This is the kind of historical fiction that I love to read. I've always had a passing interest in mythology, but sometimes it can be so dry! "So & So, son of Such & Such, did A, B, C, & D, had son Whatchamacallit with Whatshername who was the daughter of Whosthatguyagain?..." That's one of the reasons I've put off reading the Bible. Too many begats.

But McCullough manages to work all of the necessary begats in, while at the same time still moving the story along, and further making you CARE. She brings these characters to life in a way that mere Mortals could only dream of. History and myth gives them names, but McCullough gives them LIFE. Personality, aspirations, hopes and dreams, conniving brilliance, worshipful adoration, undying loyalty, etc. These are the things that McC gives us and inspires our adoration of her.

First, let me say that I wish I'd have taken notes when reading this book. Each chapter is narrated by a different character, and it's not always easy to keep track of who is who in the beginning, or which side they are on. (I said I have a passing interest in Mythology - I'm not a scholar with Heroes' names, important dates and country of births memorized!) This is the one thing that dropped this down to 4 stars for me. Granted, once I got to the midway point, I was just along for the ride and following everything without a problem, but getting there would have been easier if perhaps the chapter headings had say "Priam of Troy" instead of just "Priam" for the narrator.

That being said, even once I was up on the who's who and which side is which, McC made it VERY difficult to pick a side to root for! She portrayed everything so realistically that there is no "right" side to an impartial judge; rather "right" is dependent on which King you serve and which version of the story you get from them. Much wars today *cough*, the Greeks' war against Troy was less for the proclaimed scapegoat reason and more for profit and political gain (read: land and money). Come to think of it, we're quickly coming up on 10 years too... But I digress.

I was surprised by the humor and modernity in this book. Odysseus especially was fairly snarky and at times I felt he would just step out of the pages and start pulling strings everywhere. I got a few chuckles out of him. I d that while the feel of the book was true to the traditional story, it did feel updated and accessible to everyone- not just mythology buffs.

I also appreciated that the magic and the miracles were left open to interpretation. There is always a plausible scientific, or at least non-magical, explanation for miraculous events. That's a fine line to walk, actually, to say "Here's a possibility" but not try to sell it or convince us. I appreciate McC for being able to do that well, and for doing it at all. Too often authors want to spread their opinions little seeds, hoping that they will take root in someone else. It's a rare thing for an author to write a book without a stance.

I also enjoyed the fact that there was homosexuality and bisexuality in the book, but that it wasn't done in such a way as to be a slur or a joke. It was simply presented as an everyday occurrence and accepted. Too bad that's relegated to history, we could use a little of that mindset now.

Speaking of which, my four favorite characters in the book were portrayed as bisexual and gay: Diomedes, Odysseus, and Achilles (bi) and Patrokles (gay). I loved how these men were able to be Men (RAWR!) on the battlefield but then off the field share a part of themselves with another man that men of today wouldn't dream of. Get your mind out of the gutters! I mean their feelings, not their tools. Really though, knowing that these men were gay did not make me feel any differently about them as warriors - and I love warriors. If anything, it made me respect them more for their duality. They were able to truly love and be loved by men, yet go out and kill hordes of them daily. Crazy.

I notice that my favorite characters are all Greek, which is interesting because I am still very undecided as to which ideological side I wanted to win the war. I mean, obviously I knew which side would win, but there is a part of me that just loves the underdog and will always root for the losing side. But neither side was faultless, and both sides were harmed by the other prior to war, so who is right? Conundrum.

Anyway... I really enjoyed the book... It certainly is fuel for thought and shows that mythology is just as relevant today as it was 4,000 years ago. Give or take a century. historical-fiction lgbtq library-books ...more45 s Mark Porton478 574

Well I reckon it happened, to some extent anyway. The Battle of Troy is one of those stories we all know a little bit about, it seems to be a mixture of Mythology and History. The most beautiful woman in the world, Helen of Troy (or Sparta) – was the daughter of Zeus. Zeus was the Sky and thunder God. So, to believe that is a bit of a stretch. But on the other hand, there is considerable archaeological evidence to indicate Troy was in fact a small town in Western Turkey. A place called Hisarlik, has remains of a fortified town, Troy. There are even some archaeological ruins of the gates and walls of Troy. Reading a book such as this forced (well, hardly forced) me to look up various places mentioned in this book, you can see pictures, read up about them and imagine what happened around 1180 BCE.

The Song of Troy by Colleen McCullough is a wonderful story that straddles Ancient Mythology and History. McCullough paints a vivid, complex, picture of the period, and all the actors involved in this mysterious period.

As she did in Masters of Rome, the author recreates the characters and makes them real – she gives them personalities, dramas and lives. I feel I’ve just returned to the land of the living – this book caused me to ‘go missing’ for the last 4 or 5 days. It’s dense, thorough, slow moving but totally immersive.

The dramas start when Helen leaves her home in Ancient Mycenean Greece to go and live with her Trojan lover Paris. She leaves her husband King Menelaus, brother of King of Kings Agamemnon, to be with Paris – who later turns out to be a bit of a jerk. Menelaus and Agamemnon are mightily miffed by this development and decide to gather up the many Kings of Ancient Greece, create a flotilla of over a 1,000 ships and sail to what is now Western Turkey, to lay siege to the fortified town of Troy.

The King of Troy – Priam, Helen’s now father-in-law had his hands full for a decade as the Greek armies sat on the beaches, slowly strangling the life out of his wealthy city. By the way, Priam had over 50 sons and close to 20 daughters – one wonders how he found time to be king, but he did!

The battle scenes in this story are fantastic. More importantly, the suspenseful build-ups for each battle were so tense I could hardly bear it. There were also some wonderful duels, such as the one between the Achilles and Hector, who were the two most feared warriors of the day.

Odysseus was perhaps my favourite character. He reminded me a lot of Sherlock Holmes, a bit of a smart-arse (in a good, brainy way), he had an answer for everything and fought with his mind rather than his brawn. Helen was also a favourite, how could someone so beautiful not be? Poor Helen seemed to end up with idiots as lovers though, no wonder she was a bit lost.

Then, there’s The Horse. Enough said.
If you read this, be prepared to leave your family and friends for a few days, slap on your armour, jump in your chariot and be introduced to countless characters whilst cruising the beautiful waters of the Aegean Sea and lazing around the beaches South of the Dardanelles while you prepare for battle. You’ll love it.

I can’t get enough of McCullough’s historical fiction. I must give this one 4.5 stars, rounded down to 4 – only because I prefer the Masters of Rome series and that’s more my thing. Less myth, more history.

4 Starscolleen-mccullough historical-fiction history ...more42 s Mel BossaAuthor 28 books207

Honestly, this is a travesty.

Of course, I understand that The Iliad and its chorus of fascinating characters have inspired hundreds of authors and poets across the centuries and that they have all interpreted in their own way, but this wasn't an interpretation or an homage. This was, for me, a desecration of Homer's epic poem and I can't believe it got published.

What's more disturbing to me is that this wasn't written by an amateur who didn't know anything about the work or its time period. No clearly, she did her research and read all of the plays and stories that featured the heroes of the Siege of Troy. It's all there, from the beginning to end, every famous event or twist is present in her novel and that was also a major problem with me. I mean, it felt as though she was going to submit her book to the Iliad grand jury or something and had to prove she had the writing chops. It was bogged down with so many details with explanations about the backgrounds of each character and event that It felt contrived to no end. It was as though she wanted to make sure everyone was following and understood everything. It was so heavy handed.

Every character had the same exact voice. I'd sometimes have to check the top of the page to know who was narrating that part. From Diomedes to Helen, same droning, boring and shallow voice. My God, where is the passion, emotions and pathos? These characters inspired the best writers, poets and philosophers in the world! Give them life if you dare to join the ranks of authors who tackled this ancient story! These characters aren't just Joe and Jane going to the market to buy milk!

Then to really maddened me, she completely ursuped the plot, major plotline, to fit her image of Achilles, her Christ figure. He was so christianized, it was pathetic. He even quotes Jesus on the Cross, I believe at his time of death. In the Iliad, the first lines are about Achilles's anger and the whole story revolves around it. He is enraged because Agamemnon took Brise from him, a woman he'd taken as war loot. It's that trivial. That immature and wrong. But that makes him imperfect and flawed and we come to understand him as Homer reveals things, awful things on Agamemnon. Through it all, Patroclus is at Achilles's side, a loyal and courageous warrior in his own right, but in this book, Patroclus is demeaned and Achilles treats him shit. So all right, the author at least mentions that they are lovers but it's almost an afterthought. When Patroclus dies, it's so anti climatic and Brise is such a nasty woman with pettiness and stupidity to spare.

That brings me to the woman in this farce. I can't even. Hecube is a dog? Andromaque won't say goodbye to Hector? Helen is a nymphomaniac with nice boobs? Kassandra foams at the mouth?

Jesus. Homer wrote this almost three thousand years ago and he was less sexist!

This was awful.

That's all folks.0002-women 0004-greek-myth-related 0008-fiction29 s Carmo690 520

As versões da guerra de Troia multiplicam-se tantas vezes quantas é contada.
Esta não foi das minhas favoritas; não gostei muito do tratamento dado à maior parte dos acontecimentos, e ainda menos das características atribuídas a cada personagem.
Colleen McCullough escreveu dois dos meus livros favoritos da vida e, malgrado alguma decepção, também neste encontrei o nível de ação, intriga e suspense esperados. O problema esteve mesmo na comparação com outras histórias troianas.
Apesar de tudo, considero uma boa aposta para quem não conheça a história e queira iniciar-se neste género de temática.australia bib-p22 s Iset665 530

Oh boy. I had mixed warnings going into this book. I knew it was written by an acclaimed author, whose work I have admittedly never read before but who was high profile, highly rated by other readers, and had a slew of historical fiction titles to her name. On the other hand, I couldn’t help but notice the more critical of this book, particularly from GoodReads friends whose judgment I usually credit and whose tastes tend to align with my own, expressing their disappointment. After reading it for myself, my response falls on the critical side of the scale.

I was honestly shocked at just how nasty every character is portrayed by McCullough. I had no idea it would be this bad. Priam is a greedy power-grabber, Leda and Tyndareus are deceitful hand-wringers, Helen is a selfish sybarite, Diomedes is a pushy cad, Odysseus is a heartless bastard… It just goes on and on and on. I almost hated to pick the book up because I dreaded which awful person I was going to be forced to sit on the shoulder of this time. Oh, except Achilles. Saint Achilles can do no wrong. Okay, I admit that this is my new pet peeve. I’ve been reading a lot of Trojan War novels lately, and in 2018 in particular there have been a whole host of them released. It’s striking how many of them go for the saintly Achilles depiction. I am not a fan of it. At the bare minimum, it’s overused and tired by this point. A more brutally honest assessment would be that “Saint Achilles” is a deeply anachronistic portrayal that wants to apply modern values where they don’t belong. This paragon of virtue falls in love with and has a real romance with Briseis and despises slavery – ignoring the fact that the original Briseis, as a war captive, was indeed a slave, the loot of war to Achilles, who objects over Agamemnon taking her merely because the latter has wounded his masculine honour by stealing a possession that was his. I’ve had enough of Saint Achilles, but this book makes it worse by not only making him ‘perfect’ but by making everyone else detestable.

Other reviewers have it spot on when they point out that all the POV chapters have the same voice. There’s nothing to distinguish Priam’s chapters from Helen’s chapters from Odysseus’ chapters. In fact, if I put the book down in the middle of a chapter, and came back to it a few days later, I forgot who was supposed to be narrating.

Aside from character butchery and indistinguishable narrators, the book is written competently, which I suppose it earns points for, but I feel myself having short shrift with this book if that’s all it has to offer. Decent writing isn’t enough to save it from its problems. And the fact that it is a pedestrian, low-effort retelling of the Trojan War counts against it when it sits among a profusion of other Trojan War novels; some of them are admittedly worse, but many are better.

4 out of 10bronze-age-5000-to-1100bce-fiction14 s Rosie369 49


Aprecio muito esta escritora; li Pássaros Feridos e Tim e dei 5 e 4 estrelas respectivamente.

Segundo consta, quem está a iniciar leituras sobre a Grécia Antiga fica encantado com esta história, escrita com competência e muita dinâmica e foram exactamente essas as razões por a ter escolhido.

Achei muito curiosa esta narrativa que é feita a partir de tantas vozes abrangendo assim tantos ponto de vista; conectamo-nos com cada um, com o que lhes vai na alma e o que os move.

Esta época é verdadeiramente fascinante muito por culpa dos Deuses e da sua enorme influência.

"Os meus olhos ergueram-se para os diáfanos e majestosos picos do distante Ida e perguntei-me se os deuses não teriam abandonado o Olimpo para se sentarem nas alturas do Ida a fim de assistirem à batalha. Aquela era uma guerra digna do seu interesse(…)Apolo, Afrodite, Ártemis e outros eram adeptos fervorosos de Tróia, ao passo que Zeus, Poseidon, Hera e Palas Antena eram a favor da Grécia. Ninguém sabia ao certo de que lado estava Ares, o Senhor da Guerra, pois embora os Gregos fossem o povo que mais havia espalhado o seu culto, a verdade é que Afrodite, a secreta amante de Ares, apoiava Tróia. Hefaísto, o marido de Afrodite, era muito naturalmente, favorável à Grécia." Pág. 305

A narrativa vai fluindo com uma intensificação e uma magnitude que nos vai deixando pregados ao chão (mesmo conhecendo o desfecho).

Deslumbra-me esta têmpera destemida destes homens. Desta lealdade a toda à prova, seja a um juramento, a uma causa, a um (ou mais) companheiro de luta.

Vislumbramos actos de coragem que se transformam em verdadeiros actos heróicos.

Personagens que são extraordinários estrategas, vestindo a pele que lhes convém a cada momento e com muita argúcia levam a água ao seu moinho. Subversivos e esquivos ou altivos e poderosos, submetem a sua vontade a fim de conquistar a vitória.

"A sua mente era uma entidade prodigiosa; num ápice, era capaz de captar a mais intrincada das verdades." Pág. 168
"Ulisses era um homem verdadeiramente notável." Pág. 201
"- Que espécie de homem és tu Ulisses, para conseguires congeminar tão profunda desordem? É um plano hediondo – e assombroso!" Pág. 278
"Os homens que não conheciam Ulisses, a Raposa de Ítaca, tinham tendência a subestima-lo devido às estranhas proporções do seu corpo e ao aspecto imundo, quase que ignóbil, que ele cultivava sempre que achava adequado." Pág. 308

Colleen MCCullough reúne tantas e tão maravilhosas e intricadas personagens numa não menos poderosa história que só poderia criar este efeito impactante: 5 estrelas!
favoritos-biblioteca15 s Célia | Estante de Livros1,148 256

A Canção de Tróia é um livro que me chegou muito bem recomendado, não só por colegas bloggers em cuja opinião confio bastante, mas também porque o meu pai leu-o e gostou muito. Apesar de o ter fisicamente, li a versão em inglês: primeiro, porque não o tenho comigo e depois porque a ideia de pegar num livro que o meu pai folheou me enche de uma tristeza infinita. Não me perguntem porquê, o luto tem destas coisas.

Sabia algumas coisas sobre a famosa Guerra de Tróia: uns pedaços de sabedoria popular que apanhei aqui e ali e também porque gostei muito do filme Tróia (que eu tenho noção ter algumas alterações que vão contra o cânone, mas mesmo assim). Depois disso, li Helena de Tróia, de Margaret George, que nos apresenta a história sob o ponto de vista de Helena, e de que na altura gostei bastante, mas que é, na sua essência, bastante diferente deste A Canção de Tróia e que, de acordo com o meu gosto pessoal, fica a perder.

Se se interessam por mitologia grega e querem ler um livro que conte de forma cativante e com um bom nível de detalhe a história da Guerra de Tróia, este livro é certamente uma boa escolha. Colleen McCullough optou por contar esta história com a técnica dos capítulos point-of-view, percorrendo personagens como Príamo, Helena, Aquiles, Páris, Agamémnon, Ulisses ou Heitor, entre outros. Assim, através de várias vozes, vamos acompanhando cronologicamente os acontecimentos que antecederam a guerra de 10 anos, o seu início, desenvolvimento e conclusão. A opção pela história contada sob várias perspetivas tem as suas vantagens e desvantagens, mas neste caso penso que a autora é bem sucedida, porque esta técnica empresta frescura e dinâmica narrativa ao enredo, para além de tornar as personagens mais reais aos olhos do leitor.

Os deuses, as profecias e o destino desempenham um papel fundamental nesta história, como certamente acontecia na época. O conhecimento por parte do leitor em relação ao desenlace da guerra e o facto de saber que os oráculos irão concretizar-se poderia tirar alguma piada à leitura, mas neste caso isso não acontece pela forma cativante como os acontecimentos vão sendo relatados e por estarmos perante personagens que nos parecem reais, ainda que posteriormente tenham sido endeusadas. Adorei Aquiles, que a autora aqui tentou fazer mais humano e aprazível. Ulisses é também uma personagem fantástica, que se destaca pela inteligência e por ter uma visão sobre os acontecimentos que ultrapassa qualquer outro homem; Ulisses é perito em jogos políticos e intriga e a forma como a autora desenvolve esta personagem é notável.

Nota-se que a autora fez um grande trabalho de pesquisa. Não tenho conhecimentos suficientes para atestar da exatidão histórica do que ela relata, mas tudo me soou credível e aprofundado, em especial nas questões relacionadas com a guerra e a política da mesma. Curioso perceber que a ida de Helena para Tróia foi a razão menos importante para a guerra, apenas um pretexto. Interessante também o tratamento que a autora dá à homossexualidade, encarando-a como algo naturalíssimo para guerreiros e soldados (a mostrar que, em alguns aspetos, regredimos bastante). Outra coisa que apreciei bastante foi a não tomada de posições por parte da autora: Tróia é muitas vezes vista com uma certa nostalgia romântica, como os bons da fita porque estão na posição de invadidos, mas o que é certo é que neste caso não há bons nem maus, ambas as partes têm a devida atenção e é referido o que têm de bom e mau.

A Canção de Tróia foi, sem dúvida, uma das melhores leituras do ano. Um livro que tem tudo o que eu gosto: escrita cativante, personagens interessantes e bem desenvolvidas, pesquisa histórica detalhada e um enredo que, apesar de conhecido, encanta o leitor. Muito bom.5-stars ano-2014 ed-difel ...more14 s Mariana13 6

Song of Troy is, probably, the best recollection of the Trojan War I've read so far. Colleen McCullough, with her stupend writing and style, presents us with this book on a well-known subject which, nevertheless, manages to keep the reader's interest from first page to last.

Colleen masterfully lays down the story of the most famous war of the ancient world, all the while bringing a new scope to the narrative, as each chapter is written through the eyes of a different character: the beautiful, but inconsequent, Helen of Sparta (later of Troy); Odysseus, a lesser King but a true genious; Priam, the old King of Troy; Achilles, the greatest warrior the world has ever seen; and Agamemnon, King of Greece, whose desire to win surpasses his respect for one of the most sacred principles.

By allowing the reader to penetrate deeper inside the mind of the main characters as the plot unfolds, the author gives us a new and original view of the events leading to and during the War. Despite the fact that the story is previously known by most, each development and twist is always surprising.

In a nutshell, an essential reading to those who have always been fascinated by this War caused by love - and, this time, without godly interventions and magical influences. historical-fiction novel read-me-senseless-books13 s ArtemasAuthor 0 books62

This was my first read from historical fiction heavyweight Colleen McCullough. The story of the Trojan War isn't anything new by a longshot, but McCullough presents the tale through multiple POV's from both sides of the conflict, creating an interesting experience. I really enjoyed this book even though, the siege of Troy itself, it started to wear me down by the end.

3.5 stars rounded up to a 4

Get your copy here: https://amzn.to/2JZ2c6hancient-historical-fiction greek-historical-fiction historical-fiction12 s Genia Lukin234 194

This is the story of the Iliad, retold by Colleen McCulough, one of the big and most meticulous historical fiction writers around.

However, this book fails to live up the the usual McCulough expectations. Her research is meticulous, as usual; she's clearly read the Iliad, dug into the history of ancient Greece, etc', but somehow, un in her vast and significantly superior Masters of Rome series, she fails to engage.

Her problems in this book are threefold:

She strikes a poor balance between revisionism of classical tects, and the retention thereof - she tried her best to stick to the story of the Iliad but, for several reasons which will be partially discussed further down, fails to stick to the characterizations it provides, and has to go to great lengths to bring forth reasons and explanations for things that happened.

She tends to admire people far too strongly - this is a problem which appears to be typical of McCulough. Her adoration for a specific 'hero' or personage blinds her to everything else. She picks out her 'favourite', and everything concerning him spirals downward from there. In the Masters of Rome books her golden boy is Caesar, the man of no flaws; she subjects his enemies to deterioration of character not indicated by any of the ancient sources - Cicero is a coward and egotistical; Brutus is a weakling, Lucullus had too many 'shrooms...

In the Song of Troy, her darling is Achilles, for which reason she chooses - wrongly,I think, to represent him as a warrior poet perfect in his virtues in all way but his rage. She chooses to disregard what the Iliad puts forth as a petty, rather selfish character, and to explain his behaviour in line with the Iliad's actual text, she has to create convoluted, albeit fascinating, ploys.

Just as she loves Achilles in particular, she sides with the Greeks in general. There are foolish Greeks, but there are also wise, insightful and clever Greeks. Whereas the Trojans are nothing but negative Priam is an old, deluded fool. Hektor is not old, but a deluded fool for all that.

The women - Honestly, Colleen? Did you have to? You are female; you managed strong women in the Masters of Rome (perhaps even overly strong?) and yet all your women here act and think, even in their own POVs, the ancient men thought they behaved and thought. My disappointment was vast.

In addition, as a final straw, all points of view in the book have the same voice. Somehow, despite the fact that one is told by Agamemnon, another by Odysseus, and a third by a semi-anonymous commander, the language of all parts was the very same.

It was not a poorly written book, but I found my enjoyment of it too often curtailed by annoyance.historical12 s LolaF399 345

Bien pero con matizaciones.

La autora sigue una estructura de capítulos narrados en primera persona por los distintos personajes. Esto le permite jugar y mostrarnos los distintos puntos de vista, no solo sobre las expectativas e intenciones de griegos y troyanos, sino también de las posibles afinidades y desavenencias que se pueda dar entre los integrantes de cada "bando".

Al principio me he sentido un poco perdida y saturada intentando retener y ubicar a cada uno de los personajes que van apareciendo: cada principe y cada rey en su territorio. Dados mis limitados conocimientos previos ¡Me ha tocado buscar hasta un mapa! Pero conforme avanza la trama, los vas conociendo y te vas familiarizando con ellos. Una vez superada esta fase, se vuelve más interesante, empieza el juego de tácticas, intrigas y como no, .... de los distintos enfrentamientos, sin olvidar la mitología, los oráculos, en un destino marcado por los dioses.

Dejando a un lado personajes como Príamo y sus hijos, Eneas, Helena, Agamenón y gran parte de sus príncipes/reyes, dos personajes son ensalzados y encumbrados por la autora: Aquiles, el gran héroe, líder por naturaleza, con ese aire fatídico marcado por el destino y Ulises, el gran estratagema, esa mente brillante que siempre iba tres pasos por delante.

Teniendo en cuenta que es ficción histórica y que un autor se puede tomar sus licencias, me parece que McCulllough ha presentado una visión muy partidista: grandes héroes griegos, solo ciertas desavenencias con Calcante, que a pesar de sus comienzos -Ulises se hizo el loco para eludir su compromiso y Aquiles se vio envuelto en la trama de Ifigenia- se centraron en luchar unidos con honor y con valor siguiendo las buenas practicas de guerra, solo quebradas cuando la otra parte las había interrumpido previamente.

Y sin embargo, a las mujeres que aparecen en estas páginas debió pillarles la resaca o el resentimiento de pasar de la antigua religión a la nueva. ¡Prácticamente no hay ninguna que quede bien parada!!. La adivina que está loca, la que aúlla como un perro, la que va de mano en mano -por decirlo finamente-, la bruja tatuada, la reina amazona que casi implora por su muerte, ... ¡¡qué triste!!. Por no mencionar las que aparecen como simples objetos.

Aún así, he disfrutado con esta lectura que me ha permitido acercarme y conocer mejor esta etapa.

Valoración: 7,5/10
Lectura: Junio 201911 s Kandice1,619 341

I was moved to tears by this book, and felt ridiculous shedding them. I knew who would live and die, and exactly how it all turned out. That's McCullough's genius, though. She gives us all the little details, history books leave out, that make us feel for, and in some instances love, or hate a character. Everyone knows Odysseus was brilliant, but we don't think about how much that brilliance would have cost him. Achilles was brave, but he could have been sweet, kind and fair alongside his ruthless warring.

I love the way McC explains all the mythic/mystic mumbo jumbo with logical ideas that don't necessarily negate the intervention of the Gods, just...leave room for another explanation. I have always been a fan of Greek and Roman mythology, and even as a child, I knew it wasn't true, but always felt the legends could have happened in just the way they were described...just with mortal maneuvering, as opposed to immortal. She drives this point home, and is smart enough to explain things in a realistic way, without straying from the myth.

As I read, I would often be struck by how ruthless or cruel some act would seem. It was in perfect keeping with the time of the story, but because McC is so good at actually putting me IN her setting, I wouldn't realize how foreign it was until I was ready to stop reading. That's a great talent. Not only can she consistently suspend my disbelief, but she continually has me accepting, as the natural course of things, actions that would sicken me in life. She has me rooting for characters that commit acts I should find appalling, and relishing their acts of revenge that should actually be, not only disturbing, but down right disgusting.

I think this would be a great companion piece to The Iliad. I've read The Iliad, but know it can be intimidating and even dry for the young readers that are required to read it. If they were given this book as well, I think they would actually relish the experience of The Iliad. This book could never replace that classic, and I don't think that's what McC is going for. I think she is just trying to flesh out characters we have all heard of, but don't know well enough to care for. I fell in love with as many as I grew to hate. She certainly touched my heart and soul.8 s Vilja273 66

Todella kiinnostava kirja! Antiikki-huumassani päädyin lukemaan tämän heti Akhilleen laulun jälkeen, mikä ei ehkä ollut Troijan laululle edullisin vaihtoehto. Päädyin jatkuvasti vertailemaan kirjoja keskenään ja vaikka teokset ovat keskenään todella erilaisia, eikä niitä varsinaisesti voi asettaa paremmuusjärjestykseen, Akhilleen laulu iski enemmän tunteisiin. Siinä missä edellä mainittu on katsaus Akhilleen ja Patrokleen rakkaustarinaan, Troijan laulu käsittelee kokonaisvaltaisemmin koko Troijan sotaa monesta näkökulmasta. Kirja todella maalasi Troijan sodan silmieni eteen ja nautin paljon siitä, miten tapahtumia tarkasteltiin monesta näkökulmasta. Troijan laulu jäi kuitenkin vähän etäiseksi, vaikka siitä kovasti pidinkin.

Lempihenkilöni oli ehdottomasti Odysseus, sillä oi älykkäille henkilöille. Ah, sillä kaverilla leikkasi. Myös Helenan luvuista nautin, sillä vaikka kyseessä on käsittämättömän itsekäs ja raivostuttava nainen, olivat hänen lukunsa juuri siksi niin tavattoman mielenkiintoisia. Akhilleesta en paljoa perustanut, varmaan siksi, että Akhilleen laulu oli vielä tuoreena mielessä ja McCulloughin näkemys Akhilleesta ja Patrokleesta on sävyltään erilainen kuin Akhilleen laulussa.

Akhilleen laulun ja Troijan laulun vertailu oli kuitenkin ehdottoman kiinnostavaa, sillä kirjat kattavat samoja tapahtumia eri painopistein ja eroavaisuuksia löytyy. Nautin pikku asioiden vertailusta, enkä tahdo erityisemmin asettaa kirjoja paremmusjärjestykseen. Näistä kahdesta Akhilleen laulu oli kuitenkin oma suosikkini, sillä se iski enemmän tunteisiin. Jos taas haluan myöhemmin muistella Troijan sodan tapahtumia ja syitä romaanimuodossa, tartun Troijan lauluun.

Hieno, ehdottomasti lukemisen arvoinen teos kuitenkin kyseessä! read-20158 s Describiendo Mundos 174 42

RESEÑA COMPLETA EN EL BLOG

Tal vez sea un poco contradictorio, pero no había pensado en lo difícil que es hablar sobre tus libros favoritos o, en este caso, sobre los libros que más has disfrutado. Es contradictorio porque debería ser fácil, ¿cómo no hablar sobre lo que te gusta con fluidez? Ya lo comentaba con Laura de Paseando entre páginas, tal vez todo se trate de que sientes que por más armónicas que sean tus palabras al describir lo maravilloso que fue, no lograras trasmitir de un todo el torrente de emociones que desató en tu interior.

Llegó a mi cargado de dudas, lo vi en la librería y sopesé muchísimo en comprarlo. No conocía ningún trabajo de su autora, tampoco tenía alguna recomendación o algo parecido, así que desconocía que estilo utilizaría para tratar uno de los conflictos bélicos más importantes de la mitología griega. Mi indecisión radicaba en que a su lado había otro libro que también me interesaba, pero tenía dinero para uno de los dos, así que después de varios minutos con cada uno en mis manos elegí arriesgarme con Colleen McCullough, y ya ven, se ha llevado el premio mayor, ¿quién diría que un libro que me causó tantas dudas, incluso después de haberlo comprado, terminaría siendo mis cinco estrellas predilecto?

Seguramente ya conoces la temática del libro, pues es lectura obligatoria en las escuelas y, si no te obligaron a leerla, quizá hayas escuchado nombres como Aquiles, Odiseo/Ulises, Héctor, Helena de Troya y Paris; y si eso no fue suficiente, tal vez has visto la película con Brad Pitt como Aquiles. De una manera u otra a lo largo varias generaciones la famosa guerra de Troya ha logrado mantenerse a flote, un conflicto bélico entre los aqueos y los troyanos que se desarrolló entre el siglo XIII a.c y XII a.c teniendo una duración de diez largos años.

Hay muchos puntos de partidas sobre cómo se originó la guerra de Troya, pero al final todas logran conectarse y crear una historia aún más fantástica. Uno de esos puntos de partida nos lleva con Cassandra, hija de Príamo y Hécuba, reyes de Troya, quien luego de una serie de eventos con el dios Apolo, éste la maldice asegurando que seguiría teniendo el don de profecía pero que nadie jamás creería en sus pronósticos.

Con el nacimiento de su hermano Paris, Cassandra advierte a sus padres que el príncipe recién nacido será el causante de la destrucción de Troya, por esta razón, Paris, aun recién nacido, es abandonado a su suerte para morir, cosa que no ocurrió porque fue recogido y criado por un pastor. Años después, Paris es reconocido como príncipe de Troya y por eso es invitado a una reunión en Esparta, en el palacio de Menelao, esposo de la mujer más bella de la tierra: Helena.

Enamorados se fugan a Troya y dicha fuga es considerada como un secuestro por parte de Agamenón, rey de Micenas y hermano de Menelao, quien reúne a todo un ejército para recuperar a Helena en Troya (y vengarse por otros temas)

Otro de los puntos de partida sería la boda de Peleo y Tetis, una fiesta a la que Eris, diosa de la discordia, no fue invitada, tomando represalia por tal desaire llevó una manzana dorada con la palabra kallisti (para la más hermosa o para la más bella) y la arrojó sobre la mesa, provocando que Hera, Afrodita y Atenea la reclamaran para sí. Zeus, no queriendo enrollarse en tal situación buscó un juez, que sería el afortunado–o desafortunado– Paris; cada diosa le ofreció algo para que la eligiera como la más bella, siendo triunfadora Afrodita, quien le ofreció el amor de la más bella de la tierra.

He omitido muchos detalles arriba porque no quiero darles una versión exhaustiva sobre el tema, simplemente quiero ubicarlos un poquito en el contexto, ya que básicamente en esos puntos de partidas se crea toda una guerra en donde los guerreros más importantes de esa época se unen para hacer frente al enemigo.

McCullough no sólo me sorprendió, sino que me cautivó de principio a fin. Su prosa es sencillamente magistral: fresca, pulcra y cautivadora. Muchas personas temen a arriesgarse con novelas históricas por su prosa, piensan que será pesada, aburrida e inentendible, cosa que no ocurre con esta mujer, Collen es capaz de cautivar hasta los más reacios con su estilo narrativo.

Otro detalle que me ha encantado es la polifonía que utiliza a lo largo de la novela, cada capítulo está narrado por un personaje, ya sean los principales o los secundarios, detalle que permite que seas capaz no solo de entender la guerra desde ambos bandos, sino que te imposibilita tomar partido.

Verán, cuando leo un libro con muchos personajes siempre tomo partido, creo que todos lo hacemos, ya sea el villano o el protagonista, pero en esta historia es algo que curiosamente no puedes hacer, a simple vista eres capaz de ver quiénes son los malos, por decirlo de alguna forma, y quienes son los buenos, pero el uso de la polifonía te la pone difícil, pues los entiendes, los quieres y despiertan en ti sentimientos que te la ponen muy difícil.

Es una forma muy especial de conectar con los personajes, un detalle que honestamente me ha encantado. Por supuesto, no es la primera vez que veo este recurso en una historia, pero el hecho de tenerlo con una prosa adecuada y una historia bien abordada, da un resultado increíble.

Lo que me hace irme a los personajes. Amor, odio, compasión, dolor, desesperación y esperanza fueron algunos de los sentimientos que despertaron en mi este elenco de personajes, lo que más me llama la atención es que todos de una manera y otra me hicieron sentir ese remolino de emociones. No podría asegurarles que determinado personaje me hizo sentir solo amor o solo odio u otro sentimiento, cada uno me lanzaba a ese remolino de sentimientos. Lo que me hace pensar que Collen tiene una gran historia porque supo crear grandes personajes.

Seguramente pensaran: «bueno, pero es que ya todos esos personajes existían» y si, existían (según Homero), pero Collen les da vida en su historia. No solo te dice que Odiseo era astuto, te demuestra con situaciones anteriormente contadas o ideadas por ella porque Odiseo era astuto, ella te da situaciones, no solo renombre, detalle que hace la historia más real.

RESEÑA COMPLETA EN EL BLOG7 s Laura Coll621 87

Una novela que explica la guerra de Troya con mucha precisión, bien documentada y que ofrece una gran perspectiva de la historia gracias al uso de una narración coral. Los personajes están bien caracterizados, el tema de la mitología está muy bien integrado y la ambientación está muy trabajada. Aún así, la trama es intencionadamente previsible y tiene poco ritmo porque no hay sorpresas, por lo que no engancha. Está bien, pero a mí no me ha conquistado.

Reseña completa: http://paseandoentrepaginas.blogspot....6 s Ronda39 24

Tenía pendiente esta autora hace mucho tiempo, pero ha sido gracias al club de novela histórica que por fin la he descubierto, sólo me arrepiento de no haberlo hecho antes, una obra maestra, la recomiendo a todo aquel que disfrute de la novela histórica.7 s Alicja277 83

rating: 4/5

A beautiful retelling of the Illiad. McCullough chooses to tell the tale through a variety of POVs ( Agamemnon, Hektor, Odysseus, Helen, Achilles, Paris, etc.) but it doesn't get confusing, whether it is my previous knowledge of the Illid or McCullough's writing style and strong characters filled with unique personalities (or a combination of both), I had no problem keeping track of the narrators. This style also enables us to see the conflict from all sides, to view all the characters as human with desires and flaws and heroism, which I think makes a grander tale.

Of course, as with every story there are a few issues, Helen's insta-love with Paris (of course McCullough can't be blamed). I had to explain it away that she was just a girl suffocating in her life and he offered to get her out, give her something more.

I adored the cunning Odysseus. His sharp mind combined with ambiguous morality and desire to do whatever needs to be done (even if it destroys others) to win was truly frightening.

Her take on the Achilles/Patrokles/Braise triangle was interesting. And I even d Braise, at first. Then not so much. She showed her true colors after Patrokles' death and it pissed me off (not the author or novel, but Braise... I guess strong feeling toward a character are a good thing?). She basically said that by Patrokles questioning Achilles, he was never truly a friend and that she's better because she never questioned Achilles' motivations. Blind devotion a virtue? No way.

"I know how much he meant to you, but you grieve too much."
"He died despising me. He threw our friendship away."
"Then he didn't really know you."
"I can't explain to you either."
"You don't need to. Whatever you do, Achilles, is right."

And then...

But to Patrokles the real betrayal was your love of me. It was necessary he find flaws... to feed his own sense of injury. Forget Patrokles. He was no true friend to you at the last.

The Bitch just told Achilles to forget his best friend and decade-long lover after his death. Oh, I stopped liking her quickly.

So I secretly cheered when Achilles slapped Brise for what she said about Patrokles. I had that "oh no you didn't, bitch" moment and was glad Achilles didn't just take it either.

The Achilles/Hektor fight was epic! As it should be. One of us had to die in this duel, the other soon after, for so it had been decided when the strands of our destinies were interwoven.

This modern retelling of the classic shows just how universally a story this can speak to its readers/listeners. For thousands of years, a variation of this has been re-told and re-written, been enjoyed. I would recommend this re-telling for anyone who may be intimidated by the Illiad and those who love the Illiad and want another interpretation of the classic story.ancient-greece ancient-world dream-library ...more7 s Laura249 15

Troijan laulu oli todella mielenkiintoista luettavaa, sillä vaikka olen tietenkin kuullut Troijan sodasta, minulla ei ollut kovin vahvaa käsitystä siitä, mitä oikeasti tapahtui. Tämä myös avasi sodan taustoja kiinnostavasti. Kirja antoi tutuille nimille, kuten Akhilleukselle, Odysseukselle ja Helenalle, kasvot. historical6 s Sud6662,087 173

I've enjoyed Colleen McCullough's "Masters of Rome" series. I was rather surprised to see she had written a historical fiction about the Trojan War. "The Song of Troy" is an attempt to take the epic events of the Illiad and tell the story in a more realistic way- this is the story of Troy without the gods and myths common to the Illiad. I am not saying this is a bunch of atheists, but their "gods" are no more real, nor do they appear, any more than the Christian God appeared to Crusaders.

This story revolves really around two people. One is Odysseus and he is a clever, cunning, if not brilliant man. Then there is Priam, who is the polar opposite. In fact, the fall of Troy can be laid squarely at the feet of Priam.

The conflict starts due to the Greek states being cut off from trade with the Trojans. This is due to Priam's greed and his duplicity when dealing with Herakles. This sets off a chain of events that ends with Helen leaving with Paris. This is the excuse Agamemnon needs to start the war.

The events are the events from the Illiad, but told with less fantastical elements. While famous heroes do exist, they are nothing more than really gifted human beings. From Achilles to Ajax and Hector to Sarpedon, these are far more believable versions than the man-gods running around the Illiad.

Perhaps the best thing is that there are no real heroes here, save perhaps Hektor, and that most real history the blame can be spread around. Helen is an awful person, Menelaus is strangely weak and even the great Achilles is shown as a supreme warrior but hardly a demigod.

But the true hero? Odysseus who uses intelligence and cunning to win the war. A very interesting book and one that I enjoyed. A retelling of the Illiad in a more "realistic" sense. The reasons behind the war and the way in which it was conducted makes much more sense than the Illiad's version. While not all purists will enjoy this, I think people who enjoyed the conflict more than the tale will appreciate this historical fiction around the Trojan War.

historical-fiction6 s Deborah Pickstone852 92

4.5 stars

I was slow to get into this but once convinced it was my favourite version so far. I think most HF aficionados have favourite periods; I am willing to believe that, me, they have the opposite about some periods. This is one of mine; I've read some of the classics around the story but the novels just don't attract me. It seemed a crazy event to me. However, CMcC managed to make it have logic as an event - it wasn't Helen after all but economic necessity, human nature and, to a degree, sheer perversity.

Some excellent characterisation and a well-established story line. Using her usual technique of moving from one POV to another, it was initially jarring to have it happen every chapter but I got into the swing and ended having really enjoyed it. I had tried Margaret George's Helen of Troy but never completed it. CMcC's self-centred Helen was far more convincing. I note my favourite collective of Kate Quinn et al are putting out a version of this story this year; if that fails to please I will eat a few hats (need some new ones anyway!)allegorical australian belief-and-anti-belief ...more6 s Natasa1,255

A great read. Based on a historical event, this novel is about one of the greatest love affairs of ancient times. This is a gripping tale of love, of war and the fall of the city of Troy.ancient-greece mythology7 s R Vincent30

This book was just...not great. The format had potential. I enjoyed the idea of various POVs for different stages of the war. However, beyond that, it fell flat. Characters were wildly inconsistent and just terribly written.

The worst offender was Helen. She was written as a terrible caricature of a 'loose woman', with no emotional depth or nuance that was present in the original Iliad. She was presented as a selfish, vapid, sex-obsessed and cruel. She did not grow or change at all over the course of the book, un in the Iliad, and this iteration certainly did her no justice.

Everyone else was also written in varying levels of terrible and just outright shameful, when compared to their classic counterparts. Patroclus is written as a 'creepy gay stalker' trope, who is obsessed with Achilles. Achilles, on the other hand, is written as emotionally vacant and distant, a complete departure from his proud and sensitive self, from the Homeric texts.

I could go on, but this book was just awful. If you have any basic knowledge of the classical texts, or you just enjoy characters who aren't horribly written, then avoid this book. If you to read about slut shaming and misogyny, then maybe you'll this book. 5 s Dawn1,301 73

To write a story where the end is already known and the characters are those of legend would seem to leave little for a writer to work with but McCullough has no problem making this story come alive.
Told by multiple points of view, the story could at times feel as if it was a little choppy but the different voices were distinct and interesting. Having parts of the story told by the Trojans and parts by the Greeks, gave a wonderful overview of the war from both sides.
Every writer has their own interpretation of the characters in this story, legend can only tell us so much and so the actual personalities of the people are left wide open for an author to create. In this version, Helen and Paris aren't viewed in the rosy light of romance but under the bright lights showing vanity, stupidity and boredom. Priam is foolish, Agamemnon ambitious and greedy, Odysseus deceitful.....which all ended up making a very realistic and compelling tale. historical-fiction5 s Olethros2,679 496

-Otra aproximación al evento... otra más.-

Género. Novela histórica.

Lo que nos cuenta. Troya y varios líderes de la Antigua Grecia tienen cuentas pendientes desde hace tiempo, tanto por supuestos impagos como por cuestiones geopolíticas y comerciales. Cuando París, príncipe de Troya, se lleva a Helena, esposa de Menelao, de buena gana y con la complicidad de ella, las hostilidades estallarán de inmediato.

¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:

https://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com...4 s Georgiana 17922,056 140

Un retelling dell'Iliade piuttosto fedele, con tutti gli antefatti, dalla nascita di Achille alla costruzione delle mura di Troia, e con l'epilogo che prende invece spunto dall'Odissea e da altre opere classiche per completare la storia con le sorti degli altri personaggi sopravvissuti.
Si tratta di un romanzo corale, narrato in prima persona direttamente dai protagonisti, uno per capitolo (alcuni intervengono più volte, come Priamo, Achille, Ulisse, Elena, Agamennone; altri una sola volta, come Briseide, Nestore o Automedonte), che ho trovato però un po' troppo monocordi nel modo di raccontare le vicende. Il risultato, pur non essendo certo politically-correct (ma ci mancherebbe: mica si può cambiare la storia o il mito!), mostra un Achille più umano verso Briseide, Ettore e Priamo. Un uomo, non un assassino spietato con un'unica finalità nella vita.
«I nostri odi e i nostri amori appartengono al mondo dei vivi. Nessuna cosa così forte può esistere nel mondo dei morti. Io ho fatto del mio meglio. Non c'è altro. Ho pregato affinchè il mio nome continui a essere cantato attraverso le generazioni degli uomini che verranno. Questa è tutta l'immortalità che un uomo può sperare. Il mondo dei morti non dà gioia, ma non dà nemmeno dolore. Se io posso combattere Ettore un milione di volte sulle labbra di uomini vivi, non sarò mai veramente morto.»brb4 sfidina-invernale-pollon-20214 s Describiendo Mundos 174 42

Deben darme tiempo para una reseña digna. 4 s Megan377 33

In terms of writing style, The Song of Troy was stiff.

Just to be positive: some of the things I did find interesting, and not offensive or just ???????? were:

A) an Achilles with no lips. None. Is there a reference I’m missing? Either way, strange but I’m down.
B) Achilles’ death fits that are almost epileptic, and lend a strong foundation behind his desire for honour as he’s constantly reminded of his doom. Coolio!
C) this book covers the years leading up to The Iliad, and in doing so pulls in lesser known myths, which is always fun.

Honestly, when I realized McCullough planned on completely throwing away the last 7 books of the Iliad in favour of grossly oversimplifying Achilles’ rage and grief over Patroclus and his relationship with both him and Briseis, I started skimming pretty hard. Also, can we give Briseis a broader personality outside of virginal, naive maiden?

And I mean, come on, this Achilles is respectful to Hector’s corpse? Apologizes to him? Where’s the pizazz.

I’ve said this before, and I’ll probably end up saying it a billion times more, but why, why, why do so many contemporary authors continuously try to fabricate a star-crossed lovers plot between Achilles and Briseis? He wishes her dead multiple times in the original poem! That is not cute! Achilles’ violent disregard for Briseis can so easily be juxtaposed against the s of Hector’s love for Andromache, or Menelaus’ attempts to get Helen back, as a means to show just how far Achilles has fallen in his grief. A husband is not supposed to crassly throw his bride away, while stating how he hopes her captor will rape her, honour or no honour! A husband IS supposed to chase after her and protect her, whether he loves her or not! How about we give Briseis a man who treats her right!

I know people have been giving their own take on The Iliad, since the poem was first orally produced, so technically there are no wrong answers. That doesn’t mean there can’t be completely ridiculous answers that make me want to drive my head into a wall because again, why.

3 stars because The Song of Troy is not awful, but the flat characterization and incongruous plot was disappointing.classical-greek-roman historical-fiction lgbtqa ...more4 s Emily89 1 follower

In general, I did this take on the Trojan tale, but I have a couple of criticisms.

The narration device of having a different viewpoint in each chapter is one of my favourites, but in this case it was often difficult to tell one from the other. I think having fewer voices, more clearly defined, would have made the story immeasurely better.

My other criticism is that the author clearly has her favourites. Achilles and Odysseus have been firmly manipulated, with portions of the story greatly changed to put them to their best advantage. Achilles, in particular, seems to have been painted in a unfairly flattering light. Meanwhile, the women have been universally condemned. Hekabe does nothing but howl and scream and bewail her fate. Andromache is weak, guilty and ungrateful. Helen is a heinous slut who has no positive character traits at all. Even Brise, who starts out as a strong character, quickly degenerates into yet another of Achilles' loyal devotees.

All in all, a reasonable novel, but not my favourite version of the story by a very wide margin.4 s Joana689 13

I almost gave this one star, but since the book doesn't do really anything bad - it's just not good and so disappointing - I'm settling for a very low two stars (if it was a one star, it would be a high one, so it could be a round up...). I bought this second hand at the book fair two years ago, and this 100% not going back on my shelf, I'm donating this next chance I can, maybe this will be for someone!!!
This to me, it helped me figure out what I want from Greek Retellings, by being exactly not that, this one read the movie Troy, which I watched once and have zero interest in rewatching, this just brought nothing new to a tale almost as old as time (or what was new was also bad...). Just not wroth the pages it was, it lost from the start, and it dragged on in uninteresting ways...
As it was obvious, this was not for me, if you're looking for something the modern retellings from names Madeline Miller or Natalie Haynes, this is also not for you... if you're looking for something else, maybe... (but also for this type of story, just read the classics, start with The Illiad, and you'll be better for it!!!)3 s Vitani Days436 9

Autor del comentario:
=================================