Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-35304678-20180415140951/@comment-35304678-20180503125448

(Wiki, I dare you, don't eat my writing again.)

Yes, I think Apollo is an interesting god, too. Man, greek gods are interesting, generally. I don't adore them, but I find them interesting somehow. Not impressive, but interesting. And, Apollo...he is an interesting god to handle. Only, if Riordan pointed out and not ignored and dismissed Apollo's one of the biggest jerkish move and fault/faults. If Riordan handled and dealt with his faults without ignoring and dismissing it, I could've understood Apollo's situation. Because character development, man. Riordan wants to develop Apollo's character in time, slowly. And this could've been help to Apollo's character development much more. Three main things; flaws, faults/mistakes, and consequences. These things make things more interesting, in fiction. But if only these things pointed out and handled, without ignoring, changing, twisting and dismissing it.

I think, Riordan chose to dismiss and twist Marsyas situation, because it was an easy way to do. Why bother to pointed out and handled Apollo's one of the jerkish moves, if you can dismiss and ignore it whenever you want it, right? I say, potential lost.

And about Hera and Ares... I don't think it's like an interpretation, it's like bashing and dismissing. For example; because Ares has some good personality traits even if he is cruel, he protects and loves his children, in the myths.. So, why do you have to change Ares's one of the good traits? He, in the books, is abusive towards his own children. I don't see what kind of interpration is that. It's more like, changing this good trait that Ares has, so you can make him more jerk and unfair. I don't adore Ares. I generally don't like the greek gods. But, at the same time, I think making Ares more jerkish and abusive when he is not that abusive, is unfair. Same with Apollo. Marsyas situaton was not like an interpretation, it was dismissing and twisting the situation rather than handle and deal with it. And that was so potential lost. And Hera? She is an interesting goddess, too. Is Hera cruel and did terrible things? Of course. She is punishing Zeus's 'lovers' because she can't do anything to her husband, aka King of The Gods. Hera is cheated like 34737274 times by Zeus, and she can't do anything about it. Because Zeus is a king and he can do whatever he wants. And Hera is humiliating as a goddess of marriage, because she has the most terrible marriage in the earth. And...If Riordan pointed out Hera's unfair situation, rather than making her more, sorry for my language, b*** and unfair, it could've been interesting, for example. But yeah... why bother to do it, because we can demonize them whenever we want.

Think about it, Apollo is a terrible god. He did terrible things and he has mistakes, but Riordan did the same thing with Apollo, like he did to Hera and Ares? No. He chose to ignore and dismiss those things, because it was an easy way to do. Is Poseidon a jerk in the myths? Yes. He is lustful, moody, vengeful, vindictive, hot-headed god. But in the books, he is the opposite. He is aloof, down-to-earth, humble, cool god and a father. So, Riordan dismissed Poseidon's all jerkish personality traits in the books, while he is making Ares more jerk and abusive than he already is. Was Artemis did terrible things in the myths? Like, turning and killing men? Yes. Not the mention, she killed 7 girl without an eye of blink, because these girls's mother Niobe said that she has more children than Leto, aka Artemis and Apollo's mother. And supposedly, Artemis is a guardian of the young girls. But, yet, at the sime time, she can kill the young girls with cruelty, even if these girls has no fault. Same with Apollo. he also killed Niobe's 7 son. But why bother to point out and handle this situations? We can dismiss Artemis, Apollo and Posedion's mistakes  and flaws, while we can demonize gods like Ares and Hera.