Book Review: Fire from Heaven

[osprey_archer]

As I reported yesterday, I have AT LONG LAST finished Mary Renault's Fire from Heaven, which I have been reading since, God help me, August.

In the past I've sort of informally sorted war books along an axis, based on their attitude from war, which axis runs from BRUTAL to GLORIOUS. During Fire from Heaven, it occurred to me, perhaps belatedly, that these are properly two separate axes: brutal to not-brutal and glorious to not-glorious. These axes should be overlaid to form four quadrants of war stories.

So, on the glorious/not-brutal quadrant, you have classic boy's own war adventures. On brutal/not-glorious, you've got things like All Quiet on the Western Front. And then you've got Fire from Heaven, which is in the "war is brutal AND glorious" quadrant."

In a sense this is unavoidable: it's a book about Alexander the Great, who is Great because he conquered a swathe of the known world, and this is not a book that is trying to complicate your understanding of whether that is truly Great. This is a book about how Alexander is the bee's knees, and although war is brutal (I wouldn't say that Renault lingers unduly on the brutality, but there is a certain "this is not a boy's own story" emphasis on its presence) this does not, somehow, mean it is not glorious. In fact, brutality and glory may be inseparable.

For many modern readers, and by "many modern readers" I of course mean myself, this is an alien view. Frankly, I probably found it as challenging as many of her early readers may have found her positive depiction of Alexander and Hephaistion's love affair. (This is adorable and does not take up a lot of page time.) I was not, unfortunately, in the mood to be challenged, particularly not on this particular topic, because I read so many war books over the past year that I am honestly just tired of war right now, so whenever Alexander marched to the cusp of another brutal yet glorious battle I screeched to a halt, hence the fact that it took me four months to read the darn book.

Possibly I'm just not the right audience for historical fiction about world conquerors. I should keep this in mind if I ever run across a novel about Napoleon.

***

ALSO, does Mary Renault have an Oedipus complex kink, or DOES she have an Oedipus complex kink? It had not occurred to me that this could be a thing, but I've read four of her novels now, and the Oedipal thing is ALL over three of them, and the fourth one has female main characters, so there's really no place to shove in an Oedipal complex, but let's be real, The Friendly Young Ladies had MORE than enough going on already.

1. In The Charioteer, baby!Laurie asks his mother to marry him. They grow up to have an arrestingly dysfunctional relationship during which she's more or less constantly telling him to stop having feelings about things like "you put my beloved dog down because he was inconvenient." (At one point Laurie, apparently with no sense of irony, tells Ralph "my mother's pretty well-balanced." Laurie. Laurie. IS SHE, Laurie?)

2. In The Last of the Wine, Alexias's father accuses him of sleeping with his hot young stepmother and Alexias runs away into the hills SO far and SO fast that he almost DIES and then collapses, sobbing, because although the accusation is not literally true it is true in his HEART. And then he gets his first girlfriend, who is literally old enough to be his mother.

3. In Fire from Heaven, baby!Alexander (like Laurie!) asks his mother to marry him, AND ALSO spends most of the book seesawing about whether or not he wants to kill his father, before finally deciding that his father is NOT his father so patricide is not technically patricide and is, therefore, okay, probably. But then his father dies of other causes anyway.

In a way it is futile to ask why an author kinks on certain things, but also WHY. WHY, MARY.

I scream this to the heavens as if it is going to in any way hinder me from reading more Renault books. It definitely will not. I will continue reading them and then shrieking like an incoherent dolphin.

...But probably these further Renault readings will take place after a break of some months because honestly I am SO tired of war books right now. I've read so many. I just want to read books about books and savor the quiet life among people who are not leading any conquering armies at all.

Comments

[sovay]

In a way it is futile to ask why an author kinks on certain things, but also WHY. WHY, MARY.

Brace for impact if you attempt Return to Night (1947).

[tei]

The War Quadrants are an excellent summary of the approach to war in this book. If it helps, The Persian Boy is “brutal and glorious, but mostly for other people, and maybe at some point we could possibly consider not-war as a possibility for a bit, maybe?”

The Oedipus kink is SO STRONG. (I have only read extracts of Return To Night, but they were the most Oedipal extracts, unless the rest of the book is equally so, in which case… yeah.) Though I must consider in this case whether Alexander has Mary’s kink or if Mary has Alexander’s, because in addition to the one Extreme Mother Situation he was born with he then picked up a couple more Mother Situations on the road…

[troisoiseaux]

At one point Laurie, apparently with no sense of irony, tells Ralph "my mother's pretty well-balanced." Laurie. Laurie. IS SHE, Laurie?

I mean, is Laurie a particularly good judge of anyone's psychology.

[hedgebird]

I always assumed (given when she wrote) the books had to explain What Made Them Gay and "weird relationship with mom" was the current theory. But maybe it wouldn't actually come up that often if it weren't a kink.

[asakiyume]

Shrieking like an incoherent dolphin --awww, too adorable!

it's a book about Alexander the Great, who is Great because he conquered a swathe of the known world, and this is not a book that is trying to complicate your understanding of whether that is truly Great. ahahaha, yeah, I can see how that's more cognitive dissonance than you want in this particular moment in world history (or maybe ever).

You really have read Quite A Lot of war books.

[kore]

Persian Boy is way less "war is glorious/glorious AND brutal" and more "war is brutal, and here's the POV of someone treated like a chess piece," altho Alexander is still the bee's knees. IIRC Olympias is also in it WAY less. I thought it was kind of more varied and open than FFH, if that makes sense? FFH at times almost felt claustrophobic, although it's been a LONG time since I read it and I think I only reread it once, maybe twice.

[regshoe]

I like the 'quadrants of war stories' model, and yeah, it's very understandable that books in the 'brutal AND glorious' quadrant would be particularly difficult.

Er, yeah, I agree with the other comments about Oedipal complexes and Return to Night...! Nice to know Renault keeps on writing exactly what she likes, no matter the setting, I suppose.

I scream this to the heavens as if it is going to in any way hinder me from reading more Renault books. It definitely will not. I will continue reading them and then shrieking like an incoherent dolphin.

Extremely relatable sentiment, specifically and in general when it comes to Renault. :D

I'm glad the Alexander/Hephaistion relationship is positive and adorable, though! I didn't think any of Renault's main couples were that. Although perhaps not as 'main', if it doesn't have much time on the page compared to all the war and conquest.