Showing posts with label Troy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Troy. Show all posts

Thursday, April 19, 2018

Imaginary Friends Release Day!

Kindle | Goodreads
HAPPY THOR'S DAY! Celebrate with a fun Thor-ish read from me!

Grab your much-easier-to-read copy of Imaginary Friends for kindle, and enjoy it as a perfect waiting-room-read the next time you're trying not to get coughed on at the doctor's office! Or, you know, wherever!

And don't forget to add it on Goodreads, too!

This month's Newsletter went out today, also, with a sneak peek behind the scenes of Orc 3 (yes! A full scene that I had to cut while drafting! Because sometimes it takes me a few chapters to figure out where I'm supposed to have started!), and a giveaway for an e-edition of Facets of Fate. Which might be another reason to get your subscribe on to The Amaliad, because those Newsletter giveaways have phenomenal odds for the people entering--so few of you do!

Also, while I've got you here, just another reminder that FORGED BY FATE is still FREE pretty much everywhere. So if you haven't dipped your toe in to my Fate of the Gods trilogy, now really is a great time to give it a go. And of course if you're already a fan, I'd super appreciate any honest reviews you want to throw Amazon's way! Particularly for Facets of Fate, Beyond Fate, and Fate Forgotten!

Kindle | Nook | Kobo | iBooks | Scribd | Playster
What else?

Oh, just noodling around with a variety of just-for-fun projects. Like a Paris of Troy epilogue to By Helen's Hand because watching Troy: Fall of a City frustrated me so much--you can find my spoileriffic live-tweeted feelings on that over yonder:


But the timing is actually pretty good because this month, HELEN OF SPARTA and BY HELEN'S HAND are both on sale for just $1.99 each (kindle only), so if like me, you found Paris to be suuuuper annoying in TROY: FALL OF A CITY, allow me to humbly suggest that you might find my interpretation a little more to your liking!

Buy Now!
That should catch you all up pretty well--but don't forget to subscribe to The Amaliad to stay even MORE up to date and get peeks at what I'm working on, here and there. Especially your favorite Orc Saga!

And if you've enjoyed THE QUEEN AND HER BROOK HORSE while you wait for Orc3--please do toss it a review, as well! Because ultimately: Reviews=More Sales=I get to keep writing more books for you, and I'm pretty sure that's an end result we all want to support!



Forged by Fate (Fate of the Gods, #1) Tempting Fate (Fate of the Gods, #1.5) Fate Forgotten (Fate of the Gods, #2) Taming Fate (Fate of the Gods, #2.5) Beyond Fate (Fate of the Gods, #3) Facets of Fate Honor Among Orcs (Orc Saga, #1) Blood of the Queen (Orc Saga, #2) Postcards from Asgard
Amazon | Barnes&Noble 

Helen of Sparta By Helen's Hand Tamer of Horses Daughter of a Thousand Years A Sea of Sorrow: A Novel of Odysseus
Amazon | Barnes&Noble

Thursday, February 02, 2017

Musing on: Penelope's Suitors

Who *are* these men?
Mnesterophonia Louvre CA7124
Slaughter of the Suitors via Wiki Commons (public domain)

We know some of their names, of course, and even who their fathers are. We know that they seem to have some pretty poor manners, and as guests and suitors they have overstayed their welcome to an extreme degree (though it seems Penelope is in part to blame for not sending them away, herself, perhaps, too.) But. Who are they in the greater scheme of Ithaca's kingdom and community, post Trojan War?

Presumably, Odysseus took a majority of able-bodied men with him to Troy to fight. We know these suitors are the sons of now-old men, noble houses of Ithaca who were part of Odysseus's assembly. The sons of men who are now too old and weak to rule them -- much like Laertes is too old and weak with grief and sorrow to guard Penelope and Telemachus from the suitors, or even to engage in Ithaca's assembly to any degree. Had they been younger men, the fathers of these suitors would have left 20 years earlier with Odysseus to fight, right? And if the suitors had been older men themselves, they also would have left, for the most part, 20 years ago to fight with Odysseus.

So are these Suitors second or third or fourth sons (of second wives, perhaps)? Not quite so young as Telemachus, clearly, who was an infant when Odysseus left, but old enough to see their brothers sail off in his company, and just a shade too young to follow? Old enough to grieve for their brothers who never returned home? Are they acting out, taking back what they lost in some way, by pillaging Odysseus's stores in his absense and courting his wife?

During Telemachus's assembly in book two, Mentor says:
"Think: not one of the people whom he ruled
remembers Odysseus now, that godlike man,
and kindly as a father to his children!" (Fagles, p 100)
Is he accusing the Suitors themselves of not knowing or remembering Odysseus, suggesting that perhaps they were too young to have really engaged with him in any meaningful way? Accusing the old men of the Assembly of forgetting the kindness of their king, or betraying the kindness that Odysseus showed them by not standing against the abuses of the suitors?

It seems likely that reinforcements came to support the Greeks (generic national identity used loosely, here), so why didn't these suitors travel to Troy to fight at some later point in the war? Or had they not yet quite come of age, even then? Say they were only 5 or 6, and hadn't quite reached manhood before Troy was sacked? But that would make them only 26 to Penelope's mid thirties, at the youngest, assuming she was in her early/mid-teens when she married Odysseus and bore him Telemachus, now nearing 20.

Odysseus mustered 12 ships when he initially sailed to Troy with the army, according to Homer's Catalogue of Ships, and in the Odyssey, Odysseus claims to have begun his journey from Troy with a dozen ships, still. twenty to thirty oars per ship would mean a minimum of 240 to 360 men -- none of which returned home, save Odysseus himself. Could resentment for the loss of so many have fueled the blind eye that these old men turned to their youngest/younger sons who lived? Or simply the desire to spoil them, because they had not been lost when so many others had been?

Honestly, I'm kind of shocked that upon his return Odysseus is allowed to keep his crown, after losing so many men -- hero-kings have been thrown out of power for less, after all -- but perhaps it is the slaughter of the suitors that secures his power in the end. The old men, after all, clearly don't have the strength to stand against him when they cannot stand against their own sons. And with the suitors' deaths, an entire generation of Ithacans, ultimately, is wiped out -- leaving Odysseus with no one to challenge him at all.


Forged by Fate (Fate of the Gods, #1) Tempting Fate (Fate of the Gods, #1.5) Fate Forgotten (Fate of the Gods, #2) Taming Fate (Fate of the Gods, #2.5) Beyond Fate (Fate of the Gods, #3) Honor Among Orcs (Orc Saga, #1) Blood of the Queen (Orc Saga, #2) Postcards from Asgard
Amazon | Barnes&Noble 

Helen of Sparta By Helen's Hand Tamer of Horses Daughter of a Thousand Years
Amazon | Barnes&Noble

Tuesday, February 24, 2015

Affairs of the Gods: How Could These Victims Have Been So Clueless?

There are two ways to approach questions like this:
1) The Events of the Myths Really Happened
2) The Events of the Myths Are Stories/Propaganda/Explanations/Metaphors/etc

If you've been hanging around me or my blog(s) for any length of time, you probably know that the fiction writer in me favors the first approach -- and imagining these characters and trying to discover their motivations and understand the choices they might have made is where a lot of the fun of writing about them comes from. So with this question, it's only natural that I'd start with the more literal perspective. (It's more just more interesting guys!)

The Short Answer:
I suspect that they were less clueless and more just uninformed.

The Long Answer:
The Flight of Europa by Paul Manship
photo by me!

Here's the thing. Today, if some king's daughter were kidnapped by a really pretty bull, the whole world would know about it. Or at least the part of the world that pays attention to that kind of information, anyway. (She'd also be found and returned home, probably, rather than dumped in another country to marry into their royal bloodline, but I digress.) Back in Europa's time? It was probably more of a quiet, regional event. Why should she expect the bull of being a god in disguise, intent on stealing her away, if she'd never heard of Zeus pulling that kind of stunt?* Maybe, possibly, some kind of rumor of Zeus coming down as a shower of gold to... make sweet love? to Danae** might have been making the rounds somewhere in the Peloponnese, but it is REALLY unlikely the story would have made it as far as Phoenicia, where Europa was hanging out with her maiden friends, enjoying the attentions of a particularly tame bull.

Now maybe these two examples are cheating, because both of these women were earlier victims of Zeus' proclivities, but the fact remains that there are no guarantees that any one of the  importuned women who followed would have had extensive knowledge of the god's other exploits. There's a couple of exceptions of course. Alcmene, for example, was the granddaughter of Perseus, so the story of Great-Grandmother Danae could easily have been part of family lore before her run in with Zeus and the subsequent birth of Heracles. But since Zeus took the form of Alcmene's own husband, Amphitryon, there is really no possibly way that forewarning might have helped her avoid his attentions.

It's easy for us to see all these stories laid out neatly and chronologically, with repeated themes of Zeus putting one over on some poor beautiful girl, and wonder why these people couldn't figure it out. But the truth is, those stories weren't assembled into the written word at all until centuries after the fact. If you consider that the Trojan War was basically the end of the Age of Heroes, and all the philandering that entailed, then the majority of these events would have taken place during the Greek Bronze Age -- the Mycenaean and Minoan periods. At the end of which, civilization kind of collapsed and the Greeks not-so-promptly forgot how to write for several hundred years.

Oral history is a lot more limited, regionally, though Homer provides us with evidence that even oral stories could be spread -- if the bard thought the audience would be interested. But if he didn't?

Well. It sure makes me appreciate the bounty of the internet for self-education, that's for sure.


*Europa was mother to Minos, which means she was at least one, maybe two generations before Theseus and Heracles.

**Danae was the mother of Perseus, who was himself the very FIRST of the Greek Heroes. He did not actually ride Pegasus, and the Kraken is a sea monster out of Scandinavia. Just for the record.



Available April 1, 2015 
Amazon | B&N | Goodreads
Long before she ran away with Paris to Troy, Helen of Sparta was haunted by nightmares of a burning city under siege. These dreams foretold impending war—a war that only Helen has the power to avert. To do so, she must defy her family and betray her betrothed by fleeing the palace in the dead of night. In need of protection, she finds shelter and comfort in the arms of Theseus, son of Poseidon. With Theseus at her side, she believes she can escape her destiny. But at every turn, new dangers—violence, betrayal, extortion, threat of war—thwart Helen’s plans and bar her path. Still, she refuses to bend to the will of the gods.

A new take on an ancient myth, Helen of Sparta is the story of one woman determined to decide her own fate.





Forged by Fate (Fate of the Gods, #1) Tempting Fate (Fate of the Gods, #1.5) Fate Forgotten (Fate of the Gods, #2) Taming Fate (Fate of the Gods, #2.5) Beyond Fate (Fate of the Gods, #3)
Honor Among Orcs (Orc Saga, #1) * Postcards from Asgard * Helen of Sparta
Buy Now:
Amazon | Barnes&Noble

Friday, December 07, 2012

Fairy Tales and Greek Myths

We're all familiar, of course, with the basic fairy tales. Most of us are probably far more accustomed to the Disney versions, which while they preserve something of the story, sometimes miss a bit of the meat and all of the horror -- you'll never see a Disney movie about The Maiden Without Hands. Thankfully, I have a copy of The Complete Fairy Tales of the Brothers Grimm, Translated by Jack Zipes (Bantam, 1992), from which to refresh your memories of the important bits for the purposes of this post.

I'd like to start with an excerpt from the fairy tale of Brier Rose AKA Sleeping Beauty.

[...] the queen gave birth to a girl who was so beautiful that the king was overjoyed and decided to hold a great feast. Not only did he invite his relatives, friends, and acquaintances, but also the wise women, in the hope that they would be generous and kind to his daughter. There were thirteen wise women in his kingdom, but he had only twelve golden plates from which they could eat. Therefore, one of them had to remain home.

[...] When eleven of them had offered their gifts, the thirteenth suddenly entered the hall. She wanted to get revenge for not having been invited, and without greeting anyone or looking around, she cried out with a loud voice, "In her fifteenth year the princess shall prick herself with a spindle and fall down dead!"

And maybe we should throw in an excerpt from Snow White as well? Just to make it interesting. Same edition.

Franz Jüttner Schneewittchen 6

She had a magic mirror and often she stood in front of it, looked at herself, and said:
"Mirror, mirror, on the wall,
who in this realm is the fairest of all?"
Then the mirror would answer:
"You, my queen, are the fairest of all."
That reply would make her content, for she knew the mirror always told the truth.
I wouldn't actually recommend to anyone that they sit down to read the Complete Fairy Tales of the Brothers Grimm all at once. Ever. The redundancy is incredible, and it gets really tiresome well before you hit the half-way point. The Grimm's Fairy Tales are best read in small doses, with some space in between. I was assigned to read it for an English class once and made the mistake of reading it all at the last minute, and while I like having the book sitting on my shelf, I doubt I'll ever pick it up for leisure. So what made me pick it up now? Not only pick it up, but start quoting passages to you, gentle readers? Greek Mythology, of course.

While researching the Trojan War, I found a number of references to The Judgment of Paris, one within Apollodorus's The Libraries -- a fairly excellent catalog of myths and stories about the Olympian gods and demigods. It was an annotated translation, and I read this within the notes:

The story ran that all the gods and goddesses, except Strife, were invited to attend the marriage of Peleus and Thetis, and that Strife, out of spite at being overlooked, threw among the wedding guests a golden apple inscribed with the words, “Let the fair one take it,” or “The apple for the fair.” Three goddesses, Hera, Athena, and Aphrodite, contended for this prize of beauty, and Zeus referred the disputants to the judgment of Paris.

We know that Rome did a lot to spread the influence of the original Greek Myths and heroes, and we also know that Rome's influence reached all the way from Africa in the south to Britain in the North, and certainly the Germanic tribes absorbed a good deal of Roman culture. But until this moment, looking at the Judgment of Paris and reflecting on the fairy tales collected by the brothers Grimm, it never occurred to me how much of it stuck.

At this point, Strife has become the thirteenth fairy, and Paris, poor Paris, the Magic Mirror on the wall. Unfortunately, Paris doesn't possess the impartiality of the mirror. He can be bribed, and the goddesses (I'm sure Hercules would tell us that Hera is the definitive evil step-mother) go about taking advantage of that weakness at once.

I wonder if the Brothers Grimm, educated men that they were, realized the parallels of what they were recording?

***Originally posted on GeekaChicas.com, January 7, 2010.

Tuesday, August 30, 2011

The Character of Paris [Ovid]

Paris Palatino Inv12488
Paris always has such a dumb hat.
© Marie-Lan Nguyen / Wikimedia Commons
I haven't talked about him a lot, because I haven't written about him. His story was always supposed to be Helen's sequel, maybe even an independent companion novel. But Paris doesn't hold the same fascination for me that Theseus does, or even Menelaus. His story has been done so many times, and no matter how hard people try -- and it is clear that we have tried VERY hard -- there isn't really any way to make Paris into a real hero. The gods don't allow him to be one. They don't even let him become a proper anti-hero! I've never understood what Helen saw in him (that is not to say he is not brave and valiant in her defense, as far as he's allowed by Aphrodite), and to me, that's maybe the more fascinating and telling element. How bad was Helen's life with Menelaus that she thought running off with Paris and starting a war would be an improvement?

But I do love Ovid's writing of Paris in the Heroides. I know I've talked about it a little bit before, but those exercises of rhetoric are by far the most fascinating illustration of Paris' character that I've come across. He is bold and confident and unafraid. He's determined and conniving. There is absolutely nothing fickle about his desire for Helen. He wants her, and he's willing to employ every dirty trick in the book to get her. However idiotic he might be later, in Ovid's letters, Paris charms me. I can believe, reading his letter to Helen, that she was fighting against someone with an overpowering charisma-- and that she had no real defense against such a man's seduction, especially if her relationship to Menelaus was less than great.

Paris says:
My passion for you I have brought; I did not find it here. It is that which was the cause of so long a voyage, for neither gloomy storm has driven me hither, nor a wandering course; [...] It is you I come for – you, whom golden Venus has promised for my bed; you were my heart’s desire before you were known to me. I beheld your features with my soul ere I saw them with my eyes; rumour, that told me of you, was the first to deal my wound.
and then he boasts!
And as I long for you, so women have longed for me; alone, you can possess the object of many women’s prayers! And not only have the daughters of princes and chieftains sought me, but even the nymphs have felt for me the cares of love.
The Rape of Helen
Paris, Paris, Paris. You sure are full of yourself. And he's so unapologetic about it! I think that's what I like the most -- how he honestly believes that he is doing nothing wrong in seducing another man's wife. He has absolutely no shame, and that's even more well illustrated when he talks about her abduction by Theseus (emphasis mine).
And so Theseus rightly felt love’s flame, for he was acquaint with all your charms, and you seemed fit spoil for the great hero to steal away, [...] His stealing you away, I commend; my marvel is that he ever gave you back. So fine a spoil should have been kept with constancy. Sooner would this head have left my bloody neck that you have been dragged from marriage-chamber of mine. One like you, would ever these hands of mine be willing to let go? One like you, would I, alive, allow to leave my embrace? If you must needs have been rendered up, I should first at least have taken some pledge from you; my love for you would not have been wholly for naught. Either your virgin flower I should have plucked, or taken what could be stolen without hurt to your virgin state.
"His stealing you away, I commend; my marvel is that he ever gave you back." Paris' admissions are kind of alarming, if you ask me. But he is SO confident that she will love him, is meant to love him and can't resist him, he holds nothing back. Not even a confession that if he had been Theseus, he would have raped her, if need be. (And I'm not going to touch the fact that he talks about her like she's furniture-- that wouldn't have been odd to Helen, just as it was totally natural for Ovid.)

Even his bribes are presented in such a matter of fact way that it's obvious he doesn't think he's bribing her so much as stating the facts. The FACTS are that Troy is far wealthier, and she will be showered in riches and kept in splendor. The FACTS are that he can offer her a better life than she'll ever have in Sparta, which is nothing in comparison to his homeland. The FACTS are that Menelaus doesn't deserve her.
I regret my being a guest, when before my eyes that rustic lays his arms about your neck. I burst with anger and envy – for why should I not tell everything? – when he lays his mantle over your limbs to keep you warm. But when you openly give him tender kisses, I take up my goblet and hold it before my eyes; when he holds you closely pressed, I let my gaze fall, and the dull food grows big within my unwilling mouth.
His recklessness, his boldness in addressing her so honestly and so brutally, is what's so appealing. He is SO in love with her that he can't help himself, that he has no fear at all. Here is the bad boy, the anti-hero we're denied. He's completely arrogant, and committed to making the most of the opportunity he's been given (with Menelaus away in Crete) by any means necessary. Sure, he'd prefer her willing, but from the tenor of this letter, it's clear that he won't let her willingness really get in his way if she gives him even the smallest of openings.

Paris is a villain. A stalker, obsessed with his prey. And he will not stop, because he sees encouragement in every polite smile she gives him. He will not stop because the gods have given Helen to him, and in that certainty, there is nothing she can say that will dissuade him from what he perceives as the truth, the facts. She will love him, eventually. Aphrodite herself promised it.

Reading Ovid, I can believe that Helen never had a chance.

Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Snorri's Agenda in the Prose Edda

I give Snorri a lot of grief while I'm reading. Heck, I give Snorri a lot of grief when I'm not reading. Often times, I feel like I want to throw Snorri's Edda across the room, I'm so irritated by him. But he's still one of our best sources for the Norse gods and the pantheon. And even I have to admit, through my rage, that Snorri MUST have seen some reason to record them, and it couldn't have all been anti-pagan agenda, or else why bother at all?

But when I read something like this:
He is Öku-Thor, and to him are ascribed those mighty works which Hector wrought in Troy. But this is the belief of men: that the Turks told of Ulysses, and called him Loki, for the Turks were his greatest foes.
it is really, really hard for me to bite my tongue on the aggravation that grabs hold of me. Because it's not just twisting Norse mythology, it's twisting Greek myth too. So why the heck did he feel compelled to insert something like this? Why force a connection to Hector and the Trojan war when there is really no evidence at all to support it? Why draw a link between Thor and Hector, of all the heroes?

Hector wasn't the strongest warrior. He wasn't particularly impressive, aside from his nobility, and the picture Snorri paints of Thor through the myths is not remotely reflective of what Hector stood for. And let's not forget that Hector turned tail and RAN from Achilles when it came down to that final battle. Not exactly a glorious way to go out--and not at all the way Thor is illustrated. No Viking worth his salt would run from a fight against someone like Achilles! The reputation and fame of taking the guy down would be too much to give up! There were any number of heroes who might have made better stand-ins for Thor. Ajax the Great, Achilles himself, so fearless in battle, and with that ridiculous temper to match! Even someone like Diomedes!

So what exactly is Snorri's Agenda, here? After a leisurely brunch of consulting my conscience and digesting my irritation, an idea came to me. A theory, if you will.

The Christian world was hugely enamored of Hector, and ultimately Christianity itself spawned out of the Roman Empire. An Empire which viewed itself as "civilized" and all others, including the Germanic tribes of the north, and certainly the people of the FAR North, as "barbarians." Christians, it might be argued, have translated this same ethnocentricity into the fight against "pagan" sects, and their determination to convert them.

Snorri was clearly an educated man, and he was also a Christian. He knew what the rest of the world thought of his people and their history-- he knew what the rest of Christianity thought of his cultural heritage. Pagan. Barbaric. Uncivilized. And yet, the Greco-Roman traditions were still granted some kind of respect. Homer was still acclaimed, kept alive. Hector was constantly drawn upon as an ideal. So what better way to preserve the myths of his people than by creating a connection between his culture and the history of the "civilized" world? What better way to give his own culture a place of respect, than by turning them and their gods into descendants of that most glorified hero, Hector of Troy!


I'm giving Snorri the benefit of the doubt here, and maybe even looking for a reason to excuse his... offenses. But it makes a LOT of sense when I think of it that way. Snorri, by this one device, would have Christianized Norse mythology enough to justify keeping the record of it while legitimizing the culture of the Norse people as a product of the same civilization, not barbarians at all!

Two birds, one mixed myth.

Now I can continue reading without all the distracting rage.

Friday, February 25, 2011

On Aegeus as Poseidon

Last week I mentioned that my mythology textbook posits Aegeus is himself an aspect/stand-in for Poseidon. On the one hand, this makes so much sense it's ridiculous that I didn't see it myself, but on the other hand, I have a hard time imagining an Olympian god spending years on earth in mortal guise to be king of a city which honors a different higher power. Unless of course the Aegeus-as-Poseidon aspect only reaches as far as the little jaunt Aegeus makes to the oracle, and his stop in Troezan to impregnate Aethra, which then becomes a little bit too convenient, and leaves more questions than answers.

Here's what the book has to say, verbatim (full citation at the end of the post):
"Aegeus, like Erechtheus, is another form of the god Poseidon. This is indicated by his connection with the Aegean Sea and by the tradition that Poseidon rather than Aegeus was Theseus' father." (p. 555)
which is followed by this endnote:
"And by his link with the cult of Apollo Delphinius, i.e., Apollo as a god of spring, when the sea becomes navigable and the dolphins appear as portents of good sailing weather." (p. 571)
Themis Aigeus Antikensammlung Berlin F2538 n2
Aegeus meeting with Themis
But let's not forget that Aegeus was taken in by Medea the, uhm, witch, who supposedly murdered her own children to take revenge on Jason. Poseidon seems much too wily to let himself get roped into that kind of drama-- and he's already married to Amphitrite. While his sea-goddess wife might turn a blind eye to his affairs, here and there, I have yet to meet an Olympian goddess with the character it would take to overlook her husband's disappearance for decades to live as a mortal and take mortal wives. And why would he want to? Boredom? If he was only there as Aegeus long enough to have his pleasure with Aethra, what happened to the real Aegeus, and why does he remember Theseus as his son, later? Add to that the fact that the gods have NEVER had trouble getting male children off anyone, and I have a hard time seeing Aegeus, with his struggle to get a male heir, as any kind of godly aspect.

However. It does neatly solve the paternity problem of Theseus, and to argue that Aegeus could NOT have been an aspect of Poseidon imposes human limitations on gods which, for all any of us know, are able to do much, much, more than the occasional shape-shift to seduce a woman. Poseidon in particular, as god of the seas and Earth-Shaker, comes off as pretty mighty when it comes to godly powers. So then, perhaps this is some small bit of Poseidon, exploring the world of man and mortality-- not unlike Jesus-- with the whole of Poseidon back home in his underwater palace.

Again though, why King of Athens, after Poseidon lost out on the patronage of that city to Athena? It seems to me more likely Poseidon would be interested in spiting them than blessing them with a great hero, after something like that. This is something we've seen over and over again. The entire Trojan War is based off of a grudge match between the goddesses who Paris did NOT choose looking to take revenge on the entire city of Troy for the insult. And the fall of Crete can also be attributed to Poseidon teaching Minos a hard lesson for breaking trust and not giving the beautiful gift of a bull back to the gods in sacrifice as he promised.

I suppose Poseidon might have simply possessed Aegeus for the duration of his conjugal visit with Aethra, but I've never heard of another god taking over the body of a man in spirit, when he wanted to get it on, and if he did so, how would that have any effect on Theseus' paternity?

I can definitely see the author's point, regarding Aegeus' associations and his general sea-like presence, but I'm just not sure it takes into account everything else that we know about Aegeus, his relationship to Athens, Poseidon, and the behaviors of the gods. It does not seem consistent with the rest of the myths I've read by any means-- though perhaps I'm just reading too much from an historical viewpoint, with the assumption that these people, in some manner, lived, or must follow some internal logic. After all, if it is all just a story told around the hearth-fire, then why does it have to be anything but what it is? But if myth comes from some kernel of truth, if myth is the cultural memory of gods that have been given up for dead, no less true than any other religious story which we take as history now (like the birth of Jesus as an historical figure), then I need some more convincing than an association with Apollo and his association with the sea.

Source Cited:
Morford, Mark P.O., and Robert J. Lenardon. Classical Mythology: Seventh Edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

Considering the Source: Snorri's Prose Edda

To my greatest shame, I don't have a hard copy of the Prose Edda by Snorri Sturluson. Thankfully we live in the information age, and the internet does provide! I have been remiss in my studies of late, what with the distraction of Theseus and all that Trojan War mythology, so this post is long, long overdue, but I thought you, my fabulous followers and friends, would appreciate some examples as to why we must always, always consider the nature of the source when we look at the textual evidence we have for Norse Mythology.

To begin with, Snorri's Edda, the Prose Edda, is prefaced by a somewhat long-winded account of the beginning of man-- that is, the Christian Account of that evolution, and ultimately how it led to the men who would later be considered gods to the Norse people. Adam and Eve, Noah's Ark, the Great Flood, even King Priam of Troy get mentions. Snorri doesn't hide his agenda. In one respect, this makes it a lot easier to sift through. We know Snorri is writing from a Christian Worldview, and it's quite clear that he means to discount the divinity of the gods in order to preserve that theology.

For instance, in the prologue Snorri places Thor quite firmly into human history as a grandson of King Priam:
One king among them was called Múnón or Mennón; and he was wedded to the daughter of the High King Priam, her who was called Tróán; they had a child named Trór, whom we call Thor.
and turns Sif into Sibil the prophetess:
In the northern half of his kingdom he [Thor] found the prophetess that is called Síbil, whom we call Sif, and wedded her. The lineage of Sif I cannot tell; she was fairest of all women, and her hair was like gold.

Oh so very Greek of him, and a testament too, to the pervasive nature of the mythic Troy* and it's people as a fact of history, cross culture.  He also goes on to make Odin a descendent of Thor, and leader of an exodus to the Northlands:

Odin had second sight, and his wife [Frigg] also; and from their foreknowledge he found that his name should be exalted in the northern part of the world and glorified above the fame of all other kings. Therefore, he made ready to journey out of Turkland, and was accompanied by a great multitude of people, young folk and old, men and women; and they had with them much goods of great price. And wherever they went over the lands of the earth, many glorious things were spoken of them, so that they were held more like gods than men.

To say this is a far cry from the Norse creation myth**  is an understatement. But it serves his purpose-- turning gods back into men, historical figures who can then be explained by gossip and boasting pre-vikings. I can certainly appreciate his translation of Aesir into a term referring to men from Asia, as in men descended of the House of Priam from Troy, though his supposition that they brought with them the language from Asia has, as far as I know, no linguistic basis whatsoever. It is, however, rather creative of him.

But this is what Snorri DOES; he rationalizes the mythology of his people to something which can fit within the Christian theology without competing against it. Suggesting that these gods were not gods at all, but men who have been honored and revered to the point where we forgot they were just men allowed a certain amount of preservation, even if it leaves us with a lot of teases and a source of questionable reliability.

On the one hand, we should be grateful to Snorri for preserving even as much as he did. On the other hand, I would give my left arm for a textual source written down before contact with the Christians and the conversion of the Norse people to that new faith. To hear the stories of the Norse gods from someone who honestly believed in them, knew them for allies, and placed him/herself in their hands, would be an incredible gift to our understanding. Snorri, though, is not it.

*The influence of Homer is pretty astounding when you think about it-- this Edda was written around 1200 AD, and Homer's Iliad was at earliest recorded ~700 BCE. That's almost 2000 years later, and don't forget that Snorri is also an Icelander! That's a long way in time and physical distance for the Epics of Homer and the ancient Greeks to travel.

**Odin, a son of Bor, himself a son of Buri who was licked from the ice by the cow Audhumla, and thereby the father of all other gods--and Thor the son of Odin after Odin and his brothers slew Ymir, the giant of all giants, and formed from Ymir's body, blood and bones the mountains, rivers, seas, etc. that make up our world.

Tuesday, September 07, 2010

The Defense of Theseus' Honor (Part One)

The other day when I went through tagging Theseus entries, I realized I had yet to do a proper entry on him, as I have for others, and since I started the argument about his character in the post about The Hunger Games, it seemed only right to finish it.

Obviously, I consider Theseus to be a hero. And just as obviously, there are certain pieces of his mythology which do not exactly match with how we might consider a hero to behave in these modern times. But I don't believe that Theseus's character is that of the jerk he is sometimes painted to be, and I absolutely don't think, as I have seen said elsewhere, that he was any kind of serial rapist. In fact, every time I think of that phrase being applied to him, it kind of makes me physically sick.

The major area, which you might have surmised, where Theseus comes under criticism is in his dealings with women. In particular, his relationship and abandonment of Ariadne, and later, the question of his relationship with the Amazon Queen who is named either Hippolyta OR Antiope. Today I'm going to focus on Ariadne and Plutarch's history of Theseus!

As Plutarch himself admits:
There are yet many other traditions about these things, and as many concerning Ariadne, all inconsistent with each other.
And he isn't wrong. In Plutarch's Theseus, he gives us a fair rundown of the differing accounts, and I'll summarize them for you here, because quoting will make this the longest entry of all eternity. Generally, these stories fall into three camps:
  1. Theseus abandons Ariadne on Naxos purposely and with no regret and sails off.
  2. Theseus and his fellows spend the night on Naxos, and for reasons beyond Theseus's control he is forced to leave her behind (usually this means she married a priest of Dionysus, or Theseus's ship was blown back out to see and by the time he got back Ariadne was dead.) 
  3. Theseus never took Ariadne at all, nor did she help him, but merely admired him from a distance.
The third is by far the least well known today, but you can see that these are the same contradictions that accompany the stories of Helen's abduction by Paris. No one really agrees, and different places and different poets had their own interpretations of what happened and who in the party was wronged.

Plutarch doesn't relate the stories which are commonly known in his time in any depth. (At which choice, I shake my fist in outrage from 2000 years in the future!) But it's okay, Plutarch isn't our only source on Theseus. He does mention two things I find interesting: firstly, that Ariadne may or may not have born Theseus sons (evidently whilst they were voyaging back from Crete, which is wow pretty fast gestation) who went off to found other cities/places, and secondly, he NEVER states that Ariadne asked for anything in return from Theseus in exchange for her help, only that Theseus takes her with him when he leaves.

Now, I would argue that the same young man, who, seeing the pain of the people in Athens at having to give up their own sons and daughters, volunteers himself to travel to Crete and be part of this tribute to do what he can to lift their suffering would not, after showing such empathy, then callously abandon a woman who mothered his sons (Plutarch tells us that with the other women he may or may not have met along the way previous to this who gave him sons, he then took responsibility for seeing them married.), or callously abandon any woman who might have helped him in general, even without children. After all, hasn't he just risked his life for seven virgin Athenian girls? And the last woman who helped him and offered him kindness on his quest against the Marathon Bull, he repaid by creating what amounts to an annual holiday in her name, to honor her in perpetuity with sacrifices.

Theseus was not raised in Athens. He did not even know who his father (the Aegeus half) was until he was a young man strong enough to lift a boulder. After being made Aegeus's heir it was probably wise of him to make nice to the people he would rule, but to appease them, all he would have needed to do was throw his name into the lottery-- or APPEAR to throw his name into the lottery. Who would have known otherwise? Plutarch specifically states (emphasis mine):
These things sensibly affected Theseus, who, thinking it but just not to disregard, but rather partake of, the sufferings of his fellow-citizens, offered himself for one without any lot.
Now, it would be jerky of me not to admit that Plutarch had his own agenda in writing down the story of Theseus. Plutarch meant to show a parallel between Theseus and Romulus, the founder of Rome, and by doing so, demonstrate Rome's greatness by the greatness of its founder. In this, it behooved Plutarch to show Theseus in a favorable light so that favor would reflect on Romulus and Rome itself. The other bias of Plutarch is his habit of discounting all godly influence, and without the involvement of the gods, these mythologies alter pretty dramatically. A hero's character is made or broken by whether or not the gods compelled him to some behavior or other.

For instance, if Theseus was compelled to leave Ariadne behind that she might be made the bride of Dionysus, and through this, a goddess, that is a different thing entirely than his sailing off into the sunset to abandon her of his own accord, showing no regret. Or, in Paris's case, if Aphrodite swept Paris off the battlefield during that crucial fight with Menelaus against Paris's own wishes to deposit him in Helen's arms, that is a very different story than one in which Paris consciously flees from Menelaus, giving up the fight when he realizes he will die, and hiding in the palace in Helen's bed to let Hector do his fighting for him.

We'll take a look at some other sources on Theseus and Ariadne again, soon!

Wednesday, September 01, 2010

BIG News for Helen!

I was waiting for my Stufabulous Alpha to give me the thumbs up on my ending, but now that she has read it I feel confident in telling you all that Helen Draft Two is COMPLETE!

FINALLY!

103,300+ words and 351 pages. Hopefully should have the word count down to under 100K with cuts and revisions.

But, my followers, finishing Helen means something else too-- Something I know you ALL have been waiting for.

That's right. I have begun reading The Hunger Games.

I'm already on page 104. And Someone insists that it will help me with Helen, so that's part of why I am reading it now before diving into revisions :) Now if I can just get a copy of Catching Fire in paperback, and Mockingjay will come out in paperback sooner rather than forever from now (I know, I know, it only just came out), I will be in business.

I did just find out today that I'm a Borders Rewards GOLD member now, and while I have no idea what this really means in regard to the financial state of Borders, it's survival, or if they have turned EVERY previous Borders Rewards cardholder into a Gold member and are only trying to trick me into feeling special, I feel certain this means good things for some book purchases in my future.

Thanks to everyone who has lavished encouragement on me during my trials and tribulations with Helen's rewrite! You are all fabulous!

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Earned Distractions

Helen: 4350 words written Monday, and counting! I flew by the 100,000 word mark, which doesn't exactly thrill me. I don't WANT to be much above 100K, but I am currently sitting shy of 106,400. Odysseus has arrived on the scene, which is always a good time. Wish he'd popped up closer to 95K than 110 though!

Television: With the excellent progress I've been making, I took a break last night to watch some Deadliest Catch. Guys, Instant Play on Netflix + Deadliest Catch = I could easily accomplish NOTHING for the next week. Deadliest Catch is the crack of reality television, in my opinion. When it's on, I can't turn it off. I mean, I am physically incapable. Those Deadliest Catch marathons on Discovery channel kill me. It's one of the reasons I'm glad we don't have cable, and most of the reason I never turn the television on when left to my own devices.

Other: A conversation on twitter prompted me to open up my Mia One-Shot short story. It's a worthless 17,000 words in length, but I love it. It interrupted my work on Helen a few months ago for a good two weeks, but it was worth the time, even though I can't do much with it. I thought, for your entertainment, and mine, I might share one of my favorite scenes today (or part of it--and it isn't revised because of Helen's takeover of my LIFE). I'm not sure the background really matters, but Mia is a determined flirt, and Jean is a Parisian born Frenchman who rather enjoys the ladies.

[removed]
Ah, also, I don't actually speak any French. PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong.

Friday, August 27, 2010

Quick Update and some Odysseus!

Helen crossed 93,000 94,000 96,000 97,000 words and I haven't hit the climax. At least I'm writing forward though! I'll take what I can get. I think I have one more chapter to go and then I'll be there, and then I can start the falling action and wrap it up. At this point, I do not think it will come in under 100,000 words, but I know there is some room to cut, and I'll be able to deal with that when I start editing. Over all, I'm feeling pretty good about how things are going. Tomorrow I'll have another long day to write, as long as I get started first thing when I get up. That's the trick, for me, I think-- as long as I open up the document and start working before I get sidetracked by anything else, I end up keeping on task a lot better than if I start with anything else first.

Edit: The last 1000 words were pure agony. Judging by the emotional tones, the climax just snuck up on me. DECISIONS HAVE BEEN MADE.
Edit Edit: I'm beginning to fear that I'm going to overshoot the ending somehow. I feel like I might have just written it. Except that it isn't where I want it to be. ARRRGGGHHHH I HATE ENDINGS.

ALSO, if you were wondering, my clam sauce came out awesome. The swiss chard was delicious. And my purple green beans were delicious. (Color changing when you cook them! How much awesomer can green beans even get?!)

Re: Odysseus's Palace Being Unearthed in Ithaca.
This is a great post explaining how when it comes to things like this, you have to be skeptical of the claims. The fact of the matter is, if you go LOOKING for something in history, with an agenda, you're bound to find supporting evidence-- but when it comes down to it, it doesn't really prove anything. Would it be awesome if we found a palace belonging to Odysseus? Heck yes! But just because a palace is unearthed of Mycenaean style and with a convenient date, does not mean this is so. Claiming it belonged to Odysseus is pretty presumptuous, honestly, unless you find his name carved into the stone. (And I hate to say it, but this all applies to the King Arthur mythology stuff too.)

Have a fabulous weekend!

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Vegetables and Writing

I don't have a lot of time to blog-- Helen finally just started moving today, instead of being totally the most stubborn manuscript on the face of the earth, so I am writing writing writing for as long as it lasts. I hate the idea of opening this chapter with a dream, but I suppose since it isn't the FIRST chapter of the book it isn't breaking any rules. (I totally broke that one already anyway. I know, I know. But at least I'm not PRETENDING it's NOT a dream in the scene! More on how rules should sometimes be broken over at Mia's blog, which apparently I am determined to promote of late!)

Also, I have the monstrous task of cooking up all the vegetables my mother sent us home with. I have a giant pile of Swiss chard, a second giant pile of beets with greens attached, a smaller pile of green beans and lots of tomatoes and cucumbers, fresh basil, garden garlic, and fresh parsley. This would be great eating for the rest of the week if my husband were actually going to be home for dinner ever. Unfortunately that isn't meant to be.

I'm going to use up the fresh parsley, and a portion of the garlic with some home made clam sauce, then cook up some shell pasta. It just happens to go super well with swiss chard, and if I'm really on my a-game, maybe I'll crack open the white wine and toss some of that in too (it's been sitting in my fridge for WAY too long). Either way I need to chop the greens off the beets and store them separately so they'll keep a bit longer, and get everything squared up that way. Plus dishwashing. Oh, dishwashing, you are, as ever, the most frustrating of kitchen chores. You are the boulder to my Sisyphus.


And you know, sometimes writing can feel that way too-- like we're Sisyphus, pushing that gosh darn boulder up the hill only to have it come crashing back down on us before we make it to the top. The job is never finished. The manuscript is never complete, never perfect, never up to par with whatever it is we're doing next. Like the dishes, when you think you're done, more stuff crops up that needs revision or rewriting or editing. Or maybe it's just the new book, and the same old challenge of making it sing. But remember, as long as we're writing, even if the "finished" manuscript doesn't sell, even if we have to roll that boulder back up the hill by writing a new book, it's still practice, and with every struggle to the top, we're honing our craft and becoming stronger writers for it.

Just like Sisyphus is going to have the most awesomely sculpted thighs and arms of any man who ever lived. If, uh, he ever gets to quit rolling his boulder and show them off...

Friday, August 20, 2010

A Letter to Helen

Dear Helen,

We have been through a lot together. It's been a great run. We've had good times, and we've had bad. We've distanced ourselves with third person, and grown closer with first. We've taught each other a lot, and you know that I don't in any way wish terrible things to happen to you.

I just want to remind you of something. Though the end of your book is coming up on us, this is not the end of your story. This is not the absolute finish. You are not STUCK where I will leave you. There are plenty of options still! Egypt, Troy, body doubles made of clouds! I know you don't believe me, but the gods are in your corner, and trust me when I tell you that we will ALL be understanding of whatever choices you make in the future. I know that things don't look bright right now, and really, all this doom and gloom, it's terrible. It's agonizing. I hate every minute of what's coming in the immediate future. BUT remember that you still have hope! There is a whole new book waiting for you on the other side! A book that MIGHT* even have a happy ending, instead of a tragic one!

I really am sorry for what Homer did to you, but don't take it out on me, please. And hey, look at it this way, you still get to meet Odysseus, and he's kind of a cool guy! And there's the reunion with your brothers to look forward to! You know Pollux will be thrilled to see you again. You guys are like BFF! Then there is the lack of maintenance when you're back home-- no more worrying about coloring your roots and keeping your hair dyed! That will save you SO much time! So, I mean, it isn't ALL terrible. Let's just get through this together, just like we've gotten through everything else, and put it behind us!

Love and Skittles,
Amalia

*I'm sorry to say that I can't make any promises as to the LEVEL of happiness in this regard. But I CAN promise you that it will absolutely be less awful than this one.

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

First Kiss, Part Two

Remember when I talked about how I had been agonizing over Helen's first kiss? Well, as a form of procrastination, I am revisiting my agony again. Apparently Helen will stoop to anything to keep me from finishing her book! I'm back staring at the kiss-scene chapter again, instead of moving forward.

I went and dug through the first draft, written in third person, to find how I wrote her first kiss the first time, since all I seemed to be able to do THIS time was stare at the page while I wrote "His lips brushed mine," and then deleted it and replaced it with "He kissed me, soft and gentle," and then deleted that and rewrote "His lips brushed mine," again... and I think you know where this is going. Anyway, I wanted to share the first draft-- because I wish I could just lift it, switch the she's to I's, polish it up, and slap it into this book. Unfortunately it doesn't fit the narrative anymore though, so I'm still staring at my screen at a loss.

[excerpt removed]
Needless to say, rereading the original, I wonder how I managed to write it without agonizing. I don't remember having any problem slapping this down on the page at all, and it isn't half bad!

I must just be over-thinking it this time around. I don't know. Stupid kissing scenes. Or. It's entirely possible that my problem is that I'm writing in first person instead of third.

Does anyone else have problems writing certain kinds of scenes in first person, that are otherwise no trouble in third?

Friday, August 13, 2010

Playing with Myths

I know this is going to be a shocker to all of you fine folks, but I really love mythology. Really. Really, really. And the best part of mythology? Playing with it and putting it together in a new and interesting way that will appeal to a modern audience. This is, in fact, why I love comic books. It's also why I write the things that I write-- for the gosh darn fun of it!

But man, this does not make Helen an easy book to write. No matter how much I love playing with mythology, and how much I love writing, the end of this book always makes me feel like I'm getting my teeth pulled in a string+doorslam operation. This is the second time I've written the ending, and I think it's even worse this time around. I love my characters. But the mythology, the heart and soul of the whole story, has become my enemy.

Every time I open the document, I stare at it and wonder-- is there any possible way I can make this something other than tragic? Everyone knows what happens. Helen marries Menelaus, then she's stolen or runs away with Paris, and then:
big fat terrible DOOM.

There are a couple of questions that people who play with myth have to be aware of when writing: How true to the source am I going to stick? How much of the source material am I going include? And which sources am I going to follow? I think it's important to ask it early and to ask it often as you define your characters and explore the narrative of the story. Comb through your myths-- all the sources you can find-- and identify the places with multiple and conflicting accounts. And by God, exploit them.

Let's face it-- most of these myths don't have happy endings. The hero always dies eventually, and since we all know Being A Hero Sucks, it's usually pretty ignoble. Knowing where and how many liberties you're going to take with your story-- and how you're going to remain consistent as you do so-- is worth mapping out before you hit the ending and realize you're going to receive hate mail. And not only are you going to get it from the new fans whose hearts you just broke when you gave your hero his mythologically-accurate and terrible ending, but also from the mythology buffs who are going to tear you apart for everything else you didn't do to him/her.

But repeat after me: It's Okay To Change It

Not only is it Okay, it's typical. All it takes is one read through the myriad source materials, and you can see the revisionist nature of myth. And if the people who wrote it down and made it up to begin with can alter endings and argue over whether Theseus was pushed, jumped, or slipped off a cliff face, you can certainly throw your two cents in as well. Find the character of your hero and let him or her do what comes naturally! If it means they didn't throw themselves onto a funeral pyre to escape a poisoned shirt before ascending to Olympus, that's okay. As long as you are writing the story, and playing with the myth, it's still alive. And if it's still alive, it is DEFINITELY still open to personal interpretation, just as it was open to interpretation when it was written down in Ancient Greek, or Latin, or Old Norse, or Old English, or whatever crazy backwoods dialect you found it from.

Just remember one thing: it's no excuse for bad story telling. Clash of the Titans remake, I am looking at you.

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Miscellaneous Research

Between staring at pictures of Jökulsárlón and dreaming about going to school in Iceland for my MA, I spent a goodly amount of time researching this weekend-- for Helen, and not for Helen. These things included, in no particular order:

The Egtved Girl, my most favorite Nordic Bronze Age find. 
Seriously, if you don't know about her, you should watch this video at once. It's super short, I promise. 




Basically, the Egtved Girl is one of the most well preserved finds from the Nordic Bronze Age, and the grave goods found with her are really interesting. Unfortunately, I haven't found any great pictures of them on the internet (I have some awesome books, thank goodness), but her clothing was super well preserved, and included a delicate kind of hair net thing, as well as what  she was wearing. When it was discovered it was kind of shocking to people, because she was pretty scantily clad. The video shows you--there have been a couple of reproductions of it. Keep in mind she was discovered quite some time ago when bare-midriffs were not, shall we say, the STYLE. The reason I love this find so much is because it gives us this tantalizing glimpse of the Bronze Age and the people who lived there. It whets my appetite like whoa to write a book based in that time period. Right now I've only been able to touch on it in passing.


Natural Child Birth to see how Helen might have had a child back in ye olden days without, you know, hospitals. You know, I'm not going to go into the details on this. And I didn't even look up historical information, so I was super lame about it. I'll get back to you if I turn up anything REALLY interesting and not "Dear Lord, It Can't Be Unseen!"


Warp Weighted Looms, uhm, again, because I seem to have forgotten everything I learned last year when I wrote the first draft of this beast of a novel.

Basically we have all these glimpses of Warp Weighted Looms painted all over pottery and the like, but we still don't really know how they were used in ancient greece--if they were vertical or angled, or how they were weighted exactly, or whether they used a heddle, etc. (They were also used later in Scandinavia, which I forced myself NOT to look at information on so that I wouldn't get totally distracted. so I am not going to even get into that.)

I read someone's thesis paper (pdf. Also, I had no idea people posted thesis papers on the internet! I think it's an undergrad paper, but still.)  on the subject where they actually went so far as to build a warp weighted loom of their own, and tried weaving on it, and tested the way the weights fell to see if any set up would match the kind of evidence they've found. The funny thing is, according to what I read, we've yet to turn up a loom itself at all-- firstly because they were made of wood which wouldn't really hold up over the ages, and secondly, the thesis paper posits, because looms were not just left to take up space set up willy nilly all over the place. There are a bunch of pictures of the loom in ancient pottery representations in the paper, but apparently wikicommons has ZERO so I can't post a picture for you. (seriously?)


Rent in Iceland. 
Not as reasonable as Denmark, sad to say. BUT the University of Iceland does have an apartment complex named Ásgarðar, so. Obviously that is meant to be.

What did you do with your weekend? 

Tuesday, July 20, 2010

Things That Don't Make Sense. With Pictures!

Herodotus says that Paris and Helen make it to Troy in 3 days. Herodotus is a liar, and here is the proof!

Now, I know that this is a route from Athens to Troy, so keep in mind that it is about 18 hours from Sparta's port to Athens at top speed (9 knots). Even if they cut some time off by not going all the way in to Piraeus, you're looking at some additional hours on top of the 58 hours already accounted for by my not so scientific, but roughly accurate route!

The problem is, sea going vessels in this time period had to hug the coasts to get anywhere since they weren't made for the open waters. If a boat was blown into open waters and lost sight of the shore, it was probably lost forever (See the comments for more on this discussion!). As a result, it took a while to get places. Assuming Paris and his crew rowed/sailed for 12 hours a day (which is probably assuming a lot) we're talking about 5 days of travel. The trip only gets longer if they ran into ANY kind of complication on the way. So three days to Troy? Improbable. Even if everything went perfectly.

There's also a story which says that Helen and Paris stopped in Egypt on the way to Troy-- Euripides even claims that Helen spent the entirety of the war in Egypt. Supposedly, they stopped in Egypt to throw off pursuit, or even to ask for help from Pharaoh. Once there, Pharaoh either refused them, or, offended by Paris's behavior, took Helen into his own custody to return her to Menelaus. The truth of the matter is, Troy by way of Egypt makes little to no sense at all. The proof is on the map!

Not only would a trip to Egypt from Sparta take a solid month, but as you can see, there is no way to go to Troy by-way-of Egypt. It's way out of the way in the opposite direction. I guess it would throw people off the scent, sure, but it seems like a long way to go to accomplish it, and since they would no doubt need to stop on the way back to Troy for supplies along the way, and to spend the night, it would only spread the news of their elopement all over the Mediterranean.

As for Menelaus's return at the end of the Trojan war, again by way of Egypt-- well. If he was blown that far off course, he's lucky he lived at all. He was much more likely to be smashed to smithereens against some cliff-faced-island, and if that didn't kill him, the expanse of the Mediterranean ocean that he would have needed to cross without much in the way of necessary provisions like fresh water and food would surely do the job. If he went by way of Egypt back to Sparta on purpose, I'm only surprised that he had a throne at all when he got there (seven to ten years later on top of the ten years the war took) with Helen in tow.

So there you have it. And all I have to say, is thank God for the gods, or my plot for the sequel would have just gone to an early grave.

(if you want to calculate your own routes around and about by boat, this is the best tool to do so! Just plug in the average speed and it tells you exactly how long it would take to travel! I used it for all my calculations above.)

Friday, June 04, 2010

DREAMFEST HOOOO!

Welcome One and All to the Dream Sequence Blogfest! 

I am thrilled to host this event for you all! Hopefully we all got to challenge ourselves a little bit, by writing a good sequence, and hopefully we can all learn about what works and what doesn't from the posts of our fellow participants! Please do get around to comment on everyone's posts, and offer them some feedback so that we can all write bigger and better dream sequences in the future!

Thanks so much to everyone who is participating! I'm heading out to read all your posts right now! You can find all the blogs who are participating on the Mr. Linky!



[excerpt removed]

Thanks for stopping by, for commenting, and for participating!! You guys are awesome! The winner of the Amazon GC, drawn randomly, will be announced on the blog on Tuesday!

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Mycenaean Culture!

So it occurred to me today that I have been fudging the clothing of my characters in HELEN for approximately 120,000 words now, and it was about time that I did some research to at least make sure my fudged approach was something that I could get away with, and not totally, completely beyond wrong. Nobody wants to get called out on historical accuracy over a dress, after all.

I do actually have a couple of textbooks on the Aegean Bronze Age (Christmas presents from my parents!), but for some reason they don't seem to have a lot of good pictures. This is probably because there aren't a lot of good pictures to be had, and black and white never does a fresco justice. I've talked about it a little bit before-- if not here, at least on GeekaChicas during the Not-yet-of-Troy series letters-- but we suffer from a real lack of evidence when it comes to this period. Primarily the only information we have is about palace life. There is little if any evidence regarding the common person or daily life for anyone outside of the palace, and the evidence we have for the palace itself is less about the daily life and more about societal structure. Very fortunate for me that Helen was a princess, and not some street girl. On the other hand, Sparta isn't one of the cities known for its Mycenaean Palace of Awesome. (Welcome to the clash between history and myth, our next stop will be clothing... Also, you REALLY do want to click that link, because that rendering of the palace at Pylos will blow your mind.)

As far as clothing goes, we pretty much have frescoes. Jewelry is another story--grave goods and the like have been found and preserved, probably because metal doesn't decompose. There's a good image of men's clothing in a fresco (definitely click this first link!) on this website, and a great description of both men's and women's fashions (of which I make no guarantees about the source, but it SOUNDS right to me).

Basically, men wore belted, short dress-like outfits, sometimes with short pant-like bottoms instead, which gave them freedom of movement. Common people probably went without a shirt altogether, and ran around in just a skirt or shorts. They don't seem to be all that fancy, except for detailing around the edges (image from wikimedia commons). This isn't all that different from Minoan dress-- Mycenae really kind of ripped off a lot of culture from Crete-- but in general, Mycenaean's were a little bit more conservative in style. This is more apparent in women's dress.

Contrary to later styles, Mycenaean's and Minoans wore fitted clothing. Women especially. The image to the right is from a fresco, supposedly of a Mycenaean woman. (from wikimedia commons) You can see the detailing and complicated design of the skirt (do those look like pants to anyone else?) and the top. Minoan women, as far as we know, went bare breasted. Mycenaean women did not ALWAYS follow this convention, but as you can see, it wasn't unheard of. They usually wore a belt, to emphasize the waist and the skirt was kept full and flowing. Don't ask me how that kind of a shirt is practical at all, however. It seems like it would be a pain to keep on. The image to the right gives you an idea of what a top that covered the breasts would look like (from wikimedia commons).

For the purposes of my book, I would expect that Helen dressed as conservatively as she was able-- being the most beautiful woman in the world would probably invite enough attention without showing off her breasts as well. Theseus is another issue altogether. (and if you're wondering, no, Athens didn't have a Mycenaean (or Minoan) Palace of Awesome, either.) He was, by all accounts, a very successful king for Athens (until he got thrown out after the underworld debacle). I expect when he shows up somewhere, he does it in style to show off the wealth of his city and by association, his power as its king.

Has my fudging been at all accurate? Well, yes and no. I'll probably need to go back through and tweak a few things. But honestly, there is no real way to write about the mythology of the Trojan war while maintaining BOTH historical and mythological accuracy (more on this in a future post, probably). What about you? Has there ever been an aspect of your book that you fudged, only to research and find out that you had it totally wrong?

Also, am I the only one who looked at that rendering of the Megaron of Pylos and went WHOA? Talk about opulence!