Another new book about Alexander

[jona]

Dear friends,Perhaps this is interesting: a first-person novel about Alexanderhttp://www.AlexanderTheBook.comJona

[jan]

Thanks, Jona, as I can never remember this author's name. If it is anything like the first person book that Steven Pressfield wrote, wait til you can read it free of charge! I would like to see more about the content before ordering a copy.

[xxx]

But of course this is not the first attempt to tell the story from Alexander's point of view - there have been at least two that I know of before this one.There is an unwritten rule in historical fiction that you should never try to write a famous character first person. And so far, I've not yet seen or rather read, any reason when it comes to Alexander, that people should break that rule.

[ruthaki]

As a historical fiction writer, I'd like to know who made up the 'rule'. Some excellent books have been written in the first person voice of famous characters. (Memoirs of Hadrian by Marguerite Yourcenar. "Memoirs of Cleopatra" by Margaret George to name two) I also happened to love Steve Pressfield's "Virtues of War" (was lucky to have an advanced copy so read it during the summer). As Alexander is the subject I write about too, I was intrigued and impressed by his novel.

[marcus]

I saw this site a few days ago and I have to admit that I groaned.I appreciate what Ruth says, but I can't help agreeing with Tre. I don't have a problem with first-person narratives per se, but somehow I don't see how anyone can do Alexander justice, unless they're *blindingly* good (and knowledgeable). I don't think even Robert Graves could have done it.But that's probably as much to do with my own feelings about Alexander, rather than because he'd be necessarily more difficult to execute as a 1st person narrative than, say, Claudius.All the bestMarcus

[xxx]

I'm a bit harder to please, what can I say All the excerpts I've seen from Virtues of War have been pretty bad, but I do have a loan request from the library when it comes in, but I'm not optimistic.

[ruthaki]

Historical FICTION writers are not writing HISTORY TEXT books. They are interpreting the stories and characters as they see them. What counts is the background research and even then you have poetic license to interpret characters and events as you imagine they might have been. I try to stick to historical facts when I'm writing but my interpretation of the characters is the way I 'see' them and have grown to 'know' them through research and a lot of reading.

[Linda]

I read some of Pressfield's book in Waterstones' today, and I couldn't work out what it was at first - I had no feeling of Alexander's character from it at all. This latest book looks like a management text to me.A historical fiction book has to actually supplant the historical reality in the reader's imagination, to be any good. The trouble with a lot of fiction is that it is both inaccurate AND badly written. It is full of inconsistencies - I don't mind a writer taking liberties, as long as it feels real.

[marcus]

Hi Ruth,I'm well aware what fiction is all about. But if I don't feel it works then surely any amount of poetic licence doesn't make up for it.I promise you, I've read a heck of a lot of historical fiction that should have stayed unwritten.All the bestMarcus