SUMMARY
An in depth look at the series full of spoilers. It's quite long, as I don't just explain my criticisms but also give ideas on how the story could have been improved.
CHARACTERS
For the most part, I found the characters two dimensional. Sine Ares is the god of war, he is violent and stupid. Since Zeus is the head god, he is overbearing. Hades got the short end of the stick, so he is vengeful and short tempered. Aphrodite is romantic, emotional and pretty. Artemis is sexist (because: no men allowed). Clarisse is a daughter of Ares, so she is strong but really stupid.
ANNABETH
I was rather indifferent to Annabeth until “The Battle for the Labyrinth” when she became unbearable. She lost her temper with both Percy and Rachel when neither deserved her wrath.
Excuses were constantly made for her as her bad behavior is never addressed. She isn't even allowed to admit to bad judgment as apparently she was never in love with Luke.
She is propped up as someone special and smart all the while she acts inconsistent by being irrational and selfish more often than Clarisse. Also her being smart by adding that she likes architecture is like putting geeky glasses on a model and calling her a genius. It's a lame attempt at character depth.
She actually starts using mathematical terms in the first book, so we can remember she is smart.
LUKE
Ultimately I found Luke obnoxious and sometimes stupid. It was pretty obvious he was a pawn of the Titans (since there were never any hints that anyone was going to abandon the gods' side.)
He barely evolved from pawn to victim when his past was revealed. And even then there was never any real sympathy for him as there isn't much doubt on Percy's side if Luke is right. The reader certainly never wonders if Luke is right about anything all throughout the series.
His visit to Annabeth that's mentioned in "The Last Olympian" was a lame attempt at character development as the real goal was obviously to make Annabeth a victim since she is told she could have saved him, but did not.
RACHEL
One character I actually found interesting and likable. I was curious to know her story as it was obvious there was more than meets the eye.
Unfortunately her only real reason for existing was to cause tension between Percy and Annabeth.
The whole oracle thing felt forced as I didn't really think the dead oracle needed to be replaced with a live one. The set up seemed to work just fine for the first four books and no one hinted at the need for a replacement until we learned of Luke's mom. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
GROVER
Grover basically existed to obsess over Pan. I kind of wanted him to get over it and get a life. Maybe have his relationship with Percy help him grow. But after Pan is found, he is simply referenced as being on the council of Cloven elders. And he is more powerful, or something. And before this, his character wasn't much else. I suppose he was less of a coward near the end but it didn't feel earned.
PERCY
I wish Percy had developed but there was never any chance of him making mistakes and then fixing them.
He never got to misjudge Clarisse and then make it right with her.
He never got to choose to escape the prophecy forced upon him but escaped from by Thalia. I wish Riordan had just presented him a way to escape that didn't involve abandoning Annabeth and Grover on their quest. That would have been an actual choice. This way, he felt more and more like a victim.
The prophecy could have fallen to Nico and forced Percy into a different role then he ever expected. It could cause him to feel guilty for escaping it. So much more could have developed in his character. This could have set out a new timeline for Rachel and her becoming an oracle.
He never got to choose Rachel over Annabeth and realize he had misjudged their ability to have a relationship (she was too obsessed with Luke and too irrational).
He never got to go against the gods wishes. He never got to defy them and prove a prophecy wrong.
Everything about him felt like it was written out by Riordan in advance, and never once did Percy come to life and surprise his author by leading him somewhere new.
RELATIONSHIPS
PERCY & ANNABETH
Percy is paired up with Annabeth from “The Titan's Curse” as it's hinted he has feelings for her and Aphrodite (AKA Riordan) steps in makes it clear to the reader. It's as if to make up for this that Annabeth and Percy have a hard time simply getting along for the next two books in the series.
But Percy falls in love pretty easy. Not much thought seems put into these relationships anyway. Not with him and Calypso. Not with him and Rachel. Not with him and Annabeth.
In fact because of these relationships, Percy comes off as a jerk. He admits he needed Rachel to relax and have fun. To just be himself. But then he acts annoyed at Rachel later on. Like she is giving Annabeth the wrong impression. He never realizes he was giving Rachel the impression they were dating, or at least that he wanted to. Even though he admits he thinks she is gorgeous, that he thinks about her a lot, ect. It seems obvious he has a crush on her, but then it's like Riordan remembered Annabeth was there first, so he had to bring it back to her. He essentially gives Percy no choice in the matter.
Percy gets a vision of Annabeth that saves him, which is Riordan saying Percy has to be in love with her. Because.
Annabeth magically saves Percy from an attack on his weak spot. Because.
Basically it all feels forced and fake. Relationships should feel natural.
Rachel was the closest thing we got to an actual relationship as the two spend time together for the sake of it, and actually enjoy each others company.
PERCY & RACHEL
Rachel takes note that Annabeth has a crush on Percy in “The Battle of the Labyrinth” so she stays clear of Percy. She doesn't make any attempt to steal him, but it's obvious she has a crush on him, and he hints at the same thing admitting he memorized her phone number (meaning he thought about her a lot).
It's obvious in “The Last Olympus” that Percy has chosen her, not Annabeth. And because of that she has pursued a relationship with him. Even though we only had one book and half of another to get to know her, it's obvious she was rather lonely. The ending of their relationship makes no sense and feels forced.
PERCY & GROVER
I don't understand why Grover and Percy were friends, other then the fact that it was Grover's job to keep him safe.
It's odd how little their relationship progresses, seeing how Grover goes on most quests. He is in the first quest, but not in the second, as he needs to be rescued. He goes on the quest with the hunters but still only ever seems to be there so when can get a hint of Pan. Nothing else. In the fourth, he finds Pan, and in the last, he shows up twice in the book. He just points out about Morpheus, so when mortals fall asleep later, we can know why. So he is just used for some exposition.
They make him help Percy defeat a titan so they can show that he has gotten stronger. But it felt kind of out of the blue and unearned. Did finding Pan make him stronger somehow?
PERCY & CHIRON
I wish there were a mentor/student relationship with these two. But Chiron is barely in the books, and he never seems to be a guide or any comfort for Percy. There were obviously secrets kept from Percy so some tension and trust issues should have developed.
PLOT HOLES & INCONSISTENCIES
The story itself is not bad. But there is just so many holes. So many times where a character doesn't do something that we know they should have. Or it's obvious they are being manipulated by the author, simply so a certain plot point can work. Often times characters just act inconsistent with their previous behavior or they act like idiots to further the story. I noticed that in the first book, when Percy doesn't freak out and demand to know about his mom and if she is dead. It made no sense. He should have done so, and then schemed about rescuing her.
Clarisse in “the Sea of Monsters” seemed to be made stupid just so Percy and Tyson could be separated and to make Annabeth look smart. Thalia becoming a hunter in “The Titan's Curse” seemed out of character, just so Annabeth could be protected.
Percy's treatment of Rachel seems out of character too from their second meeting at his new school in “The Battle for the Labyrinth”. He is portrayed as so kind with Tyson, and yet he runs and hides from Rachel for no reason. Then treats her like crap whenever Annabeth shows up. He spends all summer with Rachel but thinks Annabeth should still love him. Because...why? It was all so inconsistent and made Percy look like a jerk.
BAD HUMOR
It's all a matter of taste, but whenever I came across something really stupid, I realizes it was supposed to be funny. Evil franchise stores. Space food killing a massive monster.
It got to a point when I had a hard time taking things seriously. This was a book series where people could die, and yet comical scenes were shoved in weird spots. I like when comedic scenes are sparsely added in a book or movie. It helps in a serious story. And there were a few occasions that made me smile. But those were little scenes, like funny moments of dialogue. If those had been the only points of comedy, it would have been fine. But Riordan just likes to go overboard.
BAD LOGIC
There are a few awkward moments where Riordan steps in to explain something....that just doesn't need explaining. It completely takes you out of the story. I kept thinking, why are you explaining something that has no real importance to the plot?
REWRITE
One obvious sign that a series or story is written badly is that I constantly have the desire to rewrite scenes, add scenes, or change major plot points. I think, if they added “this” then what they wrote would actually make sense.
I had a lot of things I wished to rewrite...
THE LIGHTNING THIEF
Percy could have asked about his mom dying and Chiron would have had to explain she probably wasn't dead. That she was a trap from Hades. Chiron could warn him against confronting Hades so when he disobeyed there could be tension between the two. And Chiron would wish to teach him that he won't always be lucky and he shouldn't be so reckless.
Luke could have gone along on the quest and Percy could have gotten to know him (as well as the reader). This way his betrayal would mean something.
THE SEA OF MONSTERS
Clarisse could have developed a relationship with Percy after “The Sea of Monsters”.
THE TITAN'S CURSE
Annabeth could have chosen to become a hunter, instead of Thalia. With her being estranged from her family and not really close to anyone at camp (except maybe Percy) and losing Luke and perhaps not feeling close to this new Thalia it would make sense for her to try to find a new home.
She could have later fallen in love (with Luke or Percy) and no longer been a hunter and decided how to stop Luke on her own. This could have caused conflict as no one would know just why Annabeth lost her hunter status. I mean good conflict, as Percy was growing a relationship with Rachel and not pursuing Annabeth.
Bianca could have waited longer to be a hunter so we get to know her then understood why she chose to do so. Also then her death would have mattered to the reader.
Also, Percy could have had longer to convince her to go to the camp, so when he failed it made sense that Nico would blame him. And then he would feel guilt because he actually failed, as opposed to how he had two seconds with her before she chose to become a hunter and go on a quest that would get herself killed.
This also may have hit home if Nico had been allowed on the quest and witnessed her death near the end of the book.
I don't think Zoe should have been important. There were too many characters introduced in “The Titan's Curse”.
BATTLE FOR THE LABYRINTH
Thalia could mature, become friends with Percy. The prophecy could have fallen on her or maybe have it pass her. Could be seen as defying a prophecy.
Characters come come and go, but not go away completely. Annabeth could still secretly see Percy and Grover when they need help. Thalia and Clarisse could come in and help on a quest.
Or if they don't go on a quest then they at least help Percy and aid him from afar while other campers become friends with Percy. At least then when the final battle came up we could have some familiarity with other campers besides Annabeth.
THE LAST OLYMPIAN
Rachel could have debated if she really wanted to become an oracle. Or maybe even defied the rules (like Percy when he makes demands of the gods) and pursued a relationship with Percy while still being an oracle. She could have taken him aside and said she would still pursue a relationship in secret. After all, it's never explained why an Oracle cannot marry, it's merely stated by Hermes.
If the gods were right, there relationship could deteriorate later. At least that would have been more true to her character then her just giving up on having any relationships out of the blue and being completely out of character.
Luke could have been spared and have to redeem himself by living. Maybe have Hermes come in and show his son how much he loves them. (The never explain why the gods cannot interfere with there kids, maybe there is a punishment that Hermes is willing to bear).
Nico could have earned the respect of the other campers and been welcomed without Percy having to request it from the gods. That would have been more development then just convincing Hades to join the fight (which may have been crucial to the plot, but felt more like Riordan trying to make Nico finally seem important and redeem himself from being a selfish brat.)
Luke's history could have been hinted at or revealed much earlier, in a different book. By now I really didn't care about him. He had been far too obnoxious and selfish. There was just no justifying his behavior (unless the gods really were not worth defending).
CONCLUSION
The world Riordan created could have been great (you can tell with all of my ideas on rewrites). But the relationship between Annabeth and Percy ends up being forced in the last two books; Most characters are unlikable or two dimensional at best.
Sometimes the author steps in to explain something that does not need to be explained.
The plot is often full of holes and the characters are routinely manipulated to serve an end to the plot.
On the plus side the pacing is good and some people might like Riordan's brand of humor. I give “Percy Jackson & the Olympians” one a half stars.
No comments:
Post a Comment