Helen of Troy

by Margaret George

A lush, seductive novel of the legendary beauty whose face launched a thousand ships

Daughter of a god, wife of a king, prize of antiquitys bloodiest war, Helen of Troy has inspired artists for millennia. Now Margaret George, the highly acclaimed bestselling historical novelist, has turned her intelligent, perceptive eye to the myth that is Helen of Troy.

Margaret George breathes new life into the great Homeric tale by having Helen narrate her own story. Through her eyes and in her voice, we experience the young Helens discovery of her divine origin and her terrifying beauty. While hardly more than a girl, Helen married the remote Spartan king Menelaus and bore him a daughter. By the age of twenty, the worlds most beautiful woman was resigned to a passionless marriage until she encountered the handsome Trojan prince Paris. And once the lovers flee to Troy, war, murder, and tragedy become inevitable.

In Helen of Troy, Margaret George has captured a timeless legend in a mesmerizing tale of a woman whose life was destined to create strife and destroy civilizations.

Genres: Historical Fiction, Mythology, Fiction, Historical, Greek Mythology, Romance, Fantasy

747 pages, Paperback

First published August 3, 2006

About the author

Margaret George is a rolling stone who has lived in many places, beginning her traveling at the age of four when her father joined the U.S. diplomatic service and was posted to a consulate in Taiwan. The family traveled on a freighter named after Ulysses' son Telemachus that took thirty days to reach Taiwan, where they spent two years. Following that they lived in Tel Aviv (right after the 1948 war, when it was relatively quiet), Bonn and Berlin (during the spy-and-Cold-War days) before returning--at the height of Elvis-mania--to Washington DC, where Margaret went to high school. Margaret's first piece of published writing, at the age of thirteen, was a letter to TIME Magazine defending Elvis against his detractors. (Margaret has since been to Graceland.)

But it was earlier in Israel that Margaret, an avid reader, began writing novels to amuse herself when she ran out of books to read. Interestingly, the subject of these was not what lay around her in the Middle East, but the American west, which she had never set foot in. (Now that she lives in the American Midwest she writes about the Middle East!) Clearly writing in her case followed Emily Dickinson's observation "There is no frigate like a book" and she used it to go to faraway places. Now she has added another dimension to that travel by specializing in visiting times remote from herself.

Neither of these horse sagas got published, but the ten-year-old author received an encouraging note from an editor at Grosset & Dunlap, telling her she had a budding talent but should work on her spelling.

It was also in Israel that Margaret started keeping land tortoises as pets, an interest which she still follows today. She had a great affinity for animals and nature and that led her to a double major at Tufts University in English literature and biology. Following that she received an MA in ecology from Stanford University--one of the earliest departments to offer such a concentration. Today she is active in environmental and animal conservation groups.

Combining her interests led her to a position as a science writer at the National Cancer Institute (National Institutes of Health) in Bethesda, Maryland for four years.

Her marriage at the end of that time meant moving, first to St. Louis, then to Uppsala, Sweden, and then to Madison, Wisconsin, where she and her husband Paul have lived for more than twenty years now. They have one grown daughter who lives in California and is in graduate school.

Through all this Margaret continued to write, albeit slowly and always on only one project at a time. She wrote what she refers to as her 'Ayn Rand/adventure novel' in college and her 'Sex and the City' novel in Washington DC. It was in St. Louis that she suddenly got the idea of writing a 'psycho-biography' of Henry VIII. She had never seen such a thing done but became convinced the king was a victim of bad PR and she should rescue his good name. Her background in science meant that only after thoroughly researching the literature and scholarship on Henry VIII would she embark on the novel itself. She sought the guidance of a Tudor historian at Washington University for a reading list, and proceeded from there.

It was actually fourteen years between her initial idea and the publication of The Autobiography of Henry VIII. The book made an impression for several reasons: first, because no one had ever written a novel sympathetic to the king before; second, because it covered his entire life from before birth until after his death, making it almost a thousand pages long, and third, because it was so fact-filled.

Reviews

[La Tonya Jordan · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was an amazing book. It was so well written you can follow the story of Greek names, cities, statues, ritals, and Greek culture most people are not familiar with. The belief Greek people had in the immortal God's on high Olympus that of Zeus, Aphrodite, Athena, Persephone, Apollo, Artemis, Hermes, Hera, and others is almost magical.

Helen, the Queen of Sparta, left her home for love and desire to be with someone seven years younger than she all because of Arphodite the goddess of love. This turns tragic of course and ends in the Trojan wars that lasted ten years and Helen, who is now Helen of Troy, returning to Sparta after twenty-four years from the time she left with Paris, her true love. As elegantly spoken by Gleanor , "Ends should not differ from beginnings," he said. "To do so would impugn the truth of one or the other. We must keep our integrity." He turned me toward the pillars. "Look upon it."

Helen of Troy who launched a thousand ships because of her beauty is a timeless love story that if true could heal the world of its indifferences. A must read for all.


Quote:
"Do not look too closely at something, do not come too near, or you might lose the wonder. That is what separates children from adults."

I remembered Father's words: To know is to arm. An enemy seen a far way off cannot surprise. An enemy seen from a distance can be outwitted and avoided.

Now people speak of 'the debt of Neoptolemus'-meaning that as you kill, so shall you be killed." Just as he had cruelly killed Priam at an altar, he himself had been struck down beside one.

'To Sparta! I have waited a generation, I can wait no longer! Girls born the day I left are long since mothers!" he held out his hand to me and I took my place by his side.

"Passionate...I do not know." "You will not until the man you love hold you." I leaned forward. " With women, it is the man, and not the moment. That is the truth of it. With men it is the reverse."

[Arlene · Rating 5 out of 5]

As an avid reader, it's not very often that you come across a book that immediately finds a spot on the top shelf of your bookcase. Well, Helen of Troy has earned that right, without a doubt. This book is sheer perfection in so many ways a simple review cannot express.

The author did a beautiful job of telling the story of Helen of Sparta, later Helen of Troy from a perspective which seamlessly submerges you into the Trojan War. She weaved in all the right characters, events and emotions and wrapped it up perfectly with a carefully chosen point of view and back drop. I could not put this book down! Now keep in mind, it is a very complex read, and it may take time to finish the book. I normally finish a book of this size within a few days, but Helen of Troy took me twice as long, and I feel it was undoubtedly time well spent.

Now to the story... Helen of Troy was rumored to have launched a thousand ships because of her sheer beauty. She was acclaimed to be responsible for the downfall of Troy and the loss of many Greek and Trojan lives. This story takes you back in time where the people of Troy and Sparta, as well as the surrounding kingdoms believed in their fate as provided by the gods. Helen's fate was one that brought suffering to herself and everyone around her. In this story, you learn about Helen's life as a young girl, her marriage to Menelaus, the birth of her daughter Hermione and ultimately her encounter with Paris the Prince of Troy, which eventually led to an inevidable love and the down fall of Troy.

This book was filled with poetic moments of innocence and beauty, as the story is beautifully told through the POV of Helen. IMO it's an exquisite page turner filled with characters you can't get enough of either because you love or hate them, including Helen, Paris, Hermione, Menelaus, Hector, Andromache, Priam, Achilles, Agamemnon, Odysseus, and many, many more. This story brings to life the Trojan War in a manner you won't soon forget. What a great read!

[Tatiana · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have been a fan of Greek mythology since my early childhood. However memories of it faded over last few years. "Helen of Troy" definitely revived my interest in the subject and in historical fiction in general.

There were many things that I loved about the book. The story of Helen was comprehensive and meticulously researched. I know for sure George stayed very close to the sources and the book was historically correct (well, as much as a book about mythical characters can be historically correct). I liked how numerous Greek myths were skillfully weaved into the narrative. I appreciated that George attempted to stay away from portraying gods as active players in the story (as they so often have been presented in Greek plays and legends), rather they stayed distant, almost imaginary. She slipped a couple of times when some occurrences were too magical for my taste - Paris's salvation by Aphrodite or Helen's gift of "seeing." But overall I think this approach added to the feel of "realness" of Helen's life story.

In spite of all these positives, however, the book definitely lacked something. I am saying this primarily because it was an extremely slow read for me, and I am a fast reader. I am not sure what made this book so hard to read - I was never bored, and yet I wasn't quite attached to the story. I think it can be attributed to the "voice" of the book, Helen's voice. Helen was quite a dull and emotionless narrator in my opinion. She was more of a spectator rather than an active participant throughout the book, and therefore everything she told us was bland, impersonal, and somewhat emotionless. Even her passionate affair with Paris that brought Troy to ruin, never quite touched me. And this was probably why I remained not fully involved in the story.

I doubt that I will ever be able to reread this book, it was frankly a lot of work and I do not have patience to dedicate another two weeks to reading a 600-page book, but I might try to read some other book by George, maybe about Cleopatra.

[Janice · Rating 1 out of 5]

I have previously very much enjoyed Margaret George's novels, most specifically her work on Henry VIII, Mary, Queen of Scots and Cleopatra. But as George continues to write about famous "historical" figures the last two she has chosen live more in myth rather than actual history (Mary Magdalene and now Helen of Troy).

I couldn't feel sorry for Helen, and found it sort of cheap that the "Gods" interfered with Helen's emotions in order to make her fall in love with Paris. Previously the character's motives were rooted in their actual characteristics, but there was no motivation given for Helen's actions other than "Aphrodite made me do it" which didn't work in my mind.

Additionally writing about a war that lasted 10 years, felt like it took 10 years to read. Paris was whiny, and unheroic up until the very end of the book and it's hard to understand why Helen chose him over the mostly honorable Menelaus other than "he was hot and young." She's portrayed as the original cougar.

I'm not sure I'd give Margaret George's next book a shot since I've been so disappointed with the last two. Instead of reading this book, you're far better off reading the Iliad instead.

[Lisa · Rating 1 out of 5]

I love Greek mythology and think the fall of Troy is easily one of the most powerful myths around. Prior to reading this I would never have believed that anyone could tell it in such a way as to make it utterly boring, but sadly Margaret George has proved me wrong.

Telling the story of Helen of Troy, the face that started it all, it's clear that Ms George put in rather a lot of research. It's just a shame that, while remembering to add in details like what sort of cups people might have drunk from, she didn't bring any real storytelling talent to the table. A tale that should have been pulsing with passion, instead I felt nothing. Even during the parts that would normally have me weeping like a bereaved child (the death of Hector, and Priam's pleas for his son's body to be returned) or cursing furiously (anything to do with that shit Achilles) I found it all strangely lacking.

As for Helen, considering this is all told through her eyes, it seems that even though she's the main character she's not much more than an insipid, passive nincompoop, hardly the sort of person that thousands of men would give up their lives and bring ruin to kingdoms over, and the 600 odd-pages in her company were a slow torture.

If you're after something that really brings the story of Troy to life you could do much better - I'd recommend David Gemmell's Troy series instead.

[Judith Starkston · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is one of those books I’ve been meaning to read, but didn’t get to until now, published in 2006. Here’s a somewhat meandering review, more a collection of my reactions/thoughts than a formal review. Margaret George writes historical fiction set in a number of periods from Cleopatra to Elizabeth I. I worried from a distance that someone who jumped around like that might be skimpy on the research and historical accuracy. Then I heard her speak at the Tucson Festival of Books, and I realized she is both very smart and has a great deal of integrity about just that issue. So I approached her gigantic Helen of Troy (606pp) with interest—the period I most care about by someone who cared to do it right.

Her approach to Helen is comprehensive. She starts with Helen as a small girl and takes her all the way through the Trojan War, back to Sparta and beyond. Besides making for a long book this also makes for a slightly amorphous book. There isn’t a clear focus or drive—whatever is next up in Helen’s life, that’s what we’ll get. I don’t mean George didn’t lay out a plan, but there’s often a lack of tension and a willingness to include information and scenes just for their enjoyment and detail. I happen to like an abundance of historical information and setting detail, so that’s fine by me, but it’s not a page-turner. Her portrayal of the Mycenaean world is quite faithful to Homer for the most part, which means it isn’t always faithful to the most modern historical understanding of that place and time, but Homer is a good place to be. Her Troy is a Greek city, with only slight differences from the world of Sparta that Helen has left. The historian in me knows there’s been some updates on that—scholars no longer think the Trojans were Greek speaking, for example, nor that their material world was Mycenaean but rather closer to the Hittite cultural world to their east. But this is a mythologically based book so I’m content to immerse myself in this Greek world, which is quite vivid and does reflect pretty accurately what we know about the Mycenaeans.

The most compelling things about Helen of Troy, besides the abundance of detail of daily life and war in ancient times, are George’s character portrayals. Helen starts out quite ordinary despite her half immortal parentage, except in the area of her startling appearance. Other than golden hair, George resists telling us what makes Helen’s appearance so unusual. In this she takes her cue from Homer and paints Helen through the reactions of people to her rather than description. Helen acquires her visionary insights and her outsized passion from the gods as she goes along rather than from an inborn nature. She objects to being so special in appearance and as far as personality, she stays in normal human parameters: strong-willed at times, intelligent and perceptive about people and their faults, able to take command in times of need, but often an observer more than a doer. The magical sorceress-like character that sometimes appears in the myths and Homer is not present here except in rumors that Helen rejects.

Although Helen and Paris go through a rough spot in their marriage, George has them cleave to each other to the end. Some readers of Homer would see a Helen who has grown bored and disgusted with her Paris long before the end of the war, so that’s an interesting and conscious choice.

Achilles is pretty much despicable through and through. He’s violent and mean spirited with only one or two moments, for example in the face of Penthesileia’s death, where he shows any positive actions or feelings at all. I’ve always been partial to Achilles, seeing him as the laudable existential hero of the poem, so I’m not with George on that read, but there’s plenty in the tradition to support her portrayal and it works very well with her overall storyline. I think it does reduce Achilles and therefore the whole Trojan War aura, but her portrayal of Hector’s nobility and her redeeming of Paris make up for that. Paris is a far more heroic character here than I would have been able to imagine, and I enjoyed that vision a great deal. It was fun and made Helen’s choice far more satisfying.

George uses some clever, if occasionally a little contrived, devices to put us on the scene with some famous moments in the Iliad. The novel is told from Helen’s point of view, but she wanders in her inner vision onto battlefields, and at other points she observes private moments as an eavesdropper, such as the farewell scene between Andromache and Hector and their infant son.

The tragedy of Troy’s destruction is George’s tour de force. As a reader I felt it in my bones. I wept with Priam and Hecuba and the growing bleakness and despair is beautifully depicted. She makes you want to reach into mythological history and rewrite it, make the whole thing come out differently, even as you read along knowing no such reprieve will come. That’s good writing, for sure. The final parts in
Sparta and then back to Troy have less emotional kick to them, but given her choice to portray Helen’s whole life, they are unavoidable.

I enjoyed George’s Helen of Troy. There are probably pieces here and there that could have been edited out to carry the story forward more quickly (I can hear my critique partners/editors laughing at me—that’s always what I have to do), but if you love immersion in history, George excels at that and you might object if parts were removed.

[Robert Case · Rating 5 out of 5]

Just another remake of the Trojan War? Oh no. Not this time. This version of the ancient saga is told straight from the lips, the voice, the brain, and the heart of its leading female protagonist, Helen Queen of Sparta, a/k/a the face that launched 1,000 ships, a/k/a Helen of Troy. The book is long. The narrative never gets tired.
We meet Helen as a young girl, a princess fated by the extraordinary circumstances of her birth to become the most beautiful mortal woman on earth. Teenage Helen marries Menelaus. She becomes Queen of Sparta. Soon they have a daughter together, Hermione. The goddess Aphrodite intervenes to ensure that the passions of Helen's heart take priority over everything else. So, we the readers get the meet a well-known cast of characters, Paris, Aeneas, Odysseus, Hector, Achilles, Priam Agamemnon, Clytemnestra, Andromache, and more, through the eyes of Helen.
The battle scenes of the ensuing Trojan War are the context through which the author portrays the personal struggles of Helen; ultimately, the death of Paris, the love of her life. But, not until he kills the invincible Achilles on the field of battle, to become a hero of Troy in the war-weary eyes of his father, King Priam. The glory is short-lived. Helen, the lover and wife becomes nurse, treating an infection from a seemingly minor wound that overwhelms Paris with pain, disfigures his body, and eventually kills him.
Now a widow, law and culture conspire to force Helen into marriage with the Paris' lecherous older brother, the Trojan Prince Deiphobus. His efforts to consummate the marriage while carrying on the war as the last prince standing, make an interesting subplot.
Troy falls, as it must. But there's still an entertaining story to unfold, which is why I decided to recommend this so highly. Author Margaret George continues the epic within this single volume; Helen's recapture and reconciliation with Menelaus, their return to Mycenae, and eventually, Helen's trial of reconnecting with the daughter she abandoned many years before. The book is a masterful piece of storytelling. One that does not end until Helen finds peace.

[S. ≽^•⩊•^≼ I'm not here yet · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5

آیا هدف شما پیروزی در جنگ است؟ یا اینکه میخواهید شرافت خود را حفظ کنید؟ این دو باهم یکی نیستند.
بهتر است در جنگ برنده شویم. میتوانیم بعد از پیروزی لباس شرافت را بر تن کنیم.

روایت هلن که چطور خشم، غرور، جاه‌طلبی، حرص و طمع مردان سبب جنگی شد برای دفاع از شرافت او، بهانه ای برای جنگ، بدست آوردن ثروت و زمینهای بیشتر.

تمام آن هزاران هزاری که کشته شدند بدلیل غرور و جاه‌طلبی های احمقانه تو و امثال تو بود. خون واقعی بر روی لباسهای من نیست. بر روی دستهای تو است

هلن و خواهرش کلایمینسترا با پسران آتویوس ازدواج کردند، خاندانی که نفرین خدایان بر آنهاست. آگاممنون (که از فرزندانش ایفی ژنیا، الکترا و اورستوس روایت‌ها فراوان است) با بیش از ۵۰۰ کشتی جنگی با رهبری اصلی آژاکس، آشیل و ادیسه از یونان به ترویا بادبان کشیدند.

اینبار هلن بسیار دلخراش و تا حدودی جانبدارانه از یونانیان جنگ‌طلب، آشیل وحشی و ادیسه شرور می‌گوید، از سقوط ترویا، نابودی یک نسل و سرزمین، بیرحمی خدایان و زنانی با سرنوشت بدتر از مردگان، زنانی که زنده ماندند!

بچه مار را باید کشت. در میان خرابه های ترویا حتی یک نفر هم نباید زنده بماند. مبادا از نو این شهر را سرپا کنند.

[Debbie Zapata · Rating 4 out of 5]

The story of Helen of Troy from Helen's viewpoint.

I enjoyed the book, it made me want to go back to my Homer and re-read. I will have to put that project on my mental list for Someday.

So was Helen a hapless victim of her own beauty or an active participant in deceptions and intrigue simply in order to get what she wanted out of life? This book leans heavily towards the first option, with bits of the other here and there.

I liked the way the author handled the passage of time, with Helen talking about how she never seemed to be able to tell how many years had passed while the war raged on. And I also liked how the author captured the basic personalities of each character, portraying them pretty much as I remember from my reading of Homer. Except I do think she painted Achilles with a fairly heavy brush, making him seem cartoonish, which he may have been, but every time he showed up he seemed like Woody Woodpecker bouncing around.

This book re-ignited my interest in the ancient Greece. I really do need to visit Homer again, and dig out my as of yet unread book about the old myths. They are fascinating, and I can look up some of the names I was fuzzy about while I was reading of Helen.

[Britta Böhler · Rating 2 out of 5]

I was so bored. Not for me.

[TL *Humaning the Best She Can* · Rating 4 out of 5]

*I don't know too much about the myth of Troy, just some stuff so bear with me*

A wonderful novel of Helen and the Trojan War... everything was brought to life beautifully, I felt like I was walking the streets of Sparta and Troy. Miss George's writing was amazing, very rich and beautifully detailed. The pages fly by very quickly, even though this isn't a fast read.

Helen and Paris' falling in love... happened a bit quickly for my taste and I had trouble believing their love for most of the book till they were in Troy and spent more time together... even then I still had mental flags popping up now and then.

The 'gifts' of Helen's Sight (or however you want to name it), was a nice touch.

Hector and Andromache were my favorites among the side characters, their love and devotion for each other, their family, and Troy shined through. Hector is fair, kind, strong... I would have loved to know him :). Andromache is a fitting partner for Hector, and a good friend to Helen.

Having Helen's side of things and seeing how/what she thought of everything leading up to and surrounding the war was interesting... how lonely she felt in her marriage to Menelaus, her love for Hermione and Paris, flight to troy... it was interesting but also grating sometimes. There were many moments that I wanted to shake her and make her 'grow up' in a sense.

It felt sometimes that she was 'stuck' a bit mentally and never fully matured... or maybe that's just me *shrugs*

Don't get me wrong, I loved seeing things from her point of view and all but I would liked insight/point of views from the other people... Achilles would have specially interesting.
-----
Quote from near the end:

"I cannot believe that the extraordinary deeds and person of Achilles, Hector, Paris, and you will disappear. These were different than all those others. Different from Theseus and the Minotaur, different from Jason and his Argonauts, beyond the destruction of Andromache's city of Thebes.

I smiled. At the moment I felt so much wiser than he. "Dear friend," I said "they all felt thus-- felt they, and their valiant deeds, could never vanish."
----

These people live on in the many stories about them and will continue to fascinate, there's just something about all of them that draws you in. Makes you wonder too, if any of it could have prevented, or was it destined to play out as it was? Were any of them and the Trojan war real?

A masterpiece of a novel, highly recommend :) Will definitely have to look up more about Troy later on. *May add more to the review later on, be gentle haha ;-)*

[Natasa · Rating 5 out of 5]

Margaret George brings to life the heroic and not so heroic deeds of the Trojan war. All the characters are there Odysseus, Hector, Achilles, Priam, Clytemnestra, Agamemnon and Helen, and Paris. The author brings to life the sights, sounds, and conflicts of the war and the pain and suffering of the men who fought in it. That said, I found this to be a credible, fascinating look into this era of history. Full review you can find on my blog: https://poetryofreading.blogspot.com/...

[sofia · Rating 3 out of 5]

this book had its ups and down, but i can say i enjoyed the beginning of it much better than the latter half. i think part of it is that, as the book progressed, it became really a love story between paris and helen, which: if you enjoy the pairing, this is a great book for you and i'd recommend it. i, on the other hand, very strongly don't like paris, so it didn't work great for me.

spoilers ahead just in case. i have difficulty explaining my feelings on this book while remaining vague about it. most is based on the myths, but george does fill in some things which i will be discussing, so spoilers ahead.

let's start with the characters, specifically helen, as she's the biggest one and we see the story through her eyes. now, i was very excited about this book because of that fact (helen is up there as one of my favorite mythological figures, to be frank). but while i enjoyed helen during her first half, my enjoyment with her also was diminished during the second half. during the first part of her life in sparta george fills in the blanks, painting a complete and realistic version of what helen's life before troy would have been (with some stretching, but that's to be expected). really, the strongest part of this book for me was the filling in the blanks that george does. there are things that are left out of the story (the kidnaping by theseus, for example, as they were myths added at later dates), but for the most part it's a believable potrayal of life at the time. and i say belivable and not accurate because i am not a classic expert, beyond what i have read in my spare time and as a hobby, and so i cannot judge how accurate or close to the truth it is. but as someone reading it, it was believable. which is the same with helen's portrayal here. she's believable, and i can see her being like this. she's also pretty boring after meeting paris. during the time in sparta, we see helen wanting things, choosing her husband and moving things to chose the one she wanting while still setting the terms. we see her interests. once we get to the paris part, he's the only thing in her mind and it was frankly, kind of dull to read about. that's why i say that if you enjoy the pairing of paris and helen this is a great book, because they are always present after paris first appears. helen also becomes quite passive after leaving sparta. she recovers a bit of her personality as troy falls, but even then i have some issues.

here's the thing: there's several paths you can take with helen. either she's a complete victim, taken by force by paris and kept as a prisioner during the war, or she chose out of her all volation to leave sparta. or, the third choice, aphrodite made her, and so while she 'chose' it, there's little agency there. of course, this one also depends on how far aphrodite's influence goes. did she just make her fall in love and so everything after was her choice? or did she make her leave with him? those things matter because they change completely how you portray helen as a person.

george chooses the third, and so helen is absolved of all guilt. now, i am a firm believer of 'helen is not to blame for the war (or never completely, in any case)', and while i tend to also side with the third option when trying to lean into one interpretation, i never realized how incredibly dull it could be to read about. i never read the helen shown here and believed she could be considered as a near goddess. that is obviously how everyone else sees her, but in her own mind helen is really ordinary and it was boring to read about for almost 750 pages. she does not read as a larger than life figure, as someone people would die for, and while i do think it's a realistic and believable, i also thought it got dull really fast. helen is never really painted as in the wrong, because of her love towards paris, so she's washed away from any guilt from the deaths the war brought. as i said, i am a firm believer that she's not actually to blame, i think agammenon wanted his war and this was his excuse. but it's hard to keep that rational thought in mind when she was present when her brother-in-law spoke of war with troy and then she handed him a great excuse. it's also hard to keep it in mind when she does one (1) attempt at removing herself as an excuse. and this is being said by someone who adores helen as a mythological figure. so through-out all her time in troy, past her making the decision of arriving, helen really makes no big choices. even her getting spared by menelaus is mere chance, the story of her disrobing to show herself naked now shown as her robe simply getting undone. i get why someone would have issues with the original story, but if it was going to be included at all, i wish it had been something she did by choice rather than something that happened by chance.

moving on to the next character: paris. this felt like the formal apology to paris for anyone who disliked him, which is also likely why my enjoyment just decreased so much after he was introduced. i don't like paris. i find him whiny, and conceited, and only thinking of himself. i'm also pretty sure helen never learns what paris' 'prize' was (you know: her) which pissed me off, unless i'm forgetting some crucial scene. i got some of it - if he's good with a bow, he's good with a bow, you know? this whole 'coward's weapon' would also anger me. what i didn't get was why oenone was moved from being his wife who he set aside when he wanted helen, as she was in the old myths, to simply a lover he set aside. he's also portrayed ridiculously noble through the whole thing. i do think that the oenone thing is the biggest change and the one i hate the most, but there's also how the author changed paris not stealing treasure from sparta, and how he was continuously saying that he was super understanding if helen couldn't keep going with him. except that if he's so noble, so good, why is he taking with him the queen of a nation? to be clear, from as far as helen is concerned, i don't think she should have gone with him either. the whole doomed lovers is fun and all but y'all have kingdoms to think of and helen even has a daughter. but it really clashed for me because like with helen, paris is never shown to be in the wrong. another thing that kind of ruined it for me was his age, to be frank. there really was no need to make him 16 when helen was already in her twenties. i can understand it with helen and menelaus as that was the custom for a princess, to marry when she was around 15/16. there was nothing gained from making paris so young. i get that the experiences were different at the time this was set, but it still was very uncomfortable because all i kept thinking was that he was ridiculously young. later during the story achille's son is described as a 'child', but he's merely a year younger than paris here. so how am i meant to read the beginning and not feel like he's barely left being a child behind and he's getting in a relationship that is clearly portrayed as this huge epic romance with a woman who is in her early twenties? it was uncomfortable and i hated it. again, i feel like if you enjoy paris, great book for you, you'll find a very sympathetic portrayal of him here. i just don't like him.

we have the rest of the characters. clytemnestra is fun to read whenever she's present, she was a bright spot for me because i was always looking forward to reading about her. agammenon is the worst as per usual. and then menelaus is... also really boring. it was also quite jarring to see the change between menelaus wanting to win helen's hand vs him after they married, to the point that it was a bit confusing. it felt like george wanted to clearly show why helen would choose him but also make really easy helen choosing paris. i'm not saying it wasn't realistic: i can see someone acting this way once reality set. i just didn't enjoy such a harsh shift. hecuba and priam were fine, i had no problems with how they were potrayed. hector was also fine. i will admit, hector is one of those figures i always look for when reading a story of troy, but i feel like it's difficult to mess up hector. he's always portrayed as pretty noble and brave, so you would have to really work in order to make him unlikable, i feel. not necessarily because he's kind (although he's also shown as someone who always made helen feel welcomed), but because he's unrelenting and refuses to back down. because he never abandoned his city. it just feels like a character that as long as you stick near what homer wrote, you can't really go wrong with (surely someone did it, but i find it hard to imagine regardless)

and then there's achilles. i left him for last because he was... i didn't like his potrayal here. not because i don't mind portrayals of achilles as a bad person. i think those are really fun! i enjoy those! i don't think you can write a book from the trojan pov and not paint him as terrifying. but it was more how he was written. maybe it was the manner of speech. but if you tell me this man cared about patroclus, i wouldn't believe it. achilles was arrogant and proud. i'd even say that painting him as childish can fit. but here it was taken to such an extreme that it felt like a caricature. this is also the man who would defy agammenon and promise the seer that his words would bring him no harm? that he would fight a river god in his anger for patroclus' death? i just couldn't believe it.

the book is also really lengthy. while most of the pages are used to advance the plot, i do think some could have been cut. there are instances where we learn of something and then a few pages after we get told of the whole thing again, and it was confusing. while i don't think much could have been cut, i do think some of it could have gone. it does get wordy at times.

last, i can't say i enjoyed the ending. the pacing was fine through-out, and i think it's an easy read leaving aside the length. as per usual, i said i started it back in june but in reality i read the whole thing in two days, so it's not a book i think that is difficult to read. the positive parts, as i said, was how george filled in what we didn't know of helen's life. the downside, for me, was the second half as paris consumed every aspect of helen and i don't care for paris, nor for the paring of paris and helen. the truth is i've read another story with a more 'realistic' portrayal of helen (even if that one didn't involve the gods and this one did) and while it lacked depth, i actually understood the characters action there far better. this one is much longer and should feel like it goes in much more depth, but it refuses to allow its main protagonists be ever in the wrong, so it didn't work for me.

[Rebecca Huston · Rating 1 out of 5]

One of the most boring, badly written, snooze-inducing novels that I have ever waded through. Here, Margaret George takes on the Iliad and reduces it into cheap trash. Helen is a sluttish, boring, one note, and no one else really rises up to the material, with the possible exception of Odysseus. Be smart, stick with the original, preferably Robert Fagle's recent translations. Not worth the time or money.

For the longer review, please go here:
http://www.epinions.com/review/Book_H...

[Claire · Rating 5 out of 5]

I'm terrible at writing out reviews - and actually posting them, but I just can't help myself with this one. This book is one of my absolute favorites, and so underappreciated.
Unlike many Helen of Troy books, George starts from the very beginning and goes all the way to the very end. And while this may seem like a long, tedious process for the reader, George’s writing is so flipping fantastic that I STILL want more.
George is also the first author that makes the whole “elopment” storyline readable. I have always struggled with that storyline as a reader and avid Greek mythology fan, and the way George brings it to life makes Helen’s life almost tangible to the point that you want to elope with her. Sorry, that was a mouthful. Am I the only one that’s struggled with the adultery aspect of this myth? Though it seems like a common theme among Greek myths it was still hard to bear because it is the source of blame for the iconic war. Needless to say, George turns this thread in the storyline bearable and even enjoyable at turns.
That brings me to the main heroine, Helen. She is a pampered princess, the most beautiful woman in the world, with men coming in droves to kiss her feet, and yet you still feel pity for her. She is the daughter of a god and a queen, and predictably her life will be tragic yet beautiful. The story plays in almost three parts, the first being her childhood up until her marriage to Menelaus, the second her elopment with Paris and consequential war, and the third plays a short but sweet part of her picking up the pieces. It’s an ode to one of the most iconic, yet misunderstood, heroines of all time.
Though this book is long, over 600 pages (which may seem like a walk in the park to George R.R. Martin fans like myself), each page is so beautifully written and gripping that you find yourself wishing for more as you turn the final pages.
Overall, this book is great for lovers of Greek myths and epic love stories. George does a great job weaving the portrait of Helen with equal parts realism and magic, doing this epic story complete justice.

[Jocelyn · Rating 2 out of 5]

Okay, Margaret George is an extremely "wordy" author. She likes adjectives and she likes to use them a lot. I am a simple woman, if the day is hot then I don't want to hear about how the sweat drops slide down your face.
Also, I think she got bored in the last 100 pages because Helen just kind of summarizes things and then the book is over.
Also, I hate Helen of Troy. If I was to write a fiction book about a fiction woman I would make Helen of Troy a power house. I don't CARE that Homer didn't write her like that. I would write her like that. To me, Helen would be in the war room planning the attacks. She would be on the field with the Amazon Women thrusting and cutting her way to freedom.
Instead, George turned her into a whiney, childish, frightened woman and the only reason I finished this book was because it was hot in my apartment, I didn't want to move and I have weekends off.

Seriously.

[Marissa Joyce · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was a good book, but I found Helen's character to be petulant and frankly, annoying. Perhaps this is my own pet peeve, but I found Helen's attempts to externalize the blame and repercussions of her own actions on the gods to be really tiresome- especially after 600 pages.
However, the characters were well developed, the splotseemed to stick to the historical data, and the storyline moved along at a quick pace. I enjoyed reading the novel, but I think I may have liked it more if Helen had been portrayed as a strong woman character who knew her own mind and heart- and owned her own decisions- not an immature whiner who blamed the tragic outcomes of her own decisions on the gods.

[Anissa · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another by Margaret George that I really enjoyed. Donating as clearing bookshelves for move.

[Rick Davis · Rating 2 out of 5]

Helen of Troy by Margaret George is an ambitious book. The author attempts to create an autobiography for the mythical Helen encompassing her entire life from childhood through “death”. At six hundred thirty-eight pages, it stands at about the same length as Homer’s epic tale of the Trojan War. However, upon finishing Margaret George’s book, my lament was “Ichabod”, the glory has departed.

Positives

Before I explain what I mean by that and why I think that this book, ambitious as it is, fails to achieve its purpose, I would like to share the things I thought the book got right. First of all, George has done her research well. The customs, architecture, props, and landscape of Sparta in the 13th century BC are wonderfully recreated according to the best knowledge we can have of the time. She attempts to be realistic and historical in her portrayal even of stories that are, at best, legendary. In this sense the book reminded me of The King Must Die by Mary Renault, which does the same thing, albeit more successfully, with the story of Theseus and the Minotaur. The second thing that George gets right is her inclusion of the gods in her telling of the story. Any reading of the legendary accounts of the Trojan War leaves the sense that there is no possibility that these events could have transpired with the gods pulling some strings behind the scenes. This is why the movie “Troy” was a failure and one of the reasons why Roger Ebert quipped that Homer’s estate should sue the filmmakers. However despite these positive aspects of the book, there are several weaknesses that are hard to overlook.

The Character of Helen

The first weakness of the book is in the characterization of Helen. Since the book is an autobiography, we know from the outset that Helen is going to be presented as a sympathetic character. I even went into the book willing to go along with Helen and sympathize with her. However, in this important point George does not succeed. To show why this is the case, it’s important to look at the traditional depictions of Helen, both positive and negative, and to compare them to the portrayal in this book.

Helen is a woman who left her husband and ran away with a man more than ten years her junior because he was more handsome than her husband. This might not have been a big deal for an ordinary person, though it would have still been immoral. But Helen is the queen of Sparta, and therefore her perceived abduction by a Trojan ambassador and prince is seen as an act of aggression against Sparta and a cause for war. How can a woman performing an act so clearly immoral and irresponsible be viewed in any sort of positive light? Homer’s answer appears to be twofold. In The Iliad and The Odyssey, we get the sense that Helen was deceived by Aphrodite in some sort of mind-control/hypnotic sort of way to go with Paris back to Troy. Aphrodite did this as a reward for Paris because he chose her as the winner of a beauty contest over Hera and Athena. In The Iliad, we also see that Helen despises Paris and is essentially a prisoner in Troy, bullied by Aphrodite and kept by Paris’s lust. This is a more positive depiction of Helen. For those who find this implausible, get rid of Aphrodite and cast the story in a modern world. How many women leave their husbands for someone they see as a “better man” only to find out later that he is not all they thought he was and are stuck with him because they are either afraid of him or don’t know where else to go? This is a common enough story and conjures up sympathy for the woman trapped in such a sorry situation. Even though she has done wrong, she is caught in her own snare and is to be pitied. However, though George includes the scene from The Iliad where Helen despises Paris, it turns out to be a simple misunderstanding, easily remedied. The Helen of this book is influenced by but not essentially deceived by Aphrodite. All Aphrodite does is to make Helen not enjoy making love with her husband Menelaus and enjoy making love with Paris. Because we know that the value of a marriage is tied up only with the amount of sexual enjoyment we get from it, right? Helen has few misgivings in this book and believes to the end that she has done nothing essentially wrong.

This seems to leave no other option than the common portrayal of Helen by the playwrights of the golden age of Athens. The Athenian playwrights represent Helen as a capricious whore who leaves her husband for another man for no good reason other than the fact that she feels like it. Sorry; lovey-dovey feelings do not nullify wedding vows. How does George get around this inevitable conclusion? She uses a tactic that is less than convincing. After pining after Paris, meeting with him a nighttime, and fantasizing about running away with him, she walks in on Menelaus having an affair with one of the servants. Thus she is clearly justified in running of with Paris, right? Here’s the problem with this scenario; she has clearly been toying with adulterous thoughts for Paris before she ever had any hint of Menelaus’s infidelity. The addition of a second wrong does not make the first wrong right. The revelation of Menelaus’s affair does not cause us sympathize with Helen so much as it causes us to simply despise Menelaus as well. So much for the character of Helen. When the Greek commanders later hurl invective at her and call her a whore, the reader is supposed to feel that these insults are unjust. However, given what see of Helen’s character, it’s hard to disagree with the Greeks here. George would have been much better off going with Homer’s version of the story and creating a conflicted, abused and tragic heroine rather than someone who revels in her adultery.

The Character of the Greeks

One of the most notable things about The Iliad, and one of the tragedies of war in real life, is that there are noble and good people on both sides. Hector, the hero of Troy, is a great and brave man, but so are the Greek leaders Achilles, Menelaus, Agamemnon, the Aiantes, Diomedes, and others. In George’s book, the Greeks are almost to a man despicable, petty, cruel and lecherous. The level of her negative portrayal of the Greeks is so cartoonish that one is tempted to picture the entire Achaean force wearing black capes and top hats with appropriately long mustaches to twirl.

I think the reason that George falls into this trap is that, while getting all the physical details of the culture right, the customs and the costumes so to speak, the character of Helen in this book thinks predominately like a modern. The book does not enter fully into an ancient mindset, and so the characters are all being judged by a modern worldview that really does have a hard time understanding the glory of the soldiers in the Trojan War. Achilles gets the worst of this treatment. In Homer, Achilles is a noble warrior, denied his “arête” by Agamemnon, caught in a choice between a short life with glory or a long life in obscurity, haunted by the realization that he should have been a god as powerful as Zeus had it not been for Zeus’s meddling interference. Where is this noble and conflicted character in Helen of Troy? He is gone, replaced by a whining, screeching, spoiled brat with the mental capacity of a Neanderthal. Because of this same tendency to refuse to portray the nobility and glory of the Greeks, the essential tragedy and human interest that characterizes The Iliad vanishes. The only human emotions allowed to be portrayed in this book are emotions that fit comfortably within the realm of modern paperback romance. Anything that conflicts with these norms, including true manliness to some extent, is seen as inhuman and ugly.

There is a scene in The Iliad that I consider to be the most moving scene in the book, and possibly the most moving scene in all of human literature. It is the scene where the old king Priam goes to Achilles to ask for the body of his son Hector whom Achilles has slain in battle, or “murdered” if you prefer George’s wording. While Priam is supplicating Achilles, a moment of understanding passes between them during which Achilles sees in Priam his own aged father whom he will never see again, and Priam sees in Achilles the glory of his own dead son Hector and is comforted in the fact that Hector has been killed by such a noble soldier. They weep openly together, and the reader, if he or she has a heart, weeps with them, two ordinary and good people caught up in something bigger than themselves and unable to extricate themselves from the situation. It is not surprising that this scene is completely downplayed in George’s book. She can’t risk a sympathetic portrayal of Achilles because it would destroy her cartoonish sense that Achilles is simply “the bad guy” and nothing more. Priam goes to beg for Hector’s body, but it is seen as shameful and we get no hint that anything remotely human ever passes between Priam and Achilles.

Summary

There is more that I could say about this book, but after all this is a blog and if you’re still reading this you’ve gone much further than most internet readers would. So, I’ll summarize. This book unfortunately fails at what it sets out to do. The portrayal of the events is too simplistic to feel real in the same way that Homer’s Iliad feels real. The “follow your heart” and “love conquers all” theme is worthy of a modern romance, but not an ancient story. The characters do not seem to fit into their carefully crafted historical surroundings because all of the “bad” characters are seen through a modern lens as brutal barbarians and all the “good” characters share more than a few modern attitudes themselves. Ultimately this book is not satisfying because the author does not fully enter into the worldview of the time period about which she is writing. I would not recommend this book as an introduction to the story of Helen of Troy, but would rather encourage interested readers to plunge directly into Homer’s writings or the plays of writers like Euripides and Aeschylus. Don’t be intimidated by the classics. They are most often easier to read than you’ve been led to believe, and they are classics for a reason. Unlike this book, they touch upon something essential and indelible in the human soul.

1.5/5 stars

[Iset · Rating 5 out of 5]

In Helen of Troy, George loses none of her deft story-telling touch. Reading this book, or indeed any book by George, one can feel almost as something palpable that this story is truly woven – a rich tale of many complex strands woven expertly together by George’s pen. What a joy! There’s something gloriously gluttonous about curling up with a book like that and a mug of hot chocolate of a cold winter’s evening and losing yourself for hours. Mind you, I read Helen of Troy whilst ensconced in the all-pervading heat and light, punctuated by the quenching respite of a cool sea breeze, of Crete in summertime, and maybe it was the Hellenistic location, but I felt transported in such a way that it seemed almost strange.

One thing that George does so well is in imagining past places and people and rendering them so thoroughly and completely on the page. Her stories are always so rich and detailed, and she’s an expert at filling in the gaps in history with compelling and yet believable material. Helen of Troy really feels like a sweeping epic too, maybe partly due to the tales’ extensive history and place in the western consciousness, but a great deal of credit must go to Margaret George’s skill as an author. I had read Bettany Hughes’ comprehensive non-fiction work Helen of Troy before I picked up this novel, so I was more aware of the historical authenticity reading through this book, and although Helen is, as far as we currently know, a figure of myth, I was stunned at how George managed to incorporate almost every aspect of the legends involving Helen – even those seemingly contradictory tales – and took care to render the details of the Bronze Age setting with accuracy.

I was particularly interested to see how George would handle the mythical elements of the legend, since I prefer my retellings of legends to either go whole hog with the fantasy or try to create a completely plausible historical version. George largely treats the tale in an historical manner, apart from the appearances of Aphrodite and the water nymph. I was slightly disappointed at this because she handles the other potentially mythical material in such a clever way, turning it into something historically plausible, could she not have done the same for Aphrodite and the water nymph? This book would have been truly fantastic to read as a complete historical epic.

For the most part I loved the characters. Helen felt thoroughly fleshed out and very real, as did Paris, though he is not quite as fleshed out – but this adds to our sense of confusion alongside Helen when the couple experience the distress of unknowable rifts between them. Many of the characters felt so authentic, but they appear so infrequently in the story that I was a little disappointed and rather wanted to know more, characters such as Helen’s siblings, Agamemnon, Menelaus, Achilles, Odysseus, Priam and Hecuba and their other children and so forth. The character of Gelanor was interesting, but at times felt a bit too engineered – and indeed he is an author-invented character.

9 out of 10. A richly detailed, meticulous portrait of Helen of Troy set in a sweeping epic tale. For me, only let down by a few odd characters moments and the odd random inclusion of a couple of mythical elements when the rest of the story tries to be historical, but well worth the read. A definite keeper on my bookshelf.

[Zulfiya · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a beautiful example of historical FICTION. I boldly capitalize the word ‘fiction’ because the original story of Troy and its long siege per se is a fictitious yarn, loosely based on events whose historicity has yet to be fully proven. The famous narrative ‘Iliad’ has become the intrinsic part of human cultural heritage and in its turn has given birth to a number of artistic interpretations. Most of the spin-offs (novels, paintings, poems, movies, plays) mainly tell the story of warriors and men. This lengthy novel gives a unique feminine perspective.

Helen of Sparta, later ofTroy, tells us the story of her life, marriages, loves, hopes, an epic destruction. Due to the cultural background, the plot is not original as it retells the story every person is expected to be familiar with. What is unique about this novel is the strong and independent feminine voice of the narrator who deals with the burden of circumstances, curses, fate, and people who drastically change her life.

Despite the numerous tragedies (the death of her mother, her brothers, her beloved, and other people he liked) Helen is not an embittered character even in the land of strangers. The author masterfully shows her conflicted soul and how she has to accept her new loyalty in the war betweenGreeceandTroy. The characters on both sides of this war are believable and surprisingly human. The only two of them stand out due to their voracious desire to accumulate power and to kill – they are Agamemnon and Achilles. And if the first one has notoriously been known for his instigating skills, Achilles is often revered as the strongest Greek warrior with the noble veneer. In this novel he is just a ruthless killer with the amazing power.

Because the traditional story of Troy with its eventual demise is always associated with the divine elements, this novel also has to do with the question of whimsical and petty Greek gods. The topic is daunting enough to handle from the very beginning due to the questionable nature of every deity, especially if the story is shaped by Fate and numerous prophecies. Ms. George manages to find a fine balance between the world of gods, demigods, and nymphs and the world of people. Theologically, it is more of a deistic approach; from the viewpoint of literature her gods do not influence the world of people much and their existence is harmoniously interwoven into the fabric of human life.

The language is rich and extremely sensuous, the voice of the protagonist changes with the age of the heroine – from an innocent girl and later a bride to a desirable woman to a wife and grandmother. This voice convincingly conveys the messages that every woman can relate to even nowadays. Helen of Sparta, ofTroy, and ofSpartaagain is first and foremost a woman who finally finds some peace in the end of her life.

There is also one more interesting point to consider – the book does not stop with the fall of Troy (though the biggest part is over); the narrator still continues exploring the lives of other people, involved into this historic tragedy. We learn about Andromache, Odysseus, Clytemnestra, Orestes, Electra, and Hermione.

The book itself is not only based on the famous ‘Iliad’ but incorporates many other Greek myths and the plots of ancient tragedies by Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides. Hence, both the serious research and extensive reading were the successful foundation for this culturally rich novel.

[Heather · Rating 5 out of 5]

As a lover of Greek mythology, my interests were piqued by the title alone. And as someone who has always thought of Paris as a petulant child and Helen a victim of kidnapping and rape, I was interested to read George's slant on the events that transpired between the Trojan Prince and the Spartan Queen. I was dazzled.

Helen's air headed tendencies aside, I found myself sympathizing with her more than once. She is most certainly a flawed character, but I found her humanity and tenacious spirit compelling. As for Paris, I was able to see beyond the arrogant child that I always thought him to be and perhaps fell a little in love with him myself. He and Helen's interactions were passionate and beautifully written. The chemistry between these two lovers could have ignited the pages. The tragic inevitability of their pairing was truly poetic and the ending was breathtaking, I say that because I was sobbing as I read it.

Georgoe seemlessly transports her readers to both Sparta and Troy. I felt as though I could smell the sea, feel the wind, and touch every blade of grass. Simply put, I feel in love with Troy, Paris, and this book.

[Alexia · Rating 5 out of 5]

"If I just slid my fingers away, pulled back . . . then all could be undone. If I did not, now, then I was bound forever. The grip of his hands on mine felt imprisoning, like clamps. I could not move my fingers."

This was such a magnificent piece of work.
It left me without words.
Helen was depicted sympathetically,the way she made me laugh at some of her actions,she really was such a fun character to read before the war started.
After that I cried when she cried and felt every feeling of guilt and agony that she felt,this author really knows who to pull at your heartstrings.
I know a lot of people do not like Paris but this version of him really made me love him,his relationship with Helen was full of passion and tenderness and I devoured it every time they were on page together.
All the other characters were written with such complexity that it showed that the author really wrote about something that she loved and that she did her research.
The only character I did not like was Achilles but that is only cause I always see the version of him from Song of Achilles when I read about him.

[Kim Becker (MIDDLE of the Book MARCH)]

DNF at 50%. Long with no pacing. Booooooring. 😕

[Colleen Oakes · Rating 5 out of 5]

Last year, a friend recommended the book Gone with the Wind. I balked at the idea, at the mere size of it. But I read it, because I trust her book choices with every fiber of my being. And I loved it. Never had I read a single book that was as epic, as sweeping, as Gone with the Wind. Until now. My blogger friend Ashley gave it a phenomenal review, and it turns out that Helen of Troy had been sitting in my bookcase all this time. I had bought it at a used bookstore about two years ago. WEIRD! Back to the book: Helen of Troy, which covers the entire life of infamous Helen - from her childhood to her death - has scenes of heart wrenching beauty. There were times when it flowed so well that it was like a song. It's brilliance. It's long, but every page is filled with detail and meaning. I'm not a big historical fiction person. Too often the story gets lost in the historical details, and before I know what's happening I'm stuck in a history lesson in high school, my ancient teacher leaning over me, hair growing profusely out of his ears. Helen of Troy is nothing like this. It made me interested in Troy, in the Greek Gods, in the stories of Achilles, Hector and Cassandra. Speaking of Troy...the fall of Troy in the book. Oh.My. Gosh. How can I capture the excitement, the dread of this event? Breathless. Heart-pounding in my ears. Gut-wrenching. It's maybe the best book I've read this year, and I've read some VERY good books this year. You won't want to rent it, you'll want to own it and read it every year.

[Sincerae Smith · Rating 5 out of 5]

Helen of Troy, whose beauty was so feared that her parents had her wear a veil as a child. Was her real father the god Zeus? This massive novel covers her childhood, the time she runs away with the teenaged Paris while she is a married woman in her twenties, the more than two decades she lives in Troy, the terrible invasion of Troy, and her middle aged years back with her husband Menelaus who finally forgives her.

[Estela. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Llore, reí, me enoje, volví a llorar. A pesar de lo largo y un poco tedioso que puede ser, ame este libro por todo los sentimientos que me transmitió. Muy recomendado si les gusta la mitología griega.

[Katherine Vega · Rating 2 out of 5]

No he podido con este libro. He tardado dos meses en terminarlo y ha sido tan largo como la propia guerra de Troya. ¿Quién sufrió más? ¿Yo leyendo esto o los troyanos viendo caer su ciudad? PUES YO.

¿Cómo es posible que un personaje como Helena y todo lo que la rodeó se me haya hecho insulso? Siempre he conectado con ella, siempre, ya sea porque a mí un forbidden lovers como el de Helena y Paris siempre me gana, o porque fue lo suficientemente valiente como para huir de su matrimonio. Pues aquí he conectado 0 con nadie, y cuando eso pasa, es que la lectura no va a ir bien.

Es la primera vez que leo a Margaret y veo en las reseñas que el libro de Cleopatra gustó mucho más, así que igual lo intento por ahí.

[Jam Sinclair · Rating 5 out of 5]

Such a good book. It's written so well, making it so easy to visualise the setting, remember all the characters and feel a part of it. One of them big books to get truly lost in, and mourn when you finish. Definitely recommend to anybody who has the slightest interest in Ancient Greece, fact or myth.

[Alex “Alex Reads All” · Rating 4 out of 5]

Homer gaves us the story of the end of the Trojan War and the great tale of what happened to the Odyssey when it lost its way. There are numerous tales of the greatest warriors that fought the war and endless stories of the watching gods. Margaret George tells a different story. It is the story of Helen and how she went from being Helen, Queen of Sparta to Helen of Troy. And the story is told through her eyes. From her childhood when she strained against her restraints and resented the fact that she had to wear a veil and stay hidden. Hearing rumors and whispers all her life about how she wasn't her father's daughter how in fact she was in fact the daughter of Zeus. To her marriage to Menaleus where she resigns herself to a passionless life and finally to the day she meets Paris after an encounter with Aphrodite. Aphrodite promised Helen that she would bestow passion on her life, and Helen believing that she would finally have a passion filled marriage returns home and runs into Paris. After that first glimpse she knows what true desire feels like. And things go down hill from there.

Knowing that she can no longer live without Paris in her life they decide to let the chips fall where they will and escape together. Thus begins the most passionate love filled adventure of Helen's life. And what follows her and Paris is not joy and a long life of love together but destruction and hatred. Thus begins the Trojan war. All due to a promise that was made when Helen chose Menaleus as her husband that all the other suitors would band together if their marriage was questioned.

Written from Helen's perspective the story takes on a new energy. I know the some of the stories of the Trojan War and what led up to it. This gives it a different flavor and we are able to see the war as Helen saw it. She truly had love for Paris and her adopted country of Troy and hated watching the Greeks destroy it. I highly reccomend this book to anyone who has an interest in historical fiction and Greek mythology/history. It really is an amazing read!