So She Used Ovid But Not Really, Just Like She Used Homer But Not Really Book Review For Circe | Thought

After the Apocalypse is averted and Vanya is paralyzed and has lost her memory.

Diego: I just feel like someone reached down my throat, grabbed my small intestine, pulled it out of my mouth, and tied it around my neck.

Luther: Cookie?

Stranger Things 4: a Review

So no hellcheer? *stomps on tv remote*

One thing I need foreigners to understand about Hellenic polytheism is you cannot categorise the Divine into neat little boxes like they're laboratory samples you're putting in quarantine. The Gods interact with each other and with the world, their domains mingle the same way our lives and the people in them connect like the links of a chain.

This is why you see us Greeks advocating for foreigners to do research into our culture if they want to approach Hellenic polytheism, and this is why you don't cherry-pick the Gods that "fit your vibes/aesthetic" and exclude the rest. You can't ignore aspects of existence and you can't ignore the Gods.

Do you need to work heavily with every single deity? No, of course not. But you do need to show them respect, even if it's from a distance.

Where do you think that recent trend of making Dionysus a peaceful deity comes from ? Unless it's a coincidence that both Hades II and Kaos decided it. Even then, I don't understand how they had the idea. There are at least 10 myths that prove the opposite. A quick look on Theoi is enough.

The only time he's really called gentle, it's literally used as an antithesis to his terrifying nature (because duality is awesome).

And seeing this quote requires people to read the Bacchae 😂, yk, an actual source.

(being gentle to Ariadne doesn't mean he's like that to everyone)

So, what do you think ?

Like in Euripides's play, he described him "most gentle and cruel to men". The ancient Greeks new the dichotomy and complexity of his character, but of course many gods could enforce cruelty to those that acted hubris to them.

Dionysus of course ,most of the time in art and literature is casual and relaxed, hence why he didn't get much attention of his more dark side.

Also is the fact how for centuries, the renaissance and mostly Western Europe viewed him. Most people would portray Bacchus and other Roman depictions of him. Alas why this common misconception exists today.

It's also worth noting that many people look at things at a surface level. They see a couple of based and mid portrayals of Dionysus and think they know enough about him. That's an issue i see in retellings of people constantly making him a caricature because of this surface narrative.

In regards on how Dionysus was portrayed in this year's Olympics's ceremony, i would like to start a petition to start portraying Dionysus in general as a handsome, charismatic man.

It's time to stop glorifying this false image of him (drunk, useless, laughing stock) so let's make a start, here's how i draw him for example:

reylo

because they complete each other

Did you even read what I wrote? Here are some screenshots straight from the Riordan wiki and the books:

'the books aren’t fucking saying the locations moved' I don't know how to break it to you but IT IS LITERALLY what the books ARE saying.

did you even read them?

In Greek mythology and tradition, places like the Labyrinth, the seat of the Gods, the seat of the Titans, the entrances to the Underworld exist in real geographical locations. We ARE talking about locations, and it's asinine for an author to think that he can just 'move' these places to the US (or anywhere in the world really) and call it a day. Let's take Mountain Olympus for example. The home of the Gods is on Olympus in Greece. The geographical placement of the Gods' home holds cultural significance that Riordan completely ignored. I'd say he ignored it deliberately. Olympus is the home of the Gods AND the mountain. It makes NO SENSE to move the home of the Gods to the Empire State Building. It makes NO SENSE to move the Labyrinth from Crete to "under some building in America".

And there is no reason for the Greek Gods and heroes to leave Greece behind other than the fact that Riordan did not care for the country whose mythology he is exploiting to sell his books.

This passage below is supposed to be from Percy's point of view but it is also Riordan's POV while he was writing his books:

'I was feeling pretty proud of myself' I bet you were, Rick. Imperialist minds usually do.

no, Rick, it's not

Like what do you mean Mount Olympus is the Empire State Building?? Last time I ckecked, Mount Olympus is a MOUNTAIN and it's in GREECE. 'Many of the locations of Greek mythology have also moved with Mount Olympus and can be found all over America'????? These are locations, not furniture!

Greece is a country that still exists, by the way, so why exactly would the Greek Gods (Greek, Rick, Greek) abandon it? Why would they leave their homeland?? Every time I remember that passage where Chiron is like "haha, Percy, western civilization is a liViNg fORce and it started in Greece" and "ohh it's a fire and the Gods follow wherever the flame is brightest uwu" I just- it's so stupid, it makes me want to pull my hair out. How on Earth did Riordan think that was okay to write? Did he really think it was valid justification for basically disconnecting the Greek gods and Greek culture from Greece and Greek people?

You know what this 'justification' reminds me of? This. They're both part of the same narrative.

Not even the camp- the goddamn camp for children whose parents are Greek Gods- is set in Greece. Riordan just made a US-flavored cake and sprinkled some Greek Mythology on top. Delicious.

Allison: Patrick, this is everybody. Everybody, this is Patrick.

Ben: Hey, Patrick.

Klaus: Hey, Patrick.

Diego: Hey, Patrick.

Vanya: Hi, Patrick.

Luther: I'm sorry, I didn't catch your name. Patrick, was it?

No for real, at this point I'm more willing to believe that she somehow got her bachelor's and master's in Classics without having read the Odyssey and the Iliad, than her having read the Odyssey and the Iliad once in her life

Or maybe she read it once at five years old and thought it was enough

Oh no she actually mentioned using Ovid, Shakespeare's Ulysses, and other sources in an interview.

Oh neat..

However Ovid does not depict Circe being assaulted in his work thankfully. Her stories center around her unrequited love, jealousy, and the consequences of her powerful magic. The focus is on her role as a sorceress who transforms others, not as a victim.

That's a main difference that Miller has been making in her works is the useless plot device of using women's suffering and trauma for shock value.

Like miller you are ruining the source material and the image of those old poets.

The Greek word used for this myth, the verb 'ἁρπάζω' also means to abduct, to snatch away, and it doesn't have a sexual connotation. Hades literally just steals Persephone. Meanwhile when, for example, Pausanias talks about Halirrhothios deflowering Alkippe, Ares' daughter, he specifically uses the word 'αἰσχύναντα' which means he dishonored her, disgraced her. So what I mean is, there is a difference between cases of rape as in assault, and the case of the 'rape' of Persephone, as in her abduction.

ngl i do enjoy the hades x Persophone idea, but i wish it reflected mythology more like Dread queen persophone is a damn kidnapping freak too.

The thing with Hades and Persephone is that these two are far from the perfectest, most pure, most ideal couple to ever exist. The beginning alone is disturbing, with Hades kidnapping, raping and then either tricking or straight-up forcing Persephone into remaining into the Underworld by giving her those pomegranate seeds. He also cheated on her with Minthe, so fidelity is not a strong point either.

What frustrates me though is that a lot people completely erase these aspects and try to create a version of the myth completely different from the ancient ones where the only similarities end up being the figures' names. I understand erasing the rape part, because even though back then marital rape wasn't considered a crime (and there are still parts of the world where it still isn't, unfortunately), the idea of having a woman starting to be fond or to love her rapist just because he treats her nicely is on itself deranging. But erasing the kidnapping or the infidelity only removes the complexity and the grey nuances of their relationship. Why, instead of claiming that Persephone willingly went with Hades or that Hades is the only faithful god, people would focus on the fact that she had just as much power and authority over the Underworld as him? Why, instead of demonizing Demeter, people would try to understand that having your daughter kidnapped and forcibly married off to someone is a disturbing scenario, and that her actions were completely justified?

On the "dread queen Persephone" part, I have to recognize that I despise the way people either portray Persephone as this innocent, naïve and oblivious flower girl, or as a cruel, merciless and completely terrifying queen.

Yes, she groomed Adonis (Pseudo-Apollodorus), brutally tortured Minthe before turning her into a plant (Starbo), inflicted Thebes woth a deadly plague (Antonius Liberalis) etc. etc. But she also realeased Sisyphus from the Underworld (Theognis), gave Orpheus a chance to rescue his wife (Diodorus Siculus), sent Alcestis back (Pseudo-Apollodorus), welcomed Heracles like a brother, allowed him to take Cerberus and to rescue Theseus and Pirithous (Diodorus Siculus) etc. etc. She had her own moments of cruelty, but compared to Aphrodite who made children lust over their parents or Dionysus who cursed mother to kill and devour their babies she is not as blood-thirsty and merciless as people like to give her credits for. What is ironic though is that people are perfectly capable to acknowledge that just because Hades ruled over the dead and ancient greeks were afraid to pronounce his name that doesn’t mean that he was evil, but somehow Persephone must be completely dreadful in order to be intersting.

Reducing either one of them two or their relationship to an aesthetic isn't just reductive, but also shallow, repetitive, uninteresting, uncreative and overall boring.