Scan barcode
A review by gilroi
Conspirata by Robert Harris
emotional
hopeful
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
Is Julius Caesar Hitler?
In the book succeeding this one, Robert Harris writes: "As Dictator encompasses what is arguably - at least until the convulsions of 1933-45 - the most tumultuous era in human history [...]"
Does Robert Harris think Julius Caesar is Hitler?
For the record, I don't think Julius Caesar is Hitler. I think Hitler is Hitler, and Julius Caesar is Julius Caesar. But writing Caesar as Hitler is a trap that Harris seems to fall into. It creates some logistical problems with the writing of the novel. You can't have Roman Hitler doing good things, or being kind. When Hitler-- I mean, Caesar?-- institutes reforms that enable the Corn Dole, the system with which every Roman citizen became entitled to grain, Cicero - the hero, the anti-Hitler - must oppose it, and the act must be evil. Because Hitler did it. I mean, Julius Caesar.
This is a well-written novel, on the prose level. It is consistently compelling, and excellently paced. I was riveted for almost all of it, which is saying something considering how bad my ADHD has been lately. But Harris' insertion of modern morality makes the pieced awkward at best on a political level, which is a shame because these are, in the end, political novels about political machinations. Politics is an area rife with moral greyness, where you must make compromises in order to pass legislation, where you have to get in bed with people you'd rather not. For the most part, Harris understands this, and how he depicts it slowly eating away at Cicero's morals and self-respect is compelling as hell! But the backbone of this novel is the fact that Julius Caesar is Hitler of the highest degree, which is somewhat specious considering the total lack of interest this book has in writing Roman atrocity. Because Rome in this book is basically London, and the Senate is (modern) Parliament, we can't focus on the things that detract from that analysis - the slavery, the rampant expansionist colonialism, the horrendous sexism, the legalized rape. It means Julius Caesar is Hitler without any atrocity that brings Hitler's ills into the world. He's simply Hitler because Hitler is bad, because because.
It's an Achilles heel on an otherwise strong novel, a footfall made weak by an elegantly made body. It's a shame I can't rate this novel higher, because I truly enjoyed it.
In the book succeeding this one, Robert Harris writes: "As Dictator encompasses what is arguably - at least until the convulsions of 1933-45 - the most tumultuous era in human history [...]"
Does Robert Harris think Julius Caesar is Hitler?
For the record, I don't think Julius Caesar is Hitler. I think Hitler is Hitler, and Julius Caesar is Julius Caesar. But writing Caesar as Hitler is a trap that Harris seems to fall into. It creates some logistical problems with the writing of the novel. You can't have Roman Hitler doing good things, or being kind. When Hitler-- I mean, Caesar?-- institutes reforms that enable the Corn Dole, the system with which every Roman citizen became entitled to grain, Cicero - the hero, the anti-Hitler - must oppose it, and the act must be evil. Because Hitler did it. I mean, Julius Caesar.
This is a well-written novel, on the prose level. It is consistently compelling, and excellently paced. I was riveted for almost all of it, which is saying something considering how bad my ADHD has been lately. But Harris' insertion of modern morality makes the pieced awkward at best on a political level, which is a shame because these are, in the end, political novels about political machinations. Politics is an area rife with moral greyness, where you must make compromises in order to pass legislation, where you have to get in bed with people you'd rather not. For the most part, Harris understands this, and how he depicts it slowly eating away at Cicero's morals and self-respect is compelling as hell! But the backbone of this novel is the fact that Julius Caesar is Hitler of the highest degree, which is somewhat specious considering the total lack of interest this book has in writing Roman atrocity. Because Rome in this book is basically London, and the Senate is (modern) Parliament, we can't focus on the things that detract from that analysis - the slavery, the rampant expansionist colonialism, the horrendous sexism, the legalized rape. It means Julius Caesar is Hitler without any atrocity that brings Hitler's ills into the world. He's simply Hitler because Hitler is bad, because because.
It's an Achilles heel on an otherwise strong novel, a footfall made weak by an elegantly made body. It's a shame I can't rate this novel higher, because I truly enjoyed it.