Research Rant
Nov. 29th, 2012 02:11 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lenora_roseEspecially apropos Icon, since the chatty Roman women are from the Colosseum's artifact collection.
Just finished Rick Riordan's The Mark of Athena, third in his Heroes of Olympus series. This series plays on the differences between Greek and Roman mythology. And the third book actually makes it to the classical world; Rome, for now, but Greece is promised in the future volumes.
Overall, it's a yes; it keeps the adventure pace going and ends with one hell of a cliffhanger. The usual weird modern takes on mythological figures appear. The characters are smart-assed as ever, and enthusiastic, and their battles, as usual, reflect who they are, and their strengths and weaknesses. A couple of the quests are too easy, considering (Annabeth's in particular) but Leo's "duel" with Narcissus is a singular piece of awesome. He plays well to his strengths. He's been stretching a bit by expanding the number of points of view - and succeeding in making their priorities and in some cases their observations different enough. And points again for making some of his characters people of colour, even if they're still POCs from North America, and sometimes the other cultures feel forced or surfacy. There's nothing in this series that will sell him to people who find him not to their taste, but there's also nothing that will disappoint his fans. I'm buying the next book. Possibly just as soon after it comes out.
However, I have one gripe. It's not that big, considering most of the action takes place in semi-otherworldly places. And I didn't find a review on a casual scan of 4 to 1 star reviews on Amazon that even noticed. Yet, I did notice, and I've been in Rome four days in my life.
The problem? I am about 95% positive Rick Riordan has never been to Rome. The remaining 5% is the off chance that he was but his experience was so drastically different from mine as to seem like he hasn't, or his characters were meant to be that kind of clueless American tourist. (Well, they are. But there are still details that made me go "Bwah?")
(He says he HAS been to Greece, so I hold out hope for the future volumes)
Details, from lesser to greater:
- The city itself. On the approach, from Percy Jackson's point of view, he's awed at the size of Rome, even as opposed New York.
Um. I don't know what Rome looks like from the air (All the aerial views centre on the Colosseum or St. Peter's, and don't show the whole city by far), and it is big, but.
I would think that someone used to places like Manhatten, looking on Rome, would first be thinking, "Where are all the skyscrapers? It's kind of flat..."*
Pretty minor point. If that were all, I'd have held out.
- No mention of graffiti. Maybe this would be a blind spot for the characters; I don't know how ubiquitous graffiti is in New York and Houston. But. Winnipeg is hardly graffiti-free and I noticed just how much there was in Rome. (I think he may have made note of the feral cats. but that I wouldn't expect or care about.)
- No mention of St. Peter's Basilica or square, or the Vatican. Again, could have been a deliberate choice, since the series is rather focused on Ancient Rome. But it had the feel of an elephant in the room to have the characters wandering through central Rome and not at least have someone (Probably Annabeth or Leo) at least say, "Oh, we don't have to go that way. That's the Vatican, and none of the things we're looking for will be there."
- The Tiber. Riordan mentions the steep embankment that holds the river. But he also talks about shops along it, and has Percy and Annabeth eating at a cafe overlooking it. Which the waiter says is a nice view.
I might be entirely wrong about this. We didn't wander the riverside much. But it seemed very much to me like the Tiber wasn't considered an attraction. More like it was tucked away, easy to ignore even when on the bridges over it. There didn't seem to be a profusion of cafes or stores (or warehouses) alongside.
I don't remember anything like a steel-girdered bridge next to a half-broken line of stone arches. All the stone bridges I recall crossed. Actually, I don't remember a steel-girdered bridge near any of Central Rome. Nor is there one in the google image search above, or any note of ruins on the map. They headed to the Tiber from the Colosseum, so areas off that map are unlikely.
He calls the river Caramel-coloured. He and I must have different ideas what caramel looks like.
This was my lasting impression of the Tiber.
- Scale. Here's a Map of Central Rome Note the scale in the corner. For US people, a kilometre is just a little over half a mile. In other words, that map covers a six-kilometre by six-kilometre square. And the Colosseum is about 4 1/2 km from the Vatican. EVERYTHING even name-checked in the book (The Forum, the Pantheon, the Trevi Fountain, the Spanish Steps) is between those two points. Yet the characters manage to wander around for hours, from a place that, based on description and location, is either the Villa Borghese or part of the green space just southeast of the Circus Maximus. (Probably the first. It's more than the described mile from the Colosseum, but Percy and Annabeth getting lost and finding fountains and monuments by accident between the latter and the Colosseum REALLY stretches belief.)
The characters are walking through this area from some unspecified morning time (Long enough to need to pause for lunch, though) until about two int he afternoon, plus floating over it. Yet hazel talks wistfully about seeing the Trevi Fountain and the Spanish Steps. One gets the impression they never do. Yet they find the Pantheon. (Which, incidentally, might not have AC but is still enough cooler than the outdoors to be noticeable. Yes, even with the big hole and the open doors.)
The chances of them walking as long as they did and NOT seeing these is... let's just say low.
- Pizza. Yes, my biggest beef is Pizza.
Let's just quote from the book a bit.
Annabeth ... smiled at Percy. "I think Italians eat a lot later in the day. They don't put ice in their drinks. And they only do pizza for tourists."
...The pizza was a bland doughy square with not a lot of cheese. Maybe, Percy thought, that's why Romans didn't eat it. Poor Romans.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrongity wrong. (well, Annabeth is right about the ice. I'm not sure about the question of lunch; I don't remember when they eat before the siesta.)
I know citing Wikipedia is hardly proof of anything, but:
Pizza in Lazio (Rome), as well as in many other parts of Italy, is available in two different styles. Take-away shops sell pizza rustica or pizza al taglio. This pizza is cooked in long, rectangular baking pans and relatively thick (1–2 cm). The pizza is often cooked in an electric oven. It is usually cut with scissors or a knife and sold by weight. In pizzerias, pizza is served in a dish in its traditional round shape. It has a thin, crisp base quite different from the thicker and softer Neapolitan style base. It is usually cooked in a wood-fired oven, giving the pizza its unique flavor and texture.
Look at this picture of the Largo Argentino.
See the pizzeria? They're everywhere.
The BEST pizza I had on our Honeymoon, and possibly of all time, was a pizza rustica at a hole in the wall OFF the beaten tourist path (Though not hugely far), where they didn't speak English and we had to point to order. The next best was a pizzeria pizza in Sorrento.
Maybe Percy and Annabeth were in a cafe that doesn't serve pizza, as it is a food with its own restaurants. But Annabeth is usually portrayed as knowing factual details. And why they couldn't find a pizzeria in Rome, or have noted the existence of them in their wanders, is beyond me...
(ETA: As noted in conversation below, and I'd actually meant to say, Italian Pizza isn't actually that familiar to someone who's used to a Chicago style thick-crusted pep-and-cheese.He could have made a viable scene of "I ordered pizza and got something weird." But that isn't what we were given.)
Question: Couldn't Mr. Riordan have got his work checked over by someone who'd notice?
* For those who don't know, nothing in Rome is allowed to be built taller than St. Peter's basilica.
Just finished Rick Riordan's The Mark of Athena, third in his Heroes of Olympus series. This series plays on the differences between Greek and Roman mythology. And the third book actually makes it to the classical world; Rome, for now, but Greece is promised in the future volumes.
Overall, it's a yes; it keeps the adventure pace going and ends with one hell of a cliffhanger. The usual weird modern takes on mythological figures appear. The characters are smart-assed as ever, and enthusiastic, and their battles, as usual, reflect who they are, and their strengths and weaknesses. A couple of the quests are too easy, considering (Annabeth's in particular) but Leo's "duel" with Narcissus is a singular piece of awesome. He plays well to his strengths. He's been stretching a bit by expanding the number of points of view - and succeeding in making their priorities and in some cases their observations different enough. And points again for making some of his characters people of colour, even if they're still POCs from North America, and sometimes the other cultures feel forced or surfacy. There's nothing in this series that will sell him to people who find him not to their taste, but there's also nothing that will disappoint his fans. I'm buying the next book. Possibly just as soon after it comes out.
However, I have one gripe. It's not that big, considering most of the action takes place in semi-otherworldly places. And I didn't find a review on a casual scan of 4 to 1 star reviews on Amazon that even noticed. Yet, I did notice, and I've been in Rome four days in my life.
The problem? I am about 95% positive Rick Riordan has never been to Rome. The remaining 5% is the off chance that he was but his experience was so drastically different from mine as to seem like he hasn't, or his characters were meant to be that kind of clueless American tourist. (Well, they are. But there are still details that made me go "Bwah?")
(He says he HAS been to Greece, so I hold out hope for the future volumes)
Details, from lesser to greater:
- The city itself. On the approach, from Percy Jackson's point of view, he's awed at the size of Rome, even as opposed New York.
Um. I don't know what Rome looks like from the air (All the aerial views centre on the Colosseum or St. Peter's, and don't show the whole city by far), and it is big, but.
I would think that someone used to places like Manhatten, looking on Rome, would first be thinking, "Where are all the skyscrapers? It's kind of flat..."*
Pretty minor point. If that were all, I'd have held out.
- No mention of graffiti. Maybe this would be a blind spot for the characters; I don't know how ubiquitous graffiti is in New York and Houston. But. Winnipeg is hardly graffiti-free and I noticed just how much there was in Rome. (I think he may have made note of the feral cats. but that I wouldn't expect or care about.)
- No mention of St. Peter's Basilica or square, or the Vatican. Again, could have been a deliberate choice, since the series is rather focused on Ancient Rome. But it had the feel of an elephant in the room to have the characters wandering through central Rome and not at least have someone (Probably Annabeth or Leo) at least say, "Oh, we don't have to go that way. That's the Vatican, and none of the things we're looking for will be there."
- The Tiber. Riordan mentions the steep embankment that holds the river. But he also talks about shops along it, and has Percy and Annabeth eating at a cafe overlooking it. Which the waiter says is a nice view.
I might be entirely wrong about this. We didn't wander the riverside much. But it seemed very much to me like the Tiber wasn't considered an attraction. More like it was tucked away, easy to ignore even when on the bridges over it. There didn't seem to be a profusion of cafes or stores (or warehouses) alongside.
I don't remember anything like a steel-girdered bridge next to a half-broken line of stone arches. All the stone bridges I recall crossed. Actually, I don't remember a steel-girdered bridge near any of Central Rome. Nor is there one in the google image search above, or any note of ruins on the map. They headed to the Tiber from the Colosseum, so areas off that map are unlikely.
He calls the river Caramel-coloured. He and I must have different ideas what caramel looks like.
This was my lasting impression of the Tiber.
- Scale. Here's a Map of Central Rome Note the scale in the corner. For US people, a kilometre is just a little over half a mile. In other words, that map covers a six-kilometre by six-kilometre square. And the Colosseum is about 4 1/2 km from the Vatican. EVERYTHING even name-checked in the book (The Forum, the Pantheon, the Trevi Fountain, the Spanish Steps) is between those two points. Yet the characters manage to wander around for hours, from a place that, based on description and location, is either the Villa Borghese or part of the green space just southeast of the Circus Maximus. (Probably the first. It's more than the described mile from the Colosseum, but Percy and Annabeth getting lost and finding fountains and monuments by accident between the latter and the Colosseum REALLY stretches belief.)
The characters are walking through this area from some unspecified morning time (Long enough to need to pause for lunch, though) until about two int he afternoon, plus floating over it. Yet hazel talks wistfully about seeing the Trevi Fountain and the Spanish Steps. One gets the impression they never do. Yet they find the Pantheon. (Which, incidentally, might not have AC but is still enough cooler than the outdoors to be noticeable. Yes, even with the big hole and the open doors.)
The chances of them walking as long as they did and NOT seeing these is... let's just say low.
- Pizza. Yes, my biggest beef is Pizza.
Let's just quote from the book a bit.
Annabeth ... smiled at Percy. "I think Italians eat a lot later in the day. They don't put ice in their drinks. And they only do pizza for tourists."
...The pizza was a bland doughy square with not a lot of cheese. Maybe, Percy thought, that's why Romans didn't eat it. Poor Romans.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrongity wrong. (well, Annabeth is right about the ice. I'm not sure about the question of lunch; I don't remember when they eat before the siesta.)
I know citing Wikipedia is hardly proof of anything, but:
Pizza in Lazio (Rome), as well as in many other parts of Italy, is available in two different styles. Take-away shops sell pizza rustica or pizza al taglio. This pizza is cooked in long, rectangular baking pans and relatively thick (1–2 cm). The pizza is often cooked in an electric oven. It is usually cut with scissors or a knife and sold by weight. In pizzerias, pizza is served in a dish in its traditional round shape. It has a thin, crisp base quite different from the thicker and softer Neapolitan style base. It is usually cooked in a wood-fired oven, giving the pizza its unique flavor and texture.
Look at this picture of the Largo Argentino.
See the pizzeria? They're everywhere.
The BEST pizza I had on our Honeymoon, and possibly of all time, was a pizza rustica at a hole in the wall OFF the beaten tourist path (Though not hugely far), where they didn't speak English and we had to point to order. The next best was a pizzeria pizza in Sorrento.
Maybe Percy and Annabeth were in a cafe that doesn't serve pizza, as it is a food with its own restaurants. But Annabeth is usually portrayed as knowing factual details. And why they couldn't find a pizzeria in Rome, or have noted the existence of them in their wanders, is beyond me...
(ETA: As noted in conversation below, and I'd actually meant to say, Italian Pizza isn't actually that familiar to someone who's used to a Chicago style thick-crusted pep-and-cheese.He could have made a viable scene of "I ordered pizza and got something weird." But that isn't what we were given.)
Question: Couldn't Mr. Riordan have got his work checked over by someone who'd notice?
* For those who don't know, nothing in Rome is allowed to be built taller than St. Peter's basilica.
no subject
Date: 2012-11-30 12:27 am (UTC)I don't remember the amount of graffiti in Rome standing out at all. I haven't spent enough time in New York to have an impression of what it's like there, but coming from Los Angeles, I didn't have any sort of threshold triggered in Rome.
We spent a week in Rome and never went near the Vatican/St. Peter's. We looked at a map in the hotel on the first day, decided the Vatican was too far, and never spoke of it again. I could easily see it not coming up at all if we'd been on a specific "look for things in the Fora" mission (from what I gather from your post) rather than a "go sightseeing in Rome" trip.
Agree about the pizzerias. We (my companion largely, I entirely) avoided pizza in Italy, but they made their presence felt, yes.
We flew out of Rome, but I don't remember the visuals. Wikipedia tells me that the square mileage of Rome is slightly greater than NYC, so yeah, I'd expect the lower height and density to stand out.
I can't comment on the Tiber, since we didn't go that far west.
no subject
Date: 2012-11-30 03:45 am (UTC)Almost a pity about the pizza. It's not entirely familiar from what we get in North America, and he could have gotten a decent scene out of the nature of the pizza from the perspective of a Chicago-style pepperoni-pizza habit. But doughy and only for tourists are wrong.
We flew into and out of Rome, but in the dark and on the only cloudy days of our trip.
no subject
Date: 2012-11-30 03:53 am (UTC)I don't eat thin crust pizza, as a rule, and my companion who did eat the pizza in Italy said it was crap...and actually one time we did some Wikipedia research on the history of pizza and learned how and when it became drastically improved in Chicago, because the difference was so dramatic it was research-worthy.
It was sunny and daytime when we flew out, but I just don't remember. What I remember from the view on that flight was, "I'm over Greenland! Greenland! Man, geodesics are weird. I wish it weren't overcast."
no subject
Date: 2012-11-30 06:17 am (UTC)"Chicago-style" pizza (at least as served in Houston, I don't know about Chicago itself) is itself pretty weird if your baseline is the sorts of pizza you typically get in Winnipeg. If you mean the latter, that's not what at least some people are referring to when they speak of a Chicago-style pizza. The ones I had were a very thick crust topped with an even thicker layer of cheese, sauce and whatever toppings you ordered (mixed together with no well-defined layers) in an ugly but tasty mess, cooked in a VERY deep dish and with a mix of cheese and tomato sauce intentionally burnt around the edges to form a sort of bowl. The ones we're used to were referred to as "New York style", though that can also refer to very thin crust ones of the sort our mom likes and I don't.
no subject
Date: 2012-11-30 01:47 pm (UTC)The difference between what we know as pizza and Italian styles are often subtler, really. A matter of toppings, which will sometimes be strange to us, cheese quantities and kinds, and the flavour of the crust. Wikipedia says US pizzas have more toppings and more flavour - I'm not sure that's exactly right. They tend to use less cheese but not less of anything else, and done right, it doesn't need the extra. (Also, give the thin crusts there a chance.)
Of course, there ARE bad pizzas in Italy, and I half suspect some of the most tourist-ridden pizzerias are ... not the best. (Which is why I specified that we were a bit off the beaten track. Only by a block or two but you've probably got an idea how much difference a block or two can make, especially as regards tourist attractions.) Alas, the scene wasn't written like that. It was written, as cited above, as "Italians don't eat pizza, only clueless teenaged American tourists do."
Sandra here
Date: 2012-12-01 12:36 am (UTC)