Whenever I stumble across one of these Romantasy Greek Mythology Retellings the MMC always looks like this:

There's ALWAYS a great emphasize on that strong jawline and high cheekbones that come out of nowhere, even though it's not necessary to get reminded about their existence for the 387th time. They come out in only two colors: boring pale caucasian man and boring tanned caucasian man. Hobbies? Who needs hobbies when you have muscles to flex?!

This is exactly how Perseus felt in Crown of Serpents, and how this Cadmus feels in Heroines of Olympus.

I'm wheezing 🤣🤣

It's trueee. They kinda remind me of Gaston from beauty and the beast.

Bitch that’s not a mythology retellings that’s a completely original story.

It would be so much cooler if the author simply left a few hints that would invite the reader to connect it to the story of Hades and Persephone, rather than naming the characters like the gods and making it a #Retelling. Something tells me that this book has very little #Mythology in.

"Persephone chafes under her mother's control" - not this overbearing mother trope again 😭

Basically my problem with retellings. A bunch of them could be quite good independent stories but are held down by marketability. Change the names and some obvious characteristics and normally the result would be something completely original and cool.

If you want to include some mythical inspirations, great ! Just include them as Easter eggs or some literary motif without marketing your book as a mythology retelling.

Also, I agree with @bookmark-extraordinaire's vision as well, even though I'm not a cyberpunk reader.

Atalanta retelling (review)

Since it's divided in multiple parts, I'll divide this review according to those parts.

Here is a prediction bingo I created out of my and my moots' predictions, I'd like to thank @gingermintpepper , @go-rocksquadsfan , @amostcuriousmythicist , @just-1-scorpio , @jejesoso and @margaretkart (in dms) for giving me the ideas.

Note that not all of these predictions are necessarily negative, but pretty obvious for the genre. The free spaces are for "Stuff I should've seen coming"

Since I made it AFTER reading the first part, I'll be nice and only start counting their realization in the next ones. Although I could already be crossing :

Part 1 - Childhood

In response to the tags in Ginger's reblog :

Ikrrrrr.

Like I was digging for big flaws before realizing: "wait, it's ok ? Atalanta is cute and decent (although not very complex but it's ok since it's the beginning) ? The plot is 'plot-ing' ? There are actual neat connections to the myths ?"

Though I fear that how Asclepius will be handled can completely ruin any good will the decent beginning made me want to show 🤣.

Seriously, if the author removed 3-4 plot points and wrote this part in isolation, it would have been pretty neat and I would've apologized.

Unfortunately, I'm only at 1/10th of the book so I may change my mind later on 💀

Yes, my comment is yet another distraction so you don't have to end Alcestis.

Also, your point with Artemis is very relevant (I forgot about poor Hippolytus !!) and makes the "fond of the Amazons" thingy go in the positive section from now on 😁. It's this kind of slight "liberty" with actual basis that I should really appreciate more, because it's interesting to follow on, instead of crackships (like the future main pairing) or demonizing gods.

Atalanta retelling (review)

Since it's divided in multiple parts, I'll divide this review according to those parts.

Here is a prediction bingo I created out of my and my moots' predictions, I'd like to thank @gingermintpepper , @go-rocksquadsfan , @amostcuriousmythicist , @just-1-scorpio , @jejesoso and @margaretkart (in dms) for giving me the ideas.

Note that not all of these predictions are necessarily negative, but pretty obvious for the genre. The free spaces are for "Stuff I should've seen coming"

Since I made it AFTER reading the first part, I'll be nice and only start counting their realization in the next ones. Although I could already be crossing :

Part 1 - Childhood

Clarification (because I fear I might be too mean)

Btw keep in mind that Atalanta being very strong IS a part of the myths. I'm not complaining on that specifically.

But she's too young and I don't like the set-up. That's why I complain.

But there are some neat details used from the myths (including her secret cave) and the book isn't bad for now.

If she was "stronger than men" and lifted tree trunks AFTER training with Chiron, or even just training with stronger mentors, it wouldn't be as much of a problem either.

She's not Mary-Sue level. It's just, idk, a bit too much.

Oooo, reminds me of my own two pet peeves bingos. @aliciavance4228 feel free to use them for Crown of Serpents too, I'd be pretty curious

(some of them overlap with @just-1-scorpio 's)

Now that I think about it, I have a whole bunch of new pet peeves in mind that could fill a whole new bingo. The third one 😂

(btw for the "minor gods and mortals are irrelevant" one, I mean when they're kinda minor in the grand scheme of things but VERY important to the adapted myth and don't appear in the retelling because they're not popular enough. Here it would be with Dictys or Medusa's sisters, even though they're monsters and not goddesses, for example.

I explain it because it has already raised some eyebrows.)

Not to be racist to westerners again but that retelling that makes Perseus want to kill Acrisius to avenge his mother just reeks of American individualism, like the writer can’t accept that back then family was a huge deal and kin slaying was a big no-no regardless of circumstance and that wether or not you think that mentality and culture is correct, Perseus would actually agree with it. He was an Ancient Greek man, not a modern feminist or anarchist and whatever the hell progressive label we would agree with, he’d still have rather conservative ideas of family and would view Acrisius with respect and empathy, he’d want to reconcile with his grandfather bc he’s family.

Whether or not you think Acrisius “deserves” that mercy doesn’t matter, the focus is the family tragedy, how he did everything he could to live, tearing his family apart in the process and still lost his life regardless is the tragedy. All the pain, abuse and isolation was for nothing.

Everyone (including Danaë at first) would think that Perseus would hate his grandfather and/or want to overthrow him, everyone thought that Perseus would kill Acrisius in cold blood in a war or like how Oedipus killed Laius, but that’s not what happened. The twist, the thing that makes Perseus SO INTERESTING IN THE FIRST PLACE is that he doesn’t hate his grandfather, he doesn’t want to continue the cycle of violence he wants to turn a new leaf with the man who abused him and his mother, the fact that despite everything Perseus forgiving his grandfather didn’t stop him from killing him IS THE FUCKING TRAGEDY!

Also there's the itty bitty fact that he dies in away that is so much more humiliating that Perseus getting his vengeance on him because...if he dies from Perseus getting his get back then the favor Perseus has from the Gods just vanishes and he'll be stuck trying to avoid their wrath for the rest of his very short life...

But he died by Perseus as an accident which means...he didn't break any divine or local laws or taboos, got to keep his divine favor, and if there was any part of him that felt the tiniest iota of catharsis (assuming he knew) he got so...why would you want to change that?

Like come onnnnnn ! I'm all for creativity, but these aren't your OCs. These figures and their actions were carefully crafted over the span of centuries. Sure, taking some liberties over their personalities is fine (for the more minor ones, not major deities or heroes like Perseus).

In any case, they would not act like some 21st century American individual.

At least try to incorporate some ancient Greek mentality in your ancient Greek setting.

If you don't like that, I'd suggest just writing your own story instead of banking on an actual culture without taking the time to think about it.

Ok... so, the weird mythology crackship of the day will come from my blog. @sarafangirlart and @just-1-scorpio can catch a break.

Basically it comes from a french retelling of Atalanta (NGL the idea itself sounds good, she's very interesting and badass, but I'm always on my guard with this kind of projects)

I was like "ok, if it's good then at LEAST I can read it because it's in my mother tongue". So I was curious and checked out the summary...

BUT, here's the kicker, not only is Atalanta in this mess today but there's a surprise guest that I did NOT expect to show up in this kind of retellings 😅.

Here's the translated version:

Basically my reaction when Asclepius was mentioned :

Epione doesn't matter, I guess. Neither do the 10 kids she had with Asclepius.

Or the fact that Atalanta ALSO had other partners that aren't him. In fact she never even met him. Even in the Argonaut story, the only opportunity, there's not a source stating they're in there together.

Ares, Meleager and Hippomenes seeing their baddie getting shipped with someone other than them:

From Ariadne by Jennifer Saint

This passage from Jennifer Saint’s Ariadne exemplifies many of the ways modern Greek myth retellings distort the original myths, often imposing contemporary narratives of suffering and victimhood onto characters and stories that do not align with them.

First, the inclusion of Medusa in Ariadne’s lament is historically and thematically jarring. Medusa’s myth has no direct connection to Ariadne, Pasiphae, or Semele. While modern interpretations often frame Medusa as a victim of divine cruelty, her story belongs to a completely separate lineage of myth. Ariadne, the princess of Crete, abandoned by Theseus and later embraced by Dionysus, would have no reason to invoke Medusa’s fate alongside her own. This forced grouping suggests an attempt to create a broad “sisterhood of suffering” among female figures in mythology, even when their stories do not naturally intersect.

More egregiously, the passage distorts Ariadne’s relationship with Dionysus. Classical sources portray their union as one of love, celebration, and even divine joy. Unlike the tragic relationships of other mortal women with gods—such as Semele’s fiery demise due to Hera’s trickery—Ariadne’s marriage to Dionysus is one of the few happy endings in Greek mythology. Far from being deceived or discarded, she is crowned a goddess, her love returned in full measure. The idea that she would see Dionysus as no different from the "mightiest of the gods" or "the basest men" completely contradicts the reverence and devotion their myth traditionally conveys. If anything, Dionysus is often portrayed as an outsider among the Olympians, more sympathetic to mortals, women, and the marginalized than gods like Zeus or Poseidon.

Ultimately, this passage misrepresents not only Ariadne and Dionysus but also the very nature of Greek mythology. It replaces mythic nuance with a one-size-fits-all feminist tragedy that, ironically, removes the agency and joy from characters who originally had them.

I read the book a while ago and remember liking the beginning but being sorely disappointed by the second half for precisely this reason (and Ariadne being way too passive because women suffer all the time and don't do anything else).

She's not involved in Dionysus' cult, she doesn't meet any other mythological creature or figure, barely interacts with maenads, etc. Kinda ironic that the "feminist" retelling chooses to depict her in such a way. Maybe to highlight how much of a victim women are to evil men or idk what. Making Ariadne a doormat doesn't give justice to the myth version.

And this is too bad because this retelling had the potential to be great. It had all the building bricks : a chronological story of Ariadne's life, her relationship with her family especially Phaedra, Dionysus, the kids, even the myth of the war against Perseus!

But ultimately, it fails in the execution department, specifically with the themes and the link with mythology like @margaretkart explained.

The ending is also very weirdly placed considering Ariadne dies, iirc like in the myth where she's turned to stone (I don't exactly remember the ending of the book so correct me if I'm wrong) and... that's it. Whereas in the myths, Dionysus resurrects her and makes her a goddess. But hey, why should we show him being a good husband when we can have more scenes of Ariadne lamenting her fate ?

To me, Dionysus and Ariadne have to match each other's freak. You know what I mean ? They're in-synch, gossiping together and ready to fight alongside each other.

The few versions where Ariadne has an unhappy ending because of him are SEPARATE form the versions where they meet and marry each other (most notably Homer's). So it's just treated as some divine punishment.

Listen, I'd be super hypocritical if I suddenly asked adaptations to portray Dionysus as soft and meek. Because he's not. He's 50% a party animal and 50% a lovecraftian menace to society. BUUUUT, he's soft towards Ariadne and if I see someone like Pentheus describing him in a terrible way and being terrified, she would never do that.

Portraying conflict in their marriage is fine, even showing her being overwhelmed and having abandonment issues is ok, but Dionysus should always strive to support her and again, they have a happy marriage and I'm not open on discussion about this last statement.