Why Was This Ever A Debate? I Swear Most Non Canon Ships Have Better Dynamics And Relationships Than

Carter and Sadie Kane doodles 👀? 🙏🙏🙏

we love the kane siblings in this household

I have seen some takes saying the war was inevitable and no one's denying that. But Luke let monsters feed on so many humans and sacrificed even more demigods, the very people he was doing everything to save. Forget Percy whom Luke already hated with passion but Luke tried to murder Annabeth, his supposed little sister twice, not to mention Thalia. He tried to kill an innocent 12 year old with a pit scorpion and took joy in that. He was practically torturing the trio in Sea of Monsters and smiling as he did so. In Demigod diaries, Thalia notes that by the end of their time together on the run, Luke was getting into fights just for the sake of it and bringing in even more danger because of his outbursts. Let's not pretend Luke wasn't already going insane since Book 1. Kronos's influence only worsened it.

What I will agree with is that Luke did do all this because of just reasons. He was so fucking desperate for anything at that point. He had seen the horrors that happened and wanted to stop them. He was so angry, so resentful, so full of hatred that he let Kronos manipulate and exploit him completely. He could no longer see the bigger picture at that point. His way caused even more catastrophe. He completely lost control of what he initially intended, and by the end of it, Luke was just an insane, bitter man who wanted to watch the world burn.

It's so tragic, and it's so ruthless, and it's entirely messed up. I despise Luke and I pity Luke. I like him, and I hate him. He is an absolutely phenomenal character and yet a completely messed up bastard. Yes, these opinions can coexist. You can appreciate the masterpiece of a character that is Luke Castellan and still be of the opinion that if he ever returns, you would be the first one to kick him back in his grave.

Does no one ever stop to think that even if Percy hadn’t sided with Olympus he might not have ended up with Luke.

Like the first time Luke even tries to offer. And that’s a vain offer to begin with. Luke is trying to kill him with the scorpion

And that’s not even starting on the amount of other issues with Luke that are separate from the Kronos thing

Like y’all ever stop to think about the fact that in a war against the gods a sword made to kill mortals should be unnecessary.

Or is this just a black and white thinking thing.

Luke having a point does not mean he was necessarily safe to side with.

Post-tartarus Percy and Annabeth and even post tartarus Nico weren't written well at all. Tartarus makes them manic, always on edge, jumpy. This is PTSD and it doesn't just go away. Not to mention, they lost Bob and Damasen.

Yes, sure, one could argue there weren't many opportunities for Rick to explore how Tartarus changed Percy in Heroes of Olympus series. There still should have been mentions.

Rick focused on Bob and Damasen part for a bit and then never again. It's like after Tartarus arc, Percy and Annabeth were back to being themselves, which is such a character assassination. Here are a few ways in which I think Tartarus changed Percy:

PART 1-PERCY

Percy becomes hypervigilant at all times.

He can barely sleep, and whenever he does, he is always affected by terrible nightmares.

He feels extremely guilty about not being able to save Bob and Damasen and hence is now extremely protective of his other friends and family.

He no longer feels at all safe in his cabin or at camp and avoids it since Hera abducting him from there led to the whole thing.

He spends large amounts of time away from the camp and avoids other demigods because he is constantly afraid he is going to hurt someone.

Percy only ever feels truly safe by the sea .

Percy knows how delicate Sally and Paul act around him, and he hates it and hates himself for it. They don't say a word even when his screams wake them up. In fact, they just sit beside him, holding his hand and letting him cry or scream. Mostly, he just finds himself shutting down.

Poseidon also makes his own protective tendencies known, and when Percy gets too manic to stay anywhere, he whisks him away to Atlantis to calm him and give him comfort.

Every night, Percy finds a place to look at the stars and repeat the same message : Bob says hello.

He becomes an entirely different person when attacked when fighting monsters. A killing machine. It scares most people especially Annabeth.

Percy becomes a lot more aloof and likes being by himself (so he doesn't have to bear the responsibility for protecting someone other than him for a while)

He becomes a bit more pensive and talks less than usual.

He hates his own power but doesn't shy away from using it in dangerous situations. But this leaves him with a long internal struggle.

He begins to think of himself as monstrous.

He can't feel at ease without feeling Riptide in his grasp.

Somedays the nightmares, the memories get so worse that he has to make himself bleed to take the worst of it away.

He becomes skeptical of most things: people, and food and objects.

Everyone makes sure not to bring Calypso in the same room as him lest he kill her then and there. It takes him a long time to forgive her.

Percy is now so good at sensing monsters that he is always ten steps ahead of everyone.

The worst of it is Percy's constant need to fight something. He spars with multiple strong opponents to at least make it a bit challenging for him. It makes him feel like Ares, and he hates it.

Percy's first true genuine smile is when he finds out he is going to have a baby sister.

Will cover Annabeth's and then Nico's in the next parts. This is enough ptsd for all of us for one day.

Exactly. Percy's fatal flaw is personal loyalty damn it. But no Rick decided to shove Percabeth down our throats and made Annabeth his whole personality. It's literally the character assassination of the main character, and no one even talks about it . Not enough. Not to the extent it needs to be said.

Okay, so when you look at PJO Percy and HOO Percy, his character has almost completely changed besides the basics, and I was wondering if someone wanted to rewrite the end of SoN and the rest of the HOO books? The thing that angers me the most is how he acts around/about Nico. Like Percy was completely (kinda) obsessed with Nico’s safety for BotL, and yeah they had rough patches when Nico accidentally betrayed Percy in tLO, and later when he doesn’t tell Percy who he is in SoN, but when Percy learned that Nico was captured, he should’ve like, flipped his shit. He should’ve joined Hazel in standing up for Nico in MoA.

Nico gets a lot of people who care about him later (Hazel, Jason, Will, etc.) but I think we forget that Percy has known Nico longer, he and Nico were actually friends before he met Hazel and the others. Percy claims the prophecy and lies about Nico’s parentage to protect him??? And in HOO he barely thinks about Nico which is really out of character. When they get Nico out of the jar he would’ve immediately gone to him and tried to take care of him. I feel robbed of the Percy/Nico friendship, and the disaster that was Percy’s character in HOO.

Give it up for Rachel Elizabeth Dare people. The most level-headed person in the entirety of the PJO. And while I think her hitting Kronos with a hairbrush was beyond iconic, her entrance was just as epic. Literally saved Percy's life the two other times they had met prior to this. And literally got everyone alive through the Labyrinth and then again saved Percy's life twice through her visions.

idc idc Annabeth being petty and mean to Rachel in battle of the labyrinth is everything to me

WHO HERE THINKS THAT WE SHOULD'VE GOTTEN MORE ANNABETH AND POSEIDON MOMENTS? You know how Athena disapproves of and threatened Percy? Well………….DO THAT WITH POSEIDON AND ANNABETH! Let them meet. Let Annabeth squirm. Let Poseidon smile, but let it not quite reach his suddenly cold green eyes. Let him size her up, and let her be found wanting. LET HIM SILENTLY THREATEN HER NOT TO HIT PERCY AGAIN! Let him disapprove of Annabeth's nickname for him! Let Percy defend it, defend Annabeth from Poseidon! Let Poseidon tell Percy that if things don't work out (in a way that he implies that he hopes it doesn't work out) that he can hook up with a sea nymph or naiad or something! I just feel like this was SUCH a missed opportunity. To show that Poseidon loves Percy and thinks that he can do better than a plain daughter of Athena! (At least Poseidon thinks so).

Can someone write this, please? I would, but I already have something else going on.

I wish Rick would do this in the show.

@lady-menrva, how do you like this one?

@rosabell14 you too

@cynthiav06, I read your anti Percabeth posts and thought you might like this

@bright-eyes-strawberry-lies

Dam, who else do I tag? If anyone wants to be removed, please do tell me and I will remove it immediately

Klayley were twin flames. They brought out the best in them and also the worst. They showed each other who they were and who they could be. They touched each other’s dark sides and brightened their bright sides.

Every emotion arose when they encountered each other’s presence. Love, hate, lust, indifference... And they never had an easy ride. As a matter of fact Klayley couldn’t be any other way.

Percy is a strategical genius, and this hasn't been said enough. I don't get why the Fandom collectively thinks Percy is dumb or not smart. Even Annabeth sometimes treats him as such.

Reyna, Piper, Annabeth, and everyone needs to hear this:

The truth is Percy is a far better strategist than Annabeth because Annabeth can't think quickly on her feet at all. She can weave the most ingenious of plans but only when given time and enough information, only when she is looking at the bigger picture.

She does, however, have an almost encompassing knowledge of most things, but information is just information unless you apply it.

No one and I mean no one is better than Percy at thinking on his feet.

Mostly almost always Percy seems to be unaware of who his enemies are and yet still manages to go up against them and eventually win while Annabeth is at times left reeling.

Who figured out Ares's scheme? Percy

Who figured out Luke's motives? Percy

Who tricked Crusty? Percy

Who figured out the use for Hermes's gift? Percy

Who came up with a way to show Luke's betrayal to the camp? Percy

Who helps trick Atlas? Percy

Who makes up the entire battle plan in the Battle of Manhattan? Percy

Percy tricks Phineas by goading Gaea. He could only do that if he himself understood how Gaea's mind worked.

He singlehandedly subdued Chrysaur (Yes, Frank helped, but only because Percy came up with it)

There's so many instances of Percy being far more strategic than Annabeth herself.

Not only this but Percy is extremely and terrifyingly perceptive and just a damn genius at getting people to give up secrets.

Athena is the personification of cold hard logic and facts hence Annabeth follows and so she isn't nearly good enough at reading people's intentions or body language.

Yes, Annabeth can be quick on her feet, but it's not very natural to her as it is to Percy because Annabeth believes in pre-planning, but Percy understands and embodies adaptation.

It's a flaw of many of Athena's children. The problem is Athena is a God with the mind of one, nothing stumps her so at any given moment she can and will always have the best plan because her mind is much more rapid than the surrounding circumstances.

Her children, however, are mortal and hence always vulnerable to surprises.

It's the reason why Athena favors Odysseus the most, over everyone. He was quick on his feet, along with being a great planner. He was a strategic genius, and my headcanon is that part of the reason Athena hates Percy is because her greatest enemy's son reminds her of her most favored person.

for context, @rosabell14 is referring to tags on this post.

ok we're going off-road w this one

generally speaking, i like the concept of "some things aren't meant to be controlled," which annabeth says to percy after he controls the poison. this is said and then immediately forgotten abt, however, this could be another angle of change, a reoccurring theme in hoo, as well as a continued theme from pjo.

obviously, from pjo, the change is addressed w the myths, the theme of yielding, and w the conclusion of the story:

hoo continues this concept of change w the percy-jason switch, the greek-roman conflict, the idea of what an identity is and how to change it, etc. there's a lot of individual character work w this idea, but there's less of a mythological concept attached to it. gaea is a static and flatly written antagonist, octavian becomes incredibly flat as a character and his development into this sort of fanatical antagonist that is never explored, there's a lot of teeth-gritting abt how the gods are gods and they never change and everyone just has to accept it, the myths aren't challenged in the same way they were in pjo, etc. there's a few major exceptions, i'll get to that.

this is a glaring issue i have w hoo. it wouldn't be as bad as a standalone, but hoo makes the entirety of the previous series meaningless. in tlo, percy asks for kids to get claimed and be trained so when (or if) they have to go on dangerous quests/fight monsters/etc they're both older and more experienced. this is the conclusion to the war and how the status quo is changed (disability accommodations expanded to reach more ppl and work more effectively).

hoo, however, does not do this. camp jupiter infamously has a child army while the adults are retired, all of the new characters are younger than percy (who is still 16), and only two of them have spent a long period of time training, although hazel's isn't formal/in a camp (and piper doesn't even learn how to fight until book four ffs). this sort of immediately bastardizes pjo in a way that is never acknowledge by the series and makes it, and anything after it, a failure as a continuation of pjo.

and that's where this theme could've come in. when bob is remembering who he is, him and percy have this back-and-forth abt identity. percy relates to bob bc he, too, just had his memory erased and that vulnerability exploited (annabeth's perspective in this conversation is very different bc she doesn't have this same experience nor does she understand percy's feelings abt it. a good way to build tension using different povs, but, once again, doesn't get fully utilized). in the conclusion that conversation, there's an interesting moment:

this is that idea again, "some things aren't meant to be controlled," like fate, like identity. titans are meant to "be the same...forever." and here percy is, not only as the catalyst for change by throwing bob into the river lethe, but also by encouraging him to commit to this change once bob should know better. this was percy's role in the previous series, as well, where he constantly challenges the perspective of other characters to be more quote human unquote.

afterwards, annabeth has a similar moment w damasen:

i also think these are very funny to have side-by-side, just as character analysis, bc percy is very much both insecure and empathetic like u can choose ur future, it's up to u, etc, whereas annabeth is like i am right, listen to me.

anyway, both of these moments repeat the idea from pjo/tlo: immortals can't change. but they are changing. and they will change. the rules of the world are malleable (i also think hazel's monologue abt seeing the minotaur as a victim would be another aspect of this to explore). what abt traditions? what abt camp jupiter's child army? how should these change? going back to the og thought, tho, what shouldn't change? what are the "some things" that aren't meant to be controlled? how do you balance traditions and reform (great opportunity to use octavian btw!)? why can't a god be human, act human? why are the ancient rules important? that's an important discussion to have if we're growing this universe.

i don't particularly like that hoo immediately reverts back w the premise of the story, like i was talking abt earlier, nor do i think these characters were introduced or used well in canon, but using these characters, these moments, these conversations, rick could've salvaged this mess by embracing change isn't a static thing. he doesn't, tho, so it's all lost potential.

separately, something i've always liked abt the akhlys fight is that percy wins the literal, physical fight against her, but loses the metaphorical fight. he gets to walk away, but he walks away miserable. and this is bc the gods aren't ppl, they're physical representations of concepts. and percy has this thought abt tartarus and gaea while in tartarus, and i believe it's brought up in boo, but it's barely relevant. it's something i wish was explored more.

now onto specific characters. i talk abt my general idea here, ie this moment in tartarus is forcing percy and annabeth to confront their worst-case scenarios.

for annabeth, i've repeatedly gone on record to say i hate the way annabeth is written in hoo, here is an example, ie her fatal flaw does not come thru in her character (i also think she and percy switched characterizations from pjo to hoo, but...). separate issue is that annabeth's character revolves around percy a lot. so there are two issues i would focus on, largely bc she's not written well and doesn't have established unique conflicts. like,

this is a big revelation at the end of hoh, that she has to "step back" and she can't "protect everyone she love[s]." except it doesn't make any sense. tlo ended w annabeth telling percy to give luke her knife which luke uses to kill himself. not to mention, thalia's sacrifice on hbh. ALSO. percy accepting the prophecy and "taking the brunt of the danger"! and finally. annabeth has been at camp for 7-8 years. 1) she should have relationships w these ppl and 2) she should care that some of the ogs died in the previous war (which would also require rick to figure out who died lol). but the point is, this isn't a new conflict for annabeth!

the thought she had in moa abt having to accept she's not always the best person for the job:

this is not built up nor is it delivered on, but would be interesting, given that she demanded to be on the quest and if there was an actual power struggle instead of writing her as the de facto leader. this would be a better conflict than accepting that "she couldn't protect everyone she loved" when she has historically not been able to protect everyone she loved.

anyway, back on topic.

first, this moment exists to challenge her perception of percy, which is important to challenge bc she quite frankly has an unhealthy attachment to him. other ppl have said this better than i, so here's a post abt codependency and p*rcabeth and here's another one i rbed a while ago.

tldr; rick treats annabeth's abandonment issues/possessiveness/codependency as like. cute, peak romance. and he's been doing this since pjo, right, like annabeth's abandonment issues and possessiveness didn't matter when it was thalia joining the hunters,—bc there's no romance trope here w thalia—but gods forbid percy speak to rachel.

and this doesn't change in hoo. in fact, it's worse. like,

i'm going to [statement redacted] rick for this. what part of this is cute??? i'm killing it with fire.

so anyway, i want to treat annabeth's possessiveness/etc as an actual, consistent, character flaw, that she can grow out of, even. maybe even connect it to her hubris or her rsd. explore her feelings abt luke now that we have her pov to do it in. the fallout from this moment w akhlys is a great way to begin delving into that bc it's a shocking moment for her.

second, and going back to the theme of change, annabeth is different from percy in the sense that she has a different relationship to the gods than him (which i'm comparing bc i think rick (and fandom) has a hard time giving these two consistent and separate personalities/beliefs post pjo). the two times she has rebelled against the gods directly were bc of percy's influence (again, this is percy's role in pjo), 1) in the zoo truck, a scene that only takes place bc percy challenged her view of the poseidon-athena rivalry and their place in it, and 2) w hera where the first words out of annabeth's mouth are literally "percy is right."

i find this interesting especially bc her fatal flaw is hubris, which is common in mythology and frequently ends up fatal bc ppl challenge the gods. so, annabeth using the gods and these stories to keep her hubris in check makes complete sense.

and it seems like this is the same approach she's using w percy:

percy is directly challenging a god for power, and more than that, he's challenging a domain he's not supposed to have control of at all.

very interesting! does not get explored. such is common for hoo.

for percy, this scene is part of a long-running conversation of his powers (which is a huge part of his disability coding!!!!!). and it doesn't go anywhere.

percy has established anger issues and implied emotional dysregulation. this has been a thing since the beginning, literally chapter one of tlt! punishing percy for this when he's clearly not getting the support he needs is. a choice. also there's the issue that hoo kinda. erases this aspect of percy's character until the confrontation w akhlys, which is a separate but related issue.

there really should've been more buildup to this outburst (eg: in son percy punches a shelf in the library and immediately feels guilty bc he scares frank and hazel. percy is in an incredibly stressful situation; this should've happened more), but that would mean rick would treat it and the disability conversation seriously (which falls flat after son) and do less teeth-gritting abt the whole gods thing.

so, to go back on my "using the different povs to build tension was wildly underutilized" train, a featured part of almost everyone's pov is that percy is very kind, and gentle, and forgiving. i discuss a moment w frank being impressed w percy's selflessness here and he also says that he would follow percy anywhere, jason says percy is "a nice guy" after like 2 days, nico has his whole thing, hazel says "percy was a child of poseidon’s better nature," going on to describe him as gentle, etc.

and all of this praise goes nowhere and kinda just becomes percy is so awesome...and then turns into everything is percy's fault in boo...it's bad writing.

but it's an interesting opportunity to play w perspective. percy in pjo is dehumanized in that he is both villainized and idolized, and obviously hoo is continuing the trend w idolization. rick sets up a great plotline w this in moa:

and this doesn't go anywhere bc apparently percy's problem is that he needs to learn to step back. which. part of this is bc rick recycled plotlines from percy and gave them to other characters, which means that percy cannot be in character anymore without making themlook bad (the recycled plotlines i'm talking abt are the idolization, imposter syndrome, wanting to step back but constantly pushed into the spotlight, being seen as different/elevated status bc of ur parentage, struggling to connect to who your parent is, even the dehumanization as a weapon is straight out of percy's writing in pjo). this is a big problem w hoo in general ie characters becoming ooc by necessity (see: bad writing). the other part to blame is that rick is literally trying to redo tlo what w the whole "you are not the hero." it's all the same from pjo except written worse. it's a running theme of hoo (and a bonus). bad writing all the way down!

ANYWAY. so pjo ends w percy at an elevated status bc he 1) survived an unsurvivable prophecy, 2) was offered godhood, and 3) turned down godhood to improve the lives of the demigods while all the demigods watched. and he has the curse of achilles but. we all know how that went. the point is, all of this puts percy on a pedestal. i like to think it's the biggest reason hera kidnapped percy: if he said no, if he refused, she would've lost the support of almost all the demigods at chb (also the metaphor for the audience lol). i think making percy go on the quest, or at least to new rome, is the only good bit of world building rick did between books.

the problem is, rick is kinda all over the place w how percy is perceived and misses both the point of percy's character (callback to what i said abt his disability) and the world building of the previous series (what happened to power-scaling, narrative consequence, etc fr). that's what creates the flip-flopping "percy is perfect" and "everything is percy's fault," and neither are particularly good reads.

going back to annabeth, i don't think she's an exception in idolizing percy. she has no reason to see percy's vindictive side bc he works hard to hide it. even w crusty, annabeth is preoccupied. annabeth is smart, she's not omniscient. instead, there's the famous "percy is too nice" from som. i also like to think this is why she keeps trying to talk to percy abt luke as if luke is a good person who didn't try to kill percy. she doesn't understand that percy would hate luke for betraying him bc why would he? percy is a good person.

(for the record, i think the exceptions are: 1) grover, who chooses not to bring it up w the exception of his nemesis comment in tlt, 2) rachel, who made a painting where percy's "expression in the picture was fierce—disturbing, even—so it was hard to tell if I was the good guy or the bad guy" and simply said that's how he looked, and 3) arguably nico—considering percy has attacked him before—but i do think "very [dangerous]. to his enemies." does a good job of capturing that, it just doesn't go anywhere).

so, to condense all of this, ppl are idolizing percy in terms of both strength and morals and percy feels stifled by this knowing that he is not as strong or good as ppl think (and also by the fault that he was demonized prior and has corresponding low self-esteem bc of that lol). keep this in mind, i'm changing the topic.

in botl, percy's torture scene is used primarily to set up how powerful he is. he can cause an eruption that necessitates the evacuation of thousands of ppl and wake the biggest threat in greek mythos, but he would never know that if he wasn't back into a corner. bc that's not who he is. he shies away from power and titles. he wins his fights w strategy and very rarely relies on his powers to overpower his opponents.

just to clarify, i categorize percy's powers in two sorts of ways: involuntary and voluntary. involuntary is like speaking to sea creatures, healing in water, things that don't require a lot of energy/effort/focus. he's not scared of this. he's wary of the voluntary, powerful explosions, the things that set him apart from his peers. that's what i'm referring to in this section.

so, percy has to come to terms w the fact that he 1) blew up a mountain, 2) survived blowing up a mountain, and 3) woke typhon. and what does he say immediately after that?

he immediately deflects! he wasn't in control, it wasn't him that's powerful, it was an accident, and besides, he can't do it again bc he almost died. and what's even more interesting is the only time he uses his powers after this (in botl) is when grover asks him to stop the fire in the woods.

so, what lesson did percy actually take from mt saint helens? that he's dangerous. very interesting to use this teaching moment and have the protagonist come to the quote wrong unquote conclusion.

in hoh, we don't have a purpose for the torture scene. there's no significance to confronting how powerful percy is. percy is not addressing his self-sacrificing tendencies nor his propensity for bottling his emotions up. there's no questioning of p*rcabeth's relationship. there's no questioning of the gods. it's a cool scene w no narrative purpose.

so, take two. what is percy supposed to be learning from akhlys? how do we relate this to percy taking the wrong lesson from mt st helens?

at the end of botl, nico comes up w the river styx plan and percy takes almost a full year to agree to it. how much further ahead in the war would they have been if percy had accepted the curse sooner? how many fights could percy have won faster if he used his powers? if he trained his powers? if he trusted his powers?

there's a really interesting comparison w phorcys and akhyls where percy doesn't attempt to fight phorcys bc he assumes he won't be able to overpower him,

but w akhyls he tries anyway,

bc he's backed against a corner. and he succeeds.

percy is a character who very much embodies duality. i've talked abt this before wrt his loyalty being both his greatest strength and greatest weakness and how it clashes w his desire for freedom, but it's true for almost every trait. he's honest and manipulative. he's ruthless and merciful. he's kind and violent. he's looked up to and looked down upon. he's the saint and the scapegoat. etc etc. and percy responds to this by frequently trying to deny his quote worse unquote traits until they eventually bubble up and explode out of him. this is part of why juno calls him a loose-canon (which btw, i love. everyone has been treating him as a loose canon and no one on this side has the balls to say it until then, seven books in).

all this to say, *ethan voice* it's abt balance! this moment should've been abt percy confronting his unfair treatment! the idolization from his peers! the demonization of his flaws/disability!

thanks for coming to my tedtalk.

I need others to understand that none of the incorrect quotes centered around percabeth are actually farfetched or inaccurate and that you can find evidence for all of them in canon every time. These aren't some great exaggerations. They are just conversations made around context clues and implications that are already in the books or downright direct quotes from the book.

No one is making any effort to make your "golden ship" unhealthy because that's unnecessary. It is already unhealthy, and the books are littered with such interactions, but the shippers are willfully blind and those that aren't romanticize such interactions. I am not sure which is worse.

And if these sort of quotes annoy you, then in general, pjo incorrect quotes including all the constant dumb Percy takes and character assassination of Percy is just as annoying if not far more annoying for the rest of the community.

@ogjacksonsimp @berrybore would love your thoughts on this.

Percy: Hey wise girl, can you stop encouraging all your friends to think the worst of me? Piper thinks I need to be controlled, Reyna thinks that I can't find my way out of a paper bag and now your architecture classmates don't think I'm good enough for you!

Annabeth: I don't encourage my friends to think the worse of you, seaweed brain. I tell them how it is.

Percy:

Percy: Wait you think I'm not good enough for you? I literally fell into Tartarus for you! I went through hell for you! I went on a whole quest and risked permanent banishment from camp half blood - my only safe place - for you! I even did a mission for a god after I retired to get a classy date for you! What more do you want?

Annabeth: The bare minimum, seaweed brain. You only did those things once, and you missed our 4th-11th month anniversaries. You have a lot to make up for!