Scan barcode
A review by vaporization
The Song of Achilles by Madeline Miller
4.0
I last read this book five years ago and for a long time I considered it my favorite book ever, only second to Interview with the Vampire (which beat it due to longevity). This is a beautiful book. But it doesn't really live up to memory. I think the book felt very mature to me the first time I read it because it was a lot more mature than the stuff I was reading at the time. Reading it again, I am more aware of how...sanitized? the story is.
This story is probably best appreciated without too much knowledge of Greek myth. When I read it the first time, I only knew vaguely about what happened to Patroclus and Achilles, and little else of every other episode or even their characters. Being much more familiar with what actually went down and how the characters were, I think I understand better the ...disappointment? of some of the changes Miller made. I do think she did some character assassination to Patroclus to fit this neater narrative, especially when the actual stories were so messy and at times contradictory. I also think there was some sanitizing of Patroclus' character to make him more palatable to a modern audience.
Also, I think I am rather far from a prude, but I found myself a bit uncomfortable at how sexual the nature of Achilles and Patroclus' relationship is, especially when they are so young (though Achilles is older than Patroclus for some reason). They were older than me when I first read it, so I don't think I found it that weird. I am not that old now. I don't particularly want to read about characters younger than me getting it on.
The pacing is actually quicker than I remember. Perhaps I was less engrossed in the story this time, being more familiar with what happens. All the scenes are very short and stitched together, not quite one long flowing narrative. I also felt that there were not enough contractions, which were too noticeable to really pull me into the style.
I think this is the kind of book that best exists in memory. It is, after all, a book of memories (Patroclus'). And I still find it beautiful and emotional and worth reading. But maybe not as piercing as it was then.
This story is probably best appreciated without too much knowledge of Greek myth. When I read it the first time, I only knew vaguely about what happened to Patroclus and Achilles, and little else of every other episode or even their characters. Being much more familiar with what actually went down and how the characters were, I think I understand better the ...disappointment? of some of the changes Miller made. I do think she did some character assassination to Patroclus to fit this neater narrative, especially when the actual stories were so messy and at times contradictory. I also think there was some sanitizing of Patroclus' character to make him more palatable to a modern audience.
Also, I think I am rather far from a prude, but I found myself a bit uncomfortable at how sexual the nature of Achilles and Patroclus' relationship is, especially when they are so young (though Achilles is older than Patroclus for some reason). They were older than me when I first read it, so I don't think I found it that weird. I am not that old now. I don't particularly want to read about characters younger than me getting it on.
The pacing is actually quicker than I remember. Perhaps I was less engrossed in the story this time, being more familiar with what happens. All the scenes are very short and stitched together, not quite one long flowing narrative. I also felt that there were not enough contractions, which were too noticeable to really pull me into the style.
I think this is the kind of book that best exists in memory. It is, after all, a book of memories (Patroclus'). And I still find it beautiful and emotional and worth reading. But maybe not as piercing as it was then.