Writing the Great Ones

Aristotle

I recently finished The Golden Mean by Annabel Lyon.  I’d been meaning to get to it for a while but just hadn’t managed until this summer. Any novel about ancient Greece or Alexander the Great ends up on my to-be-read list.  It’s a long list.

I’ve posted a review of the book which you can read on Goodreads or Amazon.

What I found interesting is that the book is not so much about Alexander; he has much more of a background role in the entire book.

Aristotle, the famous philosopher and tutor of the young Alexander, is the focus of this work.

This is a beautiful and immensely sad novel that gives us the author’s insights into this famous man of the ancient world, the successor of Plato and Socrates.

But, in reading this, I realized that I know very little of Aristotle.

I didn’t study philosophy in school, my tendencies being more toward ancient and medieval warfare. I know a lot more about Alexander than Aristotle.

And yet, most people with even a passing interest in history will know the name of Aristotle. Though he did not wage war or sack cities at the ends of the earth, he is legendary in his own way.

Aristotle (384–322 B.C.) wrote on an incredible range of subjects from metaphysics, the arts and rhetoric to government, politics, the natural sciences and much more. His work highly influenced the medieval Muslim and Christian worlds. Even today his teachings, I am told, greatly influence academia.

Alexander the Great

One might imagine such a man as Aristotle to be a Titan of the ancient world, tutor to a god.

But in The Golden Mean, that is not the case. Ms. Lyon does not present us with an intimidating figure. 

Rather, her Aristotle is frail, prone to fits of manic depression, a victim of his scientific mind and curiosity.

In this book, Aristotle is not what I expected.

And yet, isn’t that what is so great about historical fiction, that you can explore the unknown, the unpopular, in even the most famous of men?

In The Golden Mean, Aristotle and Alexander are talking about theatre and the use of dialogues to teach, the appeal of those methods. The character of Aristotle puts it nicely:

“You care more about the characters, about the outcomes of things. That’s the point of the literary arts, surely. You can convey ideas in an accessible way, and in a way that makes the reader or the viewer feel what is being told rather than just hear it.”

That’s a great observation by the author and one of the main reasons I believe good historical fiction is as important for teaching as entertaining, and should be a part of university reading lists.

Cover for The Golden Mean

I’ve had my own experiences in researching and writing about Alexander the Great, and that journey continues. As I mentioned in a previous post on that project, there are so many aspects to the character of Alexander that one cannot possibly get into every corner of his psyche. But you have to start digging somewhere.

I see these great men of history as fields in the landscape of history waiting to be excavated. Just as a single field might have revealed a fort in one excavation, so too can later digs reveal a civilian settlement, a coin hoard, or a burial, all of which tell a story about the place… just like a person.

Each novel about one of the great ones of history is like a test pit in a vast field, revealing a little more with each effort, getting us that much closer to knowing the whole of that person.

I’ve often thought that there must be little left to excavate or discover when it comes to the ancient and medieval worlds, and yet every day new discoveries are revealed that change our perspectives.

Academic research, archaeology, numismatics, toponymics and other fields add to our knowledge of history and past people.

But historical fiction has much to contribute in getting to know those that have gone before us. Only, when it comes to fiction, we get to know those people in a much more personal, intimate way that helps us to delve into their human side.

That’s what makes the melding of history and fiction so attractive to me. There is definitely a Golden Mean for historical fiction.

I think it best to end with Ms. Lyon’s description, through Aristotle, of the Golden Mean as he sees it:

“My few meagre tools with which I try to order the universe. You must look for the mean between extremes, the point of balance. The point will differ from man to man. There is not a universal standard of virtue to cover all situations at all times. Context must be taken into account, specificity, what is best at a particular place and time.”

Thank you for reading. 

Creating Perfection: the Golden Mean
and the Parthenon (from HazMath.net)

Back from the Dead – Fever Dreams and Creativity

'The Scream' - feeling like
rubbish

This is a bit of an odd post but one that I thought was worth sharing.

This is the time of year when many of us, or many we know, are laid low by that inevitable mid-winter cold or flu. We all go to work or school or are close to people who do, and that means exposure.

Anyone who takes public transit to and from work is going to be surrounded by an array of sneezers and coughers who, despite their best efforts, are going to end up showering you with potential sickness. 

If you have kids going to school, the odds are more steeply stacked against you.

Before last week I had been doing pretty well and had managed to stay healthy for about a year. Well, that changed with the onset of three days of fever and cold. I felt like I had taken a Dacian battle axe in the head and contracted Pontine malaria at the same time.

I’m back from the dead now and have been thinking about the experience.

It’s all a bit of a blur really but the one thought that I remember coming to me at first was that all my creative plans for writing etc. were totally shot. I knew that I was in for a few completely unproductive days.

In a way, I was wrong. I found that sickness (the non-life-threatening kind of course) can sometimes be useful and help the creativity. Let me explain.

For many writers who are going it alone, juggling the tasks of writing, publishing, family life and day jobs, there is little time to stop and focus. We flit from one task to another, on down the list without taking a breather.

I say that sickness can be useful because for some of us, it is one of those rare times when we let ourselves do nothing out of the necessity to heal.

During those wintery, bed-ridden days of sickness, the time is ripe for thinking, formulating and letting the mind wander where it will.

One of the most interesting things for me are the ‘fever dreams’. Nobody likes having a fever and frankly, I’m surprised I still have all my teeth after all that shaking. However, during my overheated odyssey, my unconscious mind was hard at work.

Alexander the Great on his deathbed

As I’ve mentioned previously, I am writing a trilogy of Alexander the Great and had yet to write the battle of Gaugamela. Just before getting sick I was just about to get stuck into writing the Companion cavalry charge in the battle. As it turned out, I wasn’t writing when sick but images of the battle and how I envisioned it were flashing behind my lids. When I was feeling a little better later in the week, I finished the scene and hence, the first draft of Book I.

Also, on the third day when the fever broke, I woke up, sat at our dining table and scribbled out ten pages on Alexander’s last days in Babylon, including his death. Now I won’t need this material until Book III but the effects of fever certainly contributed to that scene. One of the theories is that Alexander died of a fever of some kind so, with a little first-hand experience, I was able to write a few pages which I feel are rather good.

I know this sounds utterly bizarre but don’t discount it.

I have a friend who is a psychotherapist and I told him about this experience, the odd clarity and workings of the mind in fever dreams. He said that that was not surprising, that when he had been sick previously he had been able to work out problems that had confounded him when not sick. The mind truly is amazing.

I’ve found the mind focuses itself in this less scattered state simply because it is not bogged down with tasks. It absorbs whatever I’m watching or thinking on before sleeping. The thoughts can be a bit obsessive but there is an untapped creativity there that can be of benefit.

Even one of my short stories, THEOI, came out of a fever dream.

A person who has done some research along these lines, how the brain functions and how that place between asleep and awake is where creativity is born and thrives, is Phil South. There is a great podcast on The Creative Penn where Joanna Penn interviews Phil about how the brain works and where and when creative genius is born. It really is fascinating and you can listen to it HERE.

I’m not saying my amateur theory of fever dreams applies to everyone and obviously we all prefer to stay healthy. But, if you are laid low by a cold or flu this season, just go with the flow and don’t beat yourself up about getting through that to-do list.

You never know, when you are seemingly back from the dead, some of your best ideas may come to the surface and time will not have been wasted.

Now, where’s that vitamin C… 

Richard III – The Blurring of Fact in Fiction

The Battle of Bosworth

For several months now I’ve been following the research and test results on a skeleton found beneath a Leicester car park in the UK. It was believed that the remains belonged to none other than King Richard III, last monarch of the House of York and the last English king to die in battle.

Richard III was slain during the Battle of Bosworth in 1485. His forces outnumbered those of Henry Tudor (Henry VII) but despite that, Richard lost. The accession of Henry VII thus ushered in what became known as the Tudor Age. It was, more or less, the end of the Middle Ages. 

Last year, a team from the University of Leicester began a series of tests on the skeleton that was found and this week they have released the results. You can read about it on the BBC by clicking HERE.

Skeleton of Richard III, in-situ, beneath Leicester car park
Notice the curve of the spine in the middle

There are many nay-sayers who believe the results come from a bit of dodgy science but most agree that the remains are ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ those of Richard III, the last Plantagenet king.

I won’t get into all the exact science and the genetic tests that helped the team come to their conclusions, fascinating though it is.

What I found interesting is the appearance of the skeleton itself.

For most, including myself, the image of Richard III that comes to mind is that created by William Shakespeare in his play Richard III.

"But I, - that am not shap'd for sportive tricks,

Nor made to court an amorous looking-glass;

I, that am rudely stamp'd, and want love's majesty

To strut before a wanton ambling nymph; 

Cheated of feature by dissembling nature, 

Deform'd, unfinishe'd, sent before my time

Into this breathing world scarce half made up,

And that so lamely and unfashionable

That dogs bark at me as I halt by them;-"

(King Richard III, Act I, Scene I)

Lawrence Olivier as Richard III

I can’t help but picture Laurence Olivier when I think of Richard III, the humped back, the gammy leg and limp, the shortened arm. Shakespeare’s grotesque, scheming king is the image that my mind conjures without hesitation. Olivier was brilliant in the role, by the way.

However, in light of the discovery of the body of Richard III, it appears that the former image of Richard Plantagenet as a sort of monster was largely fabricated by Shakespeare. History, as we know, is written by the victors and William Shakespeare (apologies to all you Oxfordian theorists out there!) was a Tudor man through and through.

The skeletal remains that have been exhumed and studied these past months do show signs of scoliosis, an extreme curvature of the spine, but that is about it. Otherwise the body is ‘normal’ if slight in build according to researchers. No shortened arm or crippled leg, no deformity of the shoulders.

In fact, a reconstruction of the face based on the remains brings to light an almost handsome man. 

Based on these new findings, there is one question I want to ask.

In historical fiction, is it acceptable to drastically alter the personality and appearance of a person to suit the story?

I do consider the play Richard III to be historical fiction. Richard Plantagenet may well have been a monster of a person as far as his personality but it seems certain now that he was not as grotesque in appearance as Shakespeare and others of the period would have had us believe.

William Shakespeare

I am looking at this in hindsight and so it is easy for me to judge the writers of the time. Plays were very useful political tools in Tudor and Elizabethan England so it is not surprising that Richard III was portrayed a certain way in order to help smooth the Tudor claim. And it’s a bloody good story!

However, the line between absolute truth and fiction is often very fine.

The storyteller and historian in me are often at odds when I am writing. Is it more acceptable to change the appearance or personality of an historical person? Are the primary and secondary sources I am using accurate themselves?

These are questions that face the historical novelist.

When dealing with the big names of ancient history and ancient sources, one can never be absolutely certain of the accuracy. We can cross reference sources, including art, to try and develop the most accurate picture.

But often the most accurate picture is not the most entertaining. Yes, historical novelists have an obligation to portray people accurately but story also needs to be honoured.

Extreme changes are a bit difficult to justify but a slight tweaking here or there is acceptable. The thing to remember is that if any drastic changes are made the author should point them out in the Historical Note or Author’s Note at the end of the book.

Alexander the Great

As a writer, I know that not every reader will be happy with how I portray things and that’s ok.

At the moment, I am writing the first book in a trilogy of Alexander the Great (read a previous post on this project HERE). Alexander the Great is an historic person to whom many people are attached.

Alexander was a many-faceted individual and evokes as many emotions in people. The spectrum of views on Alexander is as vast as the empire he created. Realistically, there is no way a writer can successfully and completely explore every aspect of Alexander’s nature.

The Alexander I write about may be quite different from the Alexander someone else writes about.

Was Shakespeare wrong to portray Richard III as he did when it now seems obvious that his portrayal was inaccurate?

I don’t think so. We have to remember that Shakespeare was a product of his age and the way he wrote Richard may well have been the general perception people had of the recent monarch; the Tudor propagandists were very efficient. Perhaps Richard was someone mothers used to scare their children into going to bed, the King who imprisoned and killed little children?

Persians as portrayed in the movie 300

A similar portrayal might be of the Persians in Frank Miller’s 300, on which the movie was based. Now, I love that movie but I know for sure that the Persians of Xerxes were not monsters like in the book and movie.

However, at the time, an invading Persian army that was sweeping south through Greece and burned Athens would most certainly have struck terror into the hearts of the Greek populace of all city states. The wicked portrayal reflects a particular perspective.

It is the job of both the novelist and the historian to sift through the sources of history, the different perspectives, to get as close as possible to the truth.

The difference is that while the historian cannot, in good conscience, stray from the truth, the novelist has a certain freedom to do so, an obligation almost.

There are a lot of gaps in our knowledge of the historical record and there are often contradicting pieces of information.

The historical fiction writer’s task then is to gather the information, decide on a perspective and write about your chosen person or period in a way that is as accurate as possible but also entertaining and engaging.

Facial Reconstruction of
Richard III

I wonder if, in light of this week’s revelations, we’ll start seeing Richard III played a little differently at various Shakespeare festivals?

One thing is certain. A lot of history books will need to be re-written. 

Writing Alexander

Alexander the Great

I don’t often write about my book projects until they are completed. Perhaps it is a sort of superstition, a fear that if I talk about it prematurely, it won’t happen. There is so much that goes into the writing of an historical novel, let alone a trilogy. With this one, I feel as though I have taken on the Titan of all subjects: Alexander the Great.

My own expectations are high, perhaps unreasonably so, but it is a story that I have wanted to tell for a long time. I feel like Atlas with the weight of the world upon my shoulders and I won’t be shrugging it anytime soon. This is a long-term project, a campaign to the ends of the earth with an historical figure who was as big as they came. I grew up not only with the name (middle) but with the stories. Whenever I would read history, there was always some reference to Alexander, his deeds, or some later personage wanting to emulate him be it Julius Caesar or Napoleon. Generals throughout history have wanted to be Alexander, they have studied him (and still do), his genius, his persona, his propaganda, his tactics, his personal life.

Every aspect of Alexander the Great has been studied over the centuries and yet, it seems like nobody can really know him. He is one of the biggest enigmas of history and so, a dream for any historical novelist willing to take him on.

The Alexander Mosaic from Pompeii

He is the ‘marquee character’ (a term I have heard many agents and publishers use) of historical fiction. That certainly is true but which Alexander will people write about? There are so many. There is the son of a doting, sometimes scheming mother, the mortal son of an angry but brilliant general. There is the merciful man, kind towards women, but often brutal towards his enemies. There is also the genius tactician, the lover, the poet, the scholar, the megalomaniac, the Persian ‘Horned One’, and there is the god. There are other Alexanders too and the more I research and write, the more I realize that there is no possible way I can fully and satisfactorily get into that mind.

For the Alexander novels, I decided to get at Alexander through his men. The Alexander I am interested in discovering is the one that men followed to the ends of the earth, the man that inspired his troops to do the impossible at every turn. Few people in history have inspired their followers in such a way and that is the focus of my campaign to discover and get to know this larger-than-life character.

There are of course, some remnants of superstition clinging to me so I will not reveal the whole of my plot. However, I will say that the main character is named Hanbal son of Akil. He is an Egyptian horse breeder-turned-assassin who has lost everything to the Persians. He is angry, bent of vengeance and, by painful means (I know, too cryptic), he ends up in Alexander’s army.

Siwah Oasis

The first book of the trilogy begins with Alexander’s liberation of Egypt and the young king’s journey to the oracle at Siwah in the western desert. For those of you who know the history, this is a turning point for Alexander. It is also a time when Hanbal becomes acquainted with the men and women who surround the king, Ptolemy, Craterus, Nearchus and the rest of the Companions.

These are big names and I have to admit, it is utterly daunting. But it is also very exciting to weave the fiction in with history. That is why I love writing historical fiction.

The primary sources I have decided to focus on are those texts that Alexander would have been influenced by such as Homer and Xenophon. The latter’s ‘Anabasis’ was used by Alexander as a field guide when marching into Persia. Primary sources on Alexander himself are of course, Arrian and Curtius who both have their own style and focus.

As far as secondary sources, there are so many books that have been written on Alexander the Great, there is no way I could cover them all. And let’s face it, story has to come first in fiction. I have several secondary works on Alexander but the one that has proved most useful is my old copy of ‘Alexander’ by Robin Lane Fox. For those of you who are interested, this is a fantastic, accessible and interesting biography of Alexander.

Oliver Stone's Alexander - Battle of Gaugamela scene

I will post updates on the project as I go. I am almost finished the first draft of the first book which I am writing long-hand whenever I can. However, I have one major event yet to write: the Battle of Gaugamela.

Gaugamela is one of the major battles of history and it displays Alexander’s military genius to perfection. So how can I do it justice? I think many writers feel like this at times and this certainly is the time for me. For now, more research is required to attain comfort. I’ll take my time getting there and wait for the opportune moment to jump into the fray. Like Alexander, I can see the battle waiting for me on the other side of the Tigris.

The drums of war are ringing in my ears and I must write on…