#luke castellan crit

[massiveladycat]

maybe the "did you love me?" could be seen as platonic or romantic, but i'm not here to argue about that honestly, even if it was meant in a platonic way, luke was still an awful person. he manipulated kids in bad positions to join the titan army, knowing full well so many of them would die and knowing full well camp half-blood was full of children. in fact, he knew most of the campers personally children who trusted him were exploited and luke castellan is literally one of the most evil people in pjo deadass and it surprises me when i see people trying to defend him list of all the things he's done, excluding what he's done when possessed by kronos:

stole Zeus's lightning bolt to start a war with the gods, knowing full well that would have led to many deaths

framed 12-year-old percy for stealing Zeus's lightning bolt

gave 12-year-old percy cursed shoes meant to drop him into tartarus. he would NOT have survived that. that was done with every intent to kill percy.

summoned a hellhound to kill percy

left percy alone with a deadly scorpion

poisoned thalia's tree to put the campers (CHILDREN) in serious danger

tried to kill 13-year-old percy in a duel

deceived Annabeth into holding up the sky in place of atlas. she was 14. holding the sky is extremely painful. he literally took advantage of the fact she still had affection for him.

used Annabeth to make artemis hold up the sky

extorted silena into being his spy, threatening to hurt her boyfriend if she disobeyed; also took advantage of her crush on him (she was 14 or 15, luke was 23) anyways. fuck luke castellan and he is NOT innocent and never will be and he hurts children❤️ yes i agree that the gods are pretty messed up but he was more than willing to harm the people the gods were harming. he claimed to only want the best for them, but he was likely the number 1 reason that so many of the kids were dead and/or traumatized. he can't claim to only want the gods to be better when he's going to take it out on kids who've done nothing wrong.

[bugwolfsstuff]

*Makes an anti-Luke Castellan post (or any kind of post that does not see Hermes as the devil incarnate)*

Ar nawr am i gonna get screenshotted and complained about again

[ofswordsandpens]

rip Percy crashing the bus, rip Annabeth hyperventilating after Luke hugged her, rip Argus, rip the trio playing hacky sack, rip dumbass Percy and dumbass Annabeth ignoring Grover and walking straight into Medusa's emporium just cause they were hungry...

[helpallthenamesaretaken]

In PJO, the main antagonist's primary villainous motivation was the injustice of the toxic cycle that was repeating itself through centuries. the same cycle of neglectful parents, and kids that tried too hard to please them, when they never cared, only putting the innocent kid in harm. the main antagonist wanted to rebel against this vicious cycle after his own traumatic experiences in the system.

In HOO, the main antagonist's primary villainous motivation was the fact that she couldnt wake up but she wanted to.

Both can be equally relatable, in different circumstances. One arc takes place as you mature in life, another takes place on Monday morning

[my-pjo-stuff]

"Demigods can't have PTSD" LUKE'S MAIN FUCKING MOTIVATION WAS HIS TRAUMA FROM HIS YEARS SPENT IN THE IMMORTAL WORLD AND YOU'RE TELLING ME HE DIDN'T HAVE PTSD????????????

[solarspunk]

never a lukabeth(?) shipper because gross and not why annabeth loves luke at all but the LACK of relationship exposition between the two of them in the show is PISSING me off genuinely. luke and annabeth's relationship is CRUCIAL to the conflict Luke has with the gods and his subsequent redemption, as well as the entire driving force for book 3,4, and 5. it was a relationship that percy was jealous of, not simply because he liked her romantically but because it was a side of Annabeth that he never got to see and a type of bond that he never had with her, despite going through so much together.

letting Luke say "oh Annabeth and I are like family" and then never even let them interact with each other makes absolutely NO SENSE. this lack of relationship exposition between the two of them completely takes away Annabeth's emotional investment when facing Hermes and explaining May's curse. its PAINFUL for her to talk about them because it PAINS Luke and she can TELL.

if you're not gonna build up their relationship, why do we waste precious screen time with Hermes and make the Lotus Casino Scene so... meh??? When it could have been fun and whimsy and silly and the kids can take a shower and hear some weirdo say groovy and realize gambling is a trap!!!??

It also robs Annabeth of such character depth in PAINS ME. shes just a girl. shes awkward and have crushes and is emotional and is scared of losing people she loves. shes not just "six step ahead of everyone child soldier prodigy" MY GOD.

and of course i love seeing percabeth on my tv but dear LORD having luke say "youre like an old married couple" is SO OUT OF CHARACTER and to have Annabeth not even respond flustered or embarrassed?????? ITS THE SLOW BURN OF THE CENTURY I DO NOT NEED YOU TO HAMMER IT INTO MY HEAD THAT THEYRE MARRIED AT 12. I FIGURED THAT OUT WHEN HE SACRIFICED HIMSELF TWICE FOR A GIRL HE JUST MET.

[chironshorseass]

the thing is, we were never meant to sympathize with luke when he betrays percy. we aren’t meant to see his inner turmoil. we aren’t meant to see hesitancy, or regret. it’s meant to be a slap in the face. luke takes percy to the woods knowing full well what he’s about to do. in tlt kronos orders him to kill percy because he’s too volatile; kronos said so himself when percy hijacked luke’s dreams and began to figure out there were bigger things at play. the thing is, when kronos orders luke to kill percy, he doesn’t hesitate. that’s the point!!! it is essential that luke is so blinded by rage and vengeance for the gods that he will stop at nothing to get what he wants (the god’s destruction). percy accuses luke that kronos is using him, but he just retaliates that the gods do the same, and they do!!! but see, the thing is, luke’s whole point is that he’s so focused on the god’s injustices that he forgets what’s important. he goes for the “greater good” but he destroys his family, his life, in the process. by attempting to dismantle a system, he turns to another system that follows the same oppressive logic. THAT is why luke fails. THAT is why it’s so important he be blinded by rage, because it’s his inevitable, tragic end. he’s doomed by the narrative from the start. yes, we’re meant to be surprised by his betrayal because of how cold and calculating it is, but also it’s important to set the grounds for luke’s character to be this angry, vengeful boy because later on we come to understand why it is that he made those choices. we see annabeth’s side of things and percy’s side. we see luke’s side. we see many sides. we see a man who is too far gone yet comes to understand, in the end, that he’s been doing more harm than good to those he was supposed to protect (annabeth is the most obvious example). we get a complex character who won’t hesitate to kill but who also won’t hesitate to sacrifice himself so that he can save the family he has left.

the thing is, luke was supposed to be angrier in the show. percy was supposed to be angrier in the show. they’re both foils. luke is what percy could become, if percy lets his anger win. so, to change—even if it’s only slightly altering—their characters, is to change the point of the story. because luke tries to kill percy in his betrayal and later percy tries to kill luke but then percy starts to understand luke…until luke is gone and kronos is gone yet the gods don’t change but percy does. and percy’s initial anger is supposed to transform and he’s supposed to see what luke saw and the cycle continues. the thing is, it’s not even one of the worst changes the show made, yet it’s still so, so telling that they failed to see why it’s important to let your characters do bad things, to make mistakes, because that’s how a story can carry on. that’s how you give a story depth.

[tagthescullion]

My opinion on the infamous "did you love me" scene is that Luke meant it as "Did you still love me like a brother the same way I love you as a sister even after all those times I betrayed and hurt you" but didn't have the breath or time to say all that.

Annabeth understood it as "Do you still have that crush on me you were not very subtle about having when you were younger/how deep did that crush go?" So she goes "You were like a brother to me, but I didn't love you."

And Luke was like "That's obviously what I meant! What did you think I meant?!" but couldn't say so, what with using his last breath to ask Percy to help the unclaimed kids and dying and all.

ages old fandom debate.. imo there's a key problem with this and it's that rick forgets his own characters

did rick mean it in a romantic way? yes. he's thrown it in other books. did rick remember he'd shipped luke with thalia (implied it at least) and that luke's like 6-7 years older than annabeth? no. (he's retconned nico's age like 3 times by now, he has no clue who is what in his stories)

that being said, I don't think luke meant it romantically if you go with the plot. not only was he never interested in annabeth in anything more than a "you'd be useful and you were my little sister once" way, but why the absolute fuck would anybody care to be loved in a romantic way the second before they die?????

from a familial perspective it makes much more sense for a dying guy (let's remember this kid's like 23, he's not ancient or anything) to ask "did I mean something to you? would you forgive me as the brother I once was?"

like COME ON RICKKKKK!!! I fucking hate his shite obsession with everything being romantic. idk what kind of codependent thing he's got going with becky but he needs to stop making it look like if you don't have a romantic love life solid enough to last forever at age like 14, then you're not worth shit!!

and as a last little comment: either way you take the "did you love me" as a fan, stop harassing people who see it the other way, like ffs this fandom's more and more toxic every day

[braghis]

Out of the many things i don't like this much about the PJo books, there are actually three things that REALLY annoy me the most:

- RR's potrayal of femininity: almost all the female leads have the "NotLikeOtherGirls" complex and the genuine feminine girls are 1) a traitor (Silena), 2) a damsel in distress (Calypso) and 3) a mean AlphaB*tch™️ (Drew). Nothing wrong obviously with not liking classical girly things BUT being feminine ISN'T the same as being weak or stupid. A woman can be feminine AND strong. These things can totally coexist and i don't get why some people seem to fail to understand that.

- Riordan's apparent hate of common features. He really gave Piper and Hazel light eyes despite them being poc and tried to justify it by saying they have them because of their powers???? So i guess it's just an unfortunate coincidence that neither Pluto or Aphrodite have these eyes in the first place. And of course it's totally normal that ESTELLE apparently has Poseidon's sea green eyes despite her father being Paul Blofis. AND it's another complete coincidence that almost all his attractive and popolar characters have light eyes and/or hair while all the "outcasts" have common traits. Suuuuree it is.

- When the books' narrative (and honestly the fandom) tries to suggest that every single thing Nico did in the story was actually to impress Percy and nothing more. This annoys me to hell and back. Yeah he had a crush on him; Percy was his hero and Nico idolized him a lot, BUT so did Annabeth with Luke. AND why not starting with Leo, who got little crushes on every pretty girl he met before ending up with Calypso, a cheek he kinda killed himself for. But why don't i see the same attitued with them? Ohh i know why.....they are straights (or at least in straight relationships) so they are allowed to have goals, interests, A PERSONALITY outside their sexuality and love life. Gay people apparently not. A queer dude's life simply needs to revolve around a straight one, you know? That's truly one of the worst queer tropes ever.

[partlysunny15]

regardless if you think annabeth should have or shouldn’t have seen luke’s betrayal, I will say, I don’t think her reaction was right. this is the annabeth who denied that he was a traitor for nearly all five books, who let herself get tricked by him not even two years after the lightning thief, who considers him her first family, her older brother. you can’t tell me that that annabeth wouldn’t have been crying listening to him say he was the reason they went on that quest, that he tried to send percy to tartarus with those shoes, that they were in life or death situations every single day because of what he did, what her brother stole. I’m not saying she should be wracked with sobs crying loudly, but she should have had tears streaking her face when she took the cap off, she shouldn’t have said “I heard everything” with a stoic look on her face, she would’ve just stared, in disbelief, maybe quietly said his name, or how could you, or some small line of disbelief and shock because her entire world for the past 5 years came crumbling down in that one conversation.

[fellatitledthemf]

Everyone's saying how Luke and Percy are similar and how only difference is their choice.

But you are forgeting one important detail, Percy had it better.

Percy did have abusive step-father and bullies, but he had his mom, he had someone. He got attention of gods as soon as he god in camp by killing the minotaur and also by completing his first quest. His dad answered him many times, Percy's dad showed that he cares about him and Sally.

Luke didn't have that. His mother became mad after becomming an oracle when he was just born. Only time Hermes showed up he just yelled at Luke. One his quest he failed on succeeding and getting his father's attention, while also getting his scar. Can't forget the fact Luke was the oldest one in camp, meaning he watched multiple children go on a quest for getting attention of their godly parent and never coming back.

Luke didn't have a choice, and you can't blame him for his reasons.

[bugwolfsstuff]

I hate when Luke shows up in those tiktok slideshows of the gods and their kids with some Taylor swift song playing

Like I just saw one that went "give me back my childhood it was mine first" and Luke was among the demigods like he did not help steal their childhoods

Think Luke was a hero or not but he very much did traumatize the entire fucking generation in a war

[ofswordsandpens]

I probably need to stop rereading the chapters alongside the episode releases cause it only makes me miss what could have been but honestly I really forgot how much of a brat Luke was even before his big reveal like "hmmmm who could the lightning thief be 🧐 ??? Only someone who could be invisible 🤭... but not annabeth 😳!! btw are you wearing those shoes I gave you 👀" like yes Luke plant those seeds of doubt and discord, manipulate these 12 year olds 🙌

[twinsarekeepers]

I’m curious as to your honest thoughts on the show? Like I love pjo and all but the show was a bit of a let down writing wise. There’s always the point of “it’s an adaptation, not a carbon copy” like yes but this new writing isn’t exemplary better than the book just because it’s rewritten by the author himself

I think the show is well-written not because Rick is attached to it, but because I actually like the way the writers are approaching adapting the source material. I have a lot of issues with the original books in terms of writing quality because frankly speaking, I don’t think Rick is a very good writer. He has a lot of interesting things in those books that he never explores or drops within the first two and this fandom gives him and the books too much credit imo.

This is why I’m not very moved when people try to ascribe meaning to a certain scene or choice he made in the books to get mad at the show for changing. As an example, one of the main things people were upset about was the kids “knowing everything” in the show when they were getting tricked left and right in the book. Many posts were dedicated to how the book version is superior because it illustrates how they’re just twelve years old kids so of course they’ll make mistakes and get tricked by monsters.

That’s a perfectly fine interpretation but I was twelve years old when I first read tlt and I was able to anticipate almost every single trap, despite being pretty gullible and naive at that age. My knowledge of Greek mythology consisted of Disney’s Hercules, maybe two Google searches, and my second grade teacher’s reading of the kid friendly version of the Odyssey. No where near the level of Percy who’d been learning for a whole year in an established class on the topic with Chiron or Grover who was literally a satry born into the world or Annabeth, who spent the majority of her life dedicated to studying specifically quests and Greek mythology and was also on the run fighting monsters for a good portion of her childhood. Like twelve year olds can be dumb but those three stumbling into every trap was asking me to suspend my disbelief too far. I remember being upset that they weren’t able to figure it out because it was obvious that Rick wasn’t making that choice to show any personality flaws or character dynamics (because he would’ve had them learn and grow but they never did they just kept being not smart), he just wasn’t able to figure out a way for them to fall into those traps organically so he had to dumb them down.

I think the show was able to get across the characters’ childishness without compromising their established backstories. Yes, Annabeth knew it was Medusa right away because that makes sense for a kid who has experience with running into monsters. But, she still acted very much like a child in her interactions with her (and throughout the episode and season). She lashed out and called her a liar and wouldn’t listen to her side of the story because it painted her mother in a bad light. That’s peak twelve year old behavior.

Yes, Percy figured out Kronos was behind everything, but it makes sense because Percy knows Greek mythology and where Kronos resides. He still very much acts like a child when he asks Hades to give him back his mom in exchange for nothing because it’s the right thing to do.

There are dozens of examples like this for a lot of complaints of the show. And this is not me saying that the show is perfect: every single show has flaws. For me, I wasn’t the biggest fan of the dialogue or the exposition dumping. It didn’t hinder my enjoyment though because I don’t think it was egregious (and wrt the exposition dumping, I expected it because the book did it and there’s really no way to “show not tell” Greek myths). I also didn’t like that we didn’t get to really see the huge clashes between Zeus and Poseidon in the weather (we got references to it through news reports but I would’ve liked something more). I was able to look past it because I really liked the storytelling and the themes the show was pulling out of the original source material.

I loved Medusa-Sally parallels and Medusa-Annabeth parallels. I loved the juxtaposition of Pan’s quest to manifest density. I loved Percy and Annabeth’s opposite trajectory in respect to their relationships with their godly parents. I loved exploring Sally’s choice to send Percy to school instead of camp. I loved explicitly coding Annabeth as autistic. I loved Luke’s backstory being brought earlier into the story. I loved the deadline passing and Poseidon surrendering to save Percy. I loved Persues-Andromeda and percabeth parallels. I loved fleshing Grover out. I loved glory vs home seeking being the central theme of the show.

And lastly, I was able to understand that with a limited number of episodes and run time (due to the nature of child labor laws!), they did the best they could and I feel like they did a pretty good job for a first season.

These are not ALL of my thoughts on the show because that would be a very long post. I gave one detailed example of why I think the show succeeded in something the fandom tries to ascribe the books and it was like three paragraphs lol. Anyway this is not the post to try and convince me that the show is bad for whatever reason you have cooked up. I’m not going to change my mind and I doubt I’ll change yours. Here’s to a season 2 that builds on a solid season 1!

[my-pjo-stuff]

Thinking about how Luke could have been a great commentary on revolutions. How they are, even if they are justified, still incredibly bloody affairs which will get innocent people hurt in the process. We as a society and in media always sort of glorify these "righteous" revolutions against evil governments. That while it may cause death, the death itself is always (sort of) justified. Either as a sacrifice for the goal, or as a "punishment" for being on the wrong side.

Thinking about how Luke could have explored the fact that this is just not the reality of revolutions. They aren't clean, they can't always be wholly righteous and just- simply by virtue of what they are. An Uprising. Often field by emotions of anger at something. We could have gotten a deep dive into how sometimes, even good things done for the greater good will cause innocents to suffer. We could've seen a great exploration into moral greyness, and how nothing is always completely good or completely bad.

Unfortunately that would have required Rick to put some actual thought into this and also give Luke a proper character as that ISN'T some chicken out redemption at the end of the last book. it also would have required Rick to admit that the gods were shitty, weren't going to be getting better and needed to be overthrown. Which he obviously couldn't do because status quo.

[phoenix--flying]

We (read: I) need to talk about Silena Beauregard, because I fear this fandom hates one of her most interesting (to me) traits, because why do we hate her being the spy? I see so many people trying to justify it and make reasons for how Luke manipulated her. Why can't she just. Be mad.

"But she said Luke-" she was also dying. She could've minced her words, and didn't think about how it would come across. Did Luke manipulate her into joining or did he manipulate her into staying? And yes, I know, Luke is a horrible person, groomer, etc, whatever else his antis say I don't pay attention to them.

But can we just talk about the possibility that Silena joined because she wanted to? That maybe Luke saw she was mad, took that and was pushing her to join? That maybe she wasn't so vain as to see a pretty boy and betray her camp for him?

Also, do you think we would've gotten the focus on Beckendorf looking at a photo of her, her reaction to his death, her and Clarisses friendship, etc if it wasn't build up to her being a spy? She would've just. Been there, if she wasn't. Like Lee Fletcher, or Michael Yew. They had their roles, but oops they're dead, no other character traits.

Plus, Silena being a spy introduces the possibility of there being other spies within the camp. Can you imagine finding out that one of the counselors, someone who's supposed to be responsible for an entire group of kids, someone who's supposed to be trusted and a role model, was working for Kronos? That shits devastating.

There's also, of course, the people that say she isn't a traitor. Because news flash, she is. Yes, she died a hero, she saved the camp, but in the end. She still betrayed them, she is a hero, but she is also a traitor. There's no argument there, plain and simple, she is a traitor. You wanna call Ethan a traitor? You have to call Silena a traitor, they aren't that different in that regard.

Her being a spy, also introduces us to the idea of her friends and siblings feeling betrayed. Not that anyone actually likes the one character we see who does that. Drew hating Silena for being a spy, is 100% valid, nobody can tell me otherwise. Does it excuse her being a bitch to her siblings? No! But she's a fucking child and her sister told everyone she was a traitor and then died. That's gotta hurt. It's also not just the fandom that villainizes Drew for hating Silena, it's Rick himself, which is insane.

He threw Piper into the Aphrodite cabin as this new kid, who didn't know Silena I'd like to mention, and fully just. Decided she knew what Silena would want, decided that Drew was wrong to hate her sister and that Silena did nothing wrong. Which is, bullshit in my opinion. The absolute audacity to come into this new place, hear about this girl through stories and then acting like you knew her personally??

And if you know me, you know I love Drew with my whole heart, but I say this 100% truthfully, she was wrong in how she ran the cabin. Do I think she was trying to put herself as far away from Silena as she possibly could? Yes. Do I think she was right to do that? No.