Author Topic: Mary Renault Book Discussion  (Read 81257 times)

injest

  • Guest
Re: Mary Renault Book Discussion
« Reply #40 on: January 02, 2007, 12:01:05 am »
well I know I could probably order a hardback of each of them...but that would kinda be cheating...and we enjoying prowling around used books stores..

Offline Kerry

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • BetterMost Moderator
  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,076
  • ^ In pursuit of Captain Moonlite - 5 Sept 2009
    • Google Profile
Re: Mary Renault Book Discussion
« Reply #41 on: January 02, 2007, 06:42:35 am »
well I know I could probably order a hardback of each of them...but that would kinda be cheating...and we enjoying prowling around used books stores..

 A noble pursuit. Enjoy!  :)
γνῶθι σεαυτόν

Offline Kerry

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • BetterMost Moderator
  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,076
  • ^ In pursuit of Captain Moonlite - 5 Sept 2009
    • Google Profile
Re: Mary Renault Book Discussion
« Reply #42 on: January 02, 2007, 08:38:06 am »
:o  TOOT-TOOT-TE-TOOT!   :o

(that's as close as I can get to a fanfare - to gain your attention LOL) 

A fanfare is appropriate, because I believe the following quote from Mary Renault's "Fire from Heaven" has particular relevance and poignancy for all of us here at this site:

"As we know, the ashes of Achilles and Patroclus were mingled in one urn. Not even a god could sift the one from the other."

I previously quoted Plutarch's account of Alexander and Hephaestion's visit to Troy, where Alexander laid a wreath on Achilles’ tomb, and Hephaestion on Patroclus.’ It was openly accepted in classical Greece that Achilles and Patroclus had been lovers, and Alexander and Hephaestion were making a very public statement of their own love for and commitment to each other, when they laid their wreaths at Troy. It is my belief that their men would have known exactly what they were saying in this action.

But I digress. Why should this quote have such particular relevance for us here? Because I think it would be wonderful for the ashes of Jack and Ennis to be so mingled and scattered on Brokeback Mountain. Surely, if ever there were two star-crossed lovers who deserve to be so united for all eternity, it is our own dear beloved Jack and Ennis.

Kerry   :'(
« Last Edit: January 02, 2007, 08:50:34 am by Kerry »
γνῶθι σεαυτόν

injest

  • Guest
Re: Mary Renault Book Discussion
« Reply #43 on: January 02, 2007, 09:39:58 am »
very nice post, Kerry

there were so many male couples back in antiquity. The concept was much more acceptable in those days. Women were so isolated that the idea of friendship was mostly male/male...women were for kids.

Offline Jeff Wrangler

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 31,191
  • "He somebody you cowboy'd with?"
Re: Mary Renault Book Discussion
« Reply #44 on: January 02, 2007, 10:43:34 am »
very nice post, Kerry

there were so many male couples back in antiquity. The concept was much more acceptable in those days. 

Sure. Sparta--I think it was Sparta--had an entire military unit made up of male couples. I think the idea had something to do with the notion that they would fight better in pursuit of honor and glory because they wouldn't want to shame each other, or be ashamed in front of each other.
"It is required of every man that the spirit within him should walk abroad among his fellow-men, and travel far and wide."--Charles Dickens.

Offline Front-Ranger

  • BetterMost Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 30,330
  • Brokeback got us good.
Re: Mary Renault Book Discussion
« Reply #45 on: January 02, 2007, 11:05:21 am »
I am planning on picking up The Last of the Wine on my way home from Work today and starting it tonite.
"chewing gum and duct tape"

Offline delalluvia

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,289
  • "Truth is an iron bride"
Re: Mary Renault Book Discussion
« Reply #46 on: January 02, 2007, 08:23:47 pm »
I guess if we'd been a fly on the wall, way back there in Persia, we may very well have overheard Hephaestion say to Alexander, "I can't make it on a couple of high-altitude fucks once or twice a year."  :o  LOL

Kerry   ;)


 :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Offline delalluvia

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,289
  • "Truth is an iron bride"
Re: Mary Renault Book Discussion
« Reply #47 on: January 02, 2007, 08:32:37 pm »
When we look back at the ancient world, it is very important to remember that it is an era that existed long before our present Christian era, with all its moral hang-ups and prudery. Alexander, Hephaestion and Bagoas were men of their times, not ours. As for Bagoas being a "boy," it is my understanding that he was a "youth" when he met Alexander, not a child.

Someone's already pointed this out, but Bagoas was 16 at the time of the book, a teenager, but still considered a boy.  In the book, Bagoas himself uses the term for lover and beloved.  The Beloved being the 'boy'.  When he first sees Hephaestion and Alexander interact, he's surprised Alexander is already someone's 'boy'.

Quote
I can find no evidence that Alexander had any relationships with "boys." In this, he was proudly Macedonian, not Athenian!

Well, so was Phillip and he was famous for his relationships with boys.  I forgot where I read about Alexander and his favorite page.  The writer was speaking of Alexander's boy comparing unfavorably with Hephaestion.  It may come from a legitimate source or from pseudo-Callisthenes, I don't remember.  I'll have to paw through every source material I have on Alexander to find it again.  I went through a huge Alexander phase when the movie came out, and I read a bunch of books on him and even went so far as to order this professor's dissertation on Hephaestion.

Quote
Alexander was the King. He did it "because he could." It's that simple! Hephaestion would have known and understood this, and loved Alexander no less because of it.

Ah, it's good to be king.  Certainly Hephaestion understood it and probably didn't love Alexander any less for it, but that doesn't mean he liked it.

Offline Kerry

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • BetterMost Moderator
  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,076
  • ^ In pursuit of Captain Moonlite - 5 Sept 2009
    • Google Profile
Re: Mary Renault Book Discussion
« Reply #48 on: January 02, 2007, 09:22:36 pm »
Someone's already pointed this out, but Bagoas was 16 at the time of the book, a teenager, but still considered a boy.  In the book, Bagoas himself uses the term for lover and beloved.  The Beloved being the 'boy'.  When he first sees Hephaestion and Alexander interact, he's surprised Alexander is already someone's 'boy'.
As you say, "Bagoas was 16 at the time of the book." Nuff said.

Renault's Bagoas is wrong when he presumes that Alexander was Hepaestion's boy. Alexander was never anyone's boy, except maybe Olympias! (LOL). I will write more on this when I've had an opportunity to consult the sources (I'm presently at work).
« Last Edit: January 02, 2007, 10:01:17 pm by Kerry »
γνῶθι σεαυτόν

Offline Kerry

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • BetterMost Moderator
  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,076
  • ^ In pursuit of Captain Moonlite - 5 Sept 2009
    • Google Profile
Re: Mary Renault Book Discussion
« Reply #49 on: January 02, 2007, 09:33:50 pm »
Well, so was Phillip and he was famous for his relationships with boys.  I forgot where I read about Alexander and his favorite page.  The writer was speaking of Alexander's boy comparing unfavorably with Hephaestion.  It may come from a legitimate source or from pseudo-Callisthenes, I don't remember.  I'll have to paw through every source material I have on Alexander to find it again.  I went through a huge Alexander phase when the movie came out, and I read a bunch of books on him and even went so far as to order this professor's dissertation on Hephaestion.
Alexander and Philip did not enjoy a loving father/son relationship. They didn't have a lot in common, from what I can see.

Let's remember that the pages you refer to were not the little girly boys with page-boy haircuts of fairytale fame. These pages were tough young louts, hardened by years on campaign. They were not delicate in any way. And they were young men - not boys.

With respect, steer clear of Alexander according to Oliver Stone (LOL). Though, having said that, I did enjoy the movie - but strictly as a confection.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2007, 10:08:08 pm by Kerry »
γνῶθι σεαυτόν