The House of Hades discussion

Ever since this series started, it's been mandatory for every character to have a love interest.

The amount of times that the words "girlfriend" and "boyfriend" get used is utterly ridiculous, doesn't anybody agree?

It's like a soap opera (a bad one).

"Percy smiled at her - that sarcastic troublemaker smile that had annoyed her for years but eventually had become endearing. His sea-green eyes were as gorgeous as she remembered. His dark hair was swept to one side....."

UMMMM. Yeah. It's paragraphs like this that turned me off from finishing this series for a while.

And the way he's constantly making them cuddle and kiss and hold hands and call each other gorgeous and perfect...

First of all: SHALLOW
Second of all: get me a barf bag


And then there's Nico.
The cherry on top of the clown show.





I'm interested to hear other people's thoughts. Surely not everyone can worship this series, can they? At least not this trashy aspect.

By "the cherry on top of the clown show," I mean that the author writes crappy romance and the whole gay thing was obviously because he was running out of ideas to keep making romance. (I mean he has what, 6 couples by now? And how many love triangles?) True I don't approve of horrific, perverted acts, if that's what you mean but that's really not the point I was making.

I have a problem with how shallow the portrayal of love is. Interestingly enough, I agree that it's too corny and convenient that they think they're going to get married. So my question is this: why are they dating, and kissing and holding hands at all? It's shallow, pointless, not to mention annoying and plain unhealthy to use each other like drugs for pleasure.

In the end, I think ALL the "love" portrayed in this book is crap. "Gay" or not.
I just think the author misses the entire point of what love is supposed to be. This article explains it better than I can:
http://www.deviantart.com/art/How-Not...


How about we just stop the obsession with physical displays of affection already and admit that FRIENDSHIP suffices in most of these cases.

Carthya wrote: "I agree! it's so matchy-matchy :( I see what you mean by saying "cherry on top of the clown show", that as he can't date, oh well, let's make him have a crush on something else then! I mean, even N..."

Carthya, I think people (clearly, like RR) have started to believe that the girls who are girly cannot be kickass! What a typical mindset :/ Didn't expect it from RR! And I agree, not everyone has always got to be romantically involved in something- even I haven't had a crush or something on a guy (I won't say girl) for almost a year!

Okay, I get that teenage "love" for lack of a better word is usually shallow... I still don't think that means we should just accept it. It's a waste of time in a story as much as it is in real life. (It would be one thing if it was called out/portrayed as immature. Not thrown in like a reasonable expectation of kids).

I agree HP is definitely deeper, in many ways... Why shouldn't we strive for meaningful stories like that instead of settling for something corny? Isn't that ultimately just laziness or lack of talent on the author's part? It's something he ought to work on improving. (At least he could lay off on pairing up every character he invents then).

@Carthya, that's a good point, I never thought about that. I'm a girl and I hate makeup so I can appreciate when there are stories about other girls who don't care about that. At the same time, it doesn't make any sense that people act like girls who do like to dress up or wear makeup are automatically stupid/evil cheerleaders apparently? Ugh

I am ok with the romance. What else should I expect from a YA novel? Casual sex and adult behaviour? The hand holding and kissing is appropriate for the age.
I agree percy thinks too much about marriage. Even if teenage readers think that way, it won't be for long. By the time they grow up they would probably laugh at how silly they were. No harm done.
I did not mind that every one was in a relationship. Just because I am not doesn't prevent anyone else from being in one.
What annoyed me was how annabeth came to be completely dependant on percy. She went from smart and brave to bella swan. I wish their relationship was based on friendship too. But with YA it is insta love.

Adult behavior? I'm saying it should go in the OPPOSITE direction, not get worse. Basically there's no reason for them to be in "relationships" at all, if they're just gonna be immature and annoying about it. And you're right, what else can they do? They're all just twerpy teenagers. This is why it's such a waste of time.


Again, I get that they're supposed to be kids and therefore more immature. I'm asking why it's casually portrayed like an expected, normal thing then. Where does he make it sound like it's supposed to be immature and not normal or reasonable? Because realistically it really isn't so healthy to act like that.


Does he not know what friendship is? Because he severely seems to under-value it. It's not "good enough" for him unless physical displays of affection get thrown around too. That's bull crap.

Isn't it kind of sick to think that if you LIKE someone you have to automatically get in a romantic relationship with them? Aren't the people you like just called friends? I don't buy this, "but I like him in a romantic way," stuff. That part is just a choice.
At least, I'm sure nobody's forcing them to keep kissing.

Nobody else finds this shallow in the slightest?

And another thing: don't give me that, "but Percy is actually more mature because he has life experience, etc."

That's confusing the issue. It doesn't change the way he acts with Annabeth, and the pointlessness of it.
I don't care if there's an epilogue with him and Annabeth as married adults with children. (That would be pretty corny, and I really wouldn't expect that happy of an ending for their "relationship" if this was real life).


What they're doing as teenagers is plain shallow and selfish. They use each other as drugs, and that's pretty much it.

Yes, they "went through hell," but are you telling me they wouldn't have done that for anyone else in the story? It does nothing to prove or disprove anything about their "romantic" love for each other. Neither do physical displays of affection.

Frankly, being in love romantically doesn't mean a mysterious feeling that you don't feel for anyone else (even if sometimes it could produce that). It's the choice of being committed to that person for the rest of your life in a special way. Yes, we would ideally take that to include marriage/possibly having a family then.

And you're absolutely right. Why SHOULD they think about that? In other words, why SHOULD they be in a relationship then??

So they can kiss. So they can hold hands. So they can "feel good."

Yeah... Sounds like a really meaningful relationship to me...

Love is only about pleasure? Really nice...
Still waiting for a deep answer.

Brown wrote: "And another thing: don't give me that, "but Percy is actually more mature because he has life experience, etc."

That's confusing the issue. It doesn't change the way he acts with Annabeth, and th..."

Wow, that was very deep but completely true! You know, I hate it when Rick forces in a love scene just because he thinks he has to as he has mostly teenage audience! But Gods, has anyone ever told him how much he sucks at writing romantic scenes? Maybe Caleo was okay but until then I'd NEVER liked any of his pairings, ESPECIALLY Percabeth (UGH SO MUSHY) and I liked Caleo only because it was his NINTH book and he's got somewhat better after practising pathetically for years. I mean does he think teenagers won't read his books if he doesn't include romance in it? If he does, he's sorely MISTAKEN. I mean dude, he rocks at writing action and comedy scenes -I mean- god just stick to what you're good at jeez! I don't understand how people like Percabeth and Jiper and Frazel and all that! Look at Frazel- That girl is 13 yr old girl from the 1940s who is so old fashioned its almost pitiful! Do you seriously think a girl like that from the 1940s would go and kiss a guy two years older than her and just get together with him? ITS RIDICULOUS! Jeez Rick be more realistic! Don't just do anything for the sake of romance in the story! If you ask me personally, Jeyna and Prank and Hazel being single would've been good! I have MUCH MORE to rant but my fingers are tired from writing on this tiny mobile screen. Lastly, I think your thoughts are worth sharing, you should try to get them across to Rick- maybe it'll knock some sense into him!

Nightlock wrote: "Brown wrote: "And another thing: don't give me that, "but Percy is actually more mature because he has life experience, etc."

That's confusing the issue. It doesn't change the way he acts with An..."

Oh, he's AWFUL at writing romance! Possibly even more so in the Kane Chronicles. I wanted to read about an adventure, not mushy Twilight-ish garbage.

It's almost disturbing how much his writing resembles an 11 year old girl's fanfiction, especially the way he writes about Percy o.O Can we say, Gary Stu? (His fatal flaw is that he cares too much about his friends...?) It's like he (the author) shows through all his characters how much he's constantly in awe of "that amazing, FUNNY, gorgeous, heroic Percy." Ugh. Patting yourself on the back, much?

The worst of it usually comes from Annabeth though, so again it comes down to his crappy way of writing romance. Loving someone doesn't mean you think they're perfect. It means willing the good of the beloved, wanting them to always become better. Love looks past imperfections, but it isn't satisfied with them. It's not about thinking your partner is a God (so to speak).

Idk... Rick Riordan should read some C.S Lewis or something and get some better perspective on what love is. He sure didn't seem to do his research.

This is what he needs to read: http://online.santarosa.edu/homepage/...

well the series is almost over so it's not that big of a deal

Riordan isn't the best at writing romance in novels...

Honestly, the only relationship I liked, was Percy and Annabeth's. They're just one of those couples I like together. Annabeth does make sappy remarks often, and that annoys me. Jason and Piper....ugh, okay, so their relationship is based off of fake memories and Piper on her first day of actually meeting Jason she immediately obsesses over him? Seriously? I refuse to respect a girl who does that after a single day. Okay, then came the whole Leo-Hazel-Frank situation. To me, this was getting to the "oh boy another relationship" area. So, Hazel now ends up with Frank...but oh no, we can't leave Leo without a girlfriend, can we? Umm...ya you can, but instead Riordan brings back Calypso. So what're we at now, 4 relationships? Good...we're done. Wait...hold that thought, forgot about Coach Hedge. This one didn't annoy me though, I kind of just saw it as funny, actually, more ironic. I mean, paranoid kill-crazy Hedge is married and is having a baby? Haha, its kinda cute .-. Ugh...don't mean to offend anyone, but then he added the whole 'Nico' situation. I'm just gonna leave it at that.

So, ya, Riordan has turned %65 of the series into some sappy teen soap opera. :p

♫~Kelly~♫ wrote: "Riordan isn't the best at writing romance in novels...

Honestly, the only relationship I liked, was Percy and Annabeth's. They're just one of those couples I like together. Annabeth does make sa..."

OMG *_* SO TRUE.

The more I read about Percy/ Annabeth, Jason/Piper the more I dislike them. All I saw was blah blah Percy I want to jump you blah blah family marriage blah blah OMG he is so perfect! blah blah boring cheesy language. The problem is, I just don't feel the romance.

Hazel/Frank is just too insignificant and I am grateful for that.

However, I believe that Rick Jordan still got some things right in the romance department. There is the whole thing with Calypso and Leo, it is actually funny and somewhat bittersweet. I hope it will have a tragic ending, that will be marvelous...

And then there is, of course, Nico. Some of you might think Nico situation is pathetic. I think it is deliciously realistically pathetic! Hero-worship-> crush-> affection -> infatuation -> ultimate martyrdom. It's super unhealthy and destructive and I love it! Nico's gonna need healthy doses of self-esteem to help himself and hopefully he will get over his gayngst.

Fich wrote: "However, I believe that Rick Jordan still got some things right in the romance department. There is the whole thing with Calypso and Leo, it is actually funny and somewhat bittersweet. I hope it will have a tragic ending, that will be marvelous..."

The author's surname is Riordan.

My mistake. I will call him Bob, easier to remember.

Fich wrote: "My mistake. I will call him Bob, easier to remember."

We'll have to dump him in the River Lethe first ;).

Sophie wrote: "It's annoying. I think that there's both not enough and too much romance. It's weird. Because there's like so many relationships and DREAMING and THINKING ABOUT THE FUTURE BLAH BLAH BLAH. But t..."

It seemed like it could actually do with less kissing in my opinion.

Fich wrote: "The more I read about Percy/ Annabeth, Jason/Piper the more I dislike them. All I saw was blah blah Percy I want to jump you blah blah family marriage blah blah OMG he is so perfect! blah blah bori..."

I don't buy it. Nico admires Percy. It's just plain sick to tell someone that means they're romantically in love with that person. That goes for whether you're "gay" or otherwise.

It all relates back to the over-use, or maybe a better word would be over-value of romance.

I buy it and I agree with you. Which is why I want Nico to get over it and Caleo ends in tragedy. But yeah, I'm getting sick of kids automatically get romances.

P/s: I still like cherries.

Sophie wrote: "It's annoying. I think that there's both not enough and too much romance. It's weird. Because there's like so many relationships and DREAMING and THINKING ABOUT THE FUTURE BLAH BLAH BLAH. But t..."

I know. it's like Riordan wants to make them have a relationship but make it G or PG and it doesn't work like that especially when his main characters are teenagers. I don't want them to have sex or frolic too much but we need better descriptions than "she kissed him" Like details!!

Personally I think everyone is making a bigger deal out of the romance than it actually is. The truth of the matter is, Rick isn't bad at writing romantic scenes, he just doesn't put as much emphasis into them. Why? Because the romance is just a small incentive beside the adventure aspect of it.

"Loving someone doesn't mean you think they're perfect."-Brown

True, but you are stating something that was never highlighted in the story. Annabeth doesn't think Percy is perfect, she admires his strengths (and sure, his good looks) but that doesn't automatically mean she thinks he is perfect.

And as for the whole "doesn't Rick know anything about friendship?"

Well, there's Bob, of course. And let's not forget that the seven demigods are all friends more or less. And most of all, let me remind you all about the original Percy Jackson books. Percy and Annabeth have been through so many adventures as pure friends, and not even for the first few books. Throughout the whole PJ series, Annabeth sort of had this thing against him. But things were clearly building up with those two, the HoO just brought it out.

"What they're doing as teenagers is plain shallow and selfish. They use each other as drugs, and that's pretty much it."

No, not at all. The HoO is not a contemporary novel meant for literary critics to find literary value in. It does not even fall under the romance genre. It is an adventure, action sort of books written for adolescents. You claim that they are being selfish and shallow about love, but let me remind you, they are only teenagers (even then, how is feeling affectionate for one another selfish?)

But I will admit, the whole partnering up thing is getting pretty redundant. It doesn't really get in the way of the plot unless you spend too much time pondering on it. But look at the bigger picture, Reyna is single, Rachel is on her own as well, and we have a whole league of beautiful women (Thalia..) who don't do romance at all.

And finally, guys, I'm an original Percy Jackson fan. Likewise, I am reading The Heroes of Olympus simply because I am lucky enough to have Percy re-appear in another series. It's just what a loyal fan does *shrugs* That does not mean that I love everything about the books, but all of this romance junk that is being argued in this thread is not even a part of the books. Some argue that thinking about the future and children is unrealistic, but that also depends on how you look at life. Percy is around 17-18, he is almost an adult, it's quite normal for him to want safety and a long and peaceful life after everything him and his crew have been through. Yes, maybe in real life we wouldn't fall so deeply in love with a single person and want to be with them forever, but then again, it's not like we'll ever face death a dozen times with that same person. When you've been through so much, it seems natural that you build some trust with them.

(Before I close this off, Nico! I find his situation totally realistic, because things won't always be one way in real life. Also, his affection for Percy fits with his character and behavior since the original Percy Jackson Books.

"Nico admires Percy. It's just plain sick to tell someone that means they're romantically in love with that person."-Brown

Look, let's step down from the word romantic. It's clear that Nico has a crush on our pal Percy, what with all the blushing and stuff. The twist here kind of adds some layer and more incentive to the story, but it's certainly isn't anything major.)

Zanib wrote: "Personally I think everyone is making a bigger deal out of the romance than it actually is. The truth of the matter is, Rick isn't bad at writing romantic scenes, he just doesn't put as much emphas..."

Sorry, but I can't help but feel like a lot of that sounded really desperate.

Reyna, Rachel, Thalia... they're not even main characters. Face it, every character whose point of view we got to read from had to go through a romance, if not a love triangle at some point.

As for romance not being the main aspect... The reason I brought up this topic was because it actually felt like it was too much of an aspect to the point that it was ruining the adventure. I'm not saying the romance "needed to be better," I'm questioning why it's there at all. It was absolutely pointless (even in the original PJaO books. The guy and girl don't always HAVE to get together... at least not when they're just kids).

I said it was selfish, let me try to explain why.
The word "selfish" here just means, there is no other reason but for self-pleasure.
There's nothing wrong with doing something for pleasure, but relationships built solely on that are shallow.

You might disagree because their love could grow and they could get married when they're older... but that would be something much different. I'm talking about what it is now.

Maybe I'm "old-fashioned" but being in a relationship just to show physical displays of affection just seems shallow... All that's left to write about is "fluff," and the pukey bits...

When they're just friends, it's all the good stuff, without the pukey bits or the annoying side-plot soap operas. We shouldn't have to put up with sentences like: "Her multicolored eyes made it hard for him to think straight" at all.

Yes, it's an adventure book, exactly. That's why I wish he would stop putting sentences like that. Yet he insists on it, and ridiculously so. For a series where "the focus isn't romance" there was far too much focus on it.

"Look, let's step down from the word romantic. It's clear that Nico has a crush on our pal Percy, what with all the blushing and stuff." -Zanib

I'm confused. Crushes imply romance. Otherwise you just mean admiration. Second of all, what blushing? Even if there was, that doesn't mean he's romantically attracted. Again, that's just admiration.

The whole "I have a crush on so-and-so" thing was never that credible in the first place.
Oh, so you have a crush on that celebrity? Tell me more about the details of his personality in real life, not just the one you imagine he has as you day dream about a fantasy person who doesn't exist.

And just because Nico "had a crush" on Percy, he's gay now? He's all set to marry and be sexually active with a male possibly for the rest of his adult life? If the answer is no, then he's not gay. Like I said.

It's encouraging kids to over-analyze romance, and with Nico... sexual attractions. Yeah, no.
It's just shallow all around.


(Disclaimer: I'm the same age as Percy. No, I'm not some adult analyzing a kids series. I'm just sick of my generation's crappy idea of love).

Carthya wrote: "i agree, brown. just look at the 7 of the pophercy - all are romantically involved with someone
also, Reyna, Rachel and Thalia DID have love interests. they're not dating only because the other per..."

They are action books, that doesn't mean there can't be any romance. The romance could just be considered an incentive for the older audience of HoO. In general, if a book is a fantasy or action or horror, that doesn't mean there can be no sub plots. The subplots, or maybe the romance in this case, make the books interesting for some readers. It adds to the series and makes it easier to wade through rather then just having action/adventure for the whole ride.

"It was absolutely pointless (even in the original PJaO books. The guy and girl don't always HAVE to get together... at least not when they're just kids)." -Brown

There wasn't much romance in the PJO books until like the very last book, and by then they were pretty old, and there was still barely anything.

"The word "selfish" here just means, there is no other reason but for self-pleasure.
There's nothing wrong with doing something for pleasure, but relationships built solely on that are shallow.

I was only confused because I did not interpret Percabeth as based solely on pleasure. They like each other, they've been through a lot together, it's natural for them to display their affection for each other. We won't get a story about them from beginning to end, so it makes sense to try and condense the relationship building to show the reader what direction things are going in.

"I'm confused. Crushes imply romance. Otherwise you just mean admiration. Second of all, what blushing? Even if there was, that doesn't mean he's romantically attracted. Again, that's just admiration."

A crush would be that thing that is not as strong as romance and a bit more intimate than admiration. It's so evident that Nico was in fact infatuated with Percy. It's very clear when Cupid mentions it being hard for Nico. I admire girls, doesn't mean I love em. But for Nico this is not admiration. If you've read the book and the whole cupid scene, you'll know what I mean. But in any case, so what if Nico has a thing for percy. It's just a subplot in the story.

(Disclaimer: I too am Percy's age (most of us are) and I don't judge how our generation deals with their romantic lives. Ironically enough, I'm pretty sure I 'frown upon' the whole dating and displaying affectionate stuff more than you do, but still, I don't find it as big a deal, or as shallow in these books. It's just there. You can dwell on it if you want. Different people will look at the books differently. I find the adventure and romance to balance each other, other's may think there is too much romance. My opinions are as valid as yours, this is not me trying to be desperate. I'm simply stating things as I see them. This is all similar to the analogy that not all people will recall a memory the same way. It's called perspective.)

No....I don't think so. Actually, compared to a lot of books I've read, there was a serious UNDER use of romance. I can see where you're coming from though. It gets annoying when a series gets to a point where everyone starts pairing off.

Cinder wrote: "No....I don't think so. Actually, compared to a lot of books I've read, there was a serious UNDER use of romance. I can see where you're coming from though. It gets annoying when a series gets to a..."

Yeah, I will admit that everyone being paired off is a bit lame, but I feel like there ought to be more focus on percabeth.

Carthya wrote: "Zanib wrote: "Carthya wrote: "i agree, brown. just look at the 7 of the pophercy - all are romantically involved with someone
also, Reyna, Rachel and Thalia DID have love interests. they're not da..."

Quite the contrary for me, I think there is too little romance, but I agree that everyone being paired off is a bit redundant. And I take back what I said about this book being an adventure book. This book is whatever rick makes it too be, which in this case would be 70% adventure/other stuff and 30%romance (I exaggerate here, there isn't that much romance, more like 15% or 10, lol)

Zanib wrote: "Carthya wrote: "i agree, brown. just look at the 7 of the pophercy - all are romantically involved with someone
also, Reyna, Rachel and Thalia DID have love interests. they're not dating only becau..."


"A crush would be that thing that is not as strong as romance and a bit more intimate than admiration."

Okay... and we HAVE to act on these feelings? Circumstances bear no weight whatsoever? Does a married guy have to cheat on his wife if he has a crush on someone else?
If the answer is no, then I repeat: why is there a need for these dumb kids to be in relationships?
Why is there a need to label yourself as "gay" or "straight?" Can't we just admit that we don't have to act on our feelings? Can't we just be nothing?

In the end getting in any relationship is a choice. Of all the things love is, it's not a magical power that forces us to "be together." Feelings are fickle and nobody has to dwell on them.
We need to think about circumstances and what we're willing to do.

How I see it, there's no need for any of those twerps to be in relationships. All they're doing is kissing and complementing each other. My question is, why? Why can't they just enjoy being kids on an adventure?

If they're meant to get married, then they probably will. Everything right now is irrelevant. It's just barf-invoking pointlessness. These are corny books, guys, but in real life encouraging that behavior doesn't lead to anything good.

I think, maybe it's not an over-value of "romance" per say, but an over-value of the mere emotions that can produce a real romantic relationship. And a real romantic relationship, which is quite different from the feelings it produces, is something you choose to work at forever.

So... twerpy teenagers have a passing thought about how beautiful someone's eyes are and that's it? They have to get in a relationship because of that? Why?

In Percy and Annabeth's case... don't forget that what they did for each other was nothing they wouldn't likely have done for any of their other friends. I'm all for seeing them get married someday, whatever. There's really no reason for their annoying behavior when they're just kids.

Get a lesson from Ron and Lavender. It's just foolish and sad that we settle for these watered down relationships that are, at max: physical displays of affection and unhealthy adoration of a partner. (That's literally all their relationship CAN be if they're just kids).

I think seeing more of Percy and Annabeth's "relationship" would be great... if relationship means the way they interact with each other.
Keep in mind physical displays of affection are a very small part of even a romantic relationship. A romantic relationship, at its core, is just a regular relationship between two human beings who have consented to being committed to each other.

What you call "romantic feelings" might start it off, but they aren't constant. They don't even mean you HAVE to be in a relationship.

Why are we so desperate to "get in romantic relationships" for just the small, least significant parts? (like I said, that's all they CAN focus on if they're kids). Kissing isn't and shouldn't be so important to us. How does holding back take anything away from Annabeth and Percy's bond?

That's why I say it's shallow. It's not about how "deeply their feelings go." It's about being committed to each other in ways that they're not even old enough to be. (Meaningful reasons for relationships such as being open to having a family together, etc. Not mere pleasure).

It leaves us with the least important, and consequently most annoying bits of being in love. There is a time and a place for these bits in life... but when an author makes all seven+ of his main characters in the most shallow type of relationships you can get in?
Well, enough is enough. That's all I'm trying to say here. Crappy romance is annoying when not forced upon you in heavy doses.

Then he calls Nico gay just because we haven't over-valued sexual attractions yet. (Though I have doubts he even gets that far with his "crush" *sigh* )

Dwelling on your emotions in the first place fails to make me feel sorry for you, but when you hide out in the Underworld because of something as insignificant as a feeling...no matter what that feeling is... You know, what a baby.

Does he have to tell his friends? No.
Does he have to marry a guy because of it? No.
Does he have to label himself after it? No.
Does it have to affect him in any way, shape or form? No.

"But he could get bullied about it-!" Only if he thinks it's a big enough deal to even bring it up.
It's just a feeling. Feelings come and go. There not always accurate. They're fleeting and fickle even in successful relationships.

Yup. Over-value all around.

Brown: Okay... and we HAVE to act on these feelings?

Whoa there girl, I never stated such a thing. You're making a point from nowhere.. btw, if you're wondering, we don't have to act on those feelings. Never said that, lol.

Brown: "If they're meant to get married, then they probably will. Everything right now is irrelevant. It's just barf-invoking pointlessness. These are corny books, guys, but in real life encouraging that behavior doesn't lead to anything good."

Need I remind you that this is a book. The questions you bring up about the fallacy of romance relate to many, many books, so in other words romance in the majority of young adult books is fallacious and 'pointless'? As for encouraging such behavior, are you sure you're 17? Because I don't feel encouraged at all, lol, the romance in HoO is so innocent and to the minimum that I'm just surprised it's a problem in the first place. I mean, yeah, I admit that pairing everyone off is getting to be redundant, but it's not actually taking away from the rest of the journey. If the romance was fighting with the adventure aspect of the story, well, that's when it becomes an issue. And also, I expect anyone with the capability to read these books to be able to distinguish myth and reality.

As for the rest of your post, for the majority of it you talk about what romance is or isn't. Great. Loved hearing your views on such a topic.. now try putting all of that in HoO. It's very irrelevant and doesn't really relate to the books. You're putting things there that really aren't. For example,

"So... twerpy teenagers have a passing thought about how beautiful someone's eyes are and that's it? They have to get in a relationship because of that? Why?"

You did it just now! You put an idea in the books that isn't even there!! Percabeth only made remarks about eachother AFTER they'd been through so much. AFTER they'd developed their friendship, their trust. Why do you ignore that? Simple, to make an argument against me.

But you know what, I'll repeat what I said earlier, that not everyone truly reads a book the same way.

Zanib wrote: "Brown: Okay... and we HAVE to act on these feelings?

Whoa there girl, I never stated such a thing. You're making a point from nowhere.. btw, if you're wondering, we don't have to act on those feel..."



I'm not saying that YOU said we have to act on those feelings. Rick Riordan did by:
1. making everyone get in relationships they didn't have to be in.
2. Labeling Nico as gay, thereby implying his life is planned out as far as what gender he has to be with.

"in other words romance in the majority of young adult books is fallacious and 'pointless?"

Absolutely.

"As for encouraging such behavior, are you sure you're 17? Because I don't feel encouraged at all, lol"

Neither do I. I'm not saying it succeeds, just that it's trying to make something look normal that isn't.

"I admit that pairing everyone off is getting to be redundant, but it's not actually taking away from the rest of the journey."

It's not about what it takes away, but what it obnoxiously adds. Just because parts of it are good, doesn't mean we have to sit back and say all of it is good. It's like biting into an ice cream cone and finding a worm.

"I expect anyone with the capability to read these books to be able to distinguish myth and reality"

This is different than a mere fantasy world. This is a fantasy reality. Fantasy logic. There's a huge difference. Fantasy logic (such as something being corny) can be used for good... however, when it's portrayed as reasonable and normal, that's when we have a problem. Not because "people are going to believe it," but for the simple fact that it's stupid (I don't mean that as an opinion, but how it's illogical).
If we do believe it, it's brain washing us. If we don't then it's just trash. There's no place for it.


The remark about how beautiful someone's eyes were was just an example (though it was based on a real quote about Piper and Jason). I wasn't talking about Percabeth per say, just the mentality behind the majority of relationships in this book.

As for Percy and Annabeth, I stand by what I said about the shallowness of their kissing and drooling over each other. How are they any better than Ron and Lavender for that?

Their relationship as far as what they've been through is irrelevant, as it's not forcing them to do any of those things. The kissing and drooling in itself is unnecessary... not to mention very annoying.

In any case, we're not just talking about one pairing. All 7 of the Prophecy are acting this way (not to mention lots of others beside).

I see we agree that the book didn't need to have that many pairings. So you do seem to agree that there is an over use of romance after all.

You think this series is overly romantic? HAHAHAHAHAHA what. As I recall, Jason and Piper barely touch each other, was it a bit ridiculous when Piper told Jason she loved him in the catacomb thing in MoA, yes! I thought that was overly dramatic, but only because Jason and Piper's relationship is so drab I don't understand how they can even say they're "dating."

This is also about high school kids and every high schooler I know wants a relationship, so at this age it's completely normal for everyone to look for a relationship.

The only relationship I completely love is Percabeth because they've known each other for years and I love them together so much.

But there is definitely no overuse of romance in this series haha

Leahxx wrote: "You think this series is overly romantic? HAHAHAHAHAHA what. As I recall, Jason and Piper barely touch each other, was it a bit ridiculous when Piper told Jason she loved him in the catacomb thing ..."

All relationship here means is "permission to kiss."

Are you saying if they didn't kiss they're relationship would mean any less? All I'm saying is that's a pretty shallow view, and when looked on in that light, any use is an overuse anyway.

I guess what I'm saying is, they already had a relationship. Making it "romantic" just added all the unnecessary stupidity. Again, I'm all for them getting married in the end. Right now it's just annoying, even if "every high schooler" does it (which they don't, by the way. I know a lot of smart high schoolers who find that shallow).

Brown wrote: "Zanib wrote: "Brown: Okay... and we HAVE to act on these feelings?

Whoa there girl, I never stated such a thing. You're making a point from nowhere.. btw, if you're wondering, we don't have to ac..."

"I'm not saying that YOU said we have to act on those feelings. Rick Riordan did by:
1. making everyone get in relationships they didn't have to be in.
2. Labeling Nico as gay, thereby implying his life is planned out as far as what gender he has to be with."

Rather than having the characters admire each other from afar, Rick decided to put them together and be done with it. I mean, how annoying would it be if Piper was imagining Jason in her head 24/7? Just put em together and bam, no more unnecessary tension between the character's.

And about the whole Nico thing and his relationship gender being planed out. Not at all. He had a thing for Percy, maybe he still does. Whether or not that implies anything is your opinion.

"Neither do I. I'm not saying it succeeds, just that it's trying to make something look normal that isn't."

Not normal? You should look at the couples in my school, lol. I think the word(s) we might both be looking for here is/are: it's trying to make something look normal when it's not preferable for other people.
Just because you disagree with how some adolescents behave, doesn't automatically make it bizarre. Just means you personally dislike that behavior.

"As for Percy and Annabeth, I stand by what I said about the shallowness of their kissing and drooling over each other. How are they any better than Ron and Lavender for that?"

The thing between Ron and Lavender seemed to happen almost out of nowhere, lol. One day they didn't even look at each other, the next they're hogging each other whenever they can.

Percabeth on the other hand, have a history together, I've mentioned this more times than I can count.

"Their relationship as far as what they've been through is irrelevant, as it's not forcing them to do any of those things. The kissing and drooling in itself is unnecessary... not to mention very annoying."

No, it's not irrelevant. It is certainly not forcing them to do anything, but it explains, rather, WHY they do does things (and what, kiss and hug once every million pages? I mean, are we reading the same book? lol)

"I see we agree that the book didn't need to have that many pairings. So you do seem to agree that there is an over use of romance after all. "

The books certainly didn't need all those pairings. I've only ever been in it for Percy. But at the same time, beside percabeth and piper and Jason, hazel and frank next to never display any of that kissing business. Even Jason and Piper. So no, I don't think there is an over use of romance.

I don't really think anything about it at all, to be honest.

Come on, guys.
Riordan is a great author and this is visible throughout the PJO books. In my opinion he is way more talented and clever to overromanticize things just because he is out of ideas. It was in the Heroes of Olympus that all the leading characters became teenagers, which means that even biologically having affairs with the opposite gender is one of the most important aspects of their current life.

To begin with it was obvious even from the Lightning Thief that Percy and Annabeth would probably end up together so that wasnt a surprise at all.

Also, at the beginning of the Lost Hero Jason had his memories wiped out by Hera and Piper suddenly was full of fake memories of them having romantic moments and eventually getting together. Consequently, even when they found out the truth, they both still had that in mind.

Then, we have Frank and Hazel, who are both the outcasts and who tend to spend a lot of time together because of that. So, there were big chances that they would start thinking about each other that way.

FInally, we have the case of Leo and Nico. Leo is in a ship full of couples and he has become kind of the outsider. When he meets Calypso we see them both gradually falling for each other, which becomes obvious when Leo finally leaves the island. As a result, Leo becomes even more focused and determined. Nico onviously admired Percy from the very beginning. He treats him a way we wouldn;t trat anyone else but his sister. So it wasn't a last minute decision for Riordan.

Also, seeing the way some teenagers act while being in a relationship, i quite admire the way that Rick has written the romantic stuff, because even though they are obvious they dont really bisturb the whole books' plotline. I also like the fact that the couples' relationships are flawed in many aspects which make them more real, understandable and definitely not cheesy or cliche

so yeah that was me rumbling :p btw sorry for the awful english

Unnecessary tension between characters?
They're that desperate to have permission to kiss each other? Because that's all being in a relationship means here. Otherwise I don't see how they didn't have one before or why it wasn't good enough.

I'm not saying they keep making out or anything. I'm just saying any kissing is pointless here. And, come on... falling asleep together? I guess physical displays of affection are really important for twerpy teens (?)

They may have "gone through a lot together," but so did Ron and Hermoine, and the only thing they ever did was kiss once. At the end. I'm not saying every book has to be the same, I'm just saying there's no magic thing that forces you to act mushy and stupid.

It would just be an opinion except for the fact, that it's not even a healthy thing to portray as normal. Maybe "everybody does it," but there is also a 50% divorce rate. Look around you at the fruit of this mentality.

Granted, he puts the focus more on the little things like holding hands and affectionately thinking of each other. (Little annoying things. But I digress.) They could still act normal.

Okay, so it would be great if Annabeth and Percy got married someday. I'm just saying there's no reason to act like fools in the meantime while they're just kids.


"And about the whole Nico thing and his relationship gender being planed out. Not at all. He had a thing for Percy, maybe he still does. Whether or not that implies anything is your opinion."

I'm not even talking about the story so much here, rather than the whole labeling-yourself-as-gay thing in general. The book deliberately sets itself up to show favor for an agenda that does this in the guise of, "I just don't want to be bullied for how I feel," when that's not even the issue.
That whole part of the story was immature... and most things only put there to prove a point usually are.
Again, we're just left with "crushes" which could mean anything. When that's what we're putting importance on, then we're in big trouble anyway.
The Nico drama was half-baked at best.

More than any individual couple or character, it's mainly the mentality behind the whole idea of romance in the book. Why he chose in the first place to write about characters who would conveniently always be affectionately thinking of and over-analyzing each other is a question in itself.

You know, our conversation at this point is becoming quite redundant. You continue to make the same points and I continue to point out how those are your opinions.

I think we can leave it at the fact that everyone will look at romance differently. For the majority of the thread you've been talking about YOUR ideologies, and how there is an overuse of romance/negative romance according to YOUR ideologies.

I have nothing else to say that I haven't, or that Eleni up there hasn't. The rest is just how you regard what a relationship should or shouldn't consist of.

this points are way too long.....

Zanib wrote: "You know, our conversation at this point is becoming quite redundant. You continue to make the same points and I continue to point out how those are your opinions.

I think we can leave it at the ..."

Then tell me how my ideologies are wrong.
That's what discussions are for. Everyone has a stance.

An opinion is something you cannot prove nor disprove. It's not the same thing. I like talking to you, if you ever feel like coming back to the discussion that would be cool. Thanks for talking.

Brown wrote: "Zanib wrote: "You know, our conversation at this point is becoming quite redundant. You continue to make the same points and I continue to point out how those are your opinions.

I think we can l..."

Oh I'll be hanging around :p and yeah, it was fun 'discussing' lol.

Your ideologies are not wrong. Your principals are for you, but not everyone shares them. When you start saying that a certain aspect of a book is terribly done, and then backing your argument with your own values, that's when things get complicated. Because see, I might find the same 'faults' to be not faults at all, and then I can tell you why using my values.

Which is funny, because when it comes to real life, I share a lot of your opinions XD I do find it really shallow how adolescents can behave, and not just them. Other's too. I mean, I don't even get romance in general. A relationship, I would say, should be held on top of trust and respect and kindness.

But I like to keep my fictitious books separate from the way I would act in real life.

Zanib wrote: "Brown wrote: "Zanib wrote: "You know, our conversation at this point is becoming quite redundant. You continue to make the same points and I continue to point out how those are your opinions.

I ..."

Yeah, but it's good to compare values because some are better than others. For example, a murderer's compared to a nonmurderer's. Why couldn't it be the same on a lower-scale as well?

I'm not saying the characters all have to fit an ideal mold. If there's a standard it could just be used to hold them against. You know, if they're being stupid then call them out.

Anyway, it's interesting to talk about and share ideas.

Brown wrote: "Zanib wrote: "Brown wrote: "Zanib wrote: "You know, our conversation at this point is becoming quite redundant. You continue to make the same points and I continue to point out how those are your..."

Yeah, it is interesting. And comparing values is fine. Personally I just have nothing else to say. I just want to see how the prophecy will play out and how the Blood of Olympus will end, you know?

Zanib wrote: "Brown wrote: "Zanib wrote: "Brown wrote: "Zanib wrote: "You know, our conversation at this point is becoming quite redundant. You continue to make the same points and I continue to point out how ..."

Yeah, I know what you mean. XD

Brown wrote: "Zanib wrote: "Brown wrote: "Zanib wrote: "Brown wrote: "Zanib wrote: "You know, our conversation at this point is becoming quite redundant. You continue to make the same points and I continue to..."

hey, now that we're on good terms, can I just say: piper and Jason make me want to poke my eyeballs out, lol

Haha, yeah.
Percy and Annabeth aren't the worst though. Maybe I just got so annoyed because I read it right after Maximum Ride. Now that was horrible. My tolerance was really low.

Brown wrote: "Haha, yeah.
Percy and Annabeth aren't the worst though. Maybe I just got so annoyed because I read it right after Maximum Ride. Now that was horrible. My tolerance was really low."

Maximum ride? I gave up on that. Maybe I'll give it another try. You know what I decided to try after three failed attempts? The Mortal Instruments.

I haven't started that one yet.
So how do you feel about them so far?

Brown wrote: "I haven't started that one yet.
So how do you feel about them so far?"

So darn cliché.

I really agree with this. Percy and Annabeth were basically on there first relationship if you don't count Rachel and yet they want to get married. I understand demigods have ridicously short lifespans but come on. That's not realistic and the only relationship in the entire series that could actually happen was Luke and Thalia and they were never even official.

Nano wrote: "I really agree with this. Percy and Annabeth were basically on there first relationship if you don't count Rachel and yet they want to get married. I understand demigods have ridicously short lifes..."

You alright? Percy and Annabeth hardly got together even at the end of the PJO series. And no one has mentioned marriage....Don't know where you got that.