Scan barcode
A review by berenikeasteria
For The Immortal by Emily Hauser
4.0
I have to reiterate my For the Winner review: where was this quality of writing in For the Most Beautiful? The latter two books in this trilogy are better by far than the first book, and I can only assume that Hauser’s debut novel was severely curtailed by the publishing house, who gave it a distinctly frothy, juvenile spin. For the Winner and For the Immortal are thankfully much more interesting.
For the Immortal returns to a dual protagonist set up, but this time it’s well-founded on Hippolyta, queen of the Amazons, and Admete. Admete is such a minor character in myth that honestly I had to be reminded of who she was, but I think Hauser was right when she says in her author’s note that the concept of retrieving Hippolyta’s war-belt simply as a shiny trinket for Admete feels like a half-baked idea, and not terribly compelling. Hauser has elaborated upon that unspectacular beginning to create a stronger motivation for the quest, as well as increasing Admete’s role in it. I didn’t object to the author portraying a darker Hercules (although I wish he’d been named Herakles, since this was a Greek world novel), as there’s plenty in the character’s ancient mythos to suggest a darker side, but I was frankly disappointed that it is just let go at the end. I felt that his twisting, his descent into a darker personality, could’ve provided more of a crisis than it did for the other characters, and that there should have been a final confrontation between Hercules and Admete.
As for Hippolyta, I wasn’t bothered by her being combined with Antiope, since again there is grounds for it in ancient myth. Ancient writers went back and forth on the question of whether the Amazon queen who Hercules stole the war-belt from was the same person as the one who became Theseus’ queen. Plus, from a story-telling point of view, it gives Hippolyta a lot more story. However, I didn’t like the portrayal of Theseus. The ancient writers also give different accounts as to whether Theseus and his Amazon queen were a love match, or whether she was an unwilling captive. Hauser chooses to make her an unwilling captive, and Theseus a special brand of scum. I simply prefer a better Theseus – the one portrayed by Mary Renault and Amalia Carosella – than I do Hauser’s evil Theseus. Maybe it just felt like a bit too much what with a darker Hercules being portrayed as well. Besides, I kept thinking; “But what about Hippolytus?!” There’s no Hippolytus here, and Phaedra, we’re told has long since been acquired and discarded before Hippolyta’s arrival. There’s more. Hauser’s Hippolyta is also combined with and reworked Penthesilea. Oh, and by the way she was married to and had a child with Achilles long before the events of this book happen and she’s captured by Theseus. Wait, what?
Okay, that version of events does, I admit, give a much better reason for Achilles weeping over the queen of the Amazons he just killed than love at first sight. But I had trouble getting over that particular hurdle. I’m not sure the timelines match up. If Achilles, as we’re told in ancient myth, was too young to compete for Helen’s hand, and, in order to avoid being called to the Trojan War successfully disguised himself as a young woman – but old enough to father Neoptolemos during the same time – he must’ve been in his teens at the start of the Trojan War, and less than 30 when he is killed. The events of this book take place roughly between ten and five years before the start of the War, and during it Hippolyta is reminiscing back to about ten years or so earlier than that when she remembers her time with Achilles. Plus, Theseus is supposed to be an old man when he kidnaps a ten-year-old Helen, which is supposed to occur much later than his prime with Hippolyta – both occur together here. Eh, my brain just couldn’t accept this.
I was very surprised when, at about 80% of the way in, the book jumps ahead fifteen years to the Trojan War. It felt tacked on, sudden, and jarring. I prepared myself to criticise this section heavily in my review. I’ve softened to it a little, although I still feel it was overall a misstep. The section doesn’t really add anything to Admete. I like that it recognises Hippolyta’s heroism, and provides a more compelling reason for Achilles to weep over the corpse of the Amazon queen. But I still can’t buy into the Hippolyta/Achilles relationship. I can completely understand the author being tempted to revisit the Trojan War in the story – who wouldn’t want to rewrite the stumbles of For the Most Beautiful and provide a rather more dramatic, mature, and heroic slice of the Trojan War than the passive angsty voices of Briseis and Chryseis – but it did feel very last-minute and just not part of Admete and Hippolyta’s stories.
However, I’ve really enjoyed the more sophisticated writing style of For the Winner and For the Immortal, and the focus of both of them on lesser-explored but active and heroic women of ancient Greek myth, and I do recommend this book. If I were to re-read it though I’ll probably just end the book before the out-of-place time skip.
7 out of 10
For the Immortal returns to a dual protagonist set up, but this time it’s well-founded on Hippolyta, queen of the Amazons, and Admete. Admete is such a minor character in myth that honestly I had to be reminded of who she was, but I think Hauser was right when she says in her author’s note that the concept of retrieving Hippolyta’s war-belt simply as a shiny trinket for Admete feels like a half-baked idea, and not terribly compelling. Hauser has elaborated upon that unspectacular beginning to create a stronger motivation for the quest, as well as increasing Admete’s role in it. I didn’t object to the author portraying a darker Hercules (although I wish he’d been named Herakles, since this was a Greek world novel), as there’s plenty in the character’s ancient mythos to suggest a darker side, but I was frankly disappointed that it is just let go at the end. I felt that his twisting, his descent into a darker personality, could’ve provided more of a crisis than it did for the other characters, and that there should have been a final confrontation between Hercules and Admete.
As for Hippolyta, I wasn’t bothered by her being combined with Antiope, since again there is grounds for it in ancient myth. Ancient writers went back and forth on the question of whether the Amazon queen who Hercules stole the war-belt from was the same person as the one who became Theseus’ queen. Plus, from a story-telling point of view, it gives Hippolyta a lot more story. However, I didn’t like the portrayal of Theseus. The ancient writers also give different accounts as to whether Theseus and his Amazon queen were a love match, or whether she was an unwilling captive. Hauser chooses to make her an unwilling captive, and Theseus a special brand of scum. I simply prefer a better Theseus – the one portrayed by Mary Renault and Amalia Carosella – than I do Hauser’s evil Theseus. Maybe it just felt like a bit too much what with a darker Hercules being portrayed as well. Besides, I kept thinking; “But what about Hippolytus?!” There’s no Hippolytus here, and Phaedra, we’re told has long since been acquired and discarded before Hippolyta’s arrival. There’s more. Hauser’s Hippolyta is also combined with and reworked Penthesilea. Oh, and by the way she was married to and had a child with Achilles long before the events of this book happen and she’s captured by Theseus. Wait, what?
Okay, that version of events does, I admit, give a much better reason for Achilles weeping over the queen of the Amazons he just killed than love at first sight. But I had trouble getting over that particular hurdle. I’m not sure the timelines match up. If Achilles, as we’re told in ancient myth, was too young to compete for Helen’s hand, and, in order to avoid being called to the Trojan War successfully disguised himself as a young woman – but old enough to father Neoptolemos during the same time – he must’ve been in his teens at the start of the Trojan War, and less than 30 when he is killed. The events of this book take place roughly between ten and five years before the start of the War, and during it Hippolyta is reminiscing back to about ten years or so earlier than that when she remembers her time with Achilles. Plus, Theseus is supposed to be an old man when he kidnaps a ten-year-old Helen, which is supposed to occur much later than his prime with Hippolyta – both occur together here. Eh, my brain just couldn’t accept this.
I was very surprised when, at about 80% of the way in, the book jumps ahead fifteen years to the Trojan War. It felt tacked on, sudden, and jarring. I prepared myself to criticise this section heavily in my review. I’ve softened to it a little, although I still feel it was overall a misstep. The section doesn’t really add anything to Admete. I like that it recognises Hippolyta’s heroism, and provides a more compelling reason for Achilles to weep over the corpse of the Amazon queen. But I still can’t buy into the Hippolyta/Achilles relationship. I can completely understand the author being tempted to revisit the Trojan War in the story – who wouldn’t want to rewrite the stumbles of For the Most Beautiful and provide a rather more dramatic, mature, and heroic slice of the Trojan War than the passive angsty voices of Briseis and Chryseis – but it did feel very last-minute and just not part of Admete and Hippolyta’s stories.
However, I’ve really enjoyed the more sophisticated writing style of For the Winner and For the Immortal, and the focus of both of them on lesser-explored but active and heroic women of ancient Greek myth, and I do recommend this book. If I were to re-read it though I’ll probably just end the book before the out-of-place time skip.
7 out of 10