What Are You Reading 4

[RathDarkblade]

Sorry, I can't comment on God of War, Honkai Star Rail, Dr. Who or Hunger Games. (Never played or seen them). But ...

True, but in many regards, it felt like it copied what went on before. Annabeth and Grover are dollar store versions of Hermione and Ron respectively from the Potterverse, especially the former. True, Annabeth also has a more textured backstory than Hermione, but apart from that, she feels a bit like a copy.

Ugh. It's possible to "copy" another author's characters and re-do them better. (What's "better" depends on the reader, of course). Sounds like Rick Riordan took Hermione and Ron, and dumbed them down for his 12-year-old-boy audience.

In addition, the plundering of Greco-Roman myth in fiction is overdone... Don't get me wrong, Rick Riordan did a decent job in integrating Greco-Roman myth into the modern day, as well as discussing the consequences of the various deities' many illegitimate children and how their parents react to that.

Wait a sec: Rick discussed the consequences of all this? Or did he put it in the characters' mouths?

If Rick discussed it himself, as part of the story, then it's a case of "Hello, Author." If he put it in a character's mouth, in a way that sounds convincing (i.e. in language that character would use), then ... OK.

But I also think he glossed over, for example, what Poseidon did to Medusa.

Yeah, well ... Poseidon basically raped Medusa and turned her into a monster. That's not something you can include in a book for 12-year-olds. =P

I'm pretty sure Rick's editor or whoever said, "Can't you just say, 'Poseidon was rude to her'?" *snerk*

In the end, it was a decent romp, but I don't understand its following...though at least it's better than, say, Stephanie Meyer's output...

Sigh. Just about anything is better than Stephanie Meyer's output... but to be fair, her output is aimed at the teenage girl market and Twilight mums. So neither you nor I are part of that market.

Surely JFK is leagues better than Trump?

Not insofar as his "appetite" for young, pretty women was concerned. (I'd rather not get into specifics, or I might be banned from this board).

JFK had more to achieve than Trump: de-escalating the Cuban Missile Crisis, reaching an agreement with the Soviets to limit nuclear testing, launching the Apollo program, initiating the Civil Rights Act and signing the Equal Pay Act (1963), transforming mental healthcare policy. All good things.

Trump's achievements have been largely focused on the Middle East (e.g. the Abraham Accords, which are still an ongoing effort; re-negotiating trade between America, Mexico and Canada; Overseeing military operations that resulted in the defeat of ISIS’s territorial caliphate in Iraq and Syria). His domestic policies are much more conservative and controversial in nature, but I don't want to be banned by discussing too much politics. Suffice it to say that it's easier to judge JFK's achievements than Trump's because so much time has passed since JFK.

But as a husband, JFK definitely cheated on Jackie O many, many times, which peeved her so much that she cheated on him, too. (It peeved her even more because before she married him, she knew what kind of guy he was but she was determined to "change" him).

After he died, Jackie deliberately and actively set out to re-shape her husband’s historical image, and famously crafted the "Camelot" narrative just one week after his assassination.

 

[Quatermass]

Ugh. It's possible to "copy" another author's characters and re-do them better. (What's "better" depends on the reader, of course). Sounds like Rick Riordan took Hermione and Ron, and dumbed them down for his 12-year-old-boy audience.

True, but I look at Grover and Annabeth, and they just feel like watered-down versions of better characters.

Wait a sec: Rick discussed the consequences of all this? Or did he put it in the characters' mouths?


If Rick discussed it himself, as part of the story, then it's a case of "Hello, Author." If he put it in a character's mouth, in a way that sounds convincing (i.e. in language that character would use), then ... OK.

I think through Luke Castellan's dialogue, as well as that of Annabeth and Percy's own narration, they discuss the alienation that comes from being a demigod child, and having an absent parent, and possibly human parents who treat them like crap.

Yeah, well ... Poseidon basically raped Medusa and turned her into a monster. That's not something you can include in a book for 12-year-olds. =P

I'm pretty sure Rick's editor or whoever said, "Can't you just say, 'Poseidon was rude to her'?" *snerk*

Yeah, though apparently, for the TV show, they put in subtle if ambigous hints that it could've happened. It says a lot though that the Nasuverse, which normally doesn't shy away from grotesque subject matter, actually changed Medusa's backstory. Her relationship with Poseidon is kept vague, and her origin is not as a human, but as a deity different to the Olympians, as were her sisters. Medusa was cursed by Athena out of jealousy, leading to the monster of myth we know.

Nasuverse Medusa, IMO, is the best take on the character. Although a sinister and ambiguous presence in two of the storylines of Fate/Stay Night, her role in the third one is of an anti-hero/anti-villain, depending. There's a lovely and hilarious scene where Shirou and Sakura try to get Medusa to share a meal with them, even though as a Servant (a being of legend summoned to be a mage's familiar), she technically doesn't need to eat. She tries to deflect their well-meant entreaties, eventually culminating in her claiming she is unfamiliar with the customs of modern times. So Shirou gets her a knife and fork instead of chopsticks.

Sigh. Just about anything is better than Stephanie Meyer's output... but to be fair, her output is aimed at the teenage girl market and Twilight mums. So neither you nor I are part of that market.

I read Twilight once. It was mediocre more than bad. I've read worse books...like Atlas Shrugged. *shudders*

Not insofar as his "appetite" for young, pretty women was concerned. (I'd rather not get into specifics, or I might be banned from this board).

JFK had more to achieve than Trump: de-escalating the Cuban Missile Crisis, reaching an agreement with the Soviets to limit nuclear testing, launching the Apollo program, initiating the Civil Rights Act and signing the Equal Pay Act (1963), transforming mental healthcare policy. All good things.

Trump's achievements have been largely focused on the Middle East (e.g. the Abraham Accords, which are still an ongoing effort; re-negotiating trade between America, Mexico and Canada; Overseeing military operations that resulted in the defeat of ISIS’s territorial caliphate in Iraq and Syria). His domestic policies are much more conservative and controversial in nature, but I don't want to be banned by discussing too much politics. Suffice it to say that it's easier to judge JFK's achievements than Trump's because so much time has passed since JFK.

But as a husband, JFK definitely cheated on Jackie O many, many times, which peeved her so much that she cheated on him, too. (It peeved her even more because before she married him, she knew what kind of guy he was but she was determined to "change" him).

After he died, Jackie deliberately and actively set out to re-shape her husband’s historical image, and famously crafted the "Camelot" narrative just one week after his assassination.

It's not just JFK dying decades ago. He's more of a statesman than Trump, and a diplomat. Trump is just an egomaniac who managed to gain power.

But yeah, JFK couldn't keep it in his pants, I will agree there...