Scan barcode
A review by jenmaysiereads
Blood of Hercules by Jasmine Mas
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? N/A
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
0.5
0 out of 5 stars
It’s my absolute pleasure to mark this book as 1 star. I wish I could give it lower, if only to bring its average rating down that little bit more.
Unfortunately, there isn’t a scale drastic enough to quantify how embarrassingly bad this book is.
This book is just traditionally published brain rot. It’s hard not to blame anti-intellectualism movement online for the seemingly ever-increasing amount of drivel that is being forced Into the publishing market. This book feels like a symptom of the degradation of our education systems and the decline in critical thinking.
‘Blood of Hercules’ is irredeemably bad. There is nothing of merit in the pages of this book. It is wholly devoid of any meaning or nuance and exists, seemingly, to perpetuate baffling gender stereotypes and gender essentialism under the guise of being a funny, sarcastic and dark Hercules ‘retelling’.
The lack of quality control that went into this book is apparent from the book’s content warning. Which exists not to actually warn of any of the potentially triggering content —such as domestic violence, physical abuse, suicidal ideation, misogyny, homelessness, self-harm, sexualised violence, sexual harassment and child abuse— but to ‘warn’ readers of the “gallows humour” featured and that “the villains will get the girl in the end”. To be clear: this is not a content warning and mocks the very intention of what a content warning is supposed to be.
But that’s just what ‘Blood of Hercules’ is: one big joke.
It is a joke that this was picked up and published by a major publisher. It’s a joke that the book features consistent grammatical errors. It’s a joke that this is marketed at adult readers, when I’ve read more eloquent prose in early-learning books for toddlers. It’s a joke that this book was professionally edited — though I doubt any major changes were made after the zero draft was completed.
There is a part of me that hesitates in writing a long-form review, because doing so legitimises the book as something worthy of analysis and discussion. And to be frank: this book is completely undeserving of any shred of legitimacy or credibility. But bad books deserved to be critiqued — just because a novel isn’t intended to be critically acclaimed or a literary marvel, doesn’t mean it can’t be well written. And also, I am a hater and I enjoy writing negative reviews on books I hate.
‘Blood of Hercules’ is a reverse-harem “retelling” of the myth of Hercules in which the protagonist Alexis is a girl struggling to survive in a Titan infested world, ruled by the immortal god-like Spartans. When a blood test reveals that she’s part of the powerful elite, she is forced to attend the Spartan War Academy where she will undergo harrowing trials of endurance to earn her place as an immortal.
Much of this book is written both poorly and insensitively. The descriptions surrounding the explicit child abuse written into this book were not only unrealistic but also insincere. During a scene in which the ten-year-old protagonist is actively being physically and emotionally abused by her parents, the tone is deliberately unserious. The event is set to a bizarrely comical tone, with the protagonists internal monologue describing how the key to enduring abuse is “tensing your core and buttocks. Humming. And nihilism. Also, role-playing as a nineteenth century musical prodigy” (chapter 2).
While I understand the book is trying to angle for a dark and gallows humour, I find it strange that this would be what would be on a child’s mind while they are actively being abused by their parental figures. Rather than taking a very serious issue and portraying it with the respect and sensitivity it deserves, the portrayal of abuse in ‘Blood of Hercules’ feels like it’s being used as the punchline of a bad joke.
While I understand the book is trying to angle for a dark and gallows humour, I find it strange that this would be what would be on a child’s mind while they are actively being abused by their parental figures. Rather than taking a very serious issue and portraying it with the respect and sensitivity it deserves, the portrayal of abuse in ‘Blood of Hercules’ feels like it’s being used as the punchline of a bad joke.
There’s a time and a place for ‘dark humour’: but not when describing physical abuse and child abuse.
This book is likewise steeped in misogyny. There are countless instances throughout ‘Blood of Hercules’ in which the very few female characters featured are belittled, mistreated and outright abused by the cast of genuinely psychotic men. The protagonist spends almost the entirety of the book being mistreated, stalked, assaulted and abused by her love interests specifically all while said love interests repeat that she ‘needs to be protected’ and that ‘her honour is at stake’. The text has a complete preoccupation with a bizarre, bastardised brand of purity culture in which “Spartan women were rare and needed to be protected at all costs” and “it was dishonourable and wrong” that women entered the War Academy (chapter 15). There’s an entire scene in which three of the heroine’s love interest’s discuss how she was nearly assaulted by a doctor who tried to flash her breasts, however their focus is on that the act “would have dishonoured all three of us” (chapter 21). There are also two seperate instances in which the love interests brutally murder and dismember men who convey the faintest interest in the heroine, because she is ‘theirs’ (chapter 19 and chapter 26).
The book itself even goes so far as to explicitly reinforce it’s harmful internalised misogyny through several on-page interactions including “Suddenly the old beliefs that women had 'hysteria' problems didn't seem so far-fetched. I could see it. Case in point, I was a woman, and I was hysterical” (chapter 12). Likewise, the book further idealises toxic masculinity and abusive relationship dynamics through an interaction (chapter 19) between Alexis and her only friend when she asks:
“What happened to nice men who love math and treating a woman right?"
Nyx scoffed. "They died out because they were pathetic and embarrassing losers. No woman wants a nerd."
"I do," I said.
"No-you just think you do.”
I am beyond over abusive men in fantasy and romance being glorified simply because it’s considered ‘dark’ and ‘taboo’. At a certain point, it just reeks of internalised misogyny and self-hate. It’s not cute or sexy to be treated like an object, infantilised or to have your autonomy as a person stripped from you. Don’t piss me off.
Beyond the rampant misogyny and inconsistent tone, the world building in this book genuinely atrocious. I understand that when it comes to retellings of any kind, certain liberties are often taken to allow for a compelling story, but I would not even consider this a retelling given the only things that appear to have been translated over from Graeco-Roman mythology are poorly utilised buzzwords. And even then, this is poorly executed in the text.
Most of the names for the ruling elite are derived from the Ancient Greek counterparts, such as Hades and Persephone, Artemis and Zeus, Aphrodite and Achilles etc. However, if the book is following the Ancient Greek naming conventions then the titular character should be named Heracles and not referred to as Hercules, which is the Roman counterpart. Similarly, by this logic it makes no sense that Heracles, Achilles, Patroclus are called Spartans — because they were not. The shoddy world building doesn’t stop there; Alexis’ serpent best friend identifies herself as an echidna “an ancient race of invisible snakes” (chapter 1), when in actual mythology Echidna is a singular half-snake monster and not an entire species. It was also fascinating to me that one of the romantic leads of the book is the son of Erebus and Artemis —as in, Artemis the maiden and a virgin goddess… The streets are saying that the author has a degree in Classics and while I’m not sure what that means in an American context, I had assumed that this would mean they have a basic understanding and/or respect for mythology and the Homeric epics.
There were other questions I had while reading this book that made it clear that I was thinking about the implications of the world building more than the author ever did. If the Greek/Roman gods are real immortal beings in this world and there have been Titan wars which have contributed to the destruction of the planet, how is there still consistent references to Christianity/a monotheistic God? If Christianity/monotheism is a fringe ideology and exiled, would that not be a compelling plot thread to follow particularly with reference to the purity culture of the Spartan’s and the way Alexis was raised?
Beyond this, the very existence of the elite world of Spartan’s and their political system makes little-to-no sense. The design of the Spartan War Academy is as convoluted as it is nonsensical. There is no reason for the Academy to run the way it is, beyond just fulfilling the war academy trope popularised by romance books like ‘Fourth Wing’.
The writing style in ‘Blood of Hercules’ is deeply unserious and overrun with cringe dialogue and TikTok idioms. The title of chapter 3 reads “surviving hell (high school)” which might have been tonally appropriate for a contemporary young adult or middle grade novel, but not for a novel targeted at adults.
Some of the most egregious examples of dialogue and internal monologue ever put to ink are littered throughout the book, including lines like; “kids at school called it apocalyptic core” (chapter 3), “pussy power, crush the patriarchy” (chapter 14), “I let out the cry (aquatic moan) of my people” (chapter 11), “I was staring at his male thotch (thigh-crotch) region like a weirdo” (chapter 16), “If I'd known all it would take was kneeing him in the crace (crotch, then face), I would have done it ages ago” (chapter 17), “Freak, fluck, biatch, crud, darn, flippin’, shirt,” I wailed despondently, but my eyes were bone dry because emo girls didn’t cry (I’d cried yesterday)” (chapter 21), “During Fluffy Jr.’s sudden growth spurt (early-onset obesity?)” (chapter 31) and “free the nipple and the lips (vaginal)?” (chapter 5, chapter 13 and chapter 27).
Some of the most egregious examples of dialogue and internal monologue ever put to ink are littered throughout the book, including lines like; “kids at school called it apocalyptic core” (chapter 3), “pussy power, crush the patriarchy” (chapter 14), “I let out the cry (aquatic moan) of my people” (chapter 11), “I was staring at his male thotch (thigh-crotch) region like a weirdo” (chapter 16), “If I'd known all it would take was kneeing him in the crace (crotch, then face), I would have done it ages ago” (chapter 17), “Freak, fluck, biatch, crud, darn, flippin’, shirt,” I wailed despondently, but my eyes were bone dry because emo girls didn’t cry (I’d cried yesterday)” (chapter 21), “During Fluffy Jr.’s sudden growth spurt (early-onset obesity?)” (chapter 31) and “free the nipple and the lips (vaginal)?” (chapter 5, chapter 13 and chapter 27).
Calling the prose cringe does not even begin to express how poorly written this is.
Alexis’ inner monologue is utterly ridiculous and bombastic despite her consistent passivity and complete refusal to take an active role within the story. Her inner monologue remains the same from when we first are introduced to her character as a ten-year-old through to the time jump when she is nineteen. The tone of the two perspectives were interchangeable. As a character, she is little more than a mouth-piece for the author to feed insipid disingenuous ‘feminist’ one-liners through while never actually giving her anything meaningful to do and forcing her into situations where her consent is dubious at best.
The other characters within this book are equally as one-dimensional as the protagonist. Most of the men in this book are interchangeable and it was difficult to tell one misogynistic and abusive man from the other. The characterisation is so abysmal, that a third of the way through the book one of the major love interests has a personality transplant and begins to inexplicably act like a completely different person.
Alexis’ inner monologue is utterly ridiculous and bombastic despite her consistent passivity and complete refusal to take an active role within the story. Her inner monologue remains the same from when we first are introduced to her character as a ten-year-old through to the time jump when she is nineteen. The tone of the two perspectives were interchangeable. As a character, she is little more than a mouth-piece for the author to feed insipid disingenuous ‘feminist’ one-liners through while never actually giving her anything meaningful to do and forcing her into situations where her consent is dubious at best.
The other characters within this book are equally as one-dimensional as the protagonist. Most of the men in this book are interchangeable and it was difficult to tell one misogynistic and abusive man from the other. The characterisation is so abysmal, that a third of the way through the book one of the major love interests has a personality transplant and begins to inexplicably act like a completely different person.
There is no excusing the clear lack of proofreading or copy editing that went into the production of this book. The very structure of the paragraphs themselves and the lengths of the sentences felt off. Oftentimes, sentences within the book either ran too long or too short, making the prose feel either too convoluted or choppy and incomplete. This could have been remedied by a heavier editing hand, even just to reconfigure the paragraphs. Unfortunately, the editors and publishers of ‘Blood of Hercules’ didn’t care about maintaining their integrity and are happy to force this travesty out into a publishing market already overflowing with poorly-written, low-quality pseudo-feminist romances for a quick buck.
In short, this book is utter brain rot. The second hand-embarrassment of living in a world where this was published traditionally by a major publisher is enough to send me to an early grave. Save the trees and don’t bother reading this.