I honestly don’t remember being overwhelmed by anything sexual. Perhaps I’ve put on my retrospective filters, something I always have to wonder about when I recommend books since I don’t seem to recall explicit scenes unless they are completely gratuitous. I don’t recall ever thinking they were gratuitous here. Shocking, yes, but not something inserted for sales — particularly not the paedophilia or the homoeroticism. I think she was being faithful to the history and to the well documented acceptance of such practices. From my studies of the classical era — I’m not expert, though — it was very common for older men to have a young male lover, often as young as twelve or thirteen. Aristotle really was around twenty-five years older than his probably fourteen year old wife. I’m not trying to put words in your mouth by suggesting you disagree with the facts, but I think Lyon’s portrayal of it being routine is spot-on, as is her nonchalant tone.

I definitely can’t quibble with you on her characters, though. A problem with this type of fiction is that it is anyone’s best guess how Aristotle felt about his wife or how Alexander felt about Aristotle. So my concern with my own praise of the novel was that I filled in the blanks too much with my own knowledge and my own desire to feel that time period. I can’t say, then, how well the characters are drawn as purely literary characters. But I do think that the texture Lyon added to this period in time is tangible and important.

Good luck if you decide to finish it. I usually quit when I’m halfway through a book and dislike it as much as you seem to be disliking this one. If I don’t like the writing or the characters and am put-off by some of the content, I just don’t see much reason to continue. I’d like to hear your final verdict, though, perhaps especially if it continues in this same vein. Always good to have some alternate views!

I have been thoroughly disappointed. Everytime I read in it, I am left with a sour taste and a sour feeling. I dislike the book on many levels. First I dont agree at all that it is well written. I am not drawn into these characters and am left with little or no concern or caring for them.

And the sexual references that permeate the book seem to me to be overdone. I get the distinct impression that she probably wrote the book first and then went back and added in all the sexual stuff on every other page in order to spice it up and make it more saleable. Thats what it feels like because there often seems to be no other reason to go there.

I have no real problem with homoeroticism. However I am not at all convinced that it was as prevelant as she is setting it out to be.

And the pedophilia is both disturbing and unacknowledged. We are led to believe that these people routinely used children as sexual objects without any sort of awareness at all on the part of anybody that there was anything at all questionable about the practice.

I guess I will finish it. But for me now the Giller prize doesnt mean much at all. I dont know what people see in this book.

I suppose if Lyon’s book emerges this year and becomes widely read, we can assume she’s succeeded at making these historical figures interesting literary figures as well. I have my doubts, though, because I think most of my joy with this novel was based on my knowledge of the history, which this novel enriched in its own way. From my limited perspective, it doesn’t stand alone. I’m not saying it isn’t, therefore, good or of value — I think it is both — but I don’t suppose it succeeds with people who don’t like this history.

That said, seeing it as a finalist on the lists of three literary awards suggests I’m wrong there (it is incredibly well written).

It’s an interesting topic for discussion. I’d like to hear anyone’s thoughts. Also, what other great works deal with famous historical figures (I’m thinking pre-2009 here, but you can bring up Wolf Hall if you want)? And do they work on their own? Do people distinguish between the real and the literary figures, or do we conflate the two?

This business of fictionalizing major historical figures in literature seems recent to me. The historical fiction that has survived the test of time, books like Gond With the Wind or A Tale of Two Cities for example, don’t focus on well known historical figures.