Pat Barker (1)Recensioni

[a:Pat Barker|4000|Pat Barker|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1539120639p2/4000.jpg] has written the story of the [b:The Iliad|1371|The Iliad|Homer|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1388188509l/1371._SX50_.jpg|3293141] from the viewpoint of a woman, the slave and former queen, Briseis, won for his slave by Achilles. Once the wife of King Mynes of Lyrnessus, an ally of Troy, Achilles slew Mynes and the brothers of Briseis, then received her as his war prize. She and Achilles later have a child, but it is the battles and machinations of Agamemnon and the other Greek kings as well as Priam the Trojan ruler which create much of the theater of this story. Barker's writing skills shine, the pace is rapid in spite of the huge cast of characters (I wrote them down) and emphasize the suffering of all during wartime as Briseis bathes the dead and supports the vanquished while mourning her own losses.

Not the most entertaining book I've read, and it was hard not to compare it to "All Quiet on the Western Front" (which might not be entirely fair) but it was thought provoking. It brought up points that I hadn't seen discussed before, or read about, with regards to the psychological impact of World War I. I read some of Sassoon's poetry in high school and this book did provide something of an insight (though speculative) into his state of mind. In that context I found it a worthwhile read.

Whilst not up there with the 'Regeneration' trilogy, this is an involving read. Toby is never present beyond the first few chapters of the book: istead it is his sister Elinor. But he is entirely central to the narrative. His confused sexual feelings, his disappearance in action (this is the First World War) in more than usually odd circumstances. All of this occupies Elinor's thoughts and actions, despite her career as an artist. It's an interesting look at the life at that time of a woman such as Elinor, and a good story too, so I'm not sure why I don't give it more stars. Maybe I'll add to this later....

This story is best described as a psychological thriller. I found it gripping.
Child psychologist Tom Seymour is out walking with his wife along a canal. Their marriage is fragile and they were seeking space by going outdoors. They witness a young man throw himself in the canal after swallowing tablets. Tom dives in and rescues him, only to realise that it is a young man, Danny, who as a 10 year old was charged with murder of an elderly woman and Tom's testimony that he was capable of standing trial in an adult court helped secure his incarceration. Was their meeting again random chance or something more sinister?½

Weer een prachtige Pat Barker, deze keer vanuit het standpunt van Briseis, het verhaal van wat er gebeurt met de vrouwen van een veroverde stad: de mannen en jongens worden gedood en de vrouwen en de meisjes als slaven verkocht of weggegeven. Briseis wordt aan Achilles gegeven, Patroclus is de enige man die echt aardig voor haar is. Ze gaat vaak stiekem. Zwemmen, Achilles doet datt ook, dan is hij even bij zijn moeder Thetis. Briseis ruikt daarna naar de zee en Achilles wordt daar helemaal gek van. Door van Achilles te zijn heeft Briseis nog niet eens zo’n slecht leven als vele anderen, minder jonge, minder mooie vrouwen van “mindere” afkomst. Agamemnon eist haar op een dag op voor zichzelf. Achilles is dan zo woedend dat hij niet meer mee vecht. Het gaat hem niet om het meisje, maar hij is in zijn eer aangetast. Als de Pest uitbreekt gaat Patroclus als Achilles vechten, hij wordt door Hector gedood. Achilles doodt en onteert Hector, en sleept hem achter zijn paard aan. Pas als Priamus komt smeken om het lichaam van zijn zoon geeft Achilles hem terug. Het verhaal eindigt met de val van Troje (zonder het verhaal van het paard). De jongste dochter van Priamus, Polyxena wordt “voor Ajax” geofferd door Agamemnon. Andromache wordt aan de zoon van Achilles, Phyrrus, gegeven, Cassandra aan Agamemnon, Achilles heeft Briseis nog laten trouwen met Alcimus, omdat ze dan een deel van leven heeft, en ze zwanger is.

Couldn't read this novel. Not my type of book. Gave up in the 2nd chapter

This novel is a retelling of the Illiad and focuses on the last few weeks of the Trojan war leading up to the sacking of Troy, the slaughter of its male inhabitants and the enslavement of its women. It begins with the viewpoint of Briseis, a pivotal character in the Illiad but one not given her own voice. Queen of Lyrnessus, a satellite city of Troy, she is handed to Achilles as war price for his part in the sacking of her city, which included the slaughter of all the men and boys. After witnessing the cutting down of her brothers and husband by Achilles, she must endure being his bed-girl which includes rape, and later on more abuse by Agamemnon, the King in charge of the Greek army with whom Achilles had a falling out.

I found the earlier parts more interesting because as the book progresses there are sections from the viewpoint of Achilles. Possibly this is to include events and conversations which Briseis could not witness, being both female and a slave. It develops Achilles as a layered character with his own demons and throws more light on the devoted relationship between him and Patroclus, a King's son who, as a boy, killed another boy in an argument over a game of dice and was sent to become Achilles' companion. Patroclus, too, has more sides, one of them being that he is the only man in the camp who is kind to the female captives.

There is a deliberate anachronistic use of British slang and rude rugby songs in the book which on the whole I didn't mind but which occasionally jarred. I had hoped for more on how the female captives interacted. Maybe the title is a clue, because around the men the slaves have to keep quiet and among themselves they talk more about the men, probably because the men have the power of life and death over them. As Briseis herself says bitterly, she is part of Achilles' story. Also despite the overall blood-and-guts realism, the story veers into supernatural territory with the inclusion of Achilles' sea nymph mother - other people see her so she isn't some psychological quirk of his - and the transformation of Hector's corpse. The cover of this edition is also very striking.

On the grounds that I enjoyed this retelling more than 'The Song of Achilles' by Madeline Miller, enough to order the follow-up, I'm awarding this an additional star and give it a 4 star rating.

Just like it's predecessor, The Silence of the Girls, The Women of Troy is a masterpiece: eloquent tale, impassioned manifesto - an inclusive rewriting of the history. HIGHLY RECOMMEND!

What a tour de force! The Trojan War from a woman's perspective... Really powerful!

Actual rating: 4.5/5

CW: this book contains mentions of war, violence (incl. sexual), death (incl. child death and murder), slavery, and misogyny.

I had really liked The Silence of the Girls when it came out, so I was looking forward to the story continuing when I heard there would be a follow-up book. Picking up shortly after the events of The Silence of the Girls, The Women of Troy recounts the aftermath of the fall of Troy - and the fate of its women.

This book is just as powerful and hard-hitting as the previous one, and in some ways even more so as the pain of the women cuts so much deeper. War is a nasty, cruel business, and behind every glorious hero lies a trail of death and destruction, innocent lives cut short and severe pain inflicted. And the women of Troy will never be able to forget this.

Briseis is back as our main narrator and, now a survivor of the camp, she takes it upon herself to ease the pain of the new arrivals, helping them in accepting their new lives as slaves and ensuring all of them survive. Meanwhile, Briseis herself struggles to navigate her new position as Alcimus's wife while carrying Achilles's son.

As with the previous book, the author does a masterful job of giving a voice to the silenced women of history, not shying away from the brutality and violence of their lives but leaning into their pain and suffering to fully show their strength, resilience and quiet resistance. The cast of women is memorable, each of them carrying her own personal burden.

Helen, despised by all and universally blamed for the war.

Hecuba, old and frail and mourning her loved ones and the loss of her life's work.

Cassandra, abused time and again and having to find ways for men to deliver her prophecies if they are to be believed.

Andromache, reeling from the loss of her husband and the brutal murder of her infant son, forced to lie with the man who killed him.

Amina, stubborn and proud and determined to homage her king one last time by burying him, whatever the consequences.

And so many, many more.

The Women of Troy hits hard yet manages to tell so much suffering in a delicate, respectful way, restoring the dignity of otherwise forgotten women. Highly recommended to anyone looking for more feminist retellings of traditional myths.

For more reviews, visit Book for Thought.

I received an e-arc of this book from the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for my honest review. This did not affect my opinion of the book in any way.

I love retellings. There's something particularly enjoyable for me in reading a familiar story from a different point of view, and I particularly enjoy the ones where traditionally male-centric stories are re-told from women's perspectives. Similarly to other great retellings, like The Penelopiad and Circe, The Silence of the Girls takes on Greek mythology, and in particular the Trojan war.

The book is told entirely through the point of view of Briseis, a queen forced to become a slave after the Greeks conquer her city and murder her husband. While in the original Briseis is little more than a plot device to explain Achilles's rage and refusal to fight, here she finally takes on a full life, and her story is told fully. All the characters, from the well-known Greek heroes to the mostly-forgotten women who live with them, are beautifully portrayed and explored, and I really enjoyed seeing them interact in new ways. Briseis and the other women really take centre stage here, and they hold it perfectly, sharing their stories so that they will not be forgotten, and in so doing remembering all the women whose voices were taken away.

Although I mostly found this an interesting and gripping new take on an old classic, there were a few times when the pacing of the book fell a bit flat for me and it felt somewhat repetitive, especially in some parts describing camp life. I was also not too keen on how much focus was on Achilles at one point - we got enough of that elsewhere, and I just didn't feel the need for it here. This book also openly discusses violence of various kinds and rape, which might be triggering to some people.

Overall, The Silence of the Girls was an excellent retelling, giving us some insight in the life of the voiceless and forgotten. Ultimately, it is a tale of resilience and resistance, in whichever way that may be possible, and the real, human effects of war once the glamour and glory are removed.

I received an e-arc of this book from the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for my honest review. This did not affect my opinion of the book in any way.

In this novel Barker retells the legend of the Trojan War from the perspective of Briseis, a young woman from a royal family now war prize belonging to Achilles. Overall, I have mixed feelings about the book. Its promise is a story from women's perspectives and, while a good chunk was first-person Briseis, a disappointing number of scenes were narrated by an omniscient third person in order to reveal what the men were up to, which seemed unnecessary and occasionally threw me out of the story. I've read and enjoyed a fair number of retellings from Ancient Greece, and overall found this lacking in charm and kind of forgettable.

This was so much better than I expected.

I was expecting a simple retelling of the Iliad from a woman's perspective. I was not expecting something so realistic and feminist. Something that speaks to the truth of war for women. Something that makes it so clear how courageous women have always been in ways that are not acknowledged as such, but rather are portrayed as a sign of their weakness.

I loved it!

I struggle whether to give this 3-5 stars. On the one hand, it's a very good look at the realities of war, especially ancient warfare (minus the magic), especially with a centering of victims. Not always the women, but mostly the women. It's also an impressive way to look at how even the privileged suffer during wartime. Just far, far less than the marginalized.

I was thinking what would happen if Briseis actually stuck with Priam, to escape to Troy, even for a brief time. Finding comfort in her sister's lodgings until the Greeks came. Would she be kind to her sister's slaves? To the concubines? The prostitutes? She was so quick to turn even on Helen, whom she regarded so well at one point, for no apparent reason other than the war was lost. And after so many occasions where Briseis points out the cruelty of blaming the female "prizes" for the actions of territorial men who were looking for a fight anyway. For a book that spends much of its time pointing out that someone at the bottom of the ladder will do whatever it takes to climb up, even marry their rapist, that little quirk was odd. And even Cassandra was largely scorned - a woman driven mad by a man who lusted after and assaulted her, in a way Briseis herself is familiar with. Yes, even the suffering can be petty and cruel. Even rape victims can show no pity for other rape victims. Perhaps that's all it was.

There's also an oddly sparse amount of time given to how women learn things. Yes, this is about -mostly- women suffering at the hands of any men, particularly the powerful ones, but we see lots of women who are skilled in certain things, whether it's cleaning, caretaking, cooking, or funereal rites. And we do actually learn how Briseis came by some of her skills in terms of caretaking. Would the book have benefited from talking about a cookbook or where the idea for piss being used to clean out blood was taught? Probably not. But it largely gives the impression of women being united (some of the time), and seemingly emerging from the womb fully formed into knowing their duties. Unless you are Chryseis. Whom the story notes is too young to know how to pleasure men. Briseis herself notes that even SHE doesn't know all the tricks needed to get men satisfied so they can go away, but she knows some. But does anyone offer to help her, since it's implied knowing this would make things less painful for her? No. It's just kind of odd to me how we see boys learning to fish, training to be soldiers, but no time is really spent on where women learn things. I supposed to implication is that it's part of survival. Or part of things we're just supposed to know when you live in patriarchy - which I can relate to, there are definitely moments where I've looked around at AFAB folks when a topic is brought up by cis men and well...

I respect the craft of this, particularly in the way it portrays the attitude of a lot of survivors of assault and trauma towards their own experiences and continued, inescapable trauma. It's an important read. Is it enjoyable? Not really. You can't really call it that, given the content, though it does have at least one rather poignant quotation that spoke to me, "grief’s only ever as deep as the love it’s replaced". Is it compelling? Ehhh. I was recommended this as some kind of counterpoint to "Song of Achilles", and honestly, I think these books aim for different things, and if that kind of story is what the end of the book is referring to, I would disagree with that bit of the story. If someone came out of "Song of Achilles" and thought war was sunshine and daisies, I don't think they were reading the same book I was.

It was probably a good thing I found may to this after Song of Achilles, because there's no way I would have been able to stomach or finish that book in light of this one. Which isn't to say that Song of Achilles is badly written, because it's really not, it's just...written with that same internalised misogyny that we - almost all of us - have and suffer from. What can I say? I'm glad this counterpoint exists.

Can I say I enjoyed this book? That sounds a bit wrong, given the subject matter. Nevertheless, I found it compelling and moving. The prose is lucid and never wasteful - there's barely a foot put wrong in the whole novel. The characters are wonderful - likeable and comprehensible in a way that isn't easy for people living in an incomprehensible time. Part of the genius of the plot, I think, is that Barker realises there's no point in writing about the war, both because it's already been done and because it doesn't necessarily help to bring the reader any closer to understanding it. Instead, the plot revolves around reactions to the war, or in fact the reactions of a doctor to the reactions of the officers to their experiences in the war. Seeing at such a remove, like observing the transit of Venus through a pinhole camera, I felt as a reader I could get closer to seeing the truth than I ever could by staring at the sun and reading directly about the horror.

I read this at university, for one of my courses, so technically this is a reread, but books read for class don't count, I think, and although the tone and the character of Rivers were familiar, it was otherwise like reading something for the first time.

Perhaps even 4½ stars. This historical-fiction novel centers around the poet Siegfried Sassoon and his psychiatrist Dr. Rivers during his stay at the mental hospital Craiglockhart during 1917.

The central theme is conflict between duty and survival which Rivers recognizes as the basis for most of the cases of "war neurosis", shell shock or as we now call it PTSD. Where do we draw the line between a soldier's duty and a completely reasonable desire to survive? The heart-wrenching part was the fact that many of the men (especially officers) didn't want (at least in the conscious part of their brain) to be posted in a "safe" position because they felt it was shameful to desert their men. The stress of being responsible for others without having any power to control conditions must have been enormous...

This book explores some of the less well known, skeleton-in-a-closet aspects of the effect of World War I on combatants and civilians. It takes us down some very dark pathways, indeed; as if killing each other by the millions was not dark enough. It's a historical fiction book with elements of factual events weaved into the story. Some of that will be explained in the author's note at the end of the book. This is the 2nd book of the Regeneration trilogy and while you will already be familiar with many of the characters if you have read the first book, it can be read as a stand alone novel as well. It does explore in some detail the inner turmoils of some of the characters introduced in Book One of the trilogy.

This book is quite graphic in its description of male homosexual encounters and for me that was uncomfortable. While one of the characters is bisexual, where females are involved the descriptions are not nearly as graphic and mainly focus on the platonic aspects of the relationship.

The story is played out in disjointed pieces, first focusing on one character, then bouncing from one to another. It is a British book and often the details went right past me as such; much as they do with me and British TV productions, comedy shows, etc. That is simply speaking to my own obtuseness. But I'm not a big fan of bouncing from character to character in bits and pieces of the story being told in this fashion. I finally had to envision it as a (British) soap opera and in that manner I was able to settle in and finish the book.

I did appreciate the overall anti-war message of the book. The atrocities outlined are brutal. And it is horrifying that homosexuals were sought after and persecuted even as they fought for their country. As an American citizen, I'm particularly sensitive to this topic and the persecution of individuals as we have entered into very scary times here ourselves.

The factual parts of the story as related by the author at the end of the book are quite interesting and also mind boggling. Again it brought me back to current events and some of the ridiculous, yet atrocious things we see play out every day. History certainly repeats itself. It's too bad more people don't read about history. They should.

Toby's Room, as you can tell from the front cover design, continues Pat Barker's preoccupation with themes of war, survival and recovery, so I was interested to read at Wikipedia that before writing the Regeneration Trilogy (1991, 1993, 1995) she felt that she had been typecast as a northern, regional, working class, feminist—label, label, label—novelist.

Since I've only read her war novels and one of her forays into rewriting Greek myth, I hadn't come to this conclusion at all. Perhaps I should read Liza's England (1986) which has been waiting patiently on the TBR since I found it years ago in an OpShop. Wikipedia tells me that her other novels which apparently acquired these labels were

• Union Street (1982)


• Blow Your House Down (1984)


• The Man Who Wasn't There (1988)

There are class distinctions in the novel, but I hadn't paid much attention to them because they seemed extraneous to the main theme of memory and how it is constructed. Which was wrong of me, because when you're sending men to war as cannon fodder, it does matter that the officers are better fed than the men, and that even when they are wounded, they are treated better than the men...

Toby's Room explores the WW1 lives of characters from Barker's previous novels, but her focus has shifted to the medical aftermath for the wounded and how families process bereavement. Elinor Brooke, Kit Neville and Paul Tarrant are fictionalised versions of real-life students at the Slade School of Fine Art and so is Mr Tonks was their intimidating teacher there.

To read the rest of my review please visit https://anzlitlovers.com/2023/04/27/tobys-room-2012-by-pat-barker/

This tells the story of Achilles and Patroclus from the vantage point of and enslaved princess and from Achilles himself. The story is familiar: Achilles has a deep bond with a friend from childhood. Achilles is proud and offended by the actions of Agamemnon, who he feels has insulted him. Thus he refuses to help the Greeks against the Trojans. The story goes through the fall of Troy and the death of Achilles. However the narrator's voice is that of the daughter of a King who was defeated by the Greeks. She is enslaved and it is her experience that informs the story. Passages about that experience: love, sex, fear,etc are very well done. Itis a strong work, though not on a level of her other, more well known works.

184 "The process of transformation consists almost entirely of decay."
184 "He had missed his chance of being ordinary."
222 "It was prolonged strain, immobility and helplessness that did the damage, and not the sudden shocks and bizarre horrors that the patients themselves were inclined to point to as the explanation for their condition."

Child psychiatrist Tom Seymour is forced to reexamine his role at the trial of child murderer Danny Miller when the adult Danny is released and arranges for Tom to rescue him from attempted suicide by drowning. Pyromaniac who tries to drown himself (water as rebirth); childless protagonist 'births' new Danny (Ian): "The mud smelt sharp and strong. He was concious of his skin chafing against his wet clothes, and he was filled with joy." The elusive nature of boundaries: for Tom, border crossings re love (separating from wife, realizes present feelings tint past memory), responsibility (between professional and personal); Danny's re sanity ('normal', mentally ill, evil).

Ambivalence of involvement - how much is enough? Our breaks with the past: "In spite of the connecting thread of memory, the person who'd done that was not sufficiently like his present self for him to feel guilt." Is charm manipulative or just personality? "Danny wasn't breaking the rules. They were. He was very, very good at getting people to step across that invisible border." Are we really to blame if people respond to us? Duality - "That smile...[it] was enough to make an atheist believe in damnation."

Danny tries to challenge each of 3 core factors posed at trial: could he 1) distinguish between fantasy and reality (playing soldiers)? 2) understand that killing was wrong (soldier father, in or outside the circle)? 3) understand death is permanent (fear of still seeing the dead woman)? When Tom was 10 yrs old, a normal boy, yet could have killed a 4 yr old, knowing what he was doing, and possibly comprehending the permanence of it, yet children lack perfect control of the 'off' switch, the ability to stop themselves in mid action.

War is not my usual reading topic but the characters were so interesting. I was unfamiliar with the term "neurasthenia" but consider it the equivalent of PTSD or shellshock. There are wonderful descriptive detail: "the silvery sound of shaken wheat, the shimmer of light on the stalks" (p.6) when passing a windblown wheat field.

It took me a couple weeks to read because I would stop to take in the message, to think about the implications. Barker isn't just writing about soldiering, but also about how our social customs and expectations affect us, and she uses Rivers' experiences as an anthropologist as comparative alternative. Can men be nurturing or express tenderness without being considered deviant (includes homosexual in that era)? The biblical story of Abraham sacrificing his son as the basis for patriarchal (Euro-American) societies which imply "If you, who are young and weak, will obey me, who am old and weak, even to the extent of being prepared to sacrifice your life, then in the course of time you will peacefully inherit, and be a ble to exact the same obedience from your sons" (p.149). "The process of transformation consists almost entirely of decay" as the caterpillar in its chrysalis (p.184). The difference in symptoms of the emotional conflict or protest of what they are required to do between those who have power (i.e. upper class officers=stuttering, nightmares, tremors, memory lapses) and those who don't (working class=paralysis, mutism). The similarities of stress symptoms between the soldiers and low-income women: "The look of people who are totally responsible for lives they have no power to save" (p.107). The psychiatric treatment of PTSD in soldiers as really a silencing of them as humans, controlling people not to keep them from engaging in self-destructive behavior but allowing them to resume fighting which is positively suicidal (p.238).

I assumed from the blurb that Barker wanted to protest current wars but chose to clothe this perspective in the WWI era to make the topic more universal. And then I found out after reading the book that Siegfried Sassoon was a real person. Still, it does allow us the hindsight of knowing the WWII consequence of this trying to "shell the militarism out of the Hun". This turns out not to be a pacifist book so much as one which asks us to examine whether the purpose for any particular war is worth the cost.

Unrelated to the main themes, I wondered if Sassoon's advice to Own on writing poetry, and selection of words was advice this author used as her own guide. It is quite admirable writing.

While an interesting concept, I feel like 'A Thousand Ships' by Nathalie Haynes did the idea better. Still loved it ultimately, as it does give the female perspective in a world that was ravaged and dominated by men. I think my main criticism is that the language sometimes felt too modern/contemporary, rather than what would be fitting to an Ancient Greek setting.

Zo knap het eerste deel uit deze cyclus was, zo vlak is dit tweede deel. Heel vreemd. In Silence of the Girls bracht Barker een imposante hervertelling van de Ilias van Homerus, vooral vanuit het perspectief van de gevangengenomen Trojaanse prinses Briseis. Ontluisterend en innemend tegelijk. ‘Vrouwen van Troje’ bouwt chronologisch en thematisch voort op dat eerste deel. We zien Briseis – zwanger van de inmiddels gesneuvelde Achilles – nu rondzwerven in het Griekse kamp, na de val van Troje. Ze gaat systematisch langs bij de andere Trojaanse vrouwen en op die manier schetst Barker opnieuw hun eigen, meestal ontluisterend verhaal: het is een opeenstapeling van vernederingen, niet-ingeloste verlangens en verwachtingen, maar ook van gekrenkte trots en wraakgevoelens. De Griekse prinses Helena, die de aanleiding was voor de Trojaanse oorlog, toont zich van haar meest narcistische en manipulatieve kant. Het valt op dat dit deel veel meer vrouwen bevat die het heft in eigen handen nemen, zoals de imposante Cassandra (de Trojaanse prinses met voorspellende gaven die door niemand geloofd worden) of de slavin Amina (een alternatieve Antigone). De mannelijke tegenspelers brengen het er in dit deel nog minder goed van af. Vooral de jonge Pyrrhus, de zoon van Achilles, wordt geschetst als een overmoedige puber die gekweld wordt door de schaduw van zijn vader.
Dit verhaal speelt zich af tussen de val van Troje en het vertrek van de Grieken naar huis, een lange periode waarin stormwind (veroorzaakt door de boze goden) het vertrek ophoudt. Het gebrek aan actie weegt zwaar door in deze roman, in contrast met de vorige, waardoor je voortdurend op je honger blijft. Stilistisch is het allemaal wat minder, en verhaaltechnisch laat Barker enkele opvallende hiaten vallen (zo doet ze zo goed als niks met de zwangerschap van Briseis). Hopelijk weet ze dat in het volgende deel weer recht te zetten.½