What do you think?
Rate this book
Troy #2
The Return from Troy
In this sequel to The War at Troy , the trademark lyricism, lucidity, and mythic power is present in this novel that offers a timely interpretation of one of the world's great stories. After ten years of war, Troy has fallen, yet the gods have turned against the victorious Argives—and their ordeals have only just begun. Agamemnon sails back to Mycenae, where Clytaemnestra has nursed a vengeful fury over his sacrifice of their daughter Iphigenaia. Meanwhile, Menelaus must decide the fate of Helen, over whose incomparable beauty the war was fought. Odysseus, traumatized by the slaughter his own ingenuity unleashed, no longer believes himself fit to return to his wife and son. Driven both by tempests and torment, he embarks on a voyage that will take him to the margins of the world and deep into the shadows of his own heart.
496 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2005
13 people are currently reading
411 people want to read
About the author
Lindsay Clarke
34 books41 followersLindsay Clarke is a British novelist. He was educated at Heath Grammar School in Halifax and at King's College Cambridge. He worked in education for many years, in Africa, America and the UK, before becoming a full-time writer. He currently lives in Somerset with his wife, Phoebe Clare, who is a ceramic artist. Clarke lectures in creative writing at Cardiff University, and teaches writing workshops in London and Bath. Four radio plays were broadcast by BBC Radio 4, and a number of his articles and reviews have been published in 'Resurgence' and 'The London Magazine.' Lindsay has one daughter from his first marriage.
His novel The Chymical Wedding, partly inspired by the life of Mary Anne Atwood, won the Whitbread Prize in 1989. Clarke's most recent novel is THE WATER THEATRE (published in September 2010 by Alma Booka), of which a review by Antonia Senior in THE TIMES of 28 August said "There is nothing small about this book. It is huge in scope, in energy, in heart...It is difficult to remember a recent book that is at once so beautiful and yet so thought provoking."
His novel The Chymical Wedding, partly inspired by the life of Mary Anne Atwood, won the Whitbread Prize in 1989. Clarke's most recent novel is THE WATER THEATRE (published in September 2010 by Alma Booka), of which a review by Antonia Senior in THE TIMES of 28 August said "There is nothing small about this book. It is huge in scope, in energy, in heart...It is difficult to remember a recent book that is at once so beautiful and yet so thought provoking."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews
April 14, 2016
This engrossing, most imaginative novel was much more than a simple retelling of the Odyssey. The author used elements from that epic, but it was Odysseus's interior journey [which he doesn't realize until late in the novel] that was important. There were many psychological undertones with the main theme the attainment of wise love and various facets of love: constant, inconstant, lust as a counterfeit of love...
As Odysseus and other characters come to see--the whole Trojan War shows the uselessness and futility of warfare. All that time was spent; so many were killed or injured, and in the end no one had anything to show for it.
The Trojan War has ended and Odysseus is struck with self-loathing, remorse and guilt for his part in conceiving the Wooden Horse and the conflagration, rapine, and looting that follows. All through the story, we see him suffer painfully in his mind. Although he desires to return to his wife and son on Ithaca, he has to overcome physical obstacles: a monstrous sea-storm, shipwreck, overweening curiosity of his crew, detours he's forced to make. Then he does arrive home finally, disguised, and along with Telemachus, massacres Penelope's suitors.
There were gods and goddesses in the story, but the incidents, although based on the Odyssey, were all given very human explanations. I see where the stories of others such as Menelaus, Telemachus, Agamemnon, Orestes touched on Odysseus, but sometimes the extensiveness of these stories made the novel disjointed and got into the way of the main narrative. Beginning with his time spent with Circe and his journey to the Underworld, we see his spiritual or psychological journey. I thought his visit to the Underworld owed a lot to Virgil's Aeneid. The metaphor of the oar into winnowing fan expressed maturation very well.
Speaking to Phemius the Ithacan bard:
"Penelope smiled.
As Odysseus and other characters come to see--the whole Trojan War shows the uselessness and futility of warfare. All that time was spent; so many were killed or injured, and in the end no one had anything to show for it.
The Trojan War has ended and Odysseus is struck with self-loathing, remorse and guilt for his part in conceiving the Wooden Horse and the conflagration, rapine, and looting that follows. All through the story, we see him suffer painfully in his mind. Although he desires to return to his wife and son on Ithaca, he has to overcome physical obstacles: a monstrous sea-storm, shipwreck, overweening curiosity of his crew, detours he's forced to make. Then he does arrive home finally, disguised, and along with Telemachus, massacres Penelope's suitors.
There were gods and goddesses in the story, but the incidents, although based on the Odyssey, were all given very human explanations. I see where the stories of others such as Menelaus, Telemachus, Agamemnon, Orestes touched on Odysseus, but sometimes the extensiveness of these stories made the novel disjointed and got into the way of the main narrative. Beginning with his time spent with Circe and his journey to the Underworld, we see his spiritual or psychological journey. I thought his visit to the Underworld owed a lot to Virgil's Aeneid. The metaphor of the oar into winnowing fan expressed maturation very well.
Speaking to Phemius the Ithacan bard:
"Penelope smiled.
'Haven't I said it [Odysseus's dream] formed the root of our life together? Where he had once used only the oar to steer his life, always questing outward, not searching for what lay hidden within, now he had begun the use of the winnowing fan. He sorted the wheat from the chaff in the granary of his heart; and then, as Hermes had bidden him he freely made an offering of the wild energy that had driven him for so long. In so doing he became a deep-rooted tree. After that, there was no more talk of roving.' "
October 5, 2015
Having been impressed with Clarke's de-mythologised retelling of the Iliad and the tangled, inexorable origins of the Trojan War, I couldn't wait to see what he did with the Odyssey.
As with the previous volume, this book covers so much more than just the core story of the primary source text. He gives us the full story of Odysseus's ten year return to Penelope at Ithica, but also weaves in the fates of Agemmemnon, Menelaus and Achilles's son, Neoptolomus too.
In this way both books together pretty much retell not just Homer, but much of Aeschylus, Euripides and Sophocles as well.
Phemius, the Bard of Ithica, continues to write the tale on prototypical papyrus that he has heard from the horses (sic) mouth itself, Odysseus. It's not the story as you know it, the gods don't appear, though all events are attributed to their intervention, whether whole-heartedly or not.
In addition, some of the more fantastical elements, such as the Cyclops and Scylla and Charibdis, are removed from the story of Odysseus, attributed instead as embellishments stolen from previous legends such as Jason and the Argonauts.
This could detract from the legend, but Clarke concentrates on the human hardships with an easy eloquence which makes amends. It's a bold, if a little one-paced performance throughout.
Indeed, at one stage Phemius ponders upon the ornamentations and fabrications that future poets may add to his simple truths - are you listening Homer?
Epic stuff.
As with the previous volume, this book covers so much more than just the core story of the primary source text. He gives us the full story of Odysseus's ten year return to Penelope at Ithica, but also weaves in the fates of Agemmemnon, Menelaus and Achilles's son, Neoptolomus too.
In this way both books together pretty much retell not just Homer, but much of Aeschylus, Euripides and Sophocles as well.
Phemius, the Bard of Ithica, continues to write the tale on prototypical papyrus that he has heard from the horses (sic) mouth itself, Odysseus. It's not the story as you know it, the gods don't appear, though all events are attributed to their intervention, whether whole-heartedly or not.
In addition, some of the more fantastical elements, such as the Cyclops and Scylla and Charibdis, are removed from the story of Odysseus, attributed instead as embellishments stolen from previous legends such as Jason and the Argonauts.
This could detract from the legend, but Clarke concentrates on the human hardships with an easy eloquence which makes amends. It's a bold, if a little one-paced performance throughout.
Indeed, at one stage Phemius ponders upon the ornamentations and fabrications that future poets may add to his simple truths - are you listening Homer?
Epic stuff.
March 15, 2015
It was okay. Didn't enjoy it as much as the first book. However, I always did prefer the Illiad to the Odyssey, so it was almost a given that this book wouldn't be quite as enjoyable for me.
July 8, 2015
Finally!
Lindsay Clarke's Return from Troy was a joy to read from start to finish. Not only was it clear to me that Clarke did his research, but I loved the original way that he interpreted the events of the Odyssey.
While Homer's Odysseus would have you believe that he spent his entire journey thinking of nothing but Penelope and Ithaca, Clarke's Odysseus is a man haunted by the violence he unleashed with his ruse of the horse, believing himself tainted and unworthy of Penelope and Ithaca. Clarke makes the journey home both physical and mental. In the original tale, Odysseus becomes "Nobody" to overcome the Cyclops, and in this version, he embodies that identity to overcome himself. Thus, Odysseus and the Cyclops are the same person.
As much as I enjoyed this book, there are some problems with it. While some parts enjoy loving detail (Agamemnon's confrontation with Clytemnestra is especially well done), other sections get rushed through in a summary. The end of Odysseus' journey and his relationship with Calypso are merely summarized. The saddest part is when he basically skips the episode with the Cattle of the Sun - something that is integral to the plot. I think the book could have been a good 50 pages longer without feeling bloated.
Clarke's Penelope and Telemachus appear mostly as they do in the original, but it is the care he took with developing his version of that complicated hero, Odysseus, "the man of constant sorrow" that elevates this novel from historical fan fiction to worthy of the memory of the Trojan War.
Now to find and read "War at Troy"!
Lindsay Clarke's Return from Troy was a joy to read from start to finish. Not only was it clear to me that Clarke did his research, but I loved the original way that he interpreted the events of the Odyssey.
While Homer's Odysseus would have you believe that he spent his entire journey thinking of nothing but Penelope and Ithaca, Clarke's Odysseus is a man haunted by the violence he unleashed with his ruse of the horse, believing himself tainted and unworthy of Penelope and Ithaca. Clarke makes the journey home both physical and mental. In the original tale, Odysseus becomes "Nobody" to overcome the Cyclops, and in this version, he embodies that identity to overcome himself. Thus, Odysseus and the Cyclops are the same person.
As much as I enjoyed this book, there are some problems with it. While some parts enjoy loving detail (Agamemnon's confrontation with Clytemnestra is especially well done), other sections get rushed through in a summary. The end of Odysseus' journey and his relationship with Calypso are merely summarized. The saddest part is when he basically skips the episode with the Cattle of the Sun - something that is integral to the plot. I think the book could have been a good 50 pages longer without feeling bloated.
Clarke's Penelope and Telemachus appear mostly as they do in the original, but it is the care he took with developing his version of that complicated hero, Odysseus, "the man of constant sorrow" that elevates this novel from historical fan fiction to worthy of the memory of the Trojan War.
Now to find and read "War at Troy"!
May 16, 2019
Se nel precedente romanzo “La guerra di Troia” Clarke aveva le mani un po’ legate dalle narrazioni omeriche cui aveva fatto riferimento, in questo romanzo invece lascia più spazio alla sua fantasia e anche alla grande capacità descrittiva di cui ci aveva dato prova nella precedente narrazione.
Il romanzo riparte dall’incendio di Troia e dalla vittoria dei greci, con un respiro epico unito ad uno stile avvincente, moderno e fluido.
La figura più interessante, senza dubbio, è quella di Odisseo che infatti occupa buona parte della narrazione seguendo fedelmente le vicende raccontate nell’Odissea.
Ma sono interessanti anche gli altri eroi, in particolar modo Agamennone la cui tragedia viene raccontata con un tono quasi contemporaneo come se l’autore volesse ammonirci sul fatto che la violenza e il tradimento sono temi sempre attuali.
Un romanzo davvero coinvolgente!
Il romanzo riparte dall’incendio di Troia e dalla vittoria dei greci, con un respiro epico unito ad uno stile avvincente, moderno e fluido.
La figura più interessante, senza dubbio, è quella di Odisseo che infatti occupa buona parte della narrazione seguendo fedelmente le vicende raccontate nell’Odissea.
Ma sono interessanti anche gli altri eroi, in particolar modo Agamennone la cui tragedia viene raccontata con un tono quasi contemporaneo come se l’autore volesse ammonirci sul fatto che la violenza e il tradimento sono temi sempre attuali.
Un romanzo davvero coinvolgente!
January 2, 2021
What a shame. Lindsay Clarke accomplished a great re-telling of The Iliad in books 1-3, and then took on the Odyssey, and made some fatal errors.
This book is the return of Odysseus as he suffers a massive case of PTSD, and travels the seaways for ten years with fateful stops to cleanse himself of his blood guilt. It's also the Ithacan court intrigue as suitors eat Penelope out of house and home, generally harass her in various bids for her hand, and torment Telamachus as he tries to become the man of the house. Some of it is fascinating, especially some of the descriptions of the rites of cleansing - the problem is that much of it isn't.
Here's where I think Mr. Clarke goes wrong: he has the author's urge to tell all in the belief we want to know all. All is too much. Philip Pullman in his book on writing tells us every story travels either along the path, or in the woods. A brief look into the woods is fine, and can add color to the tale. Losing the path and wandering (even if it is an odyssey) through the woods loses the reader. Again, it's too much, it's dark in there, and there are a lot of trees - no need to inspect them all. So what happens in The Return from Troy is that Mr. Clarke takes us down a lot of paths that don't further the story. We just don't need to know all he'd like us to know. Too bad.
You would lose nothing by skipping this installment, and reading the series as a trilogy instead.
This book is the return of Odysseus as he suffers a massive case of PTSD, and travels the seaways for ten years with fateful stops to cleanse himself of his blood guilt. It's also the Ithacan court intrigue as suitors eat Penelope out of house and home, generally harass her in various bids for her hand, and torment Telamachus as he tries to become the man of the house. Some of it is fascinating, especially some of the descriptions of the rites of cleansing - the problem is that much of it isn't.
Here's where I think Mr. Clarke goes wrong: he has the author's urge to tell all in the belief we want to know all. All is too much. Philip Pullman in his book on writing tells us every story travels either along the path, or in the woods. A brief look into the woods is fine, and can add color to the tale. Losing the path and wandering (even if it is an odyssey) through the woods loses the reader. Again, it's too much, it's dark in there, and there are a lot of trees - no need to inspect them all. So what happens in The Return from Troy is that Mr. Clarke takes us down a lot of paths that don't further the story. We just don't need to know all he'd like us to know. Too bad.
You would lose nothing by skipping this installment, and reading the series as a trilogy instead.
January 5, 2017
I appreciated Lindsay Clarke's
The Return from Troy
, based on Homer’s,
The Odyssey
, for the historical information it provided about one of the most famous periods of Greek history and its much chronicled Trojan War. Unfortunately, the novel lacked the verve, the luminous language and the emotion-laden ambience which so impressed me when I read Madeline Miller’s,
The Song of Achilles
. Miller’s work is a re-imagining of one of Homer’s other texts dealing with the battle for Troy -
The Iliad
. I am looking forward to furthering my knowledge of Greek history and mythology in general and the work of Homer in particular with the forthcoming release of Colm Toibin’s novel about Agamemnon and the turmoil of his post-Troy life entitled House of Names as well as Madeline Miller’s novel
Circe
which will be narrated by a witch of the same name who appears in
The Odyssey
and in Clarke's
The Return from Troy
.
December 19, 2021
Non meno godibile del precedente "La Guerra di Troia" in questo libro Clarke affronta il racconto del ritorno in patria dei Greci ebbri della conquista di Troia: sono salpati dalla piana della città distrutta, conquistata con l'inganno, con le navi piene di oro e altri tesori convinti di possedere il mondo e ignari invece del destino che li attende perché lungo la rotta di casa molti periranno travolti da nemici opportunisti o da una natura ostile e se Agamennone riuscirà a sbarcare ad Argo non significa che la moglie Clitemnestra lo attenda a braccia aperte così come a Ulisse sarà inflitta la pena di vagare per anni attraverso il mediterraneo prima di riabbracciare i suoi cari. Utilizzando i miti e le tragedie greche, l'Eneide e le Metamorfosi di Ovidio, Clarke imbastisce una rivisitazione del mondo omerico gradevolissima, capace di colmare le lacune dei poemi omerici regalando una narrazione che permette di ricucire e colmare gli spazi vuoti del nostro parziale sapere.
January 4, 2019
Clarke scrive bene, non c'è dubbio.
Il suo stile è accattivante, i personaggi funzionano. Il libro è diviso in due parti nettamente distinte, la prima incentrata su Agamennone e la seconda su Ulisse.
La prima parte risulta più veloce e fedele alla narrazione della seconda, dove putroppo l'Odissea di Omero viene smontata, smembrata e raffazzonata con altri miti fra cui l'Oresteade (appena accennata ma comunque presente) e soprattutto il VI libro dell'Eneide.
Personalmente ritengo imperdonabile descrivere il viaggio di Ulisse nell'Ade come quello di Enea con tanto di Sibilla di Cuma.
Anche la fine di Ulisse non mi è piaciuta, era meglio restare fedeli al mito della morte in mare (stesso mito cui ha fatto riferimento Dante nella Commedia) e non al mito secondario per il quale il re di Itaca viene accidentalmente ucciso dal figlio illegittimo avuto con Circe.
Il suo stile è accattivante, i personaggi funzionano. Il libro è diviso in due parti nettamente distinte, la prima incentrata su Agamennone e la seconda su Ulisse.
La prima parte risulta più veloce e fedele alla narrazione della seconda, dove putroppo l'Odissea di Omero viene smontata, smembrata e raffazzonata con altri miti fra cui l'Oresteade (appena accennata ma comunque presente) e soprattutto il VI libro dell'Eneide.
Personalmente ritengo imperdonabile descrivere il viaggio di Ulisse nell'Ade come quello di Enea con tanto di Sibilla di Cuma.
Anche la fine di Ulisse non mi è piaciuta, era meglio restare fedeli al mito della morte in mare (stesso mito cui ha fatto riferimento Dante nella Commedia) e non al mito secondario per il quale il re di Itaca viene accidentalmente ucciso dal figlio illegittimo avuto con Circe.
June 17, 2024
Actual rating: 3.5 / 5
The conclusion of this saga felt different in tone, maybe because the main focus was on Odysseus and his epic journey.
It felt heavier than the others, I think due to it mainly focusing on the inner turmoil of one man and I think this I what changed the tone for me.
In saying that, I enjoyed it more than some of the other books in the quartet.
Pick it up, give it a go & enjoy!
The conclusion of this saga felt different in tone, maybe because the main focus was on Odysseus and his epic journey.
It felt heavier than the others, I think due to it mainly focusing on the inner turmoil of one man and I think this I what changed the tone for me.
In saying that, I enjoyed it more than some of the other books in the quartet.
Pick it up, give it a go & enjoy!
April 19, 2025
An incredibly masterful, beautiful, and enjoyable retelling of the Odyssey along with other stories that seamlessly merge together along the waves and flow of Odysseus' adventures.
I enjoyed and loved this book SO MUCH! And obviously fueled more of my hyper fixation with Greek Mythology. nice!!
🌟5/5 🌟!!
I enjoyed and loved this book SO MUCH! And obviously fueled more of my hyper fixation with Greek Mythology. nice!!
🌟5/5 🌟!!
October 16, 2019
Akmayan bu yüzden de zorlukla okunan bir kitap. İlyada'dan zaten birçok öykü, o açıdan Robert Graves'in kitabı "Homeros'un Kızı"na çok benzemiş sonları. Bir sürü karakterin yaşadığı garip olaylar silsilesi diyebilirim. Konuya aşırı bir merakınız yoksa pek tavsiye etmem.
July 30, 2023
Not gonna lie, I judge books by their covers and titles. And this cover was pretty and conveyed the sense of Greek mythology. Troy and the old gods. The heroes. However, just a couple of pages in and the disappointment began to show.
Of course, the theme stands true, the book does follow what happened after the war of Troy, with a focus on Odysseus and his Ithaca, the patriarchal system and the women who were there just as mere objects. I’m really unsure what the overall scope of the narrative actually was. I’ve gotten lost in a weird point of view, trying to make sense of who was speaking and why and how would that be relevant.
Turns out it was Telemachus’s friend. But his narrative voice, with everything mentioned in first person, interlaced tenses and confusing descriptions did not help the storytelling, in my opinion. One of the things that irked me was the constant skipping from one character to another, from one scenery to another, from one plot to another.
I mean, I get it. A lot was going on. But wouldn’t it have been easier to just focus on one thing at a time?
Another thing that irritated me a lot was how this book was supposed to be retold with a twist. To be different. Sure, there were some wild ideas that made it in (the rituals, Circe’s demeanor, Calypso, and even Penelope, a little bit) but those were just thrown out there, left to be read for a little, then scrapped.
The narrative quickly lost whatever little shine it had. It got lost into the “oh, look, there’s that young maiden, Odysseus instantly liked her, so he wants her, he will have her.” There’s also the matter of Odysseus having his way with the women on the island but getting mad when he as much as hears that his wife might have had an interest in another man, even though this was never proved.
You might thing my review is also all over the place, but honestly I don’t even know where to begin and where to end it. There’s just too much going on and little substance to it. The author stops to explore some stuff for a couple of pages, then moves on to another just as quickly.
I would have really liked to see more of how things were going on cohesively. For example, okay, he reached Aiaia. He met Circe. He was kinda fascinated, kind of not, with her. Get into those interactions a little more. Try to find out how the cleansing ritual works, what motivates Circe, how she came to be, how this whole interaction shaped the man. Don’t go telling us that well, they met, the dude was curious to see the ritual and then meets her and they spend a couple of nights together, then he cheats on her too (not to mention he’s married as well), and gets mad at her because he thinks this other guy on his crew might be spending his nights with her too.
In the end, not much stayed with me from this book. Maybe except for a little image of Circe, since she was described a little differently than how Madeline Miller dod, for example.
Of course, the theme stands true, the book does follow what happened after the war of Troy, with a focus on Odysseus and his Ithaca, the patriarchal system and the women who were there just as mere objects. I’m really unsure what the overall scope of the narrative actually was. I’ve gotten lost in a weird point of view, trying to make sense of who was speaking and why and how would that be relevant.
Turns out it was Telemachus’s friend. But his narrative voice, with everything mentioned in first person, interlaced tenses and confusing descriptions did not help the storytelling, in my opinion. One of the things that irked me was the constant skipping from one character to another, from one scenery to another, from one plot to another.
I mean, I get it. A lot was going on. But wouldn’t it have been easier to just focus on one thing at a time?
Another thing that irritated me a lot was how this book was supposed to be retold with a twist. To be different. Sure, there were some wild ideas that made it in (the rituals, Circe’s demeanor, Calypso, and even Penelope, a little bit) but those were just thrown out there, left to be read for a little, then scrapped.
The narrative quickly lost whatever little shine it had. It got lost into the “oh, look, there’s that young maiden, Odysseus instantly liked her, so he wants her, he will have her.” There’s also the matter of Odysseus having his way with the women on the island but getting mad when he as much as hears that his wife might have had an interest in another man, even though this was never proved.
You might thing my review is also all over the place, but honestly I don’t even know where to begin and where to end it. There’s just too much going on and little substance to it. The author stops to explore some stuff for a couple of pages, then moves on to another just as quickly.
I would have really liked to see more of how things were going on cohesively. For example, okay, he reached Aiaia. He met Circe. He was kinda fascinated, kind of not, with her. Get into those interactions a little more. Try to find out how the cleansing ritual works, what motivates Circe, how she came to be, how this whole interaction shaped the man. Don’t go telling us that well, they met, the dude was curious to see the ritual and then meets her and they spend a couple of nights together, then he cheats on her too (not to mention he’s married as well), and gets mad at her because he thinks this other guy on his crew might be spending his nights with her too.
In the end, not much stayed with me from this book. Maybe except for a little image of Circe, since she was described a little differently than how Madeline Miller dod, for example.
November 11, 2019
I really enjoyed this retelling of the Odyssey in modern, colloquial language.
July 9, 2013
I think it’s fair to say that I enjoyed The Return from Troy more than I did its prequel, The War at Troy. The Return from Troy has some really nice descriptions and is fairly well-written from a linguistic point of view, but it is a bit haphazard in the storytelling. I really want to love this book because the style of writing feels mature and competent, in contrast to too many sub-par historical fiction novels these days – but the storytelling is a little off.
Firstly, the tale abandons divine intervention for plausible human agency – good, decisive on this point at last in contrast to the first book, but also inconsistent with the last book. Can a series retain elements of divine agency in book one and then for book two abandon them all in favour of plausible human explanation?
Secondly, The Return from Troy tries to tell the aftermath stories of all the Troy heroes and their kin, a tall task which can’t succeed because those stories are extensive in and of themselves, so as a result we only get snatches of those stories, jumping around, not telling us the full tales, and interrupting Odysseus’ own tale. As a result Odysseus’ time with Calypso is entirely cut out, and summarised later in flashback.
Thirdly, there are quite a lot of changes to Odysseus’ story. I don’t mind some of the fantastical bits being altered if the author has decided to go for a more plausible, historically authentic tale, and it does bring fresh twists to the tale because suddenly I don’t know as much about what will happen, but for example the author goes to the trouble of reworking Calypso so she’s human and more plausible in a realistic world, but then leaves out the time with her entirely. Also, key parts of Odysseus’ character are changed. Clarke has Odysseus suffering from post-traumatic stress after Troy. I’m not sure what to make of this. We’re only really aware of post-traumatic stress very recently, in modern times, which kind of makes it feel out of place here, but of course that doesn’t mean that past peoples didn’t experience it. On the other hand, this is a major alteration to Odysseus’character. We all know Homer’s Odysseus as a bold, cunning adventurer. And yet if we judge Homer’s Odysseus with modern eyes, his character becomes uncomfortable. Homer’s bold hero casually engages in infidelity with Circe and Calypso with no remorse. In the historical setting this is true to life, but with our modern eyes we would find this reprehensible. So I don’t know which is better, the classic vision of Odysseus or Clarke’s reinterpretation of him as a worn-down traumatised man who makes plenty of mistakes.
Fourthly, Clarke changes the ending of the traditional Odyssey myth. In The Return from Troy, I don’t know if I like this or not.
Overall, well-written and a really enjoyable read, but there are some changes to the tale in this book, some of which I like, others of which I'm just not sure about.
8 out of 10
Firstly, the tale abandons divine intervention for plausible human agency – good, decisive on this point at last in contrast to the first book, but also inconsistent with the last book. Can a series retain elements of divine agency in book one and then for book two abandon them all in favour of plausible human explanation?
Secondly, The Return from Troy tries to tell the aftermath stories of all the Troy heroes and their kin, a tall task which can’t succeed because those stories are extensive in and of themselves, so as a result we only get snatches of those stories, jumping around, not telling us the full tales, and interrupting Odysseus’ own tale. As a result Odysseus’ time with Calypso is entirely cut out, and summarised later in flashback.
Thirdly, there are quite a lot of changes to Odysseus’ story. I don’t mind some of the fantastical bits being altered if the author has decided to go for a more plausible, historically authentic tale, and it does bring fresh twists to the tale because suddenly I don’t know as much about what will happen, but for example the author goes to the trouble of reworking Calypso so she’s human and more plausible in a realistic world, but then leaves out the time with her entirely. Also, key parts of Odysseus’ character are changed. Clarke has Odysseus suffering from post-traumatic stress after Troy. I’m not sure what to make of this. We’re only really aware of post-traumatic stress very recently, in modern times, which kind of makes it feel out of place here, but of course that doesn’t mean that past peoples didn’t experience it. On the other hand, this is a major alteration to Odysseus’character. We all know Homer’s Odysseus as a bold, cunning adventurer. And yet if we judge Homer’s Odysseus with modern eyes, his character becomes uncomfortable. Homer’s bold hero casually engages in infidelity with Circe and Calypso with no remorse. In the historical setting this is true to life, but with our modern eyes we would find this reprehensible. So I don’t know which is better, the classic vision of Odysseus or Clarke’s reinterpretation of him as a worn-down traumatised man who makes plenty of mistakes.
Fourthly, Clarke changes the ending of the traditional Odyssey myth. In The Return from Troy, I don’t know if I like this or not.
Overall, well-written and a really enjoyable read, but there are some changes to the tale in this book, some of which I like, others of which I'm just not sure about.
8 out of 10
June 10, 2013
La historia más trágica y heroica jamás contada. Vieja como la humanidad, barbarie en esencia y previa a la civilización del hierro, donde los apetitos, vicios y virtudes del hombre no se filtran con la moral judeocristiana. Leer estos dos libros de Clarke incluyen los detalles y conexiones de la historia, sin la presencia de los dioses sino sólo la irrealidad que trazamos los hombres para entender el mundo y conservar la cordura. Si el primero me dejó impactado con detalles como la muerte de Ayax Telamón, en este los destinos de Hécuba, Neoptólemo, Agamenón y Odiseo me han dejado impactado. Vale la pena leer la horrible tragedia de Micenas y la casa de Atreo para entender Troya, como teje el destino. Recomendado para todo aquel que disfrutó a Homero y Virgilio, pues aquí están las respuestas que faltaban.
March 30, 2011
Found this book hard-going in places, but it was worth it.
Read
August 19, 2011A romp through Ancient Greek mythology. At times confusing, due to the sheer number of characters involved, but still a very good read.
October 11, 2014
This was a good continuation of the story of Troy. If you enjoy Greek mythology, you will like the book.
October 29, 2012
fucking amazing actually
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews