Rating: 
Summary: Things fall apart....
Review: ...the Center cannot hold. Yeats' immortal words could be a fitting epitaph to the Macedonian empire after Alexander's death. No one could have anticipated Alexander dying so young, and his death left a void it quickly became apparent no one could fill. The army and the empire had been held together solely by one man's dynamism, and when he died, everything fell apart. "Funeral Games" was Renault's last book, and, fittingly, the subject was the Alexander she was so fascinated with. Coming after "The Persian Boy", which was the best of her Alexander books, "Funeral Games" is a bit of a letdown. For one thing, it's lacking its main protagonist. For another, for some reason I can't fathom, Renault returned to the Latin spellings of many of the Greek and Macedonian names; for instance, Antipatros becomes Antipater. It wasn't necessary and it diminishes the sense of time and place. And thirdly, Renault went back to writing in the third person, as she did in "Fire From Heaven". Part of Renault's magic is that when she writes in the first person, she propels us right into the middle of the action; when she writes in the third person, it's like watching the action through a clear sheet of plate glass. We see it, but we're not part of it. Furthermore, with Alexander out of the action, the rest of the figures are simply supporting players without a lead. Renault does introduce a couple of new characters; one is the tragic figure of Alexander's mentally retarded half-brother Arridaios, who had a bit walk-on part in "Fire From Heaven", and who conveniently turns up near at hand in Babylon at Alexander's death; the other is a young grand-daughter of Philip named Eurydike, as ambitious as Alexander's mother Olympias but unfortunately lacking her shrewd calculation; she marries Arridaios in a clumsy power play but she's helpless against Olympias's cold-blooded malice. Few of the characters actually engage us; Olympias fascinates us as a figure of pure evil; Perdikkas is exasperating in his wrong-headedness and tunnel vision; Bagoas makes a brief but ultimately frustrating appearance -- we don't see nearly enough of him this time; Roxane starts off as a miniature Olympias but she quickly pales into insignificance next to the real thing (maybe, when she met Olympias, Roxane wisely decided to keep a very low profile), and Eurydike came off as just plain annoying to this reviewer, blundering blindly from one mess to another and seemingly unable think before she acts. The only character who is wholly likeable in this book is Ptolemy, Alexander's half-brother; wise, sensible, realizing from the beginning that no one could take Alexander's place, he hewed to the Greek adage of "nothing too much", bit off no more than he could chew, and turned the satrapy of Egypt into one of the most flourishing kingdoms of the Hellenistic age. "Funeral Games" would have profited immensely from a first person narrator, one who would have tied the story together; without it, the story jumps back and forth from place to place, and the fragments never achieve a cohesive whole. But it's a fascinating ride through a chaotic period, and Renault's scrupulous research is evident throughout the book. Perhaps it was inevitable that the book, as well as the world he lived in, would be diminished without Alexander.
Rating:
Summary: Things fall apart....
Review: ...the Center cannot hold. Yeats' immortal words could be a fitting epitaph to the Macedonian empire after Alexander's death. No one could have anticipated Alexander dying so young, and his death left a void it quickly became apparent no one could fill. The army and the empire had been held together solely by one man's dynamism, and when he died, everything fell apart. "Funeral Games" was Renault's last book, and, fittingly, the subject was the Alexander she was so fascinated with. Coming after "The Persian Boy", which was the best of her Alexander books, "Funeral Games" is a bit of a letdown. For one thing, it's lacking its main protagonist. For another, for some reason I can't fathom, Renault returned to the Latin spellings of many of the Greek and Macedonian names; for instance, Antipatros becomes Antipater. It wasn't necessary and it diminishes the sense of time and place. And thirdly, Renault went back to writing in the third person, as she did in "Fire From Heaven". Part of Renault's magic is that when she writes in the first person, she propels us right into the middle of the action; when she writes in the third person, it's like watching the action through a clear sheet of plate glass. We see it, but we're not part of it. Furthermore, with Alexander out of the action, the rest of the figures are simply supporting players without a lead. Renault does introduce a couple of new characters; one is the tragic figure of Alexander's mentally retarded half-brother Arridaios, who had a bit walk-on part in "Fire From Heaven", and who conveniently turns up near at hand in Babylon at Alexander's death; the other is a young grand-daughter of Philip named Eurydike, as ambitious as Alexander's mother Olympias but unfortunately lacking her shrewd calculation; she marries Arridaios in a clumsy power play but she's helpless against Olympias's cold-blooded malice. Few of the characters actually engage us; Olympias fascinates us as a figure of pure evil; Perdikkas is exasperating in his wrong-headedness and tunnel vision; Bagoas makes a brief but ultimately frustrating appearance -- we don't see nearly enough of him this time; Roxane starts off as a miniature Olympias but she quickly pales into insignificance next to the real thing (maybe, when she met Olympias, Roxane wisely decided to keep a very low profile), and Eurydike came off as just plain annoying to this reviewer, blundering blindly from one mess to another and seemingly unable think before she acts. The only character who is wholly likeable in this book is Ptolemy, Alexander's half-brother; wise, sensible, realizing from the beginning that no one could take Alexander's place, he hewed to the Greek adage of "nothing too much", bit off no more than he could chew, and turned the satrapy of Egypt into one of the most flourishing kingdoms of the Hellenistic age. "Funeral Games" would have profited immensely from a first person narrator, one who would have tied the story together; without it, the story jumps back and forth from place to place, and the fragments never achieve a cohesive whole. But it's a fascinating ride through a chaotic period, and Renault's scrupulous research is evident throughout the book. Perhaps it was inevitable that the book, as well as the world he lived in, would be diminished without Alexander.
Rating: 
Summary: muscular, lyric, historical fiction
Review: A highly entertaining, fictional account of the disorder and political intrigue following the death of Alexander.
Rating:
Summary: A Fitting Conclusion
Review: After reading my first few Mary Renault books, I thought that her style of narrative would be similar through all, first person, told through the eyes of the protagonist. With Funeral Games, she made a major departure, in telling many stories at one time, all relating to the power struggle following the death of Alexander the Great. Reading this story at times saddened me, in the respect that Alexander, albeit through war and conflict, tried to bring unity to Greece, to bring his beloved country 'together'. To watch those that surrounded him break off into such discord, mutiny, and chaos as they all tried to succeed him in ruling Greece seemed to put the work of his adult life to waste as he was laid to rest. As the conundrum to the Alexander trilogy, this book was indeed violent, yet a fitting conclusion to Alexander's story, although it was a part he did not partake in directly. The many characters this story weaves around are all very interesting, no matter how minor, and all play their respective roles. The author took the time to research each one to portray them accurately, and kept all of the stories engrossing throughout. Once again, her portrayal of Ancient Greece is like no other in fascination and accuracy. I urge anyone who has invested the time in the first two books of this trilogy to indulge themselves in this one as well. Although it may surprise you with its darkness and violence, it will not disappoint.
Rating:
Summary: strong and consistent
Review: As with most of renault's books, the author succeeds in creating a cogent portrait of antiquity with apparent ease, and within this climate paints convincing representations of the more important succesors who warred so terribly in the wake of Alexander's death. There is quite a bit of information available from copies of old texts concerning this period. It is frustratingly patchy, however, and consequently I am surprised at how rigorous Renault's treatment has been. She simplifies somewhat the more obscure politicing between the succesors but never in such a way as to detract from the overall events that took place. As such, one could say that this is a fairly accurate assessment of what occured post 323B.C. I have only one historical quibble. The wars were considerably more unpleasant and personal than the scenarios she describes; and they effected the entire human sphere around them - all of what was then the known world reverberated as the Macedonians started to tear each other apart with unbridled ferocity from the borders of India, through Asia Minor and into the Balkans. It was a very very dark time. Yet in spite of this, and here Renault is unimpeachable, Alexander's memory loomed large over everyone - and why would it not? He had dominated his age more forcefully than any individual human being has ever done before or since. It must be pointed out that the book does not have the same easy narrative flow that her previous Alexander offerings do. But, in a way, this reflects the reality of what happened - While Alexander lived the lives of these protagonists unfolded smoothly and steadily; when he died the pattern became fractured and disjointed. I think that the book's greatest strength is that it treats of a period that is inextricably linked to Alexander, yet nonetheless is often ignored by the scholars, historians and popularisers. The wars of the Diadochi shaped the future of the Western world for some time by laying open the way for the rise of a new power. And that power did eventually come in the form of Rome. Renault is right to have drawn our attention to what became of those that surrounded the youthful king and also correct to show us that they were competent, talented and sometimes brilliant people within their own right. Too often it is assumed that Alexander's success was due exclusively to himself. Whilst this is true in many ways it forgets that he knew that he could always rely upon the immense talents of those around him, which he often did - look at his three top lieutenants and in India on the way down the Indus, and how much trust and confidence he places in them while he is weak from a wound! All in all a fine account of it. What it lacks in grit and scale it makes up for in emphasis and characterisation.
Rating:
Summary: strong and consistent
Review: As with most of renault's books, the author succeeds in creating a cogent portrait of antiquity with apparent ease, and within this climate paints convincing representations of the more important succesors who warred so terribly in the wake of Alexander's death. There is quite a bit of information available from copies of old texts concerning this period. It is frustratingly patchy, however, and consequently I am surprised at how rigorous Renault's treatment has been. She simplifies somewhat the more obscure politicing between the succesors but never in such a way as to detract from the overall events that took place. As such, one could say that this is a fairly accurate assessment of what occured post 323B.C. I have only one historical quibble. The wars were considerably more unpleasant and personal than the scenarios she describes; and they effected the entire human sphere around them - all of what was then the known world reverberated as the Macedonians started to tear each other apart with unbridled ferocity from the borders of India, through Asia Minor and into the Balkans. It was a very very dark time. Yet in spite of this, and here Renault is unimpeachable, Alexander's memory loomed large over everyone - and why would it not? He had dominated his age more forcefully than any individual human being has ever done before or since. It must be pointed out that the book does not have the same easy narrative flow that her previous Alexander offerings do. But, in a way, this reflects the reality of what happened - While Alexander lived the lives of these protagonists unfolded smoothly and steadily; when he died the pattern became fractured and disjointed. I think that the book's greatest strength is that it treats of a period that is inextricably linked to Alexander, yet nonetheless is often ignored by the scholars, historians and popularisers. The wars of the Diadochi shaped the future of the Western world for some time by laying open the way for the rise of a new power. And that power did eventually come in the form of Rome. Renault is right to have drawn our attention to what became of those that surrounded the youthful king and also correct to show us that they were competent, talented and sometimes brilliant people within their own right. Too often it is assumed that Alexander's success was due exclusively to himself. Whilst this is true in many ways it forgets that he knew that he could always rely upon the immense talents of those around him, which he often did - look at his three top lieutenants and in India on the way down the Indus, and how much trust and confidence he places in them while he is weak from a wound! All in all a fine account of it. What it lacks in grit and scale it makes up for in emphasis and characterisation.
Rating: 
Summary: Funeral Games
Review: I didn't really like Funeral Games as much as I liked Fire From Heaven and The Persian Boy. There was just too much hatred and bloodshed for me to really enjoy it but I can understand why she made it bloody, it wasn't really a very happy time to be living in, with everyone so ambitious for the crown, and the name of the book is Funearal Games after all. It was still a very interesting book altough the violence did get kind of repetitive. I recommend it to anyone who has read the previous two books but if you haven't then you should read them first, especially The Persian Boy.
Rating:
Summary: BOOM! There goes the world!
Review: I found this book in my school library first ("Persian Boy" and "Fire From Heaven" apparently not being there.) While Alexander is dead by chapter 1, and I've never read the books in which he is portrayed alive, I was amazed by Mary Renault's skill in preserving his spirit throughout the novel, so that in a sense Alexander really is a character, though he was already comatose from the start. Also, the high stakes and level of the manipulation by the people reaching for the throne was so much more detailed and elaborate than can be matched in the fantasy genre I usually prefer. Fact is stranger than fiction. It stood out to me that while virtually all the characters hated each other, they were all portrayed very well and I felt I understood their emotions, motivations, and their nuances. Thankfully, the author kept from the very tempting habit of villainizing one or another. The body count was high, but each character had a moving, highly-individiualized death without splurging into Fiction Plot Device Kill-offy Mode that many authors tend to march into. (You know, falling to your knees and screaming, "NOOOO! " or "YOU KILLED MY BROTHER! " and that sort of stuff.) Overall, an excellent read, even for your non-obsessed casual reader.
Rating:
Summary: Pleasant Surprise
Review: I read this book only because I am interested in the Successor Wars that broke out among Alexander's generals after he died, and there are few books out there on this subject. When I saw it at a used bookstore, I was wary. I had never read any Renault before, but I had read reviews of her first two Alexander books on the web. From these reviews, I gathered that she had taken the fascinating and brutal story of a Hitler-Stalin-type tyrant and turned it into a gay romance novel. Not that there's anything wrong with that :-) but that's not my thing. But finally curiosity got the better of me so I got it. And I was pleasantly surprised. The book actually works pretty well. There is no dominating figure in the actual story, and likewise there is no dominating figure in Funeral Games, so the story jumps around a lot. Renault keeps the story more managable by concentrating on only about half the figures. The best parts of the book are when Renault takes figures who are barely mentioned in the histories and turns them into full fledged characters. In particular, she makes Alexander's half brother Arrhidaeus, a mentally retarded man who is crowned king and used a pawn by several of the Successors, into a very real and sympathetic figure. Likewise with Eurydike, Alexander's niece who makes a play for power but is tragically over her head. Renault also did an outstanding job depicting the purification ritual/purge of the army performed by Perdikkas shortly after Alexander's death. The scene disturbed me for a few days. .... Although I quibble with some of Renault's historical interpretations, they are all reasonable and she sticks to the "truth" as far as can be known. In summary, I liked it, to my surprise.
Rating:
Summary: A dark retelling of the struggle for Alexander's legacy
Review: Mary Renault unquestionably presented an idealized version of Alexander the Great in the first two novels of her "Alexander trilogy," Fire from Heaven and The Persian Boy (which are essential to read before attempting Funeral Games). Although her scholarly research was extensive and thorough, most classical historians acknowledge a much more complex and flawed Alexander than the worship-inspiring icon she presents. It is a measure of her skill as a writer, however, that she can inspire similar devotion to her interpretation of Alexander in us, the readers, and that we subsequently share the despair and disillusionment of Alexander's contemporaries upon his death and the disintegration of his empire in Funeral Games. As a result, Funeral Games is indeed a bleak and sometimes chilling read as we experience the intrigue, plotting, bungling and brutal power grabs by Alexander's former officers, friends, relatives and enemies. The entire narrative is permeated with a sense of bitter regret, a longing for a period of time now forever lost, as Renault's characters romanticize their recent past and take turns lamenting "If Alexander were here..." even as they dismantle his grand achievement. Bagoas, the fictionalized narrator of The Persian Boy, makes a welcome reappearance, though as a third-person, secondary character. Serving almost as Mary Renault's alter ego, he crystallizes the pain and heartbreak and hopelessness she wants us to feel at the prospect of a world without Alexander. Ultimately, however, he overcomes grief and recovers a life's mission in watching over the memory of his lost King - standing in contrast to the doomed and misguided elites of Funeral Games who destroy each other in their attempts to seize Alexander's legacy. A worthwhile read, but again, only if you've read the earlier two books first.
|
