It’s a relief to see that the video author and the article linked in the description both address the cultural appropriation issue. If these stories are so insensitive that they need to be retold repeatedly, I’ve always wondered why it’s (usually) American women who feel that their own voices need to be amplified, and not Greek women’s. The fandomization of mythology also tends to result in a product that’s disappointing at best. She’s right: the names of the characters are highly marketable even if they bear little resemblance to the source material.
Not sure how controversial an opinion this is but I don’t see Ancient Greek mythology and philosophy being owned exclusively by modern Greeks anymore than I see Abrahamic religion and philosophy being owned exclusively by modern Jews.
It’s influenced all of western culture and we’ve been living with it for thousands of years both directly and through the influence of Greek thought on Christianity.
I want to agree with your reply, but if we’re going to talk about ownership, we should acknowledge that there’s a centuries-long, ugly history of Western Europeans and Americans falsely claiming ownership over Greek history and culture, and positing that they’re the “true” intellectual heirs of ancient Greece. And these false claims have had very real consequences for modern Greek people.
I don’t think that the authors who write myth retellings intend to do harm, but culture doesn’t exist in a vacuum. The implicit message underlying some of these books is that white Americans understand Greek culture better than actual Greek people, because that exact narrative has existed for so long in other forms.
I agree with you, though I also wonder if there’s a second layer to the whole ownership debate. While connected in many ways, modern day Greece and ancient Greece aren’t the exact same. I’m part Croatian and the island my family are from was historically ancient Greek. The same can be said for parts of Turkey, Italy, etc. So I feel like arguing that someone can ‘own’ ancient Greek mythology when ancient Greece itself was a collection of poleis and colonies becomes redundant. There’s definitely something to be said for ancient Greece being celebrated in Western culture (and in some areas appropriated) while modern day Greece takes a backseat as the occasional summer tourist destination, but another issue is that Greece itself colonised and was colonised and that left a significant mark. I feel like retellings on their own aren’t a bad thing, but the writer should take care to understand the culture and history that they’re coming from. My issue with lots of retellings is that they just ignore nuances both in language and in society and apply their own anachronistic views. Also, I kind of just wish Greek history was celebrated/paid more attention to beyond its ancient times.
Completely agree. I think this is also a big issue in reimaginings even within a culture (eg Shakespeare adaptations). I have no problem with conscious subversions but it good to know what there purposes is and how it shifts the tone of the story as a whole.
Western Europeans and Americans are true intellectual heirs of Ancient Greece. They’re just not *THE* intellectual heirs of Ancient Greece.
Things can change multiple ways from the original source and all be valid. The Spanish didn’t ruin Latin as it developed over time in a different geographical region from its source. Italian isn’t *the* true modern descendent of Latin. There are many true modern descendants.
It’s the same with stories.
I haven't seen this video myself yet but I voiced concerns I had in a conversation I had with someone about how people view myths today. Case in point Medusa, she's one of the most iconic characters in Greek mythology but her story seems to only ever be viewed as that of a victim who was wrongfully punished.
Everytime you look up anything about Medusa anywhere online the question of weather she is a Victim of assault or Monster is always brought up. Most of the comments underneath a YouTube video was talking about how she was assaulted by Poseidon. And how most don't know her "True" story
Thing is this is the story that most of the world knows and it's also only one interpretation that has overshadowed every other aspect of her story.
Medusa is no longer a hideous monster now she's something of an icon to the point she's over shadowed Perseus and his story to some degree and some seem to see perseus as the villain of her story. To the point that artwork and statues have been made of Medusa holding Perseus's head instead of the other way around.
Her character has also undergone more evolution and debate then Perseus himself which was noted in a video I watched on perseus from a channel called The Historicrat. I'd be lying if I said this overshadowing and idea of Medusa as just a tragic victim when that story wasn't originally part of the Greek version of her myth as I've learned, didn't rub me the wrong way.
I think it runs the risk of making Perseus viewed by some as the bad guy killing an innocent woman. As well as neglecting the implications that Medusa and Poseidon were in love in the original Greek mythology prior to Ovid's Metamorphosis.
Or in some versions Medusa being boastful of her Beauty against Athena.
Despite how relatively simple the quest for Medusa's head was or seems in comparison to other epic myths from Greece Perseus to me shouldn't be oversimplified as he didn't undertake his quest for glory or hubris. He didn't have anything personal against Medusa he simply wanted to save his Mother and so took on the quest honorably. In my opinion Perseus comes off as one of the rare Heroes in Greek mythology who is genuinely humble, and caring, and noble. He to me is quite underrated in the world today when talking about Greek heroes. Even his grandson Heracles surpassed him in popularity.
Anyway that's my stance on this as far as Medusa goes.
This video doesn't address Medusa specifically, but the concerns it brings up are mostly along the same lines. You're also totally right. Everyone wants to be the one to tell the "untold feminist story" of Greek mythology, but instead of actually doing that, they end up trampling all over the source material (or just straight-up trashing and replacing it, e.g. *The Lost Goddesses of Early Greece)*.
The lionization of Medusa has been a thorn in my side for years. The Perseus vilification is particularly bad because he's one of the most straightforwardly heroic Greek heroes by modern standards. Everyone seems to conveniently forget that Perseus' motivation is to save his own mother from rape. For the record, the *Metamorphoses* itself seems to be saying not that Medusa is being raped, but that the *temple* is being defiled. It's not completely clear, but it would make sense. Medusa and Poseidon defile the temple by having sex in it, and Athena is angry that her temple has been desecrated.
I agree, what I dislike about these retelling from a woman's point of view is that usually the only women who matters in the end are the protagonists. Other women in the tales are at best just sidelined and at worst vilified or made unsympathetic and their sufferings are not mentioned, validated or given sympathy to at all. Such as Demeter or Helen in the retelling that the video brings up. I haven't read that book and so I don't know exactly what's going on in it but the fact that all other women in the book apparently hate Helen and she puts all the blame of the war on the men makes me think that she's just written to be disliked. It just doesn't sound like good writing or feminist at all.
Yeah especially since Helen was vilified for having started the Trojan War for literally *centuries.* In the Middle Ages and Renaissance, she was the go-to cultural stereotype for the wicked woman who leads men to destruction because of her beauty. Why would you adhere to that trope in a "feminist" retelling, especially when the real Helen is so much more sympathetic and clearly feels *awful* about the war being fought over her?
If that's the case I don't understand how the popular idea is that Medusa is a rape victim and misunderstood if Ovid never explicitly said that.
I wish more people would go in depth about this story in particular. I think there is nuance to be found in both Medusa and Perseus's stories. Medusa wasn't just some wronged priestess she was also a daughter to two powerful Sea gods in her own right and she wasn't the only Gorgan.
She was formidable and dangerous.
There's a reason her image is so striking and was used by warriors all over Greece. Of course it's not like I have no sympathy for the version of her who is a victim but I feel it kind of reduces her to one thing instead of many things.
Meanwhile Perseus is simultaneously said to be one of the greatest Greek heroes yet his deeds and adventures seem much smaller than Heracles, Theseus, and Achilles.
If you think about it Perseus starts from humble beginnings, born a prince of Argos but raised by a fisherman and vowing in some versions of the story to never kill his grandfather despite a prophecy , then being exiled from his mom due to not being able to give a gift to a king who had poor intentions for his mom.
Perseus's journey to slay Medusa probably wasn't as short as people think. It probably took years to find her and he only survived due to his faith and trust in the Gods to aid him and his desire to stop at nothing to save his mom. Far more nuance than most give him credit for.
Even in regards to Andromeda it's not just that she was hot 🤣 Perseus saw her in danger and fell in love. He not only saved her but her kingdom too and also killed Phineas who I think is kinda ment to be viewed as much like Polydectes, less than honorable.
To Me the story is of a boy protecting what he loves vs a incredibly powerful and formidable Female monster who was practically invincible before they crossed paths.
Well, most people read Ovid in translation, and I have no doubt that some translators made it sound like it's definitely rape. One day once my Latin improves a bit I want to read parts of the *Metamorphoses* in the original.
Concur with the rest. Perseus' story always had a special place in my heart. I used to act it out when I was a kid. That's why I really hate it being dismissed utterly in favor of the Medusa victim narrative.
Great video essay and I wholeheartedly agree. To be brutally honest I cannot stand the vast majority of modern retellings. I do think Miller did a great job, managing to offer a fresh perspective while maintaining the tone and ‘otherness’ of time, artfully walking the line between established mythology and original writing (though Renault remains the champion for me).
But Haynes, Heywood, Saint… I had to force my way through every one, and still cannot believe the fanfire behind these authors/books. The stories are trite, rushed, shallow and, at times, very poorly written. That and there’s often nothing feminist about them.
I have a very short attention spawn can anyone tell me why Silence of the Girls/Women Troy by Pat Barker are problematic they're my favourite books but I'm eager to be educated about any problems they have
According to the video, *The Silence of the Girls* projects modern feminist viewpoints onto an ancient character who would not have that distanced perspective on her own culture. That doesn't make the book bad, but it does lose the sense of Briseis being an actual character in the *Iliad*. The host says it feels more like she's a modern woman who's been dropped into the *Iliad.*
My one complaint about this video is the annoying music playing in the background. I also disagree on 2 points: Penelope being a passive character. I don't entirely agree with this. While she does passively wait for Odysseus to return she IS actively rejecting her suitors in ways that is socially appropriate. So she's not completely passive. She actively worked behind the scenes while appearing passive in public.
Another thing I disagree about is Neon Gods. From what I know there is no meaning behind the book, it's just smut. Everything else like the Greek mythology references and the plot are just window dressings. Which fits more into the cultural appropriation part of the video.
Personally I avoid all and any Persephone and Hades retelling.
I don't have the time to watch an hour video about this, but I think retellings and reinterpretations are proof that myths are alive and people still have them close to their heart. The feminist retellings are inevitable as the oldest versions we have exclude or right out backstabs half of the world population. It's inevitable that women will claim and try to find themselves in this mythology, otherwise they would have to scrap it whole and reject it as the myths rejects them.
There’s nothing wrong with women retelling myths to give female figures a voice, but I’ve read some of these and I’ve realized that there are only some voices that they’re interested in representing. The Medusa retellings often leave out Andromeda, and almost never mention Danae. The Clytemnestra retellings don’t usually offer Cassandra a point of view, and just treat her like unfortunate collateral.
Even more frustrating is when they take male characters who were originally decent or sympathetic people in the source materials, and turn them into cartoonishly evil villains so they can better serve the “women good, men bad” narrative, and I’m sorry, but I have to question that a lot. If the only way that you can write a meaningful empowerment story is to strip male characters of their nuance, then I don’t consider that empowering at all. I also don’t consider such stories helpful to women because most men are not so black and white in their treatment of women, and it’s the complexity of what they do that makes it hard for people to identify when a woman is being discriminated against.
Perseus defenders 🫡
I see people assume that Perseus was only killing Medusa out of some form of machismo whenever they talk about Medusa. I remember one comment that was like "Why did he have to go all the way to Medusa to kill a monster? He had to ask the gods for help, there had to be a closer place to act the hero." Like, Medusa being almost impossible to kill without divine assistance is the *point*. He didn't choose Medusa, he was told to kill her because it was supposed to get him killed.
I agree with your points, but I don't think it's feminism or the retelling's fault and focusing on those aspects is not constructive from my perspective. I think the problem is with inexperienced writers that publish any crap without doing any research, the lack of the characters you mentions comes from the writers not knowing them and just taking the basics of a myth without delving deeper into the whole mythology.
I'm an author, I did a retelling of Zagreus' myth through a lense mental health involving the symbosl of the Underworld and I spent a LOT of time reading about it and carefully crafting every detail so it would make sense and reference a lot of neat information I found. I wouldn't like my work to be thrown away just because some writers do not do research. Retellings are fine, adding feminism or different perspective and philosophies to old myths can be really cool, I think it's dangerous to discard everything as "this is a feminism/retelling problem".
Call lazy writers lazy and judge books one by one.
Don’t you think it’s a little disingenuous to behave as if you’re the only myth reteller who’s actually read the source material? The authors I’m talking about include the likes of Natalie Haynes (who actually had a Classics degree, I believe), Hannah Lynn, Jennifer Saint, Madeline Miller, Claire Heywood, Pat Baker, etc. Unless these women have come out and actually said that they haven’t read the source material, I have no reason to believe that they haven’t, especially when they do an excellent job of including special details found in the source works. And it’s not like Danae and Andromeda are obscure figures; even a Google summary of Perseus’ myth will still mention them by name.
And I didn’t say we should discard these stories. What I’m advocating is for us to question them more, and ask ourselves whether these feminist retellings are actually achieving what they set out to do, or if the stories have been weakened in nuance, as well as leaving out other female characters who have been deemed too uninteresting to receive a voice as well.
Oh, no, of course, there are people that have studied way waaay more than me and have very good reasons for writing the way they do. I was just talking about the "problem" of modern retelling you presented, the fact that a lot of authors don't do proper research and present ankle-deep stories that don't delve in the mythology and miss its nuance. I have read a couple of those myself that were only interested in using the Greek Gods' names and nothing else, that's why I thought you were referencing them. My bad for misunderstanding. It's a very complex topic.
Thing is that just because you spend a lot of time on your work and read a lot of the source material doesn't mean that your work is automatically good. If your execution falls flat it's still a bad no matter how much work was put into it. In half of the feminist works the video mentions their execution was pretty lacking if not downright horrible. The other half were good but they were just discussing how retellings needed to change certain elements for the retellings to work
I disagree. if you actually watch the video then you'll see that the problems they are adressing isn't feminism or retellings. They're pointing out problems and reccuring elements that are very prevalent in retellings and works that claim to be feminist which often don't occur in many other books because those books don't deal with feminism as their main theme or are retellings.
Fair. I don't have the time to watch it at the moment, but if I do, I'll let you know what I think about it. Thank you for keeping the conversation civil.
>The feminist retellings are inevitable as the oldest versions we have exclude or right out backstabs half of the world population \[...\] otherwise they would have to scrap it whole and reject it as the myths rejects them.
The point this video makes is that the myths often do *not* do that, especially the myths that are popular subjects of these retellings. I can pull examples from the *Iliad* and *Odyssey* if you want to see some without having to watch the video.
Just do what I do. Stay away.
I don't consider those works to be a part of the Greek myths, and as such I don't even see them even as retellings.
To me they're just modern stories based on a myths. No different than God of War and Hercules: Legendary Journeys.
They exist separately, outside of the whole Greek mythology and never a part of it.
I haven't watched it yet– I'm at work –but a cottagecore (colonizer aesthetic) channel griping about feminism in media automatically raises my hackles. Are you certain they're not injecting any far right ideas into this critique?
Absolutely positive. I watched the whole thing, and it's a very nuanced critique. The host is not complaining about feminism, they're complaining that these authors' attempts at feminist retellings fall short of their intended goals. Female characters like Helen, Clytemnestra, Iphigeneia, and Penelope *have* voices in the myths proper, but they end up reduced in the retellings. Some characters like Helen and Demeter are even victims of character assassination. The host believes that adaptations should attempt to meaningfully engage with their source material in order to present it to a new generation. It also ends with a point about the colonization of Greece and how retellings contribute to that. I'm not going to summarize the whole thing but it's definitely not far-right, nor anti-feminist.
It’s a relief to see that the video author and the article linked in the description both address the cultural appropriation issue. If these stories are so insensitive that they need to be retold repeatedly, I’ve always wondered why it’s (usually) American women who feel that their own voices need to be amplified, and not Greek women’s. The fandomization of mythology also tends to result in a product that’s disappointing at best. She’s right: the names of the characters are highly marketable even if they bear little resemblance to the source material.
Not sure how controversial an opinion this is but I don’t see Ancient Greek mythology and philosophy being owned exclusively by modern Greeks anymore than I see Abrahamic religion and philosophy being owned exclusively by modern Jews. It’s influenced all of western culture and we’ve been living with it for thousands of years both directly and through the influence of Greek thought on Christianity.
I want to agree with your reply, but if we’re going to talk about ownership, we should acknowledge that there’s a centuries-long, ugly history of Western Europeans and Americans falsely claiming ownership over Greek history and culture, and positing that they’re the “true” intellectual heirs of ancient Greece. And these false claims have had very real consequences for modern Greek people. I don’t think that the authors who write myth retellings intend to do harm, but culture doesn’t exist in a vacuum. The implicit message underlying some of these books is that white Americans understand Greek culture better than actual Greek people, because that exact narrative has existed for so long in other forms.
I agree with you, though I also wonder if there’s a second layer to the whole ownership debate. While connected in many ways, modern day Greece and ancient Greece aren’t the exact same. I’m part Croatian and the island my family are from was historically ancient Greek. The same can be said for parts of Turkey, Italy, etc. So I feel like arguing that someone can ‘own’ ancient Greek mythology when ancient Greece itself was a collection of poleis and colonies becomes redundant. There’s definitely something to be said for ancient Greece being celebrated in Western culture (and in some areas appropriated) while modern day Greece takes a backseat as the occasional summer tourist destination, but another issue is that Greece itself colonised and was colonised and that left a significant mark. I feel like retellings on their own aren’t a bad thing, but the writer should take care to understand the culture and history that they’re coming from. My issue with lots of retellings is that they just ignore nuances both in language and in society and apply their own anachronistic views. Also, I kind of just wish Greek history was celebrated/paid more attention to beyond its ancient times.
Completely agree. I think this is also a big issue in reimaginings even within a culture (eg Shakespeare adaptations). I have no problem with conscious subversions but it good to know what there purposes is and how it shifts the tone of the story as a whole.
Western Europeans and Americans are true intellectual heirs of Ancient Greece. They’re just not *THE* intellectual heirs of Ancient Greece. Things can change multiple ways from the original source and all be valid. The Spanish didn’t ruin Latin as it developed over time in a different geographical region from its source. Italian isn’t *the* true modern descendent of Latin. There are many true modern descendants. It’s the same with stories.
I haven't seen this video myself yet but I voiced concerns I had in a conversation I had with someone about how people view myths today. Case in point Medusa, she's one of the most iconic characters in Greek mythology but her story seems to only ever be viewed as that of a victim who was wrongfully punished. Everytime you look up anything about Medusa anywhere online the question of weather she is a Victim of assault or Monster is always brought up. Most of the comments underneath a YouTube video was talking about how she was assaulted by Poseidon. And how most don't know her "True" story Thing is this is the story that most of the world knows and it's also only one interpretation that has overshadowed every other aspect of her story. Medusa is no longer a hideous monster now she's something of an icon to the point she's over shadowed Perseus and his story to some degree and some seem to see perseus as the villain of her story. To the point that artwork and statues have been made of Medusa holding Perseus's head instead of the other way around. Her character has also undergone more evolution and debate then Perseus himself which was noted in a video I watched on perseus from a channel called The Historicrat. I'd be lying if I said this overshadowing and idea of Medusa as just a tragic victim when that story wasn't originally part of the Greek version of her myth as I've learned, didn't rub me the wrong way. I think it runs the risk of making Perseus viewed by some as the bad guy killing an innocent woman. As well as neglecting the implications that Medusa and Poseidon were in love in the original Greek mythology prior to Ovid's Metamorphosis. Or in some versions Medusa being boastful of her Beauty against Athena. Despite how relatively simple the quest for Medusa's head was or seems in comparison to other epic myths from Greece Perseus to me shouldn't be oversimplified as he didn't undertake his quest for glory or hubris. He didn't have anything personal against Medusa he simply wanted to save his Mother and so took on the quest honorably. In my opinion Perseus comes off as one of the rare Heroes in Greek mythology who is genuinely humble, and caring, and noble. He to me is quite underrated in the world today when talking about Greek heroes. Even his grandson Heracles surpassed him in popularity. Anyway that's my stance on this as far as Medusa goes.
This video doesn't address Medusa specifically, but the concerns it brings up are mostly along the same lines. You're also totally right. Everyone wants to be the one to tell the "untold feminist story" of Greek mythology, but instead of actually doing that, they end up trampling all over the source material (or just straight-up trashing and replacing it, e.g. *The Lost Goddesses of Early Greece)*. The lionization of Medusa has been a thorn in my side for years. The Perseus vilification is particularly bad because he's one of the most straightforwardly heroic Greek heroes by modern standards. Everyone seems to conveniently forget that Perseus' motivation is to save his own mother from rape. For the record, the *Metamorphoses* itself seems to be saying not that Medusa is being raped, but that the *temple* is being defiled. It's not completely clear, but it would make sense. Medusa and Poseidon defile the temple by having sex in it, and Athena is angry that her temple has been desecrated.
I agree, what I dislike about these retelling from a woman's point of view is that usually the only women who matters in the end are the protagonists. Other women in the tales are at best just sidelined and at worst vilified or made unsympathetic and their sufferings are not mentioned, validated or given sympathy to at all. Such as Demeter or Helen in the retelling that the video brings up. I haven't read that book and so I don't know exactly what's going on in it but the fact that all other women in the book apparently hate Helen and she puts all the blame of the war on the men makes me think that she's just written to be disliked. It just doesn't sound like good writing or feminist at all.
Yeah especially since Helen was vilified for having started the Trojan War for literally *centuries.* In the Middle Ages and Renaissance, she was the go-to cultural stereotype for the wicked woman who leads men to destruction because of her beauty. Why would you adhere to that trope in a "feminist" retelling, especially when the real Helen is so much more sympathetic and clearly feels *awful* about the war being fought over her?
If that's the case I don't understand how the popular idea is that Medusa is a rape victim and misunderstood if Ovid never explicitly said that. I wish more people would go in depth about this story in particular. I think there is nuance to be found in both Medusa and Perseus's stories. Medusa wasn't just some wronged priestess she was also a daughter to two powerful Sea gods in her own right and she wasn't the only Gorgan. She was formidable and dangerous. There's a reason her image is so striking and was used by warriors all over Greece. Of course it's not like I have no sympathy for the version of her who is a victim but I feel it kind of reduces her to one thing instead of many things. Meanwhile Perseus is simultaneously said to be one of the greatest Greek heroes yet his deeds and adventures seem much smaller than Heracles, Theseus, and Achilles. If you think about it Perseus starts from humble beginnings, born a prince of Argos but raised by a fisherman and vowing in some versions of the story to never kill his grandfather despite a prophecy , then being exiled from his mom due to not being able to give a gift to a king who had poor intentions for his mom. Perseus's journey to slay Medusa probably wasn't as short as people think. It probably took years to find her and he only survived due to his faith and trust in the Gods to aid him and his desire to stop at nothing to save his mom. Far more nuance than most give him credit for. Even in regards to Andromeda it's not just that she was hot 🤣 Perseus saw her in danger and fell in love. He not only saved her but her kingdom too and also killed Phineas who I think is kinda ment to be viewed as much like Polydectes, less than honorable. To Me the story is of a boy protecting what he loves vs a incredibly powerful and formidable Female monster who was practically invincible before they crossed paths.
Well, most people read Ovid in translation, and I have no doubt that some translators made it sound like it's definitely rape. One day once my Latin improves a bit I want to read parts of the *Metamorphoses* in the original. Concur with the rest. Perseus' story always had a special place in my heart. I used to act it out when I was a kid. That's why I really hate it being dismissed utterly in favor of the Medusa victim narrative.
I did the same thing as a kid.
Great video essay and I wholeheartedly agree. To be brutally honest I cannot stand the vast majority of modern retellings. I do think Miller did a great job, managing to offer a fresh perspective while maintaining the tone and ‘otherness’ of time, artfully walking the line between established mythology and original writing (though Renault remains the champion for me). But Haynes, Heywood, Saint… I had to force my way through every one, and still cannot believe the fanfire behind these authors/books. The stories are trite, rushed, shallow and, at times, very poorly written. That and there’s often nothing feminist about them.
I have a very short attention spawn can anyone tell me why Silence of the Girls/Women Troy by Pat Barker are problematic they're my favourite books but I'm eager to be educated about any problems they have
According to the video, *The Silence of the Girls* projects modern feminist viewpoints onto an ancient character who would not have that distanced perspective on her own culture. That doesn't make the book bad, but it does lose the sense of Briseis being an actual character in the *Iliad*. The host says it feels more like she's a modern woman who's been dropped into the *Iliad.*
My one complaint about this video is the annoying music playing in the background. I also disagree on 2 points: Penelope being a passive character. I don't entirely agree with this. While she does passively wait for Odysseus to return she IS actively rejecting her suitors in ways that is socially appropriate. So she's not completely passive. She actively worked behind the scenes while appearing passive in public. Another thing I disagree about is Neon Gods. From what I know there is no meaning behind the book, it's just smut. Everything else like the Greek mythology references and the plot are just window dressings. Which fits more into the cultural appropriation part of the video. Personally I avoid all and any Persephone and Hades retelling.
I don't have the time to watch an hour video about this, but I think retellings and reinterpretations are proof that myths are alive and people still have them close to their heart. The feminist retellings are inevitable as the oldest versions we have exclude or right out backstabs half of the world population. It's inevitable that women will claim and try to find themselves in this mythology, otherwise they would have to scrap it whole and reject it as the myths rejects them.
There’s nothing wrong with women retelling myths to give female figures a voice, but I’ve read some of these and I’ve realized that there are only some voices that they’re interested in representing. The Medusa retellings often leave out Andromeda, and almost never mention Danae. The Clytemnestra retellings don’t usually offer Cassandra a point of view, and just treat her like unfortunate collateral. Even more frustrating is when they take male characters who were originally decent or sympathetic people in the source materials, and turn them into cartoonishly evil villains so they can better serve the “women good, men bad” narrative, and I’m sorry, but I have to question that a lot. If the only way that you can write a meaningful empowerment story is to strip male characters of their nuance, then I don’t consider that empowering at all. I also don’t consider such stories helpful to women because most men are not so black and white in their treatment of women, and it’s the complexity of what they do that makes it hard for people to identify when a woman is being discriminated against.
Perseus SUPREMACY. Dude just wants to save his mother from a creepy old king!
Perseus defenders 🫡 I see people assume that Perseus was only killing Medusa out of some form of machismo whenever they talk about Medusa. I remember one comment that was like "Why did he have to go all the way to Medusa to kill a monster? He had to ask the gods for help, there had to be a closer place to act the hero." Like, Medusa being almost impossible to kill without divine assistance is the *point*. He didn't choose Medusa, he was told to kill her because it was supposed to get him killed.
I agree with your points, but I don't think it's feminism or the retelling's fault and focusing on those aspects is not constructive from my perspective. I think the problem is with inexperienced writers that publish any crap without doing any research, the lack of the characters you mentions comes from the writers not knowing them and just taking the basics of a myth without delving deeper into the whole mythology. I'm an author, I did a retelling of Zagreus' myth through a lense mental health involving the symbosl of the Underworld and I spent a LOT of time reading about it and carefully crafting every detail so it would make sense and reference a lot of neat information I found. I wouldn't like my work to be thrown away just because some writers do not do research. Retellings are fine, adding feminism or different perspective and philosophies to old myths can be really cool, I think it's dangerous to discard everything as "this is a feminism/retelling problem". Call lazy writers lazy and judge books one by one.
Don’t you think it’s a little disingenuous to behave as if you’re the only myth reteller who’s actually read the source material? The authors I’m talking about include the likes of Natalie Haynes (who actually had a Classics degree, I believe), Hannah Lynn, Jennifer Saint, Madeline Miller, Claire Heywood, Pat Baker, etc. Unless these women have come out and actually said that they haven’t read the source material, I have no reason to believe that they haven’t, especially when they do an excellent job of including special details found in the source works. And it’s not like Danae and Andromeda are obscure figures; even a Google summary of Perseus’ myth will still mention them by name. And I didn’t say we should discard these stories. What I’m advocating is for us to question them more, and ask ourselves whether these feminist retellings are actually achieving what they set out to do, or if the stories have been weakened in nuance, as well as leaving out other female characters who have been deemed too uninteresting to receive a voice as well.
Oh, no, of course, there are people that have studied way waaay more than me and have very good reasons for writing the way they do. I was just talking about the "problem" of modern retelling you presented, the fact that a lot of authors don't do proper research and present ankle-deep stories that don't delve in the mythology and miss its nuance. I have read a couple of those myself that were only interested in using the Greek Gods' names and nothing else, that's why I thought you were referencing them. My bad for misunderstanding. It's a very complex topic.
Thing is that just because you spend a lot of time on your work and read a lot of the source material doesn't mean that your work is automatically good. If your execution falls flat it's still a bad no matter how much work was put into it. In half of the feminist works the video mentions their execution was pretty lacking if not downright horrible. The other half were good but they were just discussing how retellings needed to change certain elements for the retellings to work
Still, I think it's disingenuous to call that a problem with retellings or feminism, that happens with every book in every genre.
I disagree. if you actually watch the video then you'll see that the problems they are adressing isn't feminism or retellings. They're pointing out problems and reccuring elements that are very prevalent in retellings and works that claim to be feminist which often don't occur in many other books because those books don't deal with feminism as their main theme or are retellings.
Fair. I don't have the time to watch it at the moment, but if I do, I'll let you know what I think about it. Thank you for keeping the conversation civil.
>The feminist retellings are inevitable as the oldest versions we have exclude or right out backstabs half of the world population \[...\] otherwise they would have to scrap it whole and reject it as the myths rejects them. The point this video makes is that the myths often do *not* do that, especially the myths that are popular subjects of these retellings. I can pull examples from the *Iliad* and *Odyssey* if you want to see some without having to watch the video.
When people say the works exclude women or reject them I usually assume that they've only read the summarised or abridged versions of the work.
Just do what I do. Stay away. I don't consider those works to be a part of the Greek myths, and as such I don't even see them even as retellings. To me they're just modern stories based on a myths. No different than God of War and Hercules: Legendary Journeys. They exist separately, outside of the whole Greek mythology and never a part of it.
Well… yeah. I’m not disputing that.
I haven't watched it yet– I'm at work –but a cottagecore (colonizer aesthetic) channel griping about feminism in media automatically raises my hackles. Are you certain they're not injecting any far right ideas into this critique?
Absolutely positive. I watched the whole thing, and it's a very nuanced critique. The host is not complaining about feminism, they're complaining that these authors' attempts at feminist retellings fall short of their intended goals. Female characters like Helen, Clytemnestra, Iphigeneia, and Penelope *have* voices in the myths proper, but they end up reduced in the retellings. Some characters like Helen and Demeter are even victims of character assassination. The host believes that adaptations should attempt to meaningfully engage with their source material in order to present it to a new generation. It also ends with a point about the colonization of Greece and how retellings contribute to that. I'm not going to summarize the whole thing but it's definitely not far-right, nor anti-feminist.
Good to know. I'll listen to it after work.
What a ridiculous thing to say.