#I got into pjo bc I was neurodiverse and into myths and I still learnt about myths I didn't know ?? I'm just genuinely so confused by this

[nico-di-owgelo]

What I don't understand is the need to have made Percy know all of the myths. It's unnecessary. A familiarity makes sense, he studied it in school, and having Sally tell him stories is sweet, but that doesn't mean he can't be confused? In the books he mentions he struggles with some myths and names because his dyslexia makes it hard*, some names can be similar but are completely different figures. It's also mentioned that the more a demigod knows about the mythical world the easier they are to find. Percy's ignorance makes sense, and is important for his safety (hence why he's lied to by Brunner and Grover about Mrs Dodds). When comparing the wide breadth of myths covered in the books, not knowing exactly who someone is makes more sense than immediately knowing exactly who and what is going on.

A main theme in the books is that intelligence comes in many different forms, especially because the protagonists are both neurodiverse in more than one way. Being book smart isn't the end all be all of intelligence and both Annabeth and Percy show how clever they are in different ways. Book Percy was never made to seem stupid because he didn't immediately know about the Lotus hotel or Procrustes for example. Even Annabeth was fooled by them. That's how the myths worked in the pjo verse, they're modernised and there's the mist it's perfectly fine for them to be tricked. Hell, in universe the monsters want them to be tricked, that's the point. Percy's intelligence and quick thinking are shown not via immediate fact retrieval, but through how he manages to manipulate the situation for the better. He's perceptive, and is good at figuring things out**. He's still incredibly intelligent, it's just shown in a different way.

One of the joys of the original series was learning about the myths alongside Percy. The mystery and the unique modernisations of the stories. So it's a bit of a slap in the face to have the show's narration behave like everyone would know what any myth, that it's so obvious they don't need to explain how or why the protagonists know exactly what's coming before it has a chance to. Again: I'm aware that Annabeth has been at camp for years, but there's a massive amount of myths to know and they have adapted to the modern day. They might not be immediately recognisable, or the mist might be too strong etc etc. Not knowing something doesn't mean you're dumb.

The show, however, doesn't give the kids chances to mess up. They know everything immediately, or far too quickly. There's no room for learning or acknowledging the complexities of the pjo-universe. Them recognising Medusa straight away, fine, she's a pretty well known myth, and Percy is named for Perseus, the familiarity makes sense. The lotus hotel, less so, it's not that well known of an aspect of the Odyssey, but they are looking for a god so being suspicious of their surroundings is fair enough I guess? (Though coincidences can be coincidences. The only similarity that the island and the hotel have is a lotus, a very common flower?) There are so many things that happen in the Odyssey that not specifically remembering this tale would've been fine. But Procrustes? Immediately? Really?

What purpose does it serve to have the kids know who they're facing straight away? To the plot. Considering that the myths are intertwined with the modern, it would make sense for them not to know things, or at least not immediately recognise them as monstrous/magical, because not everything is?

I don't know, I just feel like taking the opportunity to learn away from both the audience and the characters cheapens the story and makes it less interesting. (Representations of intelligence aside. Because if I talk about that I'm going to call someone Ableist and I don't want to get into that right now. I will say though that even the movie had more overt dyslexia and adhd rep so...)

Not only that, but narratively, it's not working. There are no stakes to the situations the kids get into, or there are but certainly not to the same degree. It's just. Odd.

All that to say that the decision is a weird one and one that doesn't serve the plot to boot. That is all.

Anyways have pictures of my copy of TLT for support, please ignore my dissertation tabs.

* / **