On the orders of his boyhood friend, now King Philip of Macedon, Aristotle postpones his dreams of succeeding Plato as leader of the Academy in Athens and reluctantly arrives in the Macedonian capital of Pella to tutor the king’s adolescent sons. An early illness has left one son with the intellect of a child; the other is destined for greatness but struggles between a keen mind that craves instruction and the pressures of a society that demands his prowess as a soldier.
Initially Aristotle hopes for a short stay in what he considers the brutal backwater of his childhood. But, as a man of relentless curiosity and reason, Aristotle warms to the challenge of instructing his young charges, particularly Alexander, in whom he recognizes a kindred spirit, an engaged, questioning mind coupled with a unique sense of position and destiny.
Aristotle struggles to match his ideas against the warrior culture that is Alexander’s birthright. He feels that teaching this startling, charming, sometimes horrifying boy is a desperate necessity. And that what the boy – thrown before his time onto his father’s battlefields – needs most is to learn the golden mean, that elusive balance between extremes that Aristotle hopes will mitigate the boy’s will to conquer.
Aristotle struggles to inspire balance in Alexander, and he finds he must also play a cat-and-mouse game of power and influence with Philip in order to manage his own ambitions.
As Alexander’s position as Philip’s heir strengthens and his victories on the battlefield mount, Aristotle’s attempts to instruct him are honoured, but increasingly unheeded. And despite several troubling incidents on the field of battle, Alexander remains steadfast in his desire to further the reach of his empire to all known and unknown corners of the world, rendering the intellectual pursuits Aristotle offers increasingly irrelevant.
Exploring this fabled time and place, Annabel Lyon tells her story in the earthy, frank, and perceptive voice of Aristotle himself. With sensual and muscular prose, she explores how Aristotle’s genius touched the boy who would conquer the known world. And she reveals how we still live with the ghosts of both men.
This book falls into a category that I am increasingly aware of. It’s the category of deep and philosophical and slightly pretentious books that perhaps I’m just too lowbrow for. I didn’t hate this book, but I didn’t really enjoy it either. It was a fast read, but both the plot and characters were dull.
This is definitely not a plot based novel. Nothing really happened. There were events, but they weren’t exciting to read about. When a novel isn’t plot-driven, it needs to be character-driven but unfortunately, I never felt any connection to any of the characters. In fact, I felt such a level of disconnect while reading this book, it was like I was just a spectator. I just wasn’t involved in this book at all.
I wish that we’d gotten to know Alexander a bit better. He was more interesting to read about than Aristotle. Alexander was a haunted, complex character. In comparison, Aristotle was dull and too pensive. It wasn’t very exciting to read about him when he was trapped in his head for the majority of the novel.
Then again, this book was probably just over my head.