#drackan's posts

[mightydragoon]

Disney had a major influence but we can't forget Barbie

I honestly love how Princess Guinevere as the main female mascot for a franchise can also match Barbie so well.

And knowing Barbie we can imagine what this franchise might be a bit like In-Universe with its focus on her and mixed with the fusion of Disney Princesses.

I just think its neat.

[mightydragoon]

Why did Staff of Hermes convince me Percabeth is going to break up in the future?

The nail in the coffin for me when I was rereading the series in terms of me foreseeing that Percabeth will not make it as a couple in the future was this short story. The Staff of Hermes. Not the Judo Flip in MOA mind you which is pretty controversial or even the ending for The Bronze Dragon which is rage-inducing when I reflect upon it, but this short story.

It spoke to me how distant Percabeth were with each other and in terms of their rushed dynamic, how they are doomed as a couple.

Percy has never really been fully comfortable around Annabeth. Even their most romantic moments in BOTL for instance are tinged with anticipation for violence.

Like the volcano kiss

and Percy crashing his funeral

And of course, this comes up briefly in Staff of Hermes as well

The moments are presented as sweet, but the very fact that Percy anticipates being punched or slapped by Annabeth is revealing. It proves that the judo flip is in character for Annabeth but in many ways, Annabeth got worse as she got older. Given she actually flips Percy over and kicks his leg when he talking to Jason in MOA.

That's not even delving into Percy's major emotional insecurities when he is in a relationship with Annabeth, and how in MOA, he is constantly scared to open up to her about the future and uses the analogy of a "glass sculpture" to describe how fragile it feels to him to accidentally break it. Or even how it feels more apparent that Annabeth uses knowledge as a weapon of power to make Percy feel stupid in the relationship to feel superior.

That doesn't come across as someone who is eager to share information because they want to out of genuine passion, that's someone who uses it as a means of power and control.

The sad thing is for Annabeth's character, it makes way too much sense. MOA is a revealing glimpse into her personality but there was already hints of it in her interview in the Bronze Dragon. She does seem to like Percy, but any compliment she might have for him is backhanded at best and insulting at worst.

With that, Annabeth comes across as genuinely believing Percy is annoying her deliberately.

It reminded me of a TikTok I saw just recently where a woman was chatting with her husband about seeing Thunderbolts but he shut her down as it being just a movie. When she got upset, he said to her in order to try and ease the situation was "I love when you get excited it's just annoying sometimes." It was gutting to hear not to mention she was visibly upset and she excused her own husband's faults as a part of his healing journey. You can imagine the comment section in that video btw.

It reminded me of another scene, in fact just before the Judo Flip where Annabeth was blaming Percy for "leaving". She thought this.

Excruciating...

Not to gonna lie. That floored me when I reread that scene. I genuinely couldn't believe anyone would even think that about someone they loved. It's a bit like a man saying how much he hates his wife. Conflict does arise in relationships, but this seems like Annabeth is torn between loving and hating Percy and it's not the healthy sort either.

Not to mention she also said this later in the same book.

I know the flip was bad, but this was another layer where it feels like Annabeth genuinely dislikes Percy and oscillates between hate and love for him. Later on she also develops a fear of Percy after Tartarus, which begs the question why they are even together at this point. Annabeth also admitted she hated Percy does fit with her behaviour as she genuinely seems annoyed with Percy in the books but it becomes really questionable as she gets older and even how she acts towards him.

At one point, can we excuse Annabeth actions as a quirk of "trauma" as she is too young to know differently and using that as shield to excuse shitty behaviour as someone who is meant to be a role model.

Riordan doesn't understand the implications that is here. How it's not a healthy dynamic with Percy, who is also an abuse survivor with a fatal flaw of loyalty. His story means a lot to people and to not look into any of his relationships and how that impacted him would be doing that a disservice with the focus that was presented onto it.

Personal loyalty to stick with people no matter how they might treat you, good or bad. It provides a tragic lens onto Percy who might have Gabe as a reference but Gabe's abuse was more direct; he insulted Percy's intelligence with "brain boy", threatened to punch Percy lights out (and probably did that on occasion) and also financially took advantage of him. Annabeth's is a little different. I don't think Annabeth herself is aware of it completely, but it still doesn't erase the emotional belittling and pressure she puts on Percy throughout the series.

It doesn't change the fact that Percy asked her to stop with the nickname in the Bronze Dragon (and probably before as hinted in TTC) refusing to respect that boundary of Percy, who is never really fully at ease around Annabeth and has major emotional insecurities that have emerged so much more poignantly as a result of the relationship.

So why is the Staff of Hermes so special when this is littered throughout their dynamic across the books? Why was this the nail in the coffin for me?

Well, it's rather simple, actually. It's control.

The pair of them are on a date. Percy had clearly arranged matters. The Great Lawn is a lovely place in Central Park and the internary shows Percy took considerable care into the thought process behind it. We know from the first book Percy in not that fussed on olives and he had chocolates and lemondades with them.

Percy is not made of money, we know this firsthand from the first books but even the fact he able to do something like this for date is quite sweet and thoughtful.

Like that is the Great Lawn for reference. Not a bad place for a first date. On a lovely sunny day at that is.

Now it's infered from Frederick's background even before we further learn in Magnus Chase they come from generational wealth in Boston (and Annabeth technically inheriting the Mansion in the end) he is on the richer end. No one can afford housing in San Francisco that easily or be able to work on Sopwith Camels in TTC without a bit of money. That or Annabeth's stepmother is an underrated breadwinner.

Why is this relevant?

It's essentially Annabeth's expectations of what the date is meant to be in her mind versus what Percy could actually do.

Annabeth's character is one of privilege in the books (she is explicitly white coded not only from her appearance, along with her siblings, but also wealth), both from her home life and Camp by Chiron. Chiron informs Annabeth on nearly everything and presumably allowed her to be a Camp Counsellor at a young age. Despite not ready for some of those responsibilities as we see in her introduction, she is very rude to Percy who she should be able to empathise with his situation of losing a loved one (missed chance there to connect them by Rick), acts out against him and is deeply impatient in answering basic questions about Camp, which is her job. This is part of their poorly constructed Meet-Ugly in the books, and by the time Piper arrives, Annabeth is much better at her introductions but it doesn't change the fact that she wasn't fit for the task initially and presumably treated other Campers like that in search of the One. (I doubt she made many friends because of that)

We learn in The Lost Hero, Chiron rarely kept anything from Annabeth (with the exception of the initial theft of the Bolt and the Romans), and from what we see in the series, this is fairly true. Chiron allows her to know about the Great Prophecy from ten, but she also has information about the Labyrinth in BOTL, despite that being a secret. TLO also explores this, and one of the reasons she has the infamous "You're a coward" Percy scene is because Chiron informed her about where Percy was, and crucially neither of them informed Percy of the wartime developments like with Typhon.

I was never fussed on the You're A Coward scene and especially the dissipated resolution in it meant that the tension between the pair was never truly resolved. It never struck me as particularly romantic so to learn that was some people's favourite scene in TLO had me confused because of how frustrating it is. Especially since Percy was asking for confirmation about Rachel's vision and the possible direction. But because it's Rachel, Annabeth refuses to even entertain the possibility, despite the fact SHE said it.

Annabeth has never really liked Rachel but a part of that, I think comes down to mortality itself. Annabeth constantly dismisses Rachel is because she is "just a mortal." But even the way Annabeth talks about mortality is squint-worthy, given that she is meant to be his mortal tie through the Curse of Achilles.

Like the hidden meaning behind these scenes is Rachel and Annabeth are fighting over Percy but honestly, I think that is poorly done given how spiteful it comes across and how Annabeth says mortal like a slur. It's not even the first time we see her dismissive towards mortals either, she doesn't have a high opinion on her stepfamily in the first books and authorities like cops (which honestly fair) but it does spell a different layer to Annabeth's dislike of Rachel is connected with that dislike of mortals.

It's understandable that another reason why Annabeth might act the way she does is linked to her family and also her inherent pride in being a demigod, a divine child of Athena (Athena is the best after all), and a gift onto her father. Either way, it makes her a poor fit as a mortal tie for the Curse of Achilles.

I do think Riordan was using the Curse of Achilles as a crutch to pair Percy and Annabeth together and to rush the romance between them, given that is the primary reason they got together. But it still doesn't change the fact narratively as a mortal tie, Rachel or even Sally would've made more sense.

I don't even ship the pair but throughout TLO Percy and Rachel have a crucial impact on each other and the choices they make. As we see to Percy, Rachel is a reminder that there is something there for him in the mortal world and, you can see Rachel seeing Percy as an escape from her own life, given how she joined him on the Labyrinth quest on the spot. Rachel is present in reminding Percy he is not the Hero of the prophecy and was there when Percy gave the pithos to Hestia. Later on Percy does the same for her when her moment came with the Oracle.

This is the precursor to Percy turning down immortality and Rachel plays a critical component in that, but is ultimately the reminder for Percy of the broader picture, much like Annabeth is when Percy looks back and thinks of Camp and all those who died when he declines immortality. the only time I believe Percy's mortal tie to Annabeth made sense beyond a romantic level.

Percy is clearly more comfortable around Rachel.

And Percy made to feel guilty for his interactions around Rachel throughout TLO and much later with Annabeth, this is revealed she does this deliberately to Percy even after they have gotten together in order to assert control.

So at this point, it goes beyond Annabeth's jealousy and possessiveness and into control. Annabeth is a complicated character, but it still doesn't change how one can read into her actions and that in the text and present for all to see. Back to the Coward scene in TLO.

Annabeth is emotional and she does have decent reasons to be. She is scared for Percy. We see this when Percy reacts to the prophecy.

More than anything Annabeth is projecting her own emotional insecurity onto Percy in this scene. About his oncoming death and also his feelings towards her.

She is annoyed with Percy presumably not confessing to her when she clearly has emotions for him and for him spending time with Rachel instead. But she presents it as Percy being the coward and for running away, scared. Rather than actually confess her feelings herself. It should be Percy to be the one to do so. Percy is clearly not a coward running from his death and even in terms of their "romantic relationship" at this point, apart from a kiss which came out of nowhere there is not really a lot of reasons for them to be together (yet) Percy reads between those lines over why she is really annoyed.

This, among many scenes, continues a tension between Percy and Annabeth which is never truly resolved and its' not helped with Annabeth and Rachel making up off-screen, which doesn't make sense given how Annabeth seemed to have genuine emity towards Rachel's perceived crush on Percy.

This connects with who is well established as Annabeth as a prideful character but as controlling as well. Annabeth's pride possibly can't accept what she deems as a mediocre dinner for their first month anniversary.

It is genuinely gutting to see Percy, who was doing something nice and presumably this IS the special dinner Annabeth was thinking Percy "promised" her and what she expected him to do instead.

I presume this was the dinner Percy had in mind if he did promise, but for Annabeth she wanted something grander and more important; this wasn't it.

Annabeth wanted to pressure Percy despite him doing something nice; she wanted to keep Percy on his toes, as it were. That's not healthy.

Percy gives a lot in this relationship. He feels obligated to and as we see her, Annabeth expects a lot out of this relationship. A month anniversary is materialistic as hell. Annabeth is also not expected to do anything similar. I would understand Percy's anxiety even further if Annabeth had done something similarly nice, but that isn't the case here.

More often than not, Percy is expected to GIVE and Annabeth often TAKES in the relationship.

As someone who works on celebrating special occasions, this feels petty and ridiculous to expect from a partner. But it's also telling how the picnic dinner was not enough for Annabeth as well since Percy did still do something on their anniversary, even if unintentionally on the anniversary itself. It might not ever be enough for something so "simple".

We know from the series a lot of Percabeth moments are focused on grand and impressive feats. They had their first kiss in a volcano. Annabeth is his mortal tie. They both turned down immortality for each other(they hadn't) and they fell through in Tartarus and walked out together. Etc, Etc.

In many ways they have done a lot together, but it doesn't have the emotional weight it deserves. Percy and Annabeth frankly don't have the chemistry or a real emotional connection as people. Part of that, I think, is due to Riordan clearly trying to push them as a couple before them being friends, and Annabeth's character in particular suffered from this. Stranged from the Red String as it were.

This is meant to be a sweet and domestic moment, and it isn't even a bad idea for a date but it isn't enough. Annabeth had widely different expectations, which can also be a microcosm of how they have completely different views for the future and ideas on how that will turn out. Percy didn't believe a month anniversary was really that important or significant and honestly. He's right. It's not. But Annabeth is not satisfied with a mere picnic for a special dinner and talks about it being more like the year anniversary than a single month.

This is arguably one of their better stories together, too where we see good teamwork and some nice moments between them compared to others. One day I will get into the Bronze Dragon. But for me the focus on the dinner overshadows everything and that is a frequent problem with Percabeth, where there are so much negativity in the relationship I feel gobsmacked whenever I'm expected to clap like a seal whenever they do something positive.

It speaks to me how Percabeth don't really have a lot in common apart from being with each other, fighting threats, or just knowing each other for years.

Percy doesn't appear all that interested in architecture, and Annabeth isn't much into sea life or skateboarding. While Percy had few common threads with Rachel in BOTL which he acknowledged, they both have mutual interests in the environment and peace with each other, which we don't really get with Percabeth. Percabeth feels so performative and stale in comparison that I still struggle to even read them as friends, let alone lovers. Particularly as Annabeth doesn't really respect Percy all that much.

Percabeth desperately needed more time to develop, getting together on the same time a lot of their peers died and the pressure from Camp I don't believe helped later down the line.

Like this comes across as sweet and it is, after all, it's them getting together and then getting chucked in the water. It's a great and grand way to get together for the Finale, YAY!!!!. But it has way too many unresolved issues that we only see blossom even further in HOO with how rushed it was. I find it esoteric. The Curse and by extension, Percy's choice to turn down immortality, feeding into it. Grand reasons to get together but fragile on examination as you wonder what really connects them together and I refuse to see them as this cute and perfect couple, which is the gold standard when they are ironically quite basic.

It makes sense why Percy compares their relationship to a "glass sculpture" and how he really doesn't know Annabeth nor does she in return about Percy. A glass sculpture is something that is so fragile and can break with a good push. It is destined to crash and break. In contrast to Annabeth's grand ideas of making something that will last for thousands of years. (Annabeth also has a connection to glass in her architecture, which I will not get into today but trust me it is there and it is haunting me)

Percy has so much love for Annabeth and treats her with utmost respect in his narration, but that is not really shared to the same degree. It feels so jarring reading their perspectives and how idealised Percy pictures Annabeth in his head, like him remembering her in SON, versus how she acts towards him in MOA

Percabeth is built on grand and lofty moments from the first book which is highlighted with the forced one-sided rivalry all the way to the present to justify them being together. Rather than having something more genuine and real connecting them together.

Annabeth's expecting something more from Percy for their month anniversary is, I feel, emblematic of everything I despise about it.

The fact that Annabeth forgot proves it wasn't about the dinner but control. It was making Percy uncomfortable over "forgetting" despite him doing something nice for her anyway, and that was presumably what he originally had planned for her anyway. It was keeping him on his toes. It's small but very present.

The only reason she isn't mad is that she did get the dinner in the end, and presumably Annabeth knew full well Percy "forgot" but she kept pressuring him anyway. But the fact that she tells Percy to start planning for their second month anniversary...

I don't find that sweet, funny or the one bit pleasant. It feels so materialistic and inconsiderate to Percy, who had a lovely date planned for her with some of her favourite treats and foods. And it didn't look like she cared for that one bit.

That more than anything kills me. The lack of appreciation. And that killed any hopes of their relationship going forward for me.

In fact, she urges Percy to do more. Annabeth doesn't say she will try anything special herself for Percy. No, it's on Percy to pick up the bill here. As I said, Percy is the giver, and Annabeth is the taker in this relationship and that fact is constant.

This story made me read the series completely differently and this is more than a dinner. All Percy can think about is "surviving" a month as Annabeth's boyfriend and hopefully her seeing a future with him, which is quite bleak.

More than anything to me, it just feels tragic reading Percy's attempts to do something nice for his girlfriend being brushed off or discarded like this. Annabeth has a commanding personality, and she promised she would never make things easy for Percy. In that she's right.

This story proves to me, Annabeth will never be satisfied with Percy's attempts and Percy will never feel good enough in this relationship to feel content and genuinely happy in a way that doesn't feel like he's forcing himself to be.

But it did open my eyes and made me consider so much more about why Rick might write a certain way, what he might have been considering when writing Percabeth himself and the likely future they will have in a peacetime without the same worries of a war on the horizon. Cause I can't see it work.

[mightydragoon]

On your meta about The Bronze Dragon you mentioned children of Athena/Annabeth having a special ability (weaving). Can you elaborate on that? I’d love to hear more of your takes. <3

I'm sorry I have taken fifty years to answer this. I'll mix this a little bit with Annabeth abilities in general and some of her accomplishments. Also please don't mind if I go in a bit of tangent along the way on some things.

So in Mark of Athena, Annabeth goes through this entire monologue how she doesn't have any special powers to even enter the underground section of her Quest.

But the part she talks about Leo is interesting. Leo does have fire abilities but honestly it is the least crucial ability he has.

Leo is a talented builder and engineer and he uses those far more than his fire. It was arguably those former skills that basically had him carry the Lost Hero quest either through disabling traps and fixing up Festus. Leo constantly utilities and hones on those abilities and while he is not exactly the best fighter during the Quest, he is vital in ensuring the Quest even succeeds. He is a bit like Grover in the Lightning Thief and The Titan's Curse in that he has soft skills without whom the quest would be impossible with his guiding, being as a support during fights and dangerous situations and being able to get them a little money to go further.

Back to Leo. Annabeth said Leo would pull the right tools and build something for the job and if that is considered a power well it also serves the point that Annabeth does have powers because of how she solved this conundrum.

So if by Annabeth own criteria on powers. She does in fact have abilities, she is a very talented craftswoman and it is very similar to what we see someone like Leo make of his own inventions. It does makes sense Annabeth might have the ability to use this. Athena is a Goddess of Crafts after all and Annabeth's Frederick is exceptionally gifted in repurposing and remaking things for his own uses. Like in TTC.

But funny enough it is not a skill I think Annabeth appreciates or even considered utilising up until that moment. And I actually that might lend a bit into how rigid Annabeth is in her thinking and tactics and it is also in how Annabeth might also see her mother.

Riordan presents Athena as a mainly warlike and wisdom so much so that the other aspects of her including the craftsmanship is neglected or brushed aside. It would make sense that Annabeth would follow those aspects of her mother to the point she brushes aside other avenues because they are "not useful". It is a shame considering that weaving is a very important aspect of Athena and if you read Greek Mythology especially the Odyssey. We see a lot of noteworthy women like Helen and notably Penelope weaving Laertes funerary shroud which is a rouse to delay her marriage to the suitors. But weaving is considered feminine and Rick Riordan's brand of feminism disparages feminity.

It is quite restrictive thinking but it would line up for how Annabeth can be a bit traditional in her tactics and strategies even if they will actively fail against her.

After all she does use Nobody against Polyphemus

Not a bad strategy but it takes less than two pages before the distraction wears off even with an invisibility hat. Her thinking in BOTL also serves this more traditional thinking and "logical approach", Annabeth has a fixed idea of how things are meant to be which really bites her whenever they are originally trying to navigate the Labyrinth.

I think this is also why she is unable to deal with the fact they need additional help with a mortal because it does not fit in her rigid view on how things must work and must be done. That and she genuinely does not like them explaining another dimension to her hostility to Rachel.

It would make sense if her idea on her abilities reflected that or her lack of developing them up until MOA .

After all Annabeth values her mother wisdom and warlike aspect the most and the aspect of craftsmanship she admires is more of a traditionally male centred one in Architecture. She does not appear to be the sort of person who would invest time into arts and crafts that isn't architecture or knowledge disguised as "wisdom". After all she has "better" things to do.

The trials I think are meant to sort of serve her branching out a little as we do also see this in Blood of Olympus after they deal with the suitors.

But I think the fact it took a bit longer for Annabeth to even come to this conclusion I think we can kind of see it with how Annabeth probably thinks of herself moreso in the light of a warrior or even as a leader. The judo flip was meant to serve as this purpose to demonstrate she was one. (By attacking her boyfriend who was kidnapped and to her knowledge had lost his memories and still had a curse of Achilles where his weak point was his back where she slammed against the ground with)

Riordan grooms Annabeth to be a "leader" and a "warrior". In part I think that most of the Seven are untrained and inexperienced especially Piper and Jason lack of memories do make for her to be a more stable position to be one.

However. What the Judo Flip also intended to prove to Reyna also shows to the reader that Annabeth does not have the emotional capacity nor the complete diplomatic skills to properly be one. And as we seen briefly in BOTL her attempts to be a leader there also fail if not actively hamper the quest. And in fact as we explore with Arachne if not for intervention from Argo II thanks to her pride she would've failed as well.

It was a forced writing choice to make the Flip endear Reyna to Annabeth, considering that most of New Rome does not trust nor respect Children of Minerva and New Rome just came from a battle against a Giant and his army. Annabeth knew this, the first chapter in MOA is Annabeth going over how sensitive this situation is. And up until Annabeth commits the Flip she was doing well on this front in trying and understanding she needed to maintain the peace.

But beyond the egregious "romantic" display. It is a failure of Annabeth being a leader as well, all to show how she is supposedly a warrior.

That aside Annabeth does not really have the room to be either a leader or warrior in MOA. Annabeth was never made to be fully a warrior (her main weapon being a dagger does not really give her the reach for that). That and the Seven are too scattered doing their own things in MOA for her to make really much of a difference with their individual arcs requiring they have a mini arc one way or another despite Riordan's attempts to push Annabeth as the Leader of the Seven. Annabeth's arc in MOA is also divided with her solo quest against Arachne which also does not help. Plus she is also out of the count and "mostly" helpless in HOH due to losing her main weapon for most of the book. Not really room to either things there.

Annabeth does seem to appreciate some aspects of weaving like seen here in Circe's spa.

But well as we later see in MOA when she is chased by the spiders she is able to create a bridge she never really seem that interested in it beyond its beauty. She would admire it yes but Annabeth didn't see the use in it until that point.

And this is a wild thing to say as someone who has known she was a demigod since she was seven. Why only now is she seeing the use in weaving despite the flexibility of such a skill.

Annabeth's rigidity in her thinking might be why. I think I mentioned her being a static character before and I do believe that also translates to her thinking. Even in TLO her main role on the battlefield shes uses ideas and inventions made by others like Daedalus and nudging from her mother with the shield and the automatons.

They do help but Annabeth does not really make new ideas. She's not much an innovator on that front. She borrows from others and while they do work it's not really until MOA we even see her branch a little differently and even still she is very restricted. I'll take the case in how we can kind of see that with the Mithras cultists.

It's really interesting comparing and contrasting Annabeth to someone like Percy who uses every single thing on the battlefield even if it doesn't seem like anything much. In MOA Otis and Ephialtes throw him a a bit of Wonder bread.

It is a literal joke on Bread and Circuses. On my reread I completely forgot about this but it still shocked me with Percy's versatility in how he immediately flipped it around against the hydra and tried to use the arena against Ephialtes.

Percy uses anything and EVERYTHING against his foes. The environment, a literal gag, the works. It's similar to how he also uses the moon food against the Nemean Lion but Percy as a fighter is incredibly adaptable. He will use anything and everything against his foes and that goes for his powers too. I think it is also what makes Percy's fights so memorable.

Annabeth does not really show the same versatility and if she does it is often offset with her opponents making her victory sometimes moot or un-engaging. Annabeth mainly deals with two main groups of enemies, the Mithras Cultists and Arachne.

So the Mithras Cultists. Why is Annabeth victory against them un-engaging for the most part.

They are actual dumbasses and not even fun ones, they are just forgettable and not even a good challenge. It's not wonder I blanked them out in favour for Arachne.

It's not like Percy doesn't have stupid opponents too, heck Otis and Ephialtes are up there but his foes usually have a bit of menace and power that makes them trickier to bring down. Not to mention others he has to bring down through unconventional means. The moment against the Dolphins and Chrysaor is impressive and hysterical

It's works because again despite being outmatched, Percy knows his opponents weakness and how to exploit it with the elements around him. It is also a group effort in getting the dolphins to believe the bit and Chrysaor himself inadvertently feeds into it by confirming that Dionysus was indeed their Camp Director. Chrysaor ain't no slouch, he is smart and is one of the best fighters in the series but the dolphins aren't, they are the weak link in the group and they are understandably still a bit traumatised by their transformation. So getting rid of them helps them bum-rush Chrysaor.

And that is a problem with a lot of Annabeth's opponents. They are deliberately dumbed down to the point where it makes it easier for Annabeth to walk over them or have moment she can "outsmart" them. Annabeth smarts is more so her making educated guesses and rather than the making it actual research she learnt about about Mithras she has learnt about prior. Aphrodite gives her a hint about Mithras earlier in Charleston but she did not follow up on that.

It's a lost moment because Annabeth doesn't even come across as too knowledgeable here. Like wow she can understand a mosaic, groundbreaking!

Not to mention the misogynistic Mithras cultists are just scream "impossible" whenever Annabeth figures out something that is obvious by context clues that is also the dead bodies that are her siblings around her. These idiots lose any menace or threat by how bumbling they are and aren't even that enjoyable.

And again it is a shame because Annabeth actually uses her knowledge on architecture to her advantage in order to bring down the room and defeat them. Like THAT is smart, something Annabeth probably spent a long time learning coming in handy and if Rick used it against actual decent opponents it probably would be more satisfying but alas.

So she eventually she meets Arachne. She is actually menacing and actually interesting in terms that is strongly implied she WAS the better weaver in the contest. That and Annabeth knows she is screwed if she doesn't out scheme her. That and she is probably the smartest of of Annabeth main foes. Still that is not a lot.

The scenes with Arachne are honestly fascinating because both Annabeth and Arachne are foils and I do think both of them do share empathy in how Athena treated each other and respect for their work. Or at least Annabeth respects Arachne work.

They both have connections to Athena and at this current moment that connection is antagonistic and poor. They both are prideful people who regard their work above it all, Annabeth has described in the past how sometimes she wouldn't mind doing everything from scratch and remake the world in her own image and Arachne obsession with her skill and weaving wants it broadcasted to the top of the mountain celebrated for what it is.

Annabeth takes advantage of Arachne's desires for her recognition building her this fantasy.

This is another aspect of Annabeth's own weaving abilities in that she is even able to calculate the dimensions and plans for the trap Arachne will make herself.

Arachne hubris plays incredibly well here with how Annabeth strokes her ego and eventually leads herself into it and not even five seconds later Annabeth tests her luck.

The trap does hold Arachne in place and I do think Annabeth latent weaving abilities in knowing the calculations help in that but Arachne is still a threat for a reason and despite being restrained she initially is still hopeful her art will be seen. Rather than let her wistfully believe that while she is still in danger Annabeth shows exactly how she has the exact same flaw and taunts at her foe way too early and nearly gets killed. If not for the timely arrival of the Argo II.

And heck she gets sent to Tartarus because Annabeth still underestimates Arachne and her webs and forgot how dangerous she was and what was underneath her. It is a good encounter but man do I wish Annabeth actually learned something more about her pride and even how it lead her and Percy to Tartarus. But well....No.

Alas that's Riordan for you with lots of potential and a bit if not a lot of disappointment. No such character development for Annabeth on that front in actually showing she actually learned anything about being more careful and how her flaw which has killed heroes in tragic and interesting ways in how they themselves often orchestrate their own tragedies by their natures. But alas. Outside of Riordan favouritism of her in the narrative, I don't see it ending well for Annabeth if she doesn't learn from her pride. And after Tartarus I don't see her learning.

But yeah I hope this shows how Annabeth does in fact have powers even if they are a bit unconventional and why I think she never really uses them before. That and looking at the rest of the Mark of Athena Quest and being disappointed with most things about it and how Riordan never followed up on satisfyingly putting it all together. YAY!

[mightydragoon]

genuinely curious, what was it about annabeth in SOM you disagreed with?

Annabeth got the Golden Fleece story completely wrong. I am genuinely in awe how Rick screwed up so badly when doing it. But In-Universe, it shows how confidently wrong Annabeth is about her knowledge, which she prides above all else.

The Golden Fleece and Cadmus and Europa become very straightforward once you get the hang of the Greek Gods and Mortals genealogy and then it makes way too much sense.

So the version Annabeth mentions in SOM. Cadmus and Europa are the demigod children of Zeus and who were to be sacrificed. Prayed to Zeus to save them and Europa fell off and died. Annabeth got the gist what the Fleece is (and the main thing anyway) but Rick should've known better and especially for a character whose main thing is being an expositor of information. She also says this is the REAL story. Greek myths have differences but none of them say Cadmus and Europa were carried off on a Golden Ram or were sacrifices.

Europa is carried off. But she's carried off by Zeus in the form of a Bull to Crete and she is the mother of Minos (yes THAT Minos), Sarpedon and Rhadamanthas (oh hey father-daughter incest that didn't originally exist yay!) Her disappearance has massive repercussions as her brother Cadmus and other members of her family try to set out to try and find her and never can.

Cadmus is the King of Thebes who killed a monster and married Harmonia (daughter of Ares and Aphrodite). His family was basically cursed (Oedipus is one of his descendants for reference) but one of his children was Semele. Aka he's Dionysus' maternal grandfather. And while he had to leave his home, it was because Zeus abducted his sister.

The children who had to flee from their stepmother (incidentally, it's Ino one of Cadmus ' daughters in some versions) are

Phrixus and Helle.

Apollodorus mentions it in the Biblotecha (which is essentially the Spark Notes version of Greek Mythology), but Theoi has other versions that say the same. And the Ram wasn't sent by Zeus, either. They were to be a sacrifice to Zeus. It was sent by Nephele, the children's mother. Oh and the Ram was a Son of Poseidon, too.

Helle in particular is interesting cause there is an actual place NAMED after her called Hellespont, where its said where she fell off. It's the Dardanelles today but Helle having a geographical location named after her and a notable one in mythology (she was deified in some places), should have been mentioned.

In Greek mythology Helle was the goddess of the Hellespont, a body of water bridging the Aegean and Black Seas. Helle was once a mortal prin

Europa and the Bull is very famous in terms of imagery, which might explain the confusion with nowhere near the same as two children on a ram

Honestly more than anything. I am insulted on how confidently wrong this was. And rereading this scene after getting into the Classics annoyed me even more.