I just finished rereading the pjo series for the dozenth time and I have so many thoughts about Luke and how the fandom woobified him.
Like no Luke did not have the right idea and executed it in the wrong way. He wasn’t a misguided victim, although there is no doubt Kronos manipulated him. But him being manipulated does not absolve him of his wrongdoings. Hurt people can still hurt people, you can be abused and still become an abuser.
Most of Fandom’s idea of Luke being a ‘hero’ because he did the right thing in the end is extremely doozy like ok he killed himself to stop Kronos but that does not absolve him the blame of killing innocent people.
While Luke’s main goal was the destruction of Gods, that was not because he wanted the demigods to have better lives. He actively killed demigods.
In the Sea of Monsters, when Percy, Annabeth and Tyson snuck into Princess Andromeda; they saw 12 year olds being trained how to kill a 'dummy in camp half blood tshirts’. He was actively exploiting children and manipulating them into killing other children and saw nothing wrong with it.
He only considered deflecting from Kronos when he found out that he was going to be possessed by him.
He only worked and cared for him, he was so lost into power and revenge that HE became a monster.
“Oh but he cared for Thalia and Annabeth!!” I’ll get into that later too
I think Luke’s fatal flaw contrary to the opinion of fandom is The Urge to Prove Himself.
He had one conversation with Hermes which made him angry and bitter and Thalia even notes that after that conversation Luke got into more and more fights with monsters like he had something to prove which Annabeth didnt seem to see as a problem since he was her hero. They got into more skirmishes because of his recklessness, fighting more monsters since Luke wanted to pick a fight with each one he came across.
(Conversation from PJO, The Last Olympian)
His fatal flaw being to Prove Himself would explain why he took the failure of his quest so hard that the night he returned from the quest was the same night Kronos started speaking to him for the first time. It didn’t help that when he returned from his failed quest, the campers treated him with pity.
He wanted to pull Olympus down stone by stone because He failed his quest that he didn’t want to do because it was already done by Hercules once. 🥴
His endgame has nothing to do with wanting to help ANYBODY. He wanted to take down gods because he had a grudge against them and wanted to Prove that he could do it. Everything else comes secondary if it fits his agenda.
This is one of the reasons why it bothers me so much when people say that Luke had the right idea or that Percy would have joined Kronos if Sally had died like you fundamentally misunderstood the character of Percy if you think he would have joined Kronos.
He talks about “driving humanity back into caves, all except the strongest - who would serve him” THIS IS LITERALLY FASCISM???
(According to Merriam-Webster, Fascism is a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression)
Now onto the topic of Thalia, Annabeth and Luke
First of all, I absolutely hate that 'Thalia and Luke had a thing before she got turned into a tree bit’ because Thalia was 12 and Luke was 14 when they met and Thalia was 15 and Luke was 20-21ish when they meet again in TTC ugh hate that.
Now TTC, where to begin, here I used to believe Luke had already bathed in river Styx as there are some narrations where Percy notes that Luke looked worse and like his scar was reopened and would certainly explain how he survived the cliff fall but on my rereading I realised that Thalia and Luke fought when Percy was holding the sky and Thalia injured Luke so nvm then.
It is however in this book that Luke began to realise Kronos’s plan for him as it is implied by the General and he starts to fear for his life.
Mind you, what did Luke think would happen if Thalia did agree to join Kronos when he knew Kronos was looking for a host of body…
Luke is many things, he is cunning, manipulative, a great swordsman but what he is not is stupid. If Thalia would have agreed then Kronos would have used Thalia as a vessel 😬
And oh boy the can of worms that is Luke and Annabeth. I’ve seen many Luke fans/apologists deny that there is no canon evidence of Luke being romantically interested in Annabeth BUT THERE IS?? they refuse to believe and call Annabeth an unreliable narrator because otherwise their uwu white boy would be a Pedophile. Even if he wasn’t a Pedo, he manipulated Annabeth so many times to make her sympathise with her and use her emotions against her.
(excerpts from various books: TLO, TLO, BoTL, MoA annabeth’s pov)
^ Annabeth was 15 almost 16 or already 16 I believe when Luke asked her to run away with him in a romantic sense and he was 21-22.
also another evidence adding to the theory of his fatal flaw having proving himself.
Now, onto the topic of CHB and Luke:
Luke being hesitant to attack camp half blood in BotL has less to do with him suddenly growing a spine (as some fans suggest) and more to do with the inevitable possession.
When Kronos informs that he will himself lead the attack, Luke advises to use Hyperion instead because he knows for Kronos to attack it in person, he would finally possess Luke.
(first one is from TTC, the other two from BoTL)
One of the last things I wanna talk about is Silena Beauregard & Luke and Luke’s portrayal in the new Percy Jackson series:
- Luke was 17 when Kronos started speaking to him and 19 when he left the camp. Silena was 17-18 when she died which makes her 13-14 when Luke left the camp in TLT and 11-12 when Kronos first started talking to him. Adult Luke charmed an underage girl, and promised her that she was helping the demigods and then when she tried to stop, he started blackmailing her. [excerpts from TLO]
According to the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children UK, Grooming is when someone builds a relationship, trust and emotional connection with a child or young person so they can manipulate, exploit and abuse them. The relationship a groomer builds can take different forms. This could be:a romantic relationship, as a mentor, an authority figure, a dominant and persistent figure. They might use blackmail to make a child feel guilt and shame or introduce the idea of 'secrets’ to control, frighten and intimidate.
So canonically, Book!Luke is a fascist groomer pedophile.
- Now on the new Disney+ Percy Jackson show, it seems that Rick Riordan is subtly rewriting the character of Luke and removing the more problematic aspect of him (pedophile and grooming). Let me explain why I think that:
Even though in TLT the book, Luke describes Annabeth as his little sister we know how well that lasted but I don’t think they are keeping Annabeth’s crush on him on the show from what I’ve seen (though I could be wrong).
Secondly, the casting of Dior Goodjohn as Clarisse puts Clarisse on the same age range as Luke, maybe a year or two younger but in the first book Clarisse was 13-14 and she was 17 in TLO, so they have aged her up. It is my assumption that they will also age Silena by casting a 17-19 yr old actress as her.
And they have made Luke far more sympathetic in the show than the books (him not calling a hellhound during capture the flag and no pit scorpions in the finale), but we wouldn’t know how sympathetic or villainous they are making him until season 2 comes out. Charlie Bushnell gives an excellent performance imo
Though this again reflects the double standards it comes to PJO, they have given much grace and praise for the changes made to Luke’s character and little to no complaint for ageing up Clarisse but the hate Walker and especially Leah are given is so cruel. Leah has been so much racially targeted though I think she’s an excellent Annabeth, just something to think about.
Also, before I forget-
We don’t give enough flack to Rick Riordan for writing two weird age dynamics without recognising as grooming and pedophilic nature. (Lukabeth and Caleo/Capercy)
The characters are never made to realise (especially Annabeth) that an older person having feelings for them as a minor is not a normal behaviour.
Especially in regards to Calypso who may take the form of a 15 year old but is actually more than 4612 (according to the riordan wiki) and her having a crush on 14 year old Percy and 15-16 yr old Leo Valdez, not to mention how rudely she treated Leo. Also her cursing Annabeth because Percy left her. Not only is it plain nasty but she’s never called out. Its actually so disgusting🤕.
Anyways this turned into a long rant but I would love to read your opinions, especially on Luke’s fatal flaw.
I know for some people it may seem like I’m too hard on him but this is just my opinion.
IMO I have no problem if you like a morally bad or gray person, an antihero or a villain as long as their bad deeds aren’t swept under the rug and pretend they never happened or glorify their good deeds.
I actually think villian’s bad things make them more interesting.
Luke is an antagonist and a villain of the PJO series and a part of being a villain is that some people are going to hate you and that’s ok.
Me personally, I was never a fan of his and that’s ok.
I know some people are going to bring up the fact that Percy in MoA sympathises but the PJO characters are complicated and Luke was very skilled at making others think of his reason to destroy the Gods the way they would sympathise the most and we see that multiple times.
