Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:11 pm
I was going to leave this thread alone, but I’ve decided to add to it now. I can see how on a forum where a good number of active members are writing (or have written) novels, a constructive critique may be considered as support. However, saying something like “I don’t like your portrayal of Alexander because I don’t envision him that way,” isn’t helpful to the author. Oh, it’s said often about published novels by well-known writers and I’ve been guilty myself – Manfredi's trilogy comes immediately to mind – but famous published authors don’t come to this forum looking for either encouragement or critique. Further to this; I also think it is inappropriate for anyone to say, in essence, that “your portrayal of Alexander is wrong and my view is correct.” It’s been said often that everyone has their own Alexander; however no one can claim that their vision of Alexander is the one and only truth.
Derek, I enjoyed the chapter from your book and my personal opinion is that your exuberant Alexander is suggestive of historical depictions. I’ve often thought that the Macedonians had (for want of a better word) a childlike element to their personalities as is most demonstrated by the tales of their social life. It’s something akin to the representation of recruits in many war movies in the last few decades where their off-duty behavior can certainly be described as exuberant. The behavior is shown as a release from the trials and tribulations of training and warfare and it seems to me to be even more evident in a time when military exploits were a man’s whole life and imminent death was a constant reality. This said, I can certainly imagine Alexander’s delight in finally viewing the temple of Troy and tomb of Achilles …
On the matter of fact checking: I often see things in a novel which I don’t consider errors, per se, but which intrigue me nevertheless. I found this in Steve Oden’s book, Memnon (which I thoroughly enjoyed and really must review one of these days) when he described the sun on the white-washed walls of Rhodes, and wooden paneling on the walls of a courtesan’s rooms. Now, I don’t know if the exteriors of houses in Rhodes would have been painted in bright colors, as in Pompeii, although I have a small suspicion that they might have been. And was wood paneling a feature in any house at that time? I really can't say, but my curiosity was aroused and the questions will stay with me. That doesn’t, however, make Oden’s evocative descriptions wrong and I certainly wouldn’t complain about them. Same thing in your novel when I read the word “sightseeing” coming out of Hephaistion’s mouth - I had a thought that it might be a more recent word, and it is; apparently first used in 1842. I feel that the utilization of the word doesn’t detract from your novel though, especially as you use it to demonstrate the enthusiasm of Hephaistion for where they are about to go. As it’s part of our language today, few readers would be likely to question the use of the word, so I’m not trying to give you “constructive criticism” nor am I “nitpicking” but am simply pointing out how even a simple word in novel can pique this reader’s curiosity. That’s a good thing, IMO.
Anyway, Derek, I did enjoy the excerpt from your book and have added it to my seemingly never diminishing wish list. I’m curious to see where you go with this because events in Alexander’s life are fairly well documented from this point onwards. I’m no writer, but I suspect that it is a little easier to write a novel based on Alexander’s early years because we know relatively little about them. (I should add here that I don't consider the writing of any novel to be easy!
) I’m full of admiration, however, for writers (fledgling or otherwise) who attempt novels that cover the full expanse of his life, and trilogies especially. Whether I end up liking a book or not, I’m always curious to know exactly how the writer will fictionalize his/her tale whilst still trying to remain historically accurate. It isn’t something I would ever want to attempt. Good luck with your endeavors.
Best regards
Derek, I enjoyed the chapter from your book and my personal opinion is that your exuberant Alexander is suggestive of historical depictions. I’ve often thought that the Macedonians had (for want of a better word) a childlike element to their personalities as is most demonstrated by the tales of their social life. It’s something akin to the representation of recruits in many war movies in the last few decades where their off-duty behavior can certainly be described as exuberant. The behavior is shown as a release from the trials and tribulations of training and warfare and it seems to me to be even more evident in a time when military exploits were a man’s whole life and imminent death was a constant reality. This said, I can certainly imagine Alexander’s delight in finally viewing the temple of Troy and tomb of Achilles …
On the matter of fact checking: I often see things in a novel which I don’t consider errors, per se, but which intrigue me nevertheless. I found this in Steve Oden’s book, Memnon (which I thoroughly enjoyed and really must review one of these days) when he described the sun on the white-washed walls of Rhodes, and wooden paneling on the walls of a courtesan’s rooms. Now, I don’t know if the exteriors of houses in Rhodes would have been painted in bright colors, as in Pompeii, although I have a small suspicion that they might have been. And was wood paneling a feature in any house at that time? I really can't say, but my curiosity was aroused and the questions will stay with me. That doesn’t, however, make Oden’s evocative descriptions wrong and I certainly wouldn’t complain about them. Same thing in your novel when I read the word “sightseeing” coming out of Hephaistion’s mouth - I had a thought that it might be a more recent word, and it is; apparently first used in 1842. I feel that the utilization of the word doesn’t detract from your novel though, especially as you use it to demonstrate the enthusiasm of Hephaistion for where they are about to go. As it’s part of our language today, few readers would be likely to question the use of the word, so I’m not trying to give you “constructive criticism” nor am I “nitpicking” but am simply pointing out how even a simple word in novel can pique this reader’s curiosity. That’s a good thing, IMO.
Anyway, Derek, I did enjoy the excerpt from your book and have added it to my seemingly never diminishing wish list. I’m curious to see where you go with this because events in Alexander’s life are fairly well documented from this point onwards. I’m no writer, but I suspect that it is a little easier to write a novel based on Alexander’s early years because we know relatively little about them. (I should add here that I don't consider the writing of any novel to be easy!
) I’m full of admiration, however, for writers (fledgling or otherwise) who attempt novels that cover the full expanse of his life, and trilogies especially. Whether I end up liking a book or not, I’m always curious to know exactly how the writer will fictionalize his/her tale whilst still trying to remain historically accurate. It isn’t something I would ever want to attempt. Good luck with your endeavors. Best regards
HI Derek, I see that you have reprinted a phrase from your own work. I have always read and heard that in a movie the first ten minutes is crucial to getting the audience wheeled in to listen to you. In a book it is the first page...
I did see the latest movie starring Renee Zellweger as Bridget Jones in which she marries Mark. The name McLeod popped up there, and it made me think of John. 
