Scan barcode
desiree_mcl's review against another edition
3.0
Listened to this on audio. While I like the narrator, his voice is very pleasant, for some reason anything he's reading just goes in one ear and out the other. Hardly anything sticks in my brain.
As for the book, I did enjoy it. I know very little about Nero, so it was nice to read an historical fiction about him. And I'm interested in reading some history books about him.
However, my main issue with this book was that Nero seemed more modern in his thoughts. Now-a-days childhood and making sure children have a childhood and thinking/saying "I'm still a child" is common place. Back in Nero's time, I'm not sure how prevalent that was, that may be a wrong assumption on my part, but having adult responsibilities at a much earlier age happened a lot more than it does now and, I think, was more of the norm of that time. So I didn't believe that he would have had that thought process, as often as he did.
As for the book, I did enjoy it. I know very little about Nero, so it was nice to read an historical fiction about him. And I'm interested in reading some history books about him.
However, my main issue with this book was that Nero seemed more modern in his thoughts. Now-a-days childhood and making sure children have a childhood and thinking/saying "I'm still a child" is common place. Back in Nero's time, I'm not sure how prevalent that was, that may be a wrong assumption on my part, but having adult responsibilities at a much earlier age happened a lot more than it does now and, I think, was more of the norm of that time. So I didn't believe that he would have had that thought process, as often as he did.
lreay89's review against another edition
dark
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
bookfever's review
The Confessions of Young Nero is a book that I should've loved. Historical fiction set in ancient Rome is one of my favorite settings. I can't get enough of it. But when I'm reading a book and don't want to pick it up for three whole days, I know something is up. So around 30% of the book I decided to give up on it and not continue reading anymore. I just didn't like the story and I didn't want to waste more time on a book I wasn't enjoying anymore.
I felt kind of bad for not continuing with reading the book. I love reading about ancient Rome so much and I've always been intrigued by Nero because I don't think I've ever read a book about him before, whether it's fiction or nonfiction. The start of the book wasn't even that bad. I actually really enjoyed the first 50 pages and was looking forward to where the story would go next but then it started going downhill very fast.
I started having issues with how the story told in the first person. It just didn't feel right to me. The book started with Nero being a little kid but the way he would think and speak was more like an adult would. I do have to say that I never like it when a big part of a story is devoted to when the main character in question is a child. It's just not something I enjoy reading about. But it was all still pretty weird.
I only know the basics about Nero but it was pretty clear the author tried to rewrite the history about him. I don't think there's anything wrong with that exactly because authors are allowed to write their take on a historical figure but I guess I wish she had done things differently, especially with the writing, which was kind of bland. Also, the attraction Nero had toward his mother and the things he may or may not have done with her, no matter if these things happened or not (though a lot was implied in the book) was just something I didn't want to read about.
Another thing I didn't like was how the powerful women of the time were being portrayed. They were all basically murdereresses that didn't do anything more than poison the people around them for their own personal gain. And Nero was portrayed in a better light. I mean, sure that stuff did happen in those times but I think at this point in history we can maybe not judge women in history the way old male historians have done for ages, especially with a book written by a woman. But that's just my personal take on it.
I felt kind of bad for not continuing with reading the book. I love reading about ancient Rome so much and I've always been intrigued by Nero because I don't think I've ever read a book about him before, whether it's fiction or nonfiction. The start of the book wasn't even that bad. I actually really enjoyed the first 50 pages and was looking forward to where the story would go next but then it started going downhill very fast.
I started having issues with how the story told in the first person. It just didn't feel right to me. The book started with Nero being a little kid but the way he would think and speak was more like an adult would. I do have to say that I never like it when a big part of a story is devoted to when the main character in question is a child. It's just not something I enjoy reading about. But it was all still pretty weird.
I only know the basics about Nero but it was pretty clear the author tried to rewrite the history about him. I don't think there's anything wrong with that exactly because authors are allowed to write their take on a historical figure but I guess I wish she had done things differently, especially with the writing, which was kind of bland. Also, the attraction Nero had toward his mother and the things he may or may not have done with her, no matter if these things happened or not (though a lot was implied in the book) was just something I didn't want to read about.
Another thing I didn't like was how the powerful women of the time were being portrayed. They were all basically murdereresses that didn't do anything more than poison the people around them for their own personal gain. And Nero was portrayed in a better light. I mean, sure that stuff did happen in those times but I think at this point in history we can maybe not judge women in history the way old male historians have done for ages, especially with a book written by a woman. But that's just my personal take on it.
gilmoreguide's review against another edition
4.0
Who hasn’t heard some version of the phrase “Nero fiddled while Rome burned”? It’s long been the standard epitaph for any ruler so decadent and foolish that they were more interested in entertaining and enriching themselves than running a country. Hhhhmmm. Current similarities aside, Margaret George decides to investigate the life of Emperor Nero to see what, if any, of this historical reference is true. Her novel The Confessions of Young Nero is an in-depth look at the Roman boy who, through the convoluted lines of family and his mother’s ambition became, at sixteen, the youngest emperor in Rome’s history.
Thanks to the constant infighting in Roman politics Nero’s early life was spent with his aunt’s family. His father was dead and his mother, Agrippina was banished from Rome by her brother, Caligula. Only after Caligula’s murder does his mother return and then things get spicy. First she married a much older, wealthy man and once he re-established them in Roman society she had him murdered because money was not goal, power was. She then married the new emperor, her uncle Claudius, and soon enough he was dead and her son was on the throne.
The bulk of The Confessions of Young Nero is spent from the years 41AD to 64AD, Nero’s formative years to just past the midpoint of his reign. During that time George carefully fleshes out a Nero who shifts from a gentle child with a love of the arts and an appreciation for beauty to a young adult who must deal with the weight of unfettered power. Slowly, she shows how corrupting power without guidance can be. Nero had no father or any male figure to model himself on and his mother’s influence was of power at any cost.
The rest of this review is available at The Gilmore Guide to Books: http://wp.me/p2B7gG-2cW
Thanks to the constant infighting in Roman politics Nero’s early life was spent with his aunt’s family. His father was dead and his mother, Agrippina was banished from Rome by her brother, Caligula. Only after Caligula’s murder does his mother return and then things get spicy. First she married a much older, wealthy man and once he re-established them in Roman society she had him murdered because money was not goal, power was. She then married the new emperor, her uncle Claudius, and soon enough he was dead and her son was on the throne.
The bulk of The Confessions of Young Nero is spent from the years 41AD to 64AD, Nero’s formative years to just past the midpoint of his reign. During that time George carefully fleshes out a Nero who shifts from a gentle child with a love of the arts and an appreciation for beauty to a young adult who must deal with the weight of unfettered power. Slowly, she shows how corrupting power without guidance can be. Nero had no father or any male figure to model himself on and his mother’s influence was of power at any cost.
The rest of this review is available at The Gilmore Guide to Books: http://wp.me/p2B7gG-2cW
mdodds11's review against another edition
5.0
I love Margaret George's writing and books. This was eye opening and amazing! :)
riseclare's review against another edition
5.0
Was so excited to win this giveaway and get ahold of this book early! Margaret George is one of my FAVORITE authors and hearing she had a new book out was thrilling, to say the least. I ONLY read ebooks but made an exception for The Confessions of Young Nero. It did not disappoint! She brought life to this character that little is known about, and showed a different side of him; a more human side. I loved the point of view changes; they brought in more perspective. Having mentions of Jesus and Paul of Tarsus was so fun! Her writing style is beautiful. Enough description of the scene to let you know, but not enough to bore you and make you skim on down. I loved reading about Nero's childhood and rise to power, about his friends and enemies, and his loves. Enthralling and highly recommended- like everything else Margaret George writes. Adding to my "loved" list on Goodreads.
The only negatives I would say...to the publisher/editor: I do not love the title, as there are so many "confessions of" books already. Confessions of Marie Antoinette, etc. Would suggest a more unique title for the very unique Ms George. Also, I'm devastated that it is broken into TWO novels instead of one large one, as Ms George usually does, as I am now DYING to know what happens NEXT!!! Devoured this book within 24 hours. Kudos on a fantastic book! I'd love to pre-read the next one as well! Thank you for this opportunity!
The only negatives I would say...to the publisher/editor: I do not love the title, as there are so many "confessions of" books already. Confessions of Marie Antoinette, etc. Would suggest a more unique title for the very unique Ms George. Also, I'm devastated that it is broken into TWO novels instead of one large one, as Ms George usually does, as I am now DYING to know what happens NEXT!!! Devoured this book within 24 hours. Kudos on a fantastic book! I'd love to pre-read the next one as well! Thank you for this opportunity!
kassi_kennedy's review against another edition
5.0
I don't know if Margaret George is especially talented at writing about Rome or if it is my own interest in these characters that makes this book and Memoirs of Cleopatra so special to me, but I loved reading this book.
There is an almost mythical darkness in the story and I think it would speak to anyone simply because it's archetypal. I would highly recommend this book to any person interested in historical fiction and, if Nero is not an interesting character for you, I'd recommend Memoirs of Cleopatra as Geroge wrote exceedingly well in that book as well.
There is an almost mythical darkness in the story and I think it would speak to anyone simply because it's archetypal. I would highly recommend this book to any person interested in historical fiction and, if Nero is not an interesting character for you, I'd recommend Memoirs of Cleopatra as Geroge wrote exceedingly well in that book as well.
apriltwilights's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
I have read everything by Margaret George and this was by far my least favorite. It was such a slog. I don't know why, but I was bored to tears the entire time I read it.
sofia_brizio's review against another edition
2.0
Only got through the first few chapters of the audiobook. I don’t think it’s a bad book in itself, but the fact that the audio version is read by a full cast and in a very melodramatic way really put me off. Will maybe give it a second chance with the physical version.
hekate24's review against another edition
2.0
The best summary of this book's flaws come from the USA Today review of it:
In short, it’s a city you’ll believe — filled, unfortunately, with people you won’t.
Margaret George clearly did a lot of research. This book is full of window dressing about life in ancient Rome; everything from daily life to major celebrations and festivals. In that respect it's the kind of immersive experience I hope to get from historical fiction.
However the people... Well. The characterization is about as flimsy as Agrippina's assassination boat.
The book starts out somewhat strong. There's a subtle exploration of kid Nero's trauma and general befuddlement with adult politics. Each chapter seems to bring increasingly diminishing returns. In the author's note, Margaret George states she wants to redeem a maligned historical figure. That's all well and good. However, this Nero is bland, with absolutely no agency whatsoever. Nearly all of his negative acts are assigned to someone else. When Nero actually does do something morally dubious, the narrative twists itself in knots to make it self-defense. The author claims he couldn't have been that bad because people left flowers on his grave after his death, apparently missing that even charismatic leaders have their detractors. Often with good reason. In all honesty, this just feels like a mirror image of the ancient Roman sources that the author's notes cite. Instead of him being pure evil, he's 99.9% wonderful. Both takes are boring and unlikely.
This could have been forgivable in some respects if the author had tried to reconsider other historical figures who get caricatured in the popular imagination. But, no, Agrippina is an incestuous murderer. Messalina is malevolent and suicidally promiscuous (the narrative literally calling her "pure evil" at one point.) Caligula is a maniac, even though he was subject to missing contemporaneous sources as well. The narrative tries to blend all the different caricatures of Claudius into one but isn't really successful, so it's impossible to know what he's all about. Whenever things seem to build to an interesting point of conflict between two characters, the narrative just drops it. Case in point:
I'm deeply annoyed by this book and would have given it one star but for one thing. Like I said before, it's really good at portraying a time and place. I'll probably read the sequel out of morbid fascination.
In short, it’s a city you’ll believe — filled, unfortunately, with people you won’t.
Margaret George clearly did a lot of research. This book is full of window dressing about life in ancient Rome; everything from daily life to major celebrations and festivals. In that respect it's the kind of immersive experience I hope to get from historical fiction.
However the people... Well. The characterization is about as flimsy as Agrippina's assassination boat.
The book starts out somewhat strong. There's a subtle exploration of kid Nero's trauma and general befuddlement with adult politics. Each chapter seems to bring increasingly diminishing returns. In the author's note, Margaret George states she wants to redeem a maligned historical figure. That's all well and good. However, this Nero is bland, with absolutely no agency whatsoever. Nearly all of his negative acts are assigned to someone else. When Nero actually does do something morally dubious, the narrative twists itself in knots to make it self-defense. The author claims he couldn't have been that bad because people left flowers on his grave after his death, apparently missing that even charismatic leaders have their detractors. Often with good reason. In all honesty, this just feels like a mirror image of the ancient Roman sources that the author's notes cite. Instead of him being pure evil, he's 99.9% wonderful. Both takes are boring and unlikely.
This could have been forgivable in some respects if the author had tried to reconsider other historical figures who get caricatured in the popular imagination. But, no, Agrippina is an incestuous murderer. Messalina is malevolent and suicidally promiscuous (the narrative literally calling her "pure evil" at one point.) Caligula is a maniac, even though he was subject to missing contemporaneous sources as well. The narrative tries to blend all the different caricatures of Claudius into one but isn't really successful, so it's impossible to know what he's all about. Whenever things seem to build to an interesting point of conflict between two characters, the narrative just drops it. Case in point:
Spoiler
After a certain point, Nero knows Octavia has tried to have him killed. Octavia knows he's killed her brother. They still have to be married and perform official functions together. But the narrative almost entirely elides showing these interactions, probably because it will remind the audience that Nero is not an angel. This kind of thing happens over and overI'm deeply annoyed by this book and would have given it one star but for one thing. Like I said before, it's really good at portraying a time and place. I'll probably read the sequel out of morbid fascination.