I dare you to find one character in this series who doesn't have curly hair...

Storm of Olympus is the third and final book in the Daughter of Sparta trilogy, and while I think it's a satisfying ending in a plot sense, I had a few issues with this book. The first two books were enjoyable, and I thought this one was fine as well, just not to the same extent. I'll go into more spoiler-y details below my review, and I'll be honest, they account for most of the issues I have with this book.

Troy has been destroyed, and Olympus is in danger of falling as the Titans walk the earth once more. Meanwhile, Daphne struggles to connect with her power and confront her destiny of destruction. I can't go much into plot details here because some major spoilers occur within the first few chapters, and that's kind of the issue I had with this book: everything important happened at the beginning or the end. The pacing is relatively fast still, but the middle is kind of dry in terms of plot (I can only think of one major scene, and it doesn't feel like it has much stake in the actual trajectory of the novel. I liked the beginning and had high hopes for the rest of the book; it was very action-packed, and the stakes were high. However, as I've seen some other reviews mention, Daphne died in both previous books, so she seems invulnerable, and there isn't really a question of her survival anymore. Admittedly, most of the other characters don't have the same amount of plot armor, but because Daphne is our protagonist, it's kind of hard to be invested in a story where we know she can't really be damaged. And, like I said earlier, I think the ending is satisfying in a vague sense, but I was disappointed by certain arcs. I do want to mention that I thought the fight scenes were written very well and reminded me a lot of MCU level fight scenes, even if the ending battle was kind of similar to the fifth Percy Jackson book. Overall, I'm glad I finished the series, but I'm not sure that the ending is worth the dry middle sections.

I don't really have many thoughts on the characters for this book because I was kind of "meh" toward all of them. Daphne is still a decent protagonist, but she's kind of overpowered in this book, and there's never really a sense of danger when she's involved. I don't dislike her, but I don't find her as empowering as everyone says because I think it would've been a stronger message had she not embraced divinity as an equalizer. Apollo felt irrelevant again; I was honestly half convinced that Hermes was taking over as love interest because the dynamics between him and Daphne felt more natural than her random simp scenes with Apollo. I didn't care for Hermes on his own, or Apollo, for that matter. Lykou was a wolf for a while again, and I think that's why I started liking him again? But he didn't have much page time, nor did Pyrrhus (whose arc I was also excited for). I was hoping to see more rage from Pyrrhus since, y'know, both Achilles and Patroclus died and he was their third lover, but he only served as a minor conflict for Daphne. The rest of the characters didn't have much depth to them, and I found the relationship between Lyta and Helen to be a bit abrupt, but I still liked seeing Daphne interact with them.

So is Storm of Olympus worth it? Yes, if you're a long-time enjoyer of the series and enjoy feminist retellings that stray from the original material. I think it's a worthwhile conclusion to the trilogy, even if I have issues with it, and I appreciate the messages it tries to send.

3.25/5

SPOILERS
I tried to be vague above because most of my problems with this book would be considered spoilers, but I feel the need to talk about them.

1) The Norse Gods...why? I understand that the author is probably interested in mythology of all kinds, but the inclusion of the Asgardians felt entirely random to me, and I also didn't think it mattered that much in the end. When Daphne and the others are resolving the conflict involving the Garden of Hesperides, a few Asgardians show up and say they have a stake in it because all the "trees" are connected. Okay, fine, but why not include other gods, too? Maybe I missed something, but it felt to me like the author just wanted to add Norse Gods for funsies, and it didn't match with the plot.

2) Lykou's death. Why? For emotional shock? It felt like the author's way of eliminating any chance of a romance between Daphne and Lykou was just to kill him. Dude deserved way better than to die for a woman who doesn't love him back, especially considering that if his death was a "solution" to a love triangle, it didn't matter because Daphne kept flirting with Hermes. Also, he was, like, the one mortal character left, so I guess it's expected that he died, but it felt too convenient and so short that I didn't even cry.

3) Aphrodite, Athena, and Artemis's final choice. I guess it was maybe supposed to reinforce the feminist themes because the female goddesses were sacrificing themselves? Aphrodite I could maybe understand since both of her lovers are gone, and Athena's sacrifice could be considered reasonable because it's the choice of wisdom, but Artemis? Giving up her life so her brother could have a freaking girlfriend? Absolutely not. No. I don't know why it bothers me so much, but it does.

4) The original myth. I don't know much about the original Daphne/Apollo myth besides what I found from a quick summary: Eros shoots Apollo with an arrow of love and Daphne with an arrow of hatred; Apollo falls in love with Daphne and pursues her, and Daphne is turned into a laurel tree to avoid his advances. I wasn't expecting this adaptation to follow the same tragic ending, but I was hoping for some sort of hint of this story besides the laurel tree at the end. It's a minor complaint (I know retellings/adaptations don't have to be loyal), but I wish there were a few more hints of the original myth.

5) Similarly, the author's intended message. I read the author's notes, and it seems that she was trying to create a feminist retelling because, in reality, none of these mythological stories have been proven true, and what's to say her version isn't the true one? I like the discussion involving the history of mythology and the unknowns that still remain, but creating your own story that varies so differently from the original, marketing it (as far as I've seen) as a retelling, and then claiming it could be true and we'll never know just comes across as a bit weird to me. Again, this is just a minor thing I had an issue with, but fans looking for a faithful retelling might want to look elsewhere.