Customer Reviews

Funeral Games

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Someone described "Funeral Games" to me as "a ghost story", which is the best way I can think of to summarize this story. It is the most affecting, haunting tale I've ever read. Alexander the Great has died; from the moment of his death, the cohesive force that was the Macedonian army is no more, and his generals, wife, and enemies fight for prominence--as well as a young woman unmentioned in Renault's previous novels.

Once again, Renault brings us deep into that time, so deep we can almost see each character before us; her writing is clear, yet layered in its concise, descriptory power. There are no wasted words, anywhere. The dialogue is direct and to the point; this tale is a much faster "read" than "Fire From Heaven" or "The Persian Boy", but the adventures turn grim as the desire to take up Alexander's mantle overcomes nearly everyone he knew, favored, or despised. Although luxuriously buried in the tomb of his beloved Hephaistion, Alexander is an unquiet spirit all through the book. As Perdikkas, Philip Arrhidaios, Demetrius the One-Eyed, Ptolemy, Seleukos, and Kassandros vie for control of Macedonia and the remains of Alexander's empire--and of his legend--a granddaughter of Philip, Eurydike, steps forward to make her own claim for the throne. Too, Roxane and Olympias take their places, one as mother of the dead king, the other as mother to his only living son. Both women have blood on their hands; both women--in fact, nearly all the contestants--meet their end. The only one left standing by the end of the story is the only man who leaves what was Alexander's alone: his half-brother Ptolemy, who takes up the throne at Egypt and pays honor to Alexander there.

There is a brief mention of Bagoas, and his mourning is displayed with a gentle elegance, but neither of Alexander's wives are portrayed favorably. Renault seems to have had a dislike of women in general, particularly ambitious ones. Stateira, Alexander's Persian wife, is shown as a naive victim of Roxane's vindictive jealousy, and Roxane herself is so unpleasant that her fate evokes little besides a sense of justice done at last. Eurydike, the young challenger, is almost patronized by the author. Olympias, who was shown in "Fire From Heaven" as a smothering, damaging mother, is shown behaving in much the same way in "Funeral Games", but her reaction to Alexander's death--and her own--is moving.

Some battle scenes are alluded to; Renault does not linger on gore and violence, probably because she knew that do so would be excessive, as deaths occur in every chapter. This succession war is so bloody that it should come as no surprise that no one of Alexander's family or inner circle holds on to the Macedonian empire. The betrayals and murders are numerous. It is almost as if a curse claims each and every man (and woman) who attempts to follow Alexander to the throne. Perhaps so? It's hard not to wonder when the bodies start piling up, with the survivors being those who chose (for whatever reason) to stay out of the fight.

Finish the book, and the ghost remains with you for days. Mary Renault was a conjurer without peer.

I found this book in my school library first ("Persian Boy" and "Fire From Heaven" apparently not being there.) While Alexander is dead by chapter 1, and I've never read the books in which he is portrayed alive, I was amazed by Mary Renault's skill in preserving his spirit throughout the novel, so that in a sense Alexander really is a character, though he was already comatose from the start.

Also, the high stakes and level of the manipulation by the people reaching for the throne was so much more detailed and elaborate than can be matched in the fantasy genre I usually prefer. Fact is stranger than fiction.

It stood out to me that while virtually all the characters hated each other, they were all portrayed very well and I felt I understood their emotions, motivations, and their nuances. Thankfully, the author kept from the very tempting habit of villainizing one or another. The body count was high, but each character had a moving, highly-individiualized death without splurging into Fiction Plot Device Kill-offy Mode that many authors tend to march into. (You know, falling to your knees and screaming, "NOOOO! " or "YOU KILLED MY BROTHER! " and that sort of stuff.)

Overall, an excellent read, even for your non-obsessed casual reader.

Mary Renault unquestionably presented an idealized version of Alexander the Great in the first two novels of her "Alexander trilogy," Fire from Heaven and The Persian Boy (which are essential to read before attempting Funeral Games). Although her scholarly research was extensive and thorough, most classical historians acknowledge a much more complex and flawed Alexander than the worship-inspiring icon she presents. It is a measure of her skill as a writer, however, that she can inspire similar devotion to her interpretation of Alexander in us, the readers, and that we subsequently share the despair and disillusionment of Alexander's contemporaries upon his death and the disintegration of his empire in Funeral Games. As a result, Funeral Games is indeed a bleak and sometimes chilling read as we experience the intrigue, plotting, bungling and brutal power grabs by Alexander's former officers, friends, relatives and enemies. The entire narrative is permeated with a sense of bitter regret, a longing for a period of time now forever lost, as Renault's characters romanticize their recent past and take turns lamenting "If Alexander were here..." even as they dismantle his grand achievement. Bagoas, the fictionalized narrator of The Persian Boy, makes a welcome reappearance, though as a third-person, secondary character. Serving almost as Mary Renault's alter ego, he crystallizes the pain and heartbreak and hopelessness she wants us to feel at the prospect of a world without Alexander. Ultimately, however, he overcomes grief and recovers a life's mission in watching over the memory of his lost King - standing in contrast to the doomed and misguided elites of Funeral Games who destroy each other in their attempts to seize Alexander's legacy. A worthwhile read, but again, only if you've read the earlier two books first.

...the Center cannot hold. Yeats' immortal words could be a fitting epitaph to the Macedonian empire after Alexander's death. No one could have anticipated Alexander dying so young, and his death left a void it quickly became apparent no one could fill. The army and the empire had been held together solely by one man's dynamism, and when he died, everything fell apart.

"Funeral Games" was Renault's last book, and, fittingly, the subject was the Alexander she was so fascinated with. Coming after "The Persian Boy", which was the best of her Alexander books, "Funeral Games" is a bit of a letdown. For one thing, it's lacking its main protagonist. For another, for some reason I can't fathom, Renault returned to the Latin spellings of many of the Greek and Macedonian names; for instance, Antipatros becomes Antipater. It wasn't necessary and it diminishes the sense of time and place. And thirdly, Renault went back to writing in the third person, as she did in "Fire From Heaven". Part of Renault's magic is that when she writes in the first person, she propels us right into the middle of the action; when she writes in the third person, it's like watching the action through a clear sheet of plate glass. We see it, but we're not part of it.

Furthermore, with Alexander out of the action, the rest of the figures are simply supporting players without a lead. Renault does introduce a couple of new characters; one is the tragic figure of Alexander's mentally retarded half-brother Arridaios, who had a bit walk-on part in "Fire From Heaven", and who conveniently turns up near at hand in Babylon at Alexander's death; the other is a young grand-daughter of Philip named Eurydike, as ambitious as Alexander's mother Olympias but unfortunately lacking her shrewd calculation; she marries Arridaios in a clumsy power play but she's helpless against Olympias's cold-blooded malice. Few of the characters actually engage us; Olympias fascinates us as a figure of pure evil; Perdikkas is exasperating in his wrong-headedness and tunnel vision; Bagoas makes a brief but ultimately frustrating appearance -- we don't see nearly enough of him this time; Roxane starts off as a miniature Olympias but she quickly pales into insignificance next to the real thing (maybe, when she met Olympias, Roxane wisely decided to keep a very low profile), and Eurydike came off as just plain annoying to this reviewer, blundering blindly from one mess to another and seemingly unable think before she acts. The only character who is wholly likeable in this book is Ptolemy, Alexander's half-brother; wise, sensible, realizing from the beginning that no one could take Alexander's place, he hewed to the Greek adage of "nothing too much", bit off no more than he could chew, and turned the satrapy of Egypt into one of the most flourishing kingdoms of the Hellenistic age.

"Funeral Games" would have profited immensely from a first person narrator, one who would have tied the story together; without it, the story jumps back and forth from place to place, and the fragments never achieve a cohesive whole. But it's a fascinating ride through a chaotic period, and Renault's scrupulous research is evident throughout the book. Perhaps it was inevitable that the book, as well as the world he lived in, would be diminished without Alexander.

As with most of renault's books, the author succeeds in creating a cogent portrait of antiquity with apparent ease, and within this climate paints convincing representations of the more important succesors who warred so terribly in the wake of Alexander's death. There is quite a bit of information available from copies of old texts concerning this period. It is frustratingly patchy, however, and consequently I am surprised at how rigorous Renault's treatment has been. She simplifies somewhat the more obscure politicing between the succesors but never in such a way as to detract from the overall events that took place. As such, one could say that this is a fairly accurate assessment of what occured post 323B.C. I have only one historical quibble. The wars were considerably more unpleasant and personal than the scenarios she describes; and they effected the entire human sphere around them - all of what was then the known world reverberated as the Macedonians started to tear each other apart with unbridled ferocity from the borders of India, through Asia Minor and into the Balkans. It was a very very dark time. Yet in spite of this, and here Renault is unimpeachable, Alexander's memory loomed large over everyone - and why would it not? He had dominated his age more forcefully than any individual human being has ever done before or since. It must be pointed out that the book does not have the same easy narrative flow that her previous Alexander offerings do. But, in a way, this reflects the reality of what happened - While Alexander lived the lives of these protagonists unfolded smoothly and steadily; when he died the pattern became fractured and disjointed. I think that the book's greatest strength is that it treats of a period that is inextricably linked to Alexander, yet nonetheless is often ignored by the scholars, historians and popularisers. The wars of the Diadochi shaped the future of the Western world for some time by laying open the way for the rise of a new power. And that power did eventually come in the form of Rome. Renault is right to have drawn our attention to what became of those that surrounded the youthful king and also correct to show us that they were competent, talented and sometimes brilliant people within their own right. Too often it is assumed that Alexander's success was due exclusively to himself. Whilst this is true in many ways it forgets that he knew that he could always rely upon the immense talents of those around him, which he often did - look at his three top lieutenants and in India on the way down the Indus, and how much trust and confidence he places in them while he is weak from a wound! All in all a fine account of it. What it lacks in grit and scale it makes up for in emphasis and characterisation.

After reading my first few Mary Renault books, I thought that her style of narrative would be similar through all, first person, told through the eyes of the protagonist. With Funeral Games, she made a major departure, in telling many stories at one time, all relating to the power struggle following the death of Alexander the Great. Reading this story at times saddened me, in the respect that Alexander, albeit through war and conflict, tried to bring unity to Greece, to bring his beloved country 'together'. To watch those that surrounded him break off into such discord, mutiny, and chaos as they all tried to succeed him in ruling Greece seemed to put the work of his adult life to waste as he was laid to rest.

As the conundrum to the Alexander trilogy, this book was indeed violent, yet a fitting conclusion to Alexander's story, although it was a part he did not partake in directly. The many characters this story weaves around are all very interesting, no matter how minor, and all play their respective roles. The author took the time to research each one to portray them accurately, and kept all of the stories engrossing throughout.

Once again, her portrayal of Ancient Greece is like no other in fascination and accuracy. I urge anyone who has invested the time in the first two books of this trilogy to indulge themselves in this one as well. Although it may surprise you with its darkness and violence, it will not disappoint.

"Funeral Games" is the final stroke of Mary Renault's epic Alexander trilogy. It is a haunting, exciting novel on the world tearing itself apart after the death of Alexander and the confusion engulfing his men as to who will run the vast empire, or more precisely, who will be master of the world. As always Renault's use of detail shines, she does a wonderful service by taking history and showing all the drama, passion, heartbreak and ambition hidden between the words in your school textbook. She demonstrates how history is a human story, propelled by the same kind of emotions that apply to everyone. The main character of Alexander dies early in Babylon, and he remains more of a haunting presence through-out the book, it works to great effect and it is fitting that Renault concludes her trilogy that began with "Fire From Heaven" and "The Persian Boy" with the events that happened after Alexander dies, we see how the world falls apart with his abscence and how men who do not have his flare or fiery intelligence struggle to run a world mesmerized by the unifying vision of the Macedonian conqueror. There is no main character here, only individual stories and tragedies. The characters are brilliantly written, the strong Eurydike with her Amazon spirit, the half-wit Philip, Alexander's disabled brother who is declared King is written with a sweetness and comedic touch while Kassandros, Alexander's arch-enemy burns off the page as a cold killer after the spoils. Renault has a way of exploring interesting characters set-up in the previous novel of whom we wanted to know more. Here we really get to meet Roxane, Alexander's Bactrian wife and mother of his heir. Renault brilliantly parallels her with Alexander's mother Olympias which raises the Oedipus issue. The novel rushes through the years in a fever as characters conspire against each-other and there is the feeling that no one is safe. "Funeral Games" is also notable, like Renault's entire body of work, for it's richness in language and construction, you realize these stories are not written simply as examinations of antiquity but of life in general. There is a sense of humanity and spirit that propells Renault's novels and this one is no exception, these feel like real people experiencing large events in their own time. "Funeral Games" plays like the best dramas, it always feels alive, outcomes are uncertain, sometimes even for those who already know the history. It is a wonderous epic of dark times after the passing of greatness, and how our ambitions fuel us and how our hates can destroy us. Renault has honored her love honorably, with the kind of understanding, insight and scope he deserves. There has never been a better series of novels about Alexander The Great, it is hard to imagine there will ever be another.

Alexander may be dead in chapter one, but his spirit looms large in the pages of this book, as indeed it must have done in the world immediately after his passing. This book is a stunning and breathtaking journey through the ten or twenty years following Alexander's death - a time when men who would be king, and indeed women who would be queen, play for the known world as though it was a chess board. It is a measure of the strength of Alexander's personality and force of will, that the only legitimacy these players can claim is that they knew, or loved, or eventually just knew someone who knew, the man himself; and in the end it's not enough for any of them, they're all found wanting by the only judges who matter: the common men of the army Alexander led to the ends of the known world. This book makes me cry every time I read it, not so much for any of the characters themselves, though their pain is real, but for the world at that time. There is just so much chaos, and Mary Renault shows brilliantly how fragile the constructs of human civilisation really are - removing the man who held it all together with little more than a smile and a forceful but attractive personality, sends the whole thing tumbling down.

After enjoying her first two novels in the Alexander trilogy (Fire From Heaven and The Persian Boy)I was wholey unprepared for this account of the bleak horror that Alexander's world descended into after his death. It is difficult for the history buff to keep from falling in love with Ms. Renault's truely heroic Alexander and it is equally difficult not to weep for his family and empire in this catyclismic finale. I love this book and am deeply moved by it.

The third bookof this magnificent retelling of the life and times of Alexander the Great focuses on the 8 years following his untimely death. It is said he left his far flung empire to "whoever is strongest" - some dozen noteworthies began contending for the succession, often by assasination of their peers, with labyrintine plots described in graphic detail. The action, enhanced by the tribal clan allegiances of Macedonia, was more Byzantine than that produced centuries later under the aegis of Constantinople, and truly illustrates the Greek conviction that the Gods despise hubris. This may well be the best historical fiction ever written..