More in the "not sure if want" tag...

[taotrooper]

So I just heard today that Rick Riordan is writing a sequel series for Percy Jackson, called Heroes of Olympus. Not the one with Egyptian setting, but another one in LOLGREEK that actually takes off from the open oracular cliffhanger by the end of the book.

So in my search I'm first directed to the Amazon page (ah, it's about a new trio of demigods :oo ), then the cover (OMG MECHA DRAG-- wait, which one is Jason and which one is Leo? No wait, what do you mean 'familiar demigods'? Oh brother). Finally, a link from the author's blog to the first two chapters (*reads blog post* ...seriously? bummer!)

SO, IT'S PRETTY MUCH APOLLO JUSTICE BUT WITH SHOUNENTARDS INSTEAD OF LAWYERS*.

No, think about it. Set in the same universe and premise. Sequel. The main character isn't the title guy from the first series, yet the plot still revolves more about him than our new lead. I'm sure Percy will steal Jason's spotlight harder than Phoenix as soon as he appears (or even before; hell, even Annabeth popping in for two pages and not doing anything stole the show.) Especially since Jason is SO BORING, YOU GUYS.

I mean yes, he has amnesia, but that doesn't excuse how dull he was (if anything, it makes him duller). I'd much rather have Piper or Leo as the main lead. I'm at a lost about who could be Piper's mom (as I guess her dad is the mortal one), but so far she seems badass and I like her. Leo is the one showing more personality of the trio and I'm really liking him the best. Plus now I bet Jason is the remaining blond kid in the cover, and that annoys me so much and makes me crave more for the other two to be the real protagonist, since Piper is half Cherokee and Leo half Latino and you're ruining the chance to have a non-white-boy lead nnnnng raaaaaah.

But back to Leo because I have to add something. The Amazon summary mentions that his cabin has a lot of tools and he could build shit, and I was all "dude, wouldn't it be cool if he was a son of Hephaestus?!" PJO wasn't kind to him, so that's a nice change of focus. But now after reading the chapters and knowing him, naaaah fat chance, I was all "LMAO ttly Hermes' kid like whoa". I'll eat a hat with wings if he's not Cabin Eleven. From the physical description to the personality. And I actually love the idea of having a son of Hermes who a) doesn't have such a complicated fate of doom (I-I guess?), and b) isn't a Weasley twins ripoff. Plus, after the shit ton of development Hermes got in PJO5, it would be bittersweet to see if they can retake where he stands now with another child of his, after that talk with Percy. Seriously, why isn't Leo the lead? Most personality from the three, a strong sense of humor, is a POC, might have a deity parent the old readers are familiar (Jason is probably Zeus', how meh), and so on.

So, um. I have no idea. I'll still read it because I enjoyed the original series so much, but I don't think I could like it better than the Percy story. But like I was telling fujurpreux on Twitter, I would've preferred a sequel that took place one or more generations later, that we wouldn't have them dealing with this prophecy and let seven new kids shine alone. But now I bet this is going to be four old characters (I'm betting Percy, Annabeth, and either Clarisse, Nico or Thalia) + these three new ones. That's just tacky.

On the other hand, I was curious about post-canon Rachael!



*And mind you, I fucking love Apollo Justice. Then again, Apollo was likable and Jason is a walking cliché of dullness.

Comments

[rainmage.livejournal.com]

The weird thing about Harry Potter is that he wasn't even that good at magic, or even smart to compensate. Book after book, he wins because someone helped big time or he just had dumb luck or he managed to escape in time. He literally beats Voldemort by bouncing a death curse of his with the easiest spell ever (technicalness of the MacGuffin Wand, but still, it was sheer luck he didn't die that night... er, again).

Potter is a case where he's still helped and saved all the time by everything and everyone ever. But unlike Percy, he never truly does anything on his own (he moves with the plot) but is still fixed in the Hero Role. Jackson takes it with humor, is aware of almost all his flaws, appreciates more the help he gets, and isn't the absolute hero. So, it's easier to like him better. Plus, the action pacing is better in PJO than HP.

[meganbmoore.livejournal.com]

I'm reading HP right now because we have it at work (legally on the shared drive) and there isn't much left for me to read (this is also how I read PJO, but I enjoyed those and need to get the books). Harry is immediately loved and the hero for, uhm, doing nothing (and treated like he deserves it) and immediately good at "cool" things, like the flying, which makes him the sports superstar within 5 seconds, and while he's basically an incompetent who constantly breaks rules it's dangerous to break and lies to the teachers, he somehow always saves the day while others are conveniently out of the way, and then gets rewarded for, essentially, being an idiot.

But my coworkers are pretty much all in general agreement that PJO is better because, well, it is.

(Also, I have such severe issues with how "Muggle" is essentially a derogatory racial term that's supposed to be cute and ironic.)

[rainmage.livejournal.com]

Just like real life, being famous and good at sports and having people doing the stuff for you will make you awesome or something!

I did like the first five books at the time, regardless of his lameness as a hero. But I really find PJO far superior and not only because of my fondness for mythology butchery makes me forgiving. Which is why I really hope this Jason kid gets better when he gets his memories back, since the author was really decent at writing main and secondary characters and more consistent than Rowling. It's sad that he's milking the cash cow.

[meganbmoore.livejournal.com]

*nods*

I get why kids, and people who started reading it at 10-14 like it, but how adults who first encountered it as adults can like it is beyond me. (For that matter, I wonder how people with options survive the tedium of the first book until Hagrid shows up. Hagrid and Professor McGonegal-I know I misspelled that-are the only characters I really like as of mid-book 3. I also like Hermione a lot, but I suspect that's mostly for charactertype. The Weasley's are fun individually and together,but don't grab me. Everyone else I either forget unless they show up, or am annoyed by, except for enjoying Snape and Draco's irrational hatred of Harry.)

[rainmage.livejournal.com]

I happen to like children's literature and soft fantasy better than serious books, so it helps. And I started to read Harry Potter when I was about 19 (then again, I picked up Percy Jackson in my mid twenties, soooo).

Then again, most of my fun was to pretend that the Potters descended somehow from Clow Reed, a la Watanuki (obsessed with Cardcaptor Sakura at the time). McGonagall and Hagrid don't get enough spotlight later on, though. More adults start to show up later or get a bit deeper, but I really don't know if you'll grow fond of any.