Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.12 AVERAGE
4.12 AVERAGE
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
reflective
slow-paced
informative
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Mémoires d'Hadrien (Memoirs of Hadrian) by Marguerite Yourcenar
1951
**Not putting stars on my reviews**
Meticulously researched faux autobiography of Roman emperor Hadrian. Very meditative; ornate style.
What I’ll cop to liking:
-Did a good job of making this character, from a remote time and place, feel relatable and not exotic. He thought through things in a way that I might myself
-Becomes exciting at a few moments: when everyone is waiting for Emperor Trajan to announce an heir; when we’re waiting for Antinous’s death; when Hadrian himself is picking a successor
-Cleverly executed conceit. I read that Yourcenar wanted to write this book in part to vindicate Hadrian, a famous pederast who had long been dismissed as a pervert (Yourcenar was a lesbian, so it’s personally important for her). For her, he’s a great emperor. What I admired about the construction of the book was that, towards the end, Hadrian explains he’s justifying himself to the text’s addressee, emperor in waiting Marcus Aurelius, since he knows that Marcus Aurelius is an ascetic and that Hadrian’s lifestyle looks dissolute and opulent. It’s an elegant alibi for Yourcenar’s own project–championing Hadrian–within the premise of the fiction
If you pared it down, it would be great. In the end, it was a painful read b/c:
-Lotta unnecessary wonky detail about Roman statecraft. Someone at book club said the original draft was 1000s of pages. Editing it down to this must’ve already been hard, but it still needed more. Often aimless
-Overwritten, plodding style. My least favorite were these classical rhetorical structures where he would give a heading at the start of paragraphs and then list examples. The structure overall was too paratactical for me–within a chapter, paragraphs would relate to each other not as thoughts that flowed but as items in a list
-Philosophically tedious–a problem, because a lot of it is philosophizing. In the text, Hadrian declares himself a pragmatist uninterested in abstractions. He still likes to think about things, but he’s uninterested in the rigor you need to get to anything very interesting. The result: a lot of hot air
1951
**Not putting stars on my reviews**
Meticulously researched faux autobiography of Roman emperor Hadrian. Very meditative; ornate style.
What I’ll cop to liking:
-Did a good job of making this character, from a remote time and place, feel relatable and not exotic. He thought through things in a way that I might myself
-Becomes exciting at a few moments: when everyone is waiting for Emperor Trajan to announce an heir; when we’re waiting for Antinous’s death; when Hadrian himself is picking a successor
-Cleverly executed conceit. I read that Yourcenar wanted to write this book in part to vindicate Hadrian, a famous pederast who had long been dismissed as a pervert (Yourcenar was a lesbian, so it’s personally important for her). For her, he’s a great emperor. What I admired about the construction of the book was that, towards the end, Hadrian explains he’s justifying himself to the text’s addressee, emperor in waiting Marcus Aurelius, since he knows that Marcus Aurelius is an ascetic and that Hadrian’s lifestyle looks dissolute and opulent. It’s an elegant alibi for Yourcenar’s own project–championing Hadrian–within the premise of the fiction
If you pared it down, it would be great. In the end, it was a painful read b/c:
-Lotta unnecessary wonky detail about Roman statecraft. Someone at book club said the original draft was 1000s of pages. Editing it down to this must’ve already been hard, but it still needed more. Often aimless
-Overwritten, plodding style. My least favorite were these classical rhetorical structures where he would give a heading at the start of paragraphs and then list examples. The structure overall was too paratactical for me–within a chapter, paragraphs would relate to each other not as thoughts that flowed but as items in a list
-Philosophically tedious–a problem, because a lot of it is philosophizing. In the text, Hadrian declares himself a pragmatist uninterested in abstractions. He still likes to think about things, but he’s uninterested in the rigor you need to get to anything very interesting. The result: a lot of hot air
challenging
dark
mysterious
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Fascinating work, skillfully blending robust academic research into a masterpiece of historical 'fiction.' The meditations on Antinous, in particular, make this an intriguingly queer text.
challenging
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
N/A
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
This was an incredibly comfy read, philosophically stimulating, and brought Ancient Rome right to me.
reflective
slow-paced
I adored this book, really and truly. Yourcenar’s prose, even in translation, is a triumph. The novel takes the form of a letter written by Hadrian to his heir presumptive, the young Marcus Aurelius; and in it, she really manages to capture some of the stately elegance of which Latin is capable, even though she was writing in another language. Her prose flows beautifully; it’s such a joy to read.
For a biographical novel concerned with the life – and the leaving of it – by a Roman emperor, she never really goes into too much detail on the facts of his reign, or the people by whom he was surrounded. Yourcenar is much more concerned with how Hadrian sees the world around him, his philosophy of life, and the function which he sees the empire as having. For all that some of his actions would seem reprehensible, and some of his ideas mistaken, to a modern reader, I always found myself sympathising with him because Yourcenar conveyed his world view so well. There is a very real sense of inhabiting the (mental) world of ancient Rome for a time when reading this.
Such a brilliant psychological study, and a very persuasive and plausible recreation of what Hadrian might have been like as a man. Highly recommended.
For a biographical novel concerned with the life – and the leaving of it – by a Roman emperor, she never really goes into too much detail on the facts of his reign, or the people by whom he was surrounded. Yourcenar is much more concerned with how Hadrian sees the world around him, his philosophy of life, and the function which he sees the empire as having. For all that some of his actions would seem reprehensible, and some of his ideas mistaken, to a modern reader, I always found myself sympathising with him because Yourcenar conveyed his world view so well. There is a very real sense of inhabiting the (mental) world of ancient Rome for a time when reading this.
Such a brilliant psychological study, and a very persuasive and plausible recreation of what Hadrian might have been like as a man. Highly recommended.
informative
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
Great writing... it reads like it was indeed translated from an ancient Latin text. I liked how the arc of Hadrian's life was depicted, especially his old age. The pace was very slow and reflective, Stoic. It draws comparison to another reconstructed "memoir", The Emperor of China by Johnathon Spence.