The Women of Troy: A Novel

I read a review of THE WOMEN OF TROY in the Sunday paper. I’m generally a fan of historical novels. This one was a bit surprising in that the characters Odysseus, Achilles and other Greek fighters are not the ones we’ve come to know.This might be because the main character, Briseis, is a former Trojan queen. She became Achilles’ slave after the fall of Troy and is now pregnant with the deceased hero’s child.Another lesser known Greek fighter, Pyrrhus, is the villain in the story. He is one of the hero’s of the fall of Troy, which might be a bit misleading because he so badly botched the murder of Trojan king Priam and dragged his body behind his horse back to the Greek camp. Pyrrhus will not allow anyone to bury Priam’s body. The reader should also know that Pyrrhus is only sixteen years old; according to Wikipedia he was ultimately a great Greek general, most famously know for the term “Pyrrhic victory’. He defeated the Romans and lost his army in the process, hence the term.Briseis has been married off to Alcimus, who was Achilles’ choice. Alcimus isn’t around much but he treats Briseis well when he is. Briseis befriends one of the Trojan slave girls who’s determined to bury Priam’s body, which would be a serious crime.Later on Calchas, a holy man for the Greeks, determines that when Priam asked Achilles for the body of his son Hector, Achilles had befriended him as a guest; any mistreatment of Priam would be a violation of the Greek code of ethics. Obviously Pyrrhus is guilty as he had beheaded Priam who was an old man who couldn’t fight back, but it wouldn’t be a capital crime as Pyrrhus didn’t know about the relationship between Achilles and Priam. The reader should also know that Pyrrhus is Achilles’s somewhat bumbling son. He’s also rather sensitive about the fact.The Greeks were stalemated after the fall of Troy. The wind would not stop blowing, and they could not leave with their spoils. This book is the second in what you could call a trilogy, and you should know that if you don’t want to read all three books. The ending just sort of fades away as the Greeks are leaving when the wind finally dies down. Odysseus is the first to leave and we know what happens to him.

I read The Silence of the Girls a few weeks ago and was fascinated by it, as a fan of many ancient historical novels. I was eager to plunge into Women/Troy, but ultimately found it merely a pallid vehicle to get to Part 3. Today, because I was let down and suspicious that a third part was coming, I found an interview that revealed Barker is working on one, although she dislikes being pigeon-holed as a trilogy writer. Here's an idea then: Write the entire story in one book. Simple, right? I'm disappointed that a seasoned author (and trilogy writer) would offer this disingenuous claim. Hey, if I had an idea for a novel that has already sold well, and a sequel that's quite well received now, would I not leave room for a second sequel, or trilogy? No need to pretend it's just happening organically. We all know authors need to keep those books coming!

This is Barker’s second book recounting the invisible fates of the Trojan women after the fall of Troy. It puts a very human touch onto a mythic story. Reading the early chapters left me wondering where the book was heading, then I found myself captured by the struggles of the women. I finally understood that this is very much a character-driven work, rather than the event-driven recounting I thought it would be. Accolades to the author.

Read very easy

Novelists, of course, can and should take liberties to fully develop their characters and advance their stories. Here and in her earlier work, The Silence of the Girls, Barker creates character and drama in the unexpressed wiggle room of legend. For instance, she has Briseis marry Alcimus while pregnant with Achilles' son, and Pyrrhus forbid the burial of Priam. But in this novel Barker drives no benefit from the dissonant changes.The Women of Troy often diverges from and contradicts traditional versions of the story. Inconsistencies and inaccuracies abound. The differences are disconcerting and annoying and add nothing.-- Briseis was friends with Hecuba and Andromache before the war and identifies herself as a Trojan. (p. 126 "I am a Trojan.")--Calchas, the priest, was a Trojan (p. 91 and 116). Legend had him presiding over the sacrifice of Iphigenia at Aulis before the war. (Barker even implies that Calchas and Hecuba may have been romantically involved in the past).-- Diomedes died in the Trojan War: "before Achilles intent on avenging Diomedes's death, had returned to the fighting" (p. 121): that should be Patroclus, not Diomedes. Probably just a typo but a whopper, since this author shows him very much alive competing in a chariot race after the war (p. 220).-- Agamemnon married Cassandra at Troy (p. 186).-- Helen is called "Helen of Argos" several times. She was from Sparta. In his translation of the Odyssey Fagles refers to her as "Helen of Argos" but the ancient Greek uses the adjective "Argive," meaning she is Greek.

Tells the story of the fall of Troy, from a woman’s point of view that “The Iliad” didn’t tell us! It starts off by telling the reader what it was really like inside the Trojan horse before the final battle for Troy began.

This was a tale of the women of Troy and one possible way they were treated after the war had ended. I thought it a bit boring but readable

I took up this book thinking it was about the women of Troy, but it actually was about one woman of Troy, and not a very important or interesting character.Didn’t think much of it.

The story of Helen and the siege of Troy may be the greatest tale ever told, and Pat Barker's retelling of parts of the tale, from the perspective of some of the women involved, is excellent. This book follows on from the earlier Silence of the Girls in telling the tale mainly of Briseis and her fate in the Greek camp.This book starts inside the Trojan horse, and quickly moves through the fall of Troy to the aftermath, with the Greeks unable to set sail for home with their booty, including the women they enslaved, due to unfavourable winds. The atmosphere is tense, and for the Trojan women held in the camp dangerous, humiliating and very uncertain.It has long been hard to see the Greek 'heroes' as worthy of admiration, and Pat Barker's books, told largely form a Trojan perspective, only add to that impression.On its own this is a great tale, beautifully told, but it would be worth reading the earlier book, Silence of the Girls, first, and you may well benefit from a fair understanding of Homer's tale - but in any event this is a good story, told with humanity and style and well worth reading

I love everything by Pat Barker so had been looking forward to this book. I wasn’t disappointed because it’s an excellent read - faithful to the source materials but really inventive as well. The women do finally get their voices here. The first person narrative is intercut with third person narrative from Pyrrhus, whom I’ve hated since my schooldays for killing Priam! Still don’t like him much but it’s made me think …I recommend this whole-heartedly.

This views the fall of Troy from a woman's perspective. Even though I am an old man with lingering chauvinist attitudes, I found this to be a wonderful read as indeed most books by Pat Barker are. I do recommend you read her previous book first though.

This book wasn't really what I was expecting. I think I've been spoilt by Madeline Millers take on Greek mythology and her way of telling stories in a newly imaginative way. For a book titled 'The Women of Troy" I was surprised by how much of the story is told from a man's perspective. The opening chapter begins from the perspective of Pyrrhus inside the Trojan horse. Although we follow the women of Troy post capture there is very little of story content and instead we meander through the time between the end of the battle and the sailing of the ships. There are a lot of characters in this and I would say there is a strong expectation that you have a basic grasp of the main players in the Trojan war otherwise the names have little context. I won't be reading the second book in the series.

I read and loved silence of the girls, and have read many of the retellings of greek myths published in the last ten years. Personally I struggled to embed myself in this story for roughly the first half, and would possibly have given up had I not enjoyed the earlier book. The last third of the book was where I felt it all came together and all the strands were complete.Not sure I would reread this book but if you enjoyed "Silence of the girls" or "Achilles song" then I would advise ginving this one a go.