New Leaf July 2020 Discussion • The Lightning Thief by Rick Riordan

[Luffy]

I gave the book 3/5 stars. I will put off reading every comment until the weekend. But I'm surprised that most readers have got negative views on a book that is different than most of the books of the months. I thought my view would be the most forbidding one. I found myself liking the book overall, and in my review I did mentioned that the book was like R.L. Stine's books in terms of limited appeal. I was too right, according to the reaction here.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Bookworm_Girl

I think the movie was better than the book. I think it was a good concept to get kids interested in Greek mythology, but it was just poorly executed.

Mostly I could not get past the writing. Just better writing would have made a big difference to me. Sometime it was just too immature, like the Macy's Parade pooper-scooper reference, or sometimes just plain bad (the Arch looks like a shopping bag handle???).

I liked Camp Half-Blood too. It's a location for kid movies and books that I think is appealing and timeless. Camp was cool and fun as a kid. Camp was going away from the parents and being more "adult." Camp Bunks/Houses create a convenient rivalry and also camaraderie. In this case competing houses had to work together too.

I agree. I found the movie to be more enjoyable then the book. The writing was middle grade at best. It read like this was written for a 10-year old. The story was pretty good but the writing was not all that good.

Does the writing get better in any of the other books or is it too middle grade at best?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Luffy

I gave the book 3/5 stars. I will put off reading every comment until the weekend. But I'm surprised that most readers have got negative views on a book that is different than most of the books of the months. I thought my view would be the most forbidding one. I found myself liking the book overall, and in my review I did mentioned that the book was like R.L. Stine's books in terms of limited appeal. I was too right, according to the reaction here.

I liked the story. I didn't much care for the writing. I also gave it a 3 of 5 stars. The movie wa better because it didn't have the problem of the writing. This was a book I had on my TBR list. I got it as a free eBook from Kobo some time ago.

[jj2me]

Unfortunately, I think I'm too old, in that I tend to value only reality for my remaining years--no time for silly nonsense. At least that's the only theory I have for why I can't fathom why any adult would find any part of this enjoyable.

Thank you, Catlady, abandoning now at 60% read.

[gmw]

Well, you know what they say about getting old? It's not for the faint of heart, but it's better than the alternative.

But you don't need an excuse. Not everyone will enjoy every book (but please don't knock silly nonsense just because it's not your sort of silly nonsense ). Join us next round to nominate something more to your tastes.

[CRussel]

It's true, I often love silly nonsense (Jeeves & Wooster, for example), but this particular silly nonsense was just so poorly written that I couldn't just bury myself in it. Too bad, I actually had hopes for this book. Sigh.

[jj2me]

Originally Posted by gmw

Well, you know what they say about getting old? It's not for the faint of heart, but it's better than the alternative.

But you don't need an excuse. Not everyone will enjoy every book (but please don't knock silly nonsense just because it's not your sort of silly nonsense ). Join us next round to nominate something more to your tastes.

My intent was not to disparage anyone's taste (your take that I have my own types of silly nonsense is of course correct). I should have chosen my wording more carefully (was struggling on mobile in landscape).

I know my lack of appreciation for fantasy that involves any superpowers is extreme. I've been trying to figure out why, and age seems to fit the best.

I also don't appreciate what seems to me to be a lack of craft, in that it appears to be too easy for authors to just make up crazy stuff to get out of any bad situation. "You think I wrote that post above? That wasn't me, it was my best friend the all-password-knowing goat!" Seems too easy.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by jj2me

I know my lack of appreciation for fantasy that involves any superpowers is extreme. I've been trying to figure out why, and age seems to fit the best.

I also don't appreciate what seems to me to be a lack of craft, in that it appears to be too easy for authors to just make up crazy stuff to get out of any bad situation. "You think I wrote that post above? That wasn't me, it was my best friend the all-password-knowing goat!" Seems too easy.

I don't know that super powers per se are a problem for me--I grew up addicted to Superman and other DC comics--but shape shifting and magic make me groan. I definitely agree about making up "crazy stuff" to resolve sticky situations; I need a story to be based in reality and set in a recognizable world, with minimal deviations.

[gmw]

We all have our limits for the crazy stuff we will, or will not, accept. They are just at different levels or types.

The best fantasy worlds have their own rules and must operate within those rules or the story falls apart - and there are some that do fall apart, I had one series do this around book 5 or 6 (they were long books). And some do cheat for their ending (literally the hand of God in some cases), although a few seem to get away with it, at least for most their audience.

All that said, one of the things I've noticed about the many variations of stories based on ancient mythology is that the rules tend to be quite loose. This can be because my knowledge is limited, and so sometimes the author is using some aspect I was previously not aware of, but I also think it's because the myths themselves played pretty fast and loose. I didn't find Percy to be any more guilty of this than most.

[gmw]

Thinking about this a bit more, one thing that bugged me a bit was the first person perspective that has become so common to YA and middle-grade stories, what I've come to think of as First-Person-Self-Obsessed.

The self-obsessed part wasn't too excessive in this book, which is what typically bugs me the most in YA works, but the first person perspective means that the text can become awkward in places as it tries to integrate details that happened elsewhere (off-camera, if you like). The confrontation with Ares near the end is a particularly awkward moment that still stands out in my mind.

[fantasyfan]

Originally Posted by gmw

We all have our limits for the crazy stuff we will, or will not, accept. They are just at different levels or types.

The best fantasy worlds have their own rules and must operate within those rules or the story falls apart - and there are some that do fall apart, I had one series do this around book 5 or 6 (they were long books). And some do cheat for their ending (literally the hand of God in some cases), although a few seem to get away with it, at least for most their audience.

All that said, one of the things I've noticed about the many variations of stories based on ancient mythology is that the rules tend to be quite loose. This can be because my knowledge is limited, and so sometimes the author is using some aspect I was previously not aware of, but I also think it's because the myths themselves played pretty fast and loose. I didn't find Percy to be any more guilty of this than most.

Yes, I agree about the best fantasy worlds having an inner consistency with their own natural laws. That’s why I especially love the first three volumes of Ursula Le Guin’s Earthsea Trilogy—particularly the second, The Tombs of Atuan.

And there’s no doubt but that playing with worlds based on mythological narrative structures can go in all sorts of directions. In my last post I mentioned Tenn’s A Lamp for Medusa. There’s a case where the myth becomes science fiction. Yet it all works (for me, anyhow). I think the liberties taken by Riordan are par for the course and are generally entertaining. I am going to read more because, as you note, the ratings remain high. Maybe I’ll be disappointed but the Harry Potter series certainly increased in strength and possibly this will happen to Percy Jackson.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by jj2me

Unfortunately, I think I'm too old, in that I tend to value only reality for my remaining years--no time for silly nonsense. At least that's the only theory I have for why I can't fathom why any adult would find any part of this enjoyable.

Thank you, Catlady, abandoning now at 60% read.

I do feel for you in that you won't allow yourself to enjoy good fiction. It's not silly nonsense to read fiction. There are a ot of good stories out there. It's unfortunate that the writing for Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief happened to be not all that well written.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by fantasyfan

Yes, I agree about the best fantasy worlds having an inner consistency with their own natural laws. That’s why I especially love the first three volumes of Ursula Le Guin’s Earthsea Trilogy—particularly the second, The Tombs of Atuan.

I cannot stand Le Guin. She's is so overrated. One of her books was a book club pick and it did not go over well.

[gmw]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I cannot stand Le Guin. She's is so overrated. One of her books was a book club pick and it did not go over well.

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I do feel for you in that you won't allow yourself to enjoy good fiction.[...]

I'm sorry, but the above was a conjunction I just could not resist ... it's been said before, I should try harder.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by gmw

I'm sorry, but the above was a conjunction I just could not resist ... it's been said before, I should try harder.

But Le Guin doesn't write well enough to be enjoyable. It's like Riordan. Good idea, terrible execution.