#either Percy's loyalty doesn't go both ways or he had just been looking for an excuse to be nasty to nico

[purpleshadow-star]

Tbh, I really don't understand why Percy was so quick to turn on Nico in The Last Olympian. Like, Nico said multiple times that Hades just wanted to talk to Percy. He said that Hades wanted to see him before they tried the river, which means obviously Nico had no intentions of them staying with Hades for long. And he explicitly said that Hades just wanted to talk. I get being annoyed or even upset at being tricked into a surprise visit to Hades, but going as far as trying to attack Nico and calling him a traitor? As if Nico completely lied to him? As if Nico wasn't still (obviously) planning on helping him? Especially since Nico already seemed reluctant and guilty about his actions? I don't get that at all.

Seriously, so unnecessary.

And he was told, straight up, that Nico made Hades promise not to hurt him and that Nico genuinely wanted to help him.

Percy isn't dumb! At this point, it should have been clear that Nico was tricked. Nico obviously didn't want Percy captured or hurt, yet Percy is still acting and thinking awfuly towards Nico, even when he literally shows up to help him escape.

Honestly, I think Nico handled this much better than I would have. If I were Nico and Percy attacked me like that after it was clear that I was tricked, I would just threaten to leave Percy there. There is literally no other way to make it more clear that Nico didn't want to see Percy hurt. From the beginning, there was no doubt that Nico thought Percy would be safe, yet Percy still was acting like an irrational idiot and ignoring what everyone around him was telling him, for what? Just so he could feel justified in his anger towards Nico?

And then, after all that, he had the nerve to say that Nico owed him! After Nico broke him out and helped him become invincible!

I get that Percy's fatal flaw is loyalty. It only takes one instance, one breech of that loyalty, for him to turn on people, but there was literally no instance where anyone could doubt that Nico wanted Percy safe. Literally, from the first moment it was revealed that Nico brought Percy to Hades in exchange for information about his past, it was clear that Nico thought Hades only wanted to talk to him. It was clear that Nico thought Percy wasn't in any danger. It was clear that Nico never wanted Percy to be hurt, imprisoned, or killed.

Sure, I'd get it if Percy was annoyed that Nico used him as a bargaining chip for information without warning him in advance, but Nico's loyalty to Percy was never in question, and Percy was literally told that several times by multiple people.

Percy just annoys me so much in this part. It annoyed me before, just based on memory, but I thought he was kind of justified in his mistrust of Nico since Nico did trick him. Now, after rereading it? No. Percy is definitely in the wrong here.

I don't ever want to hear another person say that Percy never treated Nico unfairly ever again. He totally overreacted to this situation. If Percy should have been mad at anyone, it should have been Hades (although Percy already had unjustifiable biases against Hades even before this, but that'll be another post). Hades is the one who tricked Nico into bringing him there, and he's the one who broke his promise. Hades is the one who locked him up. Nico went out of his way and defied his father in order to help Percy escape.

Is Nico right for tricking Percy to get more information about his past? No, of course not. Nico should have at least told Percy about what he planned to do. He might have been able to convince Percy to go along with it. But was Percy justified in his actions and thoughts towards Nico during and after this? Absolutely not.

[alexalessandro]

Frederick is not what you think

I saw a lot of people take umbrage with Frederick's new characterization in the train cart scene, but this is setting us up for either misdirect or a deeper nuanced take on Frederick's character.

Remember, they're setting up a parallel between the love Percy knows and understands and the love Annabeth has come to accept.

Percy is our voice for unconditional love. It's why he loves and trusts so fiercely; loyalty is his fatal flaw. He hasn't received much love from the world, but he will hang on with dear life to the love of the few people in his life. He will sacrifice himself for Grover and Annabeth. He will lay down his life on a quest he didn't want for the slight chance it could bring his mom back. He is loyal and stubborn, and he can't, and won't, accept the gods' definition of love and family.

"This is the kind of family the gods are to each other..."

"But at least with the gods you know the rules"

Annabeth is our proxy for every child demigod at camp, for all the campers that drunk down the Kool-Aid camp half-blood and the gods are feeding them. Most of these kids didn't have a Sally in their life. They didn't have someone who loved them and stayed in their corner no matter what. "All that matters is that you're safe... I told him I believe my kid, it was a very short call".

Annabeth has fully bought into the fact that love is conditional, that to be the pride of Athena's offspring, she has to be perfect.

"A monument to perfection... that's how you show Athena your love"

Now... Frederick.

From the train cart scene, we understand that Annabeth felt loved by Frederick and that she was "treated as a gift", but even gifts can be returned.

To argue in favor of Frederick for a second here, the way children of Athena come into this world is extremely jarring for their mortal parent. In the case of most other gods that have normal relations with humans, at least both parties are in favor during the act (one can only hope) or can expect a child as an outcome. With Athena, a child just plops on your doorstep after a nice conversation you had with a woman once and surprise surprise! You're a parent now! Congratulations! No, we do not take receipts.

This doesn't set up the relationship between the kid and the parent to be amazing (just another way that gods keep being inconsiderate of mortals and their children), to Frederick's merit, at least he tries with Annabeth in the series.

Their situation is neither of their fault he knows that, so he reframes Annabeth's arrival as a gift (prompting her to idolize her mom even before she knew she was a half-blood). He tries to be a good parent to Annabeth, but if there's anything that Annabeth's story and the fact that he didn't even try to look for her in the 5 years she's been missing tells us that he wasn't all that grateful for Athena's gift. Yet again, the only instance of love Annabeth has ever known has been conditional. I'll love you until I start a proper family of my own. I'll love you until it becomes inconvenient to go after you.

This leaves Annabeth with only Luke... Even Thalia had her "prove herself".

Thalia was most likely worried about Annabeth's chances of survival if she traveled with her. Annabeth was 7, untrained, traveling with a forbidden child of Zeus, with Hades actively trying to kill them. It makes sense she would try to keep Annabeth at arm's length at first, for both their sakes.

TLDR: In the end, I believe the series is setting up Frederick to be more of a nuanced character. He tried with Annabeth but he let her run away, proving his love to be conditional. I think the series is setting up Annabeth and Percy to be mirrors of each other in the way they perceive and understand love, all to make it all the sweeter and more painful once they discover the traitor's motivations because Percy gets it, but Annabeth won't understand. Annabeth perceiving Frederick's love as genuine and unconditional even though he didn't look for her is essential to set up her worldview of the gods and parental love.

[kamiko1234]

*Yapping Ahead*

(Listen I know I'm putting too much thought and getting way too invested in a book series for kids. Just bare with me for a second)

Okay I am done with BOTL and WOW, the gods and camp are really begging Luke/Kronos on their knees to just- obliterate them all. Because like were they REALLY just doing NOTHING !? Okay to be fair with them, I AM a big agitated because I'm still sort of reeling from Luke but STILL.

Those people JUST had their camp invaded. They KNOW that stuff's getting serious. I mean people DIED there just now. AND IN RESPONSE TO THAT THEY DO BLOODY NOTHING. Like did I miss something? Are they for real? I understand the concept of licking your wounds after a battle like that- BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN JUST GOING ON LIKE NOTHING HAPPENED. Maybe, oh idk- START TO FORM A COUNTER ARMY!? ATTEMPT TO DO COUNTERSTRIKES!? TRY TO STRENGHTEN YOUR POSITION WHO HAS ALREADY BEEN INVADED ONCE!? Let me remind you that Luke/Kronos is out there with a fully formed army including a viable command structure, good training and allies in form of actual minor GODS. ALL THE WHILE ALSO HAVING ALREADY STARTED LAUNCHING ATTACKS. All this and the camp does NOTHING of value! Sure I mean they are sort of training demigods, and even if we say they can't launch attacks themselves for some reason- them doing nothing is just stupid. Atleast start to get these kids used to army strategy and genuinely monster fighting OUTSIDE off capture-the-flag or whatever else they are playing. Maybe also, ikd- INTERROGATE CHRIS!? Like maybe they did and is just wasn't mentioned but- that man was in the army. He should know valuable info and you don't even so much as CHECK of he knows anything!

LAND ALSO WHY IS HE FREELY MOVING AROUND THE CAMP ANYWAY!?

Listen I do NOT care if he had a "change of heart" or "deserves a second chance". This is a purley objective statement here but that guy was an ENEMY. He already switched sides ONCE. THERE IS NO REASON FOR YOU GUYS TO TRUST HIM AT THIS POINT OF TIME, AND EVERY REASON TO HAVE HIM LOCKED UP AND INTERROGATED SOMEWHERE.

I know this is a kid's series but please, Rick. Atleast mention Chris getting question. Don't make your main good guys look like morons compared to the baddies.

Or someone please tell me I missed something of the books because so far it looks like any semblance of battle smarts left CHB with Luke 💀 Also am I the only one a bit irked between the few months timeskip at the end between the Battle and Percy talking with Annabeth? 'cause like, I feel this is a conversation they (logically speaking) should have had a few weeks at MOST after the whole thing going down in the story, NOT a few months after. This too is just a personal ick but, I do not like what they did with Chris. With him joining up with camp just like that? Yeah, no. He betrayed them before. That means he must have had atleast SOME grievances with how things were run. And now he's just back again a "redemtion arc" (that isn't even really an arc if we are honest, it's just there) and no further focus!? It's not like anything got BETTER. I mean sure it was cool to see Dionysus acctualy grieve his kids and be a bit nicer to Percy.

DOESN'T MEAN HE WASN'T ANY LESS OF A DICK BEFOREHAND.

DOESN'T MEAN THAT LUKE DIDN'T HAVE A FUCKING POINT EITHER. Like, idk. I'm just disappointed, as of now I'm just hoping we'll see more of Chris and see the demigods and Luke delved more into with the last book.

The only thing I genuinely pray doesn't happen is that they'll start to demonize the demigods who joined Luke and Luke himself. I'm really nervous since Chris seems to be treated like a "redeemed" villain, ignoring the fact that they all had valid point and valid reasons to go against Olympus. The gods and Camp Halfblood are both objectively horrible as a whole. The system in itself is flawed and I'm pretty sure even stacked against the demigods. I'm gonna be real I see no real reason to expect any real loyalty from Demigods nor do I see any reason why they should keep dying for what's basically a blood mill that couldn't care less. The Demigods who joined Luke are not evil. Luke is not evil. The gods are not good people. If these books start to pretend that Luke and his allies are wholly evil I WILL flip a table. Ngl I have little mind for much else of the bunch of things that happened in the story. Maybe I'll make a second post where I'm talking about other stuff, maybe I won't. I'll see, if I don't feel free to ask. As always I ask to mark spoilers in any replies or reblogs you may make so I can avoid them, thank you ^^

[ignitesthestxrs]

gosh listening to how you envisioned the story to go is like hearing everything i dreamed about in my head! i can totally see how the dynamic would work that way, and i would've loved to see how you would approach the percy/luke dynamic. who do you think would've broken first? for some reason i feel like it would be luke who realises what he was feeling, and that understanding his emotions would make him be even more hostile to percy at first, until one day the tension just breaks and everything falls into place! what do you think haha i would love to know your thoughts :) ~ tirefire anon

oh luke would have figured out what was up first - even at the point in the story i got to, luke basically knew what was up - but percy would have been the one who cracked.

like! the thing is luke is older and more experienced than both percy and annabeth. he's also uh full of self loathing! so he has zero expectation of being wanted back by either of them, and is definitely not in a 'make the first move' kind of place - he will take whatever he can get, but he also thinks he deserves nothing from either of them.

but with percy in particular there's also a real thread of competition there. luke is softer with annabeth because he's more protective of her/recognises that she is the person he betrayed worse than anyone else and she is the person he feels he actually needs to make things up to.

percy meanwhile is both the demigod he could have been and the demigod he never was and that drives a real fury in him. but luke knows the cost of that anger now, knows to keep it under control, just as percy clearly can't keep his anger under control. a thing i always really enjoyed exploring with percy was the cost of his anger and the cost of his loyalty and the effect the trauma of tartarus and the constant whimsy of the gods might have on him. luke is watching this happen, and luke recognises what is happening because it's what he went through himself! so there is mixed vindication and pity there, and also some envy - luke knows that percy jackson is capable of feats he could never achieve. when he was younger that lit that same fury in him, but older and tireder and less naive, he's more wistful for that level of passion lol.

percy meanwhile - the older and angrier he gets, the more he thinks, luke was right. and that is infuriating because luke hurt so many people, especially annabeth, but also - wasn't he possessed? was it really luke at all who caused all that pain, or was it just another game of the gods? there's some part of percy that still admires luke, or maybe admires him anew, for doing something that percy thinks, i don't have the guts to do that - is it that he's lucking the guts, or is it that he knows he'd fail? is he jealous, that luke had enough faith in himself to think he'd succeed? that he could take down the gods?

they're both so alike and they both recognise that in each other, and luke is a condescending fuck because he likes to get a rise out of percy but also because he sees himself in percy and he can't decide if he wants to beat that down or goad it further. percy looks at luke and can't figure out if he's a warning or a promise.

i think luke finds the fact that he's attracted to percy to be very grimly funny. like he's already amused at himself for loving annabeth, the dramatic irony of falling for someone he could have had if only he'd turned away from the path he was on. and now this growing attraction for a man he only wants because of all his worst choices. while he recognises that percy is hot for him in this verse, i don't think he attributes that to any real feeling - it's chemistry, it's rage turned horny, it's their fucked up connection, but it's not like - love or affection or anything good, because luke doesn't think he is deserving of any of those softer emotions. so he taunts percy and provokes him and feels pretty content and certain in the idea that percy will never actually want him, that whatever he wants from luke is in fact in spite of luke.

percy on the other hand is an all or nothing sort of boy. percy only knows how to love with his whole heart, percy only knows how to reach out with both hands, and this is a part of what has been fucking him and annabeth up in this verse for so long - with luke around, he didn't feel like there was room for all of him, you know? he thought he had to be content with annabeth's friendship, they were both too scared of hurting each other or displacing something that meant so much to both of them to make a move.

but with luke? percy doesn't have to be afraid of losing anything with luke, he already literally stabbed him. their relationship exists in the ashes of everything they burned down, they have hit the bedrock and there is nowhere to keep digging. so when he realises what he's experiencing is - attraction, affection even, some kind of love all wound up in fury and resentment, what is stopping him from throwing himself at luke?

[yonemurishiroku]

It was very much intentional, even if he did not do it out of malice. He still intentionally handed Percy, a living human being who's gone out of his way to help Nico and care for him when no one else did, over to Hades just to get info about his dead mother. Percy distrusting Nico because of it is understandable, though Percy had already forgiven Nico for that incident and only said he wasn't sure about Nico's loyalties, plus was mad at Nico for pretending he doesn't know Percy and leaving him to his amnesia.

Oh thank Gods, I can finally understand every word you send. Thank you for the effort. *sobs*

Anyway, I actually... don't have anything to say about this?

Yeah, I'm aware that the Percy - Nico debate has been going on in the fandom for... however long it has been. And honestly? I think everyone's right. Yes, Nico was wrong to lie to Percy. No, he wasn't wrong that Hades took Percy. Yes, Percy was right to be mad at Nico. No, Nico wasn't wrong to pretend to not know Percy. Yes, Percy can doubt his loyalty. No the first thing Percy says to Nico after he's rescued shouldn’t be accusations-----etc and etc.

Every post I read, it just makes sense. Yes, yours is, too. Because honestly? This is children and their feelings we are talking about. They make mistakes: we all do. They're emotional: they're sentient beings, not rocks. So I wouldn't hold it against them. One makes a mistake, the other's mad at them, and that's totally fine. Their reasons are validated. Their feelings are validated (you can't control how people feel, now can we?).

The only thing that was at fault is the situation (and Hades, duh). It forces them to do those against their own will. I'm sure Nico doesn't want to cause Percy harm. I'm sure Percy cares about Nico. I'm sure they both wish each other safe and happiness.

With that being said, the matter is only which side you choose to believe, what you choose to look at and recall when you mention it. You resent either of them, that's totally understandable.

Just don't let it cloud your judgments.

Thank you a lot for your insights, though! Have a nice day. <3