During recent decades, most of the studies on the ancient Greek novels have focused on intertextuality, identity and the relationship with the contemporary society. This book has the merit of identifying and filling a gap in this research field by undertaking a literary analysis of characterisation in the five fully extant Greek novels (the so-called ‘Big Five’).
D.T.'s agenda is clearly set out in his theoretical introduction. His book assesses the novels' protagonists in the light of three important oppositions: typified versus individual characterisation, idealistic versus realistic and static versus dynamic. While previous studies have privileged the first members of each opposition, D.T. seeks to reverse this view. His method consists of ‘approaching rhetoric in novelistic characterization as pervasively interwoven with narrative texture’ (p. 33) and identifying a wide range of descriptive techniques with the help of ancient rhetorical treatises.
More specifically, the book offers a close reading of the ‘Big Five’, within which protagonists are presented as characters having some individual and realistic traits and as dynamic figures. Features of individuality are identified at the level of emotions, body language and ‘understanding’ in the sense of ‘learning how to build up control and power over their environment’ (p. 14). With the help of internal focalisation, intratextuality and intertextuality, D.T. challenges the protagonists' alleged idealistic characterisation, especially through a reading of the ambiguous depiction of their moral virtues. Finally, character change is established as a recurrent feature of the genre: by reacting to misfortunes most of the protagonists develop rationally and emotionally. Moreover, since this change affects the characters in different ways, D.T. deconstructs the simplistic use of the pattern of symmetry to characterise the protagonists' relationship (introduced by D. Konstan, Sexual Symmetry [1994]).
The analysis undertaken by D.T. stands out for its carefulness and, by identifying many traits of the novelistic protagonists, it successfully makes characters of this genre ‘more tangible’ (p. 314). This can be seen from Chapter 1 dedicated to Chariton's Callirhoe, which provides a detailed description of the two protagonists focused on two crucial threads of this novel, Callirhoe's double marriage and Chaereas' heroic change.
This book will stimulate new discussion on the understanding of the ancient novel. To begin with, scholars are invited to enrich their view of single novels, as proven by the two following cases. The study of the Ephesiaca, with its focus on narrative techniques matching the rhetorical ideal of apheleia or ‘simple discourse’ (p. 119), sheds new light on the puzzling simplicity of this novel, advancing an interpretation of this feature as a literary component of the text. As for Leucippe and Cleitophon, D.T. reinforces the originality of its homodiegetic nature on the basis of Cleitophon's use of maxims and generic knowledge in his portrait of Leucippe, a strategy that is cleverly interpreted as the former's way to overcome the latter's cognitive inaccessibility (pp. 176–202).
The book also contributes to the current scholarly debate on the Greek novels: despite the recent proliferation of publications, comprehensive studies on important issues such as intertextuality and genre are still lacking, and D.T.'s study reinforces the need for them. In his book novelistic protagonists are often associated with figures of classical literature and in most cases the intertextual connections are clearly described, with the fascinating inclusion of the possibility of a deconstruction of the established parallel (see pp. 173–4 and 277–89). This being said, the identification of a high number of models for the same character and the interpretation of some of them through the filter of ancient moral readings (see the reference to Penelope's ambiguity at p. 54) raise questions about the way in which readers are supposed to recognise and use these parallels to enhance their understanding of the texts. In agreement with current scholarship, D.T. takes novelistic intertextuality as a very sophisticated technique – as if it were comparable to that adopted by Hellenistic and Augustan poets – but he does not overtly discuss this choice. Thus, his book increases the need for theoretical discussion of this theme.
A similar effect is produced by D.T.'s view of the novelistic genre. While, with reason, he focuses on the fully extant novels since they provide us with a consistent take on characterisation, the book also includes some parallels between the protagonists of the ‘Big Five’ and characters of Iamblichus' Babyloniaca (p. 83), Calligone (p. 83) and the Ninus-novel (p. 165). Moreover, D.T. points out some analogies in characterisation within the ‘Big Five’ – between Habrocomes and Cleitophon (pp. 163–5) and between Callirhoe and Leucippe (pp. 191–4). While each of these connections is helpful for interpreting specific passages, D.T. is very cautious about offering a comprehensive interpretation of them, as he writes: ‘whether these similarities are to be read as indications of indirect influence or of generic, common notions about novelistic heroism does not matter too much’ (p. 327). This conclusion could stimulate scholars to question the inclusion of characterisation in the definition of the novelistic genre, and to reassess the extent to which novels other than the ‘Big Five’ can be considered to be part of this genre.
Finally, D.T.'s book stimulates further debate on the study of ancient narrative as a whole. In the currently well-established trend of using modern narratology in the analysis of ancient texts, some scholars have begun to point out the importance of a historical focus, since narrative forms and functions change over time (M. Fludernik, ‘The Diachronization of Narratology’, Narrative 11.3 [2003], 331–48). As a case in point, Whitmarsh has shown that Apuleius' Metamorphoses and Lucian's The Ass, by deliberately conflating the figures of the narrator and the author, call into question the narrator / author divide so central to modern narratology (see T. Whitmarsh, Beyond the Second Sophistic [2013], pp. 63–74). D.T.'s book, by counteracting a tendency to interpret ancient characterisation as typical, induces readers to compare novelistic protagonists with those of modern novels, and to question the boundaries between characterisation in ancient and modern literature. D.T.'s conclusion is again very cautious, as he identifies some features of individuation in ancient characterisation (p. 328) but at the same time acknowledges that ‘it is more limited than that with which readers of modern novels are comfortable’ (p. 320). A different take is offered by J. Grethlein's study of the Aethiopica. Grethlein (‘Social Minds and Narrative Time. Collective Experience in Thucydides and Heliodorus’, Narrative 23.2 [2015], 123–39) stresses more than D.T. the difference of ancient characterisation: he takes the protagonists of the ancient novels as flat characters in comparison with those of modern stream-of-consciousness novels, and he explains this difference by arguing that in the former texts, unlike in the latter, the readers' engagement with the temporal dynamics activated by the plot is more important than character portrayal. In my view, the combination of D.T.'s and Grethlein's studies can further enhance our understanding of characterisation in the ancient novels as a whole by including their plots. D.T. does not overtly address this issue, since – to use a modern narratological distinction (see P. Brooks, Reading for the Plot: Design and Intention in Narrative [1992]) – he reads the novels for the characters rather than for the plot and concentrates on the complex description of characters rather than on their function as narrative agents (p. 27). However, by undertaking, as many scholars do, a reading of the novels for the plot, some of the character features identified by D.T. turn out to be very useful, especially control on their environment and change, since both are closely related to the development of the novels' plot and can thus enhance the readers' engagement with it through their identification with the characters. I see the final merit of D.T.'s book as one that will stimulate debate and further research into this intriguing topic.
