Unfortunate, because I was interested in the story

[Janet]

I'm disappointed that this book was well written with a captivating story and then about 100 pages in, after a brief encounter earlier of what seemed an innocent 'kiss' between boys, I am hit with a detailed description of a sexual encounters between two teenage boys. I find it unfortunate that reviews or the book itself doesn't divulge the nature of this story or I would have not read the book.

[Kiersten]

Bruh it's a good book what are you on about, also it's not even detailed, its vague and written more as a mystical bond than anything gritty or smutty

[Nidhi ;)]

Yes, out of everything that happens there’s only one and even then moderately detailed scene all the other times, it’s only implied through emotional metaphors.

[Sophie]

Ok, so to explain in historical context (correct me if I am wrong) , but throughout ancient Greece, it was common for teenage boys or girls to fall in love and have sexual interactions with people significantly older than them and of the same gender. Also, just to mention that the age at which people died was pretty young at the time, so considering Achilles and Patroclus' age, for them I would assume that for them they would be considered in their adult years already. Especially, since I believe either in the Illiad or TSOA it is mentioned that boys their age were fighting in the Trojan war.

[Sharon]

I thought the writing was perfection but I felt that the author didn’t flesh out the two main characters enough. I felt empathy but in a general sense, and it would have made a difference if there was a stronger connection for me. In this way, the lack of emotional connection felt like the film “300,” where there are countless deaths of main characters but no one really got to know them so such a meaningful story can fall flat if it doesn’t emotionally connect you to the characters.

[Selbee]

I agree with you. It went from tame to NSFW in the blink of an eye, and the change in rhythm bothered me as well. The story is severely underdevelopped, the characters are superficial. But the most grievous issue I have with this book is the lack of consistency, both mythology and literature wise. And for an author who prides in her classical scholar titles, she made a huge error which should not be in this book. Anyone who's ever heard of Achilles knows that he was killed when an arrow struck his heel, you know like "Achilles heel", his only vulnerable point. So how can he die when an arrow hits his heart. Was the author going for the symbolism? His heart was Patrocles and he was killed?
Whichever, it is ridiculous and completely ruined the book for me!