#also i didn't recognize u as the op at first so im sorry dkfhdojfkdjfkdjf

[emeagirnacamps]

say about the whole "nico + the seven not saving him" discussion pls

i read your tags in my post and i think this is a better place to discuss

probably we agree in everthing about piper, leo, frank and hazel's actions (except the part of piper and leo not knowing nico's life was im risk; i doubt SO MUCH percy wouldn't tell the whole picture to them)

jason yes, i probably was unfair bc of his memory, i only focused on his 'roman leader' side

AND YES, ANNABETH IS SAID TO BE SO FUCKING SMART AND SHE DIDN'T THOUGHT OF A LOGICAL REASON OF WHY NICO WOULDN'T TELL ANYONE THE TRUTH???? DON'T MAKE ANY SENSE

percy is... very difficult. i read accurate reason of why he would be either spiteful or it was just rr's bad writing. Want to hear your opinions

okay, here i go. i will just say my opinions on this, i'm not expecting you to agree with everything nor i want you to. please keep in mind i barely remember the series and have just reread the scene you mentioned. plus this is so long, i fear i will bore you.

the scene is so bad written. it's so funny how bad it is given the fact it is supposed to be a moment where both the readers and the seven get to be troubled and hesitant about what to do. except that we don't feel like that because the situation is showed to us like an emergency: nico has five days to live and he can't get out of it alone.

anyone who disagrees with the idea of saving him will be seem like an asshole. there's no question, because the situation that is presented was something urgent and without other choice besides them going and saving him.

i was surprised with piper being a mediator, i barely remember the stuff she did so reading she trying to calm and reassure hazel that yes, they are going to save her brother was so sweet. frank clearly was just trying to keep hazel from panicking so i will judge him here: he was only a trophy boyfriend in the whole scene. he didn't have an opinion and he just accepted that well, it's time to save hazel's brother then. i kinda can judge piper for the same, but given i hardly have good things to talk about her i will let it slide this time.

it's so funny how everything happens in percy pov and he. barely talks about it. he says he have a "rocky relationship" with nico, but he also affirms they are going to save him — that they have to —, but when he could say anything to make jason and leo to feel less suspicious about the whole thing, he does nothing.

it's interesting to see that since hearing about nico's situation, all annabeth does is analyze what's happening and say the obvious — she points out he is the bait when she is alone with percy and she is the first to make it seems ambiguous ether or not they were going to save him, as it shows here:

“The giants are trying to lure us,” Annabeth said. “They’re assuming we’ll try to rescue him.”

she doesn't say if she agrees or not to go save him. damn that's cold as fuck. in her defense, she is supposed to be more "rational", but she could still keep being neutral and make people think and theorize about the why nico couldn't tell anyone about the two camps instead of just passive watching. actually besides this and the other line about the death slumber, she says nothing in the entire scene.

(which is weird to me. guess i remember a different annabeth then.)

and now we came to the "assholes"! /hj

leo, like annabeth did in private with percy, was just pointing the obvious.

“Uh…” Leo shifted in his chair. “One thing. The giants are expecting us to do this, right? So we’re walking into a trap?”

that's his first line. it's after this that everything went downhill. in a critical approach, i think it should be questioned if they would save him or not before they know if nico is a) alive and b) could get out of the situation on his own. doing it after just seems like leo is being rude and apathetic to another human being life. which i doubt was the point here, given he does have some points to make:

“Don’t get me wrong, Hazel. It’s just that your brother, Nico… he knew about both camps, right?”

“Well, yes,” Hazel said.

“He’s been going back and forth,” Leo said, “and he didn’t tell either side.”

Jason sat forward, his expression grim. “You’re wondering if we can trust the guy. So am I.”

Hazel shot to her feet. “I don’t believe this. He’s my brother. He brought me back from the Underworld, and you don’t want to help him?”

while we, as a readers, knew about nico's intention and reasons, the characters does not. so if there was a change he was, in fact, a traitor, it would be great to point it out while they have time to discuss it. neither leo (, piper) or jason really knew nico — plus, while jason does says he remembers the guy — some pages ahead —, something we should keep in mind is how much does he actually remembers? and how much does he knew about him?

these two were not good judges of character here, since they didn't really knew nico beyond what others could tell them (and one of them was still working on remembering his past life). they really were the best ones for this, to add this tension, but the timing was bad. it made them look like bad guys even though they had the right to question if that was actually a good move.

hazel also gave them no actual reason as to why they should save nico (besides it being the actual heroic and right thing to do). the only thing she said here is he broke the law of the circle of life for her. and they don't want to help her?

she only made him look worse (/lh) while trying to defend him. it's not like jason or leo were bringing an impossibility to the table — he maybe could be gaea's ally, how would they know? his actions were not adding up and what she said is just a reminder of how far nico can go if he feels like it. were they right? of course not (but now my mind is like wHAT IF THEY WERE– damn being a ficwriter is ridiculous).

and even while bringing this possibility on the table, these two never said what if we don't save him, uh? it can be implied that maybe they didn't wanted to — to me it isn't though —, i guess it depends on the interpretation on who reads it. the thing is, they raised a point that nobody wanted to — or thought about — and the only thing that made they look like assholes was the fact that nico's days were counted. (my mind is so giddy to work on something like that i'm starting to hate this concept /hj)

and what it's the most funny about it for me is that hazel makes a jab at jason a lil later.

Hazel’s arms shook. A silver platter zoomed toward her and hit the wall to her left, splattering scrambled eggs. “You… the great Jason Grace… the praetor I looked up to. You were supposed to be so fair, such a good leader. And now you…” Hazel stomped her foot and stormed out of the mess hall.

my sweet summer child, he is being fair — but it doesn't seems like it because people are biased and are only caring about one life. (i probably sound like a big asshole too lmao, i swear i just being the "cold and analytical" cliche here, i hated this scene when i first read it too). was it really a good option to go in a rescue mission when they were fighting to save the world? one life is really more worth than thousand, millions one? should they really risk everything to save nico just because he is hazel's brother?

a good leader see all the options and try to see the situation from a lot of ways so they can better prepared for whatever is thrown at them. i don't think he is being a bad leader here (you, who is reading this, can totally disagree with me. my opinion won't change.)

now, if the question was only if it was a good choice to save him or not and his life time limit, i would end the post here. but no, there was another thing to put in the equation:

“That’s not much time,” Piper summed up. She put her hand on Hazel’s shoulder. “We’ll find him. At least we know what the lines of the prophecy mean now. ‘Twins snuff out the angel’s breath, who holds the key to endless death.’ Your brother’s last name: di Angelo. Angelo is Italian for ‘angel.’”

did they even had a choice here? another thing that came way too early in my opinion is how they must save nico because he was part of the prophecy puzzle. of course the majority would go on board with saving him if he is a necessary tool to defeat gaea — this could also be used as an argument, a pretty bad one being honest, since you would only see him as a way to finish your task. but still would be one more way to convince others to save him too.

it doesn't necessarily negates the point that leo and jason made though it does make it clear that ether it is a good or a bad idea doesn't matter — they will need him. they will have to rescue him, because the prophecy says that he is the one who can guide them, so even if they have solid proof that they shouldn't; it doesn't matter.

the prophecy always became true. be it by the way we think it would or be it in the unthinkable way.

to resume: does i agree with the character questions and debates? no, nico is dying and i need and want him alive. jason and leo acted like assholes? depends on how i am judging the scene, if i am being biased: yes. if i am not being biased: a little. does percy and annabeth silence is okay? no, cause it doesn't make sense — even if percy is feeling petty or is simple ooc (or both, because these two arguments can coexist), i still think he should have at least tried to make nico be seem in a better light (even if he failed at it, like hazel). annabeth could still make a neutral point about how he helped in the wars while also didn't help or made it easier in finding percy while theorizing about the reason why nico did that. frank could do better, maybe he could side with leo and jason (surprisingly) and it could be something to work on his relationship with hazel. piper actually was very interesting in this scene, i could feel she somehow empathized with hazel since she also was in a similar situation with her dad in the first book (also she calling jason and leo out for being cold?? amazing, perfect, i loved it, this piper is now part of the characterization i wil use to write her).

i don't even remember what point i was trying to do lmao. all i remember was being too annoyed with people being angry at the seven for this scene. like yeah it's completely okay and valid to be angry, frustrated or uncomfortable with their decisions (or lack of), i just felt like people didn't really understood why the scene was even there in the first place (although very bad done and executed).