Scan barcode
notrealytea's review against another edition
1.0
I'm starting with Helen because, while I can't stand her portrayal, it's less surprising. Helen is as dumb as a box of nails in this... and less interesting. She's so painfully naive. Her relationship with Menelaos is one big massive miscommunication and I hated it. The only interesting things the author added were Helen and Leda's relationship and Helen's trauma from childbirth. Her struggle with not wanting to be pregnant again in a world where having children is viewed as women's primary reason for being was an interesting route to go with Helen and it added depth to her otherwise shallow character.
Helen was a passive pathetic vain and idiotic ball of mush. Paris easily manipulates her into running away with him just from complimenting her appearance. I kid you not, he compliments her constantly and stares at her and she agrees to run away with him because of that. Since the author was going with the Helen-as-a-willing-participant-route I so wanted any sort of depth to their relationship. I liked the idea of Paris manipulating Helen, but it was so obvious to anyone with an IQ higher than 1 that it wasn't interesting or subtle; it was pathetic. He viewed her as a sexy leg lamp from the start and that's all she wanted. I understand that she was lonely and felt neglected and that made her vulnerable, but Paris' manipulation should have been more subtle (or entirely unnoticeable). I liked how Paris readily agreed with Helen's stipulation to not have kids but that should have come up earlier. The author already has them meeting up at night to talk for hours, why couldn't they have talked? He could have plied her with compliments and staring at her the first few nights, then start talking and pretending Helen had anything interesting to say to him, she could confide her post partum depression and fear of childbirth, and He'd drop hints about how he'd never neglect her and he'd be content with her even if they never had a child, before asking her to come with him. And have him ask her to come with him earlier! A few days earlier! Have him beg and plead but say he won't force her (maybe hint that he probably would). Then, the final night, have Leda confront Helen and call her a whore. Let that be the final blow and Helen agrees to go with Paris, only for his promises to have meant nothing once she's on the ship or in Troy.
And her in Troy. There's not much to say about her time in Troy. Poor pathetic Helen is the victim. She feels guilty that her arrival has caused so many deaths. This whole section was a waste of paper. Cassandra isn't well liked by the other women for no apparent reason, but since she's not popular she's bold enough to befriend Helen. There isn't much to say. The author took away Cassandra's ability so at least in this iteration she didn't suffer as much. Helen and Menelaos reconcile for no good reason. Helen isn't smart enough to even try manipulating him and he just magically forgives her humiliating him and cuckolding him because.... He should have cherished her more? I mean, yeah, but why does an ancient Greek man suddenly think of women as more than objects? He's not even mad. Her running away humiliated him and caused a war that lasted 10 years. 10!! Years!! Even the most patient and kind person would be pretty mad after that. But I guess he had to be unrealistically kind and empathetic to Helen because God knows she wasn't smart enough to find a way out of him killing her if he'd wanted to.
I just want to say-- I don't think Helen (the Woman, the Myth, the Legend) is dumb. I don't blame her for the war, whether she chose to run off with Paris or if he forced her. She's not my favorite of Ancient Greek women from Mythology (Medea holds my heart) but I generally can swing with any interpretation of the enigma that is Helen of Troy. I, personally, like the versions of her in Euripedes' plays where she defends herself unerringly and with brilliant arguments that are hard to defeat. But I know that Euripedes wasn't the typical portrayal of women. I could live with a somewhat naive Helen, I could live with a whore that slept around, I could live with her being a perfectly loyal wife that was abducted against her will, I cannot stand whatever this author went with. Helen grew up in Sparta and grew up with the brilliant and brutal Klytemnestra (the Woman, the Myth the Legend) as her sister, I don't think she would be as idiotic as this author portrayed. She also might have been able to fight and defend herself. There were so many interesting ways to write Helen without making her this infuriating fool.
And speaking of the brilliant and brutal Klytemnestra...
Klytemnestra, oh my Klytemnestra.... What has she done to you? The author made Klytemnestra into a pathetic passive wimp. As if that wasn't insulting enough, she was also complacent in her daughter's murder. The Klytemnestra I know would n e v e r. It's not like I expected a modern girlboss kind of character, but I expected a SPARTAN woman to have some teeth. Instead she's a passive observer that can't even fight or struggle to prevent her daughter's murder. Seriously? I might have found a Klytemnestra that was passive but once her daughter was threatened became the rage filled murderess that we know and love. Klytemnestra (the Myth) is a woman who plots to murder her husband for years and succeeds! This Klytemnestra has no substantial plans until the war ends, and almost doesn't kill Agamemnon because.... maybe he changed? He killed their daughter! There is no return from that! And as if making this Klytemnestra into a spineless insult of what she should be wasn't bad enough, she's not even clever. Klytemnestra (the legend) outmaneuvers Agamemnon in the Oresteia. She's a good queen and gets the loyalty of the people during the war, and keeps it after murdering their king. But this Klytemnestra? Well, at least she's not as dumb as Helen. For all that means.
Helen was a passive pathetic vain and idiotic ball of mush. Paris easily manipulates her into running away with him just from complimenting her appearance. I kid you not, he compliments her constantly and stares at her and she agrees to run away with him because of that. Since the author was going with the Helen-as-a-willing-participant-route I so wanted any sort of depth to their relationship. I liked the idea of Paris manipulating Helen, but it was so obvious to anyone with an IQ higher than 1 that it wasn't interesting or subtle; it was pathetic. He viewed her as a sexy leg lamp from the start and that's all she wanted. I understand that she was lonely and felt neglected and that made her vulnerable, but Paris' manipulation should have been more subtle (or entirely unnoticeable). I liked how Paris readily agreed with Helen's stipulation to not have kids but that should have come up earlier. The author already has them meeting up at night to talk for hours, why couldn't they have talked? He could have plied her with compliments and staring at her the first few nights, then start talking and pretending Helen had anything interesting to say to him, she could confide her post partum depression and fear of childbirth, and He'd drop hints about how he'd never neglect her and he'd be content with her even if they never had a child, before asking her to come with him. And have him ask her to come with him earlier! A few days earlier! Have him beg and plead but say he won't force her (maybe hint that he probably would). Then, the final night, have Leda confront Helen and call her a whore. Let that be the final blow and Helen agrees to go with Paris, only for his promises to have meant nothing once she's on the ship or in Troy.
And her in Troy. There's not much to say about her time in Troy. Poor pathetic Helen is the victim. She feels guilty that her arrival has caused so many deaths. This whole section was a waste of paper. Cassandra isn't well liked by the other women for no apparent reason, but since she's not popular she's bold enough to befriend Helen. There isn't much to say. The author took away Cassandra's ability so at least in this iteration she didn't suffer as much. Helen and Menelaos reconcile for no good reason. Helen isn't smart enough to even try manipulating him and he just magically forgives her humiliating him and cuckolding him because.... He should have cherished her more? I mean, yeah, but why does an ancient Greek man suddenly think of women as more than objects? He's not even mad. Her running away humiliated him and caused a war that lasted 10 years. 10!! Years!! Even the most patient and kind person would be pretty mad after that. But I guess he had to be unrealistically kind and empathetic to Helen because God knows she wasn't smart enough to find a way out of him killing her if he'd wanted to.
I just want to say-- I don't think Helen (the Woman, the Myth, the Legend) is dumb. I don't blame her for the war, whether she chose to run off with Paris or if he forced her. She's not my favorite of Ancient Greek women from Mythology (Medea holds my heart) but I generally can swing with any interpretation of the enigma that is Helen of Troy. I, personally, like the versions of her in Euripedes' plays where she defends herself unerringly and with brilliant arguments that are hard to defeat. But I know that Euripedes wasn't the typical portrayal of women. I could live with a somewhat naive Helen, I could live with a whore that slept around, I could live with her being a perfectly loyal wife that was abducted against her will, I cannot stand whatever this author went with. Helen grew up in Sparta and grew up with the brilliant and brutal Klytemnestra (the Woman, the Myth the Legend) as her sister, I don't think she would be as idiotic as this author portrayed. She also might have been able to fight and defend herself. There were so many interesting ways to write Helen without making her this infuriating fool.
And speaking of the brilliant and brutal Klytemnestra...
Klytemnestra, oh my Klytemnestra.... What has she done to you? The author made Klytemnestra into a pathetic passive wimp. As if that wasn't insulting enough, she was also complacent in her daughter's murder. The Klytemnestra I know would n e v e r. It's not like I expected a modern girlboss kind of character, but I expected a SPARTAN woman to have some teeth. Instead she's a passive observer that can't even fight or struggle to prevent her daughter's murder. Seriously? I might have found a Klytemnestra that was passive but once her daughter was threatened became the rage filled murderess that we know and love. Klytemnestra (the Myth) is a woman who plots to murder her husband for years and succeeds! This Klytemnestra has no substantial plans until the war ends, and almost doesn't kill Agamemnon because.... maybe he changed? He killed their daughter! There is no return from that! And as if making this Klytemnestra into a spineless insult of what she should be wasn't bad enough, she's not even clever. Klytemnestra (the legend) outmaneuvers Agamemnon in the Oresteia. She's a good queen and gets the loyalty of the people during the war, and keeps it after murdering their king. But this Klytemnestra? Well, at least she's not as dumb as Helen. For all that means.
amy_the_joy's review against another edition
dark
emotional
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
4.25
mirandaaaa's review against another edition
informative
reflective
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.25
The past couple of retellings I’ve read I have been very underwhelmed as it’s the same weak “feminist” retellings written by those who have little connection to study of the ancient world thus causing great inaccuracies which me (a Classics student and all round Ancient nerd) cannot deal with. This book however was a breath of fresh air. It stuck to the stories of old whilst being historically accurate and writing a new take on the whole shenanigans. Although I know Helen and Klytemnestras stories inside out I was still reading this book with pathos and trepidation at what was to come. This book also importantly accepts slaves as actual slaves and that it was the norm for girls to be married at 14 and at heart focussed on women as a commodity whilst also giving them a voice. But not too much power which lots of these retellings fail at. All characters were complex and human rather than the cliche the good the bad and the side character which so often occurs in these retellings.
Historically authentic and accurate whilst also breathing fresh air into these women with cracking writing, what more could you want?? I would whole heartedly recommend this book.
Historically authentic and accurate whilst also breathing fresh air into these women with cracking writing, what more could you want?? I would whole heartedly recommend this book.
nanabookshelf's review against another edition
5.0
I've seen people comment that the heroines lacked the usual characteristics and heroic/mythical path, but… isn't that the purpose of this story? To give voice to the forgotten voices of the women. They don’t need to be heroines to be heard, they don’t need to be mythical or special, they just need to be women. There was no choice for them, no path that they can truly create by themselves. They are confined to a life in their chambers in their husbands’ shadows.
This wasn’t just the story of Nestra and Helen, but every woman that has been written out of history, or whose story hasn’t been considered. Women had worst fates than death in battles they did not even fight in, they did not get to decide if that battle was even worth it. They feared for their husbands and sons, tended to the wounded, and suffered when the ending came and they were used and destroyed physically and mentally.
This story tells just that. As a reader, we suffer the realization that no matter how hard they tried (how tame or bright they were), women would be victims to a life they could not control. If they were cheated on, humiliated in front of their own children and people, they could not do anything to speak their feelings; if they were afraid for their own lives, there was nothing they could say if it went against the natural order that was expected of them.
This book was gifted to me by a friend, and I believe it to be one of the best presents I’ve gotten.
This wasn’t just the story of Nestra and Helen, but every woman that has been written out of history, or whose story hasn’t been considered. Women had worst fates than death in battles they did not even fight in, they did not get to decide if that battle was even worth it. They feared for their husbands and sons, tended to the wounded, and suffered when the ending came and they were used and destroyed physically and mentally.
This story tells just that. As a reader, we suffer the realization that no matter how hard they tried (how tame or bright they were), women would be victims to a life they could not control. If they were cheated on, humiliated in front of their own children and people, they could not do anything to speak their feelings; if they were afraid for their own lives, there was nothing they could say if it went against the natural order that was expected of them.
This book was gifted to me by a friend, and I believe it to be one of the best presents I’ve gotten.
joc12332449's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
hopeful
inspiring
reflective
relaxing
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
starsteeker's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
emotional
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.5
kchen96's review against another edition
dark
emotional
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.5
brigittecm's review against another edition
4.0
I love Greek mythology retellings I thought this book did a really good job giving these two very important woman in these stories a side of their story and from their point of view. But every time I read a story like this it leaves me feeling so empty all the women deserved so much better and the fall of Troy will always be so tragic. Both Helen and klytemnestra are very interesting people I love how it’s about their pov very different from all the stories told by the men!