstances surrounding the great Alexander`s birth, and carry on from there. Be forewarned however, that this book only covers Alexanders early life and childhood. It makes a very interesting read, but is NOT historically exact. The writer has greatly expanded upon current knowledge of Alexander in order to make the book interesting and transform it from a historical tome to a very nice novel. It provides a good basic knowledge of Alexander, in a fictional form.
If you`re going to be too critical, avoid it; it will make you groan. If you hunger for whatever you can get about Alexander, or have some idea of him and want a good book which will teach you more, read it. If you`re just a bit bored and want a good book to read, read it. You`ll like it.
Rating:
Summary: A Terrific Introduction to Alexander
Review: The life of Alexander the Great is among the most popular subjects of ancient studies, and thus a common theme for fiction set in ancient Greece. Dr. Manfredii does an excellent job of portaying one of history's favorite heroes. The is the first volume of the trilogy and focuses on Alexander's privileged childhood, his adolescence as a student of Aristotle, and the first months following being crowned king of Macedon. Manfredii offers us particularly strong characters in Alexander's parents: Philip, the overbearing and nearly barbaric king; and Olympia the trophy wife of Philip's early career who becomes cold and coniving as her husband grows more distant. Most of us know the story of Alexander; therefore, we already know what to expect. Manfredii is gifted, however, and adequately keeps us in anticipation as the inevidible events unfold. He visits all the non-historical (=legedary, mythic) aspects of Alexander's life: the taming of his warhorse Bucephalus, Olympia and the snake, and the conspiracy surrounding Philip's death. He offers new insights and approaches these events from different angles, making them all the more exciting to the reader, whether you are a casual fan of historical fiction or a professional historian. Admittedly, the book does have a few weaknesses. The dialogue at times is a bit generic and "quirky"--occasionally, Alexander seems to quoting lines from a Schwarzeneggar film. And although Alexander was inspired in part by Homer, I think Manfredii's many references to "The Iliad" are a bit excessive. Moreover, and this is really a pet-peeve more than anything, all references to Odysseus instead name the hero as his latin (Roman) counterpart (Ulysses); which is not accurate. But I don't think these weaknesses are entirely at the fault of the author; I read the novel in English and I think something may have been lost in the translation from Italian. I'd deduct a half-star if I could, because these are merely minor complaints. Regardless, the book is fast-paced and detailed, and overall well-written. Of course, avid historians may see that Manfredii bends the facts in more than a few places. But that's why this is a novel and not a biography. We expect the events to be bright and exciting, and the author delivers them wonderfully. If you are unfamiliar with the life of Alexander, this is a great book to start you out. Furthermore, fans of both historical fiction and ancient Greece will find a fresh and exciting story in Mandredii's approach to ancient history's most fascinating character.
Rating:
Summary: Not bad...for a translation.
Review: There are a couple things you must know when you read this book. First of all, the author had to take a few creative liberties with the details of Alexander's life. This is, more or less, historical fiction. Entertaining fiction, but fiction none the less.
Second, keep in mind that this is a translation from the Italian. No translation is ever going to be as good as the original.
Those things aside, this book is a very quick read, and very entertaining. It will not inspire anyone to go out and take over the world, but it's a good rainy day book. The license Manfredi took with the facts is easily overlooked if you're not a keen historian. For those who know (almost) nothing about Alexander, this is a good start for your education. Unlike non-fiction books, this holds a degree of suspense and intrigue.
If you are a die-hard history buff, you don't like embellishments, or you need intricate and multi-faceted characters, maybe you should consider getting the book from a library first.
If not, enjoy this book, because it is a great start to the trilogy.
|
