pothos.org

Thank you!
One of the favourite films of the past few years in the west is The Shawshank Redemption, which is a kind of romance between the two male protagonists. So, perhaps things aren't as bad as we fear.Linda

Hi Linda,I don't have time to answer all your post right now, but I will just respond to one point. I admit that it was a bit ambiguous, but I didn't intend it to look as if *any* of my reasons for disliking Hephaistion were to do with his not being a top commander.All the bestMarcus

Hi Halil,I'm pretty sure I don't disagree with much of what you say, but if I understand your post I fear you might have misunderstood my viewpoint."... it's personal prejudice against romanticized figures that has given you negative feelings about Hephaistion and not really the little that is known about Hephaistion himself."This is partly true, although from the little I know about Hephaistion I've still come to my conclusion that I don't like him very much "those who mistrust or dislike the idea of (romantic or friendship-based) love as a male-motivator are very negative to Hephaistion."If you're including me in this, then I fear you might have misunderstood me. I have no problems at all with either Hephaistion's motivations, nor indeed his friendship/love/whatever with Alexander. Having said that, I do believe that his devotion to Alexander might (I repeat *might*) have led him to one or two pretty underhand actions (such as over Philotas), and to believing, to some extent, that he was above the law (his needing to be brought down to earth by Alexander after his argument with Craterus). It's not his motivation that I have a problem with, but his attitude.Perhaps it's my use of the word 'romanticised' - by which I mean the way in which characters become 'heroes' (who in some cases can do no wrong - pace Lancelot in most Arthurian myth) because of their position - which in Hephaistion's case is his relationship with Alexander. I often feel that the rosy picture some people have of Alexander extends to a belief that he could only have formed close friendships with 'nice' people; when, in fact, Alexander was probably just as fallible as the rest of us. It doesn't (or shouldn't) lessen or cheapen Alexander's feelings towards Heph., but just because we all adore/worship/idolise (or whatever) Alexander, doesn't mean that we should think of Hephaistion as a whiter than white character.All the bestMarcus

OK, I've decided that I'm going to write an anti-Hephaistion piece so I can set out all my arguments, references etc. (Otherwise I'm going to keep chucking in my ha'pennysworth, and keep having to hop onto my back foot when I get attacked ).It will take a while, because I'm rather pushed for time at the moment; but I'm sure it will be worthwhile.Hey, there's even a chance that I'll change my mind once I start writing ... nah, unlikely :-)All the bestMarcus

Hello Marcus"those who mistrust or dislike the idea of (romantic or friendship-based) love as a male-motivator are very negative to Hephaistion. If you're including me in this, then I fear you might have misunderstood me."I must admit I was beginning to feel that you had some sort of problem with this, but I've only got that from your previous posts. I am glad that that is a misunderstanding on my part. You see how easy it is to misjudge someone based on only a few words to know them by. "I've still come to my conclusion that I don't like him very much "And that is very much your perogative. But precisely because you do dislike him, you should be careful not to let that colour your perceptions about him based on the tiny amount that can be dredged from the ancient sources, or your extrapolations might blind you to some interesting alternative ideas."I have no problems at all with either Hephaistion's motivations, nor indeed his friendship/love/whatever with Alexander."Good for you! Me neither. "Having said that, I do believe that his devotion to Alexander might (I repeat *might*) have led him to one or two pretty underhand actions (such as over Philotas),"You say "might" and I agree he *might*, and yet I would urge that you take up the idea that it is equally possible that he *might not* have done anything to warrant your dislike. When you decide something with so little evidence to back up the idea, you close your mind to possibilities and other ways of looking at events and indeed at Alexander himself. Also Hephaistion wasn't the one who was trying to get Philotas in trouble with Alexander - we are told that since Egypt, Krateros had been gathering evidence against Philotas in a quite underhand way, and yet you have no problem with Krateros. Krateros was even one of Philotas' torturers, and yet, you have no problem with Krateros...have you ever wondered why that is? Incidentally, if you read the ancient texts with an open mind, you will see that Krateros is much more romanticized than Hephaistion (and remains so with many historians even today), but you don't object to that. If it's the "romanticising" that you dislike, how about debunking some of the idolization that occurs connected with Krateros?"and to believing, to some extent, that he was above the law (his needing to be brought down to earth by Alexander after his argument with Craterus)."Above the law? And what law was that? I could argue this one exte

Above the law? And what law was that? I could argue this one extensively with you, but won't here. This is a whole 'nother topic, enough for a thesis even. "It's not his motivation that I have a problem with, but his attitude."But you don't know what his attitude was. You can't possibly assess what his attitude was when you don't even know the real circumstances behind his quarrel with Krateros. You have no idea what was said on either side to make the fight break out in the first place, but already your sympathy is with Krateros. If Krateros was such a mighty warrior and Hephaistion was not, Hephaistion going up against him was almost suicidal. And yet all your sympathy is with Krateros. Why is that?"Perhaps it's my use of the word 'romanticised' - by which I mean the way in which characters become 'heroes' (who in some cases can do no wrong - pace Lancelot in most Arthurian myth) because of their position - which in Hephaistion's case is his relationship with Alexander." I totally agree with your quarrel with the "romanticised" Hephaistion. Like you, I can't believe in the Saint Hephaistion image of some books either. But just because some people see good in all his actions, doesn't mean that there was only bad. Just like anyone else, including Alexander, he probably had good days and bad days and days when things just plain went wrong. (Haven't you ever had days like that? When all your best intentions went out the window - someone pushes the wrong buttons and all the good intentions are history?)"just because we all adore/worship/idolise (or whatever) Alexander, doesn't mean that we should think of Hephaistion as a whiter than white character."I totally agree with you. Sorry if this sounds like an anti-Krat tirade, it wasn't meant to be. I'm sure Krateros had his good points too ;)Best regardsHalil

Hi Halil,I appreciate the time you're taking with these posts - I wish I had the time! (Unfortunately, with no Internet access at home at the moment, I'm constrained with what I can get away with at work.)Yes, you're completely right with all that you say - although I'm not sure I agree that Krateros is romanticised in the same way that Hephaistion often is. Of course, the problem is always that one will be coloured by one's own prejudices; but I promise that I shall be as fair to Hephaistion as possible. I certainly don't believe (and never have) that he was *always* a nasty character, and am prepared to give him his due - I consider one of the instances of his 'charm' being his role in the elevation of the chap (can't remember his name) to be king of Sidon - I'm not aware that the story is considered apocryphal, and even if it is it is surely based on true qualities that Hephaistion possessed. In this case, his 'charm' would have been manifested in his 'statesmanship' in selecting, and having accepted, his choice.Of course, I would also ask you to realise that, being in a position of holding an 'unpopular' point of view, I am prone to polemicise - I assure you that my eventual essay will be much more even handed (I doubt I'd be able to keep up an anti-Heph tirade without applying proper due diligence to the sources).All the bestMarcus

Fair enough, Marcus. Fortunately (or unfortunately!), I do have Internet access at home so I do manage to steal a few moments to ponder things other than work, though often that has to be in the middle of the night or very late or very early. But it's my one recreation at the moment and it's good mental exercise. Thanks for the interesting posts.CheersHalil