2.5 stars rounded down.

Thank you NetGalley for the ARC of this book. The premise of Psyche and Eros really drew me in. I’m a sucker for a good retelling of one of best love stories in Greek mythology. Sadly, I was disappointed. There was no depth to Psyche and Cupid/Eros’s relationship. I found myself not caring for either of them or whether or not they end up together. Certainly not a delicious love story like in the Song of Achilles. The way Psyche was portrayed also made me extremely uncomfortable. Every interaction with Eros made her seem like a child. She was naive like a child and spoke like one too. She never questioned anything really which goes completely against her character before they meet. Their relationship seemed predatory and just… wrong.

Additionally, not a whole lot happened. There was barely any action or plot.

Overall, a disappointing read.

This retelling gave us a great foundation to start with but as someone who loves Greek and Roman mythology it was hard to look past some of what I know! I still enjoyed the story and though Psyche was written different from what we are used too I do love how strong and fierce she was! I am a sucker for a heroine who kicks butt!

I will say this story reignited my love for myths and legends and overall I love their love! Eros and Psyche have always been a favorite of mine and I did truly love this book.

Luna McNamara’s Psyche and Eros is a telling of a lesser known Greek myth. Interweaving many different elements of mythology and Greek history, this story was captivating from the very first page. The romantic plot is perfectly illustrated, and doesn’t take away from the strength and battle Psyche is to display. If you love “Song of Achilles”, you’ll love this book too.

I knew I'd have issues with this book the moment I saw the Prologue pre-emptively being defensive about there being only 3 words for love in Greek without presenting an argument other than plot necessity. When you feel the need to start off your novel with a prologue in which you lay out your choice of plot that goes against most academia but without a convincing argument for it, that spells trouble. And the author's notes by the end didn't help matters since she merely waved it away with "there's some debate" about the number of Greek words for love but doesn't say what this supposed debate is built on and omits one word from the count. This is coming from an author that puts in her bio that she's studied Greek and Roman history and language.

And since we're on the subject of authors with supposed expertise in Greek & Roman culture, I have to ask the hard question: what is their problem with feminine women in ancient Greece and Rome? Why do they feel the need to take a feminine woman and make her into some warrior princess she never was? There are already some women like that in their myths, like Atalanta, Penthesilea, Artemis, Hippolyta, etc., that you could use if all you want is "active" women who can wield a bow and fight like men. So why do you take women who aren't warriors or tomboys and rewrite them as some sort of tomboys who can be as manly as any Greek hero with the excuse that it's "feminist"? How is it feminist to negate a woman's personality and distort it into another kind of personality that you, a modern woman from the 21st century who probably thinks Wonder Woman is the epitome of feminism, think is the correct way to be a "hero"?

Psyche is the only story with a Heroine's Joruney arc in Greco-Roman mythology, and it turns out she is a feminine and "girly" character. She is no warrior, she doesn't go around shooting at stuff and defying the males to athletic & horsemanship competitions. But in this retelling, Luna McNamara twisted her into some unrecognisable warrior princess with an abrasive personality that expresses misandrist opinions at times (except when she has to fall in love with Eros, of course) and learns to fight with none other than Atalanta. Our sweet, kind, hard-working, persistent, and courageous but also naïve and flawed Psyche is turned into some wannabe Amazon for the sake of appealing to modern sensibilities that can't stand a woman who can't fight and save herself, apparently.

And that's only the start of the issues, because there's more. McNamara doesn't like Apuleius' tale much, which she dismissively labels as "so termed Roman myth" and decides it needs almost complete reworking, so she cooks a soup of all myths regardless of consistency and narrative cohesion. She makes Eros not the son of Aphrodite and Mars as Apuleius wrote it but threw in Hesiod's version of the myth that has Eros as one of the primordial gods that existed before the Olympians. Bear in mind that Eros & Psyche is Apuleius' creation, there are myths about Eros and Psyche earlier than his book but they are different and don't make them a couple. Aside Apuleius, we don't have any early version about Eros & Psyche as a couple, so yes, the "so termed Roman myth" isn't even a myth but a Roman novel, not a Greek myth, whether you like it or not. By that time, Greece had been part of the Roman empire for centuries and its culture had been absorbed into Rome's quite intrinsically. You'd think someone who's studied the classics would know how to distinguish between the actual myths relayed as they were told, like Hesiod's, and retellings and reinventions of those myths, like Apuleius or Euripides. But McNamara doesn't, she pretends it's all the same, that this is some strange myth that defies categorisation, blah, blah, and let's forget there's depths of philosophical allegory in the tale that come form Apuleius' particular worldview. I'm always surprised by supposed classicists that can't tell one from the other.

So, here we have a mediocre pastiche of the actual myths surrounding Eros with the novel by Apuleius plus Greek drama bits and plenty of personal tastes forced into foreign ancient mythology. Eros is forced to be Aphrodite's "son," why? Because she says so and he can't avoid becoming her slave. Psyche is made a Mycenaean princess and granddaughter of Perseus, why? Because the author wanted it, screw cohesion. Psyche's sisters aren't the envious saboteurs as in the novel, why? Because the author despises having precious sisterly bonds depicted negatively, screw that as a social worker she'd know well how dysfunctional families can be, but of course let's keep Aphrodite as the arch-villain and make her even eviller than in the novel, because that's not sexist, no, sir, only showing women as bad sisters is sexist.

The story becomes a name-dropping marathon of Who's Who in Greek mythology. Everyone worth a mention in the heroic cycle appears here. The author decided this story would take place during the Trojan War timeline, because why not, a time where human sacrifice was still practised, but somehow making a feminine girl a tomboy so she's properly feminist is more important than the horrific customs of the time. You get a catwalk throng of heroes and gods sashaying around here, and all changed from how they are in the myths. Why? Because "myths are always evolving and adapting." Yeah? Is Greece your culture and are those myths part of your modern culture? No. The author is American, and as many Anglophone authors recently, seems to think they can take another culture's mythology and do as they please with it in the name of "reclaiming it" or making it feminist.

Whilst I particularly hated the changes to Psyche's character, I also didn't think the other changes made sense. Why make Penelope the sister of Helen and not Clytemnestra? Why make Aphrodite's motives for punishing Psyche not a matter of divine prerogatives accidentally infringed on but jealousy over Eros being freed from his slavery to her? Why change the three tasks of Psyche to your taste and involve Eros in them when they're Psyche's to solve? And the biggest question of them all: why on Hades make the gods deny Psyche her boon of becoming a goddess and make her become a goddess illegally through an unauthorised potion by Hekate et al.? That wouldn't be possible, Zeus could kill Psyche for becoming an immortal without his authorisation. And in any case, it was him who made her an immortal on Eros' pleading in the first place, so what's so bad about this that it needed changing? Nobody can become a god without Zeus allowing it, so this outcome is nonsensical to the Nth degree. And it also warps the only happy ending in a Greek myth-based story that was actually earned.

So, no, this isn't a good retelling for so many reasons but mainly for the incongruous pastiche of Everything Goes plots. And it isn't even a good romance because there's such a throng of characters and mishmashed plotlines that there's hardly any time for Eros and Psyche to build a relationship. It's a collage of half-chewed ideas that were plucked out at will and fancy and put together regardless of cohesion, in a world that doesn't read like Greece in any time period, and much less like Troy-era Greece because the gods and the heroes talk and think rather modernly.

I received an ARC through NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.

3 likes

I absolutely loved this book so much I can't even begin to express how much. It was everything I wanted and more loved the story and the writing was amazing.

Thank you NetGalley, William Morrow, and Luna McNamara for a copy of this book in exchange for an honest review! This is a unique book focusing on the relationship between Psyche and Eros and includes many famous stories in Greek mythology. The writing style is lyrical and easy to read and I really liked the storyline between the two main characters. I had my own issues with it and became a little bored during the middle, but I think people will enjoy this one!

I will not be reviewing Harper Collins titles until they agree to a fair contract with the union. I stand in solidarity with HarperCollins Union Local 2110 UAW in their fight for a fair contract. We urge HarperCollins Publishers to come back to the negotiating table and agree to a contract that reflects the Union’s need for diversity commitments, union protections, and wage adjustments. Publishing is a historically underpaid industry and current salaries do not reflect HarperCollins’s profits, the current cost of living, or salaries paid by peer media and publishing companies. Low wages affect everyone but are particularly hard on people who are underrepresented in the publishing industry—vital voices that HarperCollins needs to cultivate, not drive away.

The book is wonderful for those who love Greek Retelling/Greek Mythology. The book itself reads slow, the plot not exhilarating or fascinating. There are a lot of side characters to remember and keep track of. If you are not familiar with Greek mythology prior to reading, it may be daunting reading this.

As for it being a romance, this book doesn't read like one. The main characters fall in love, are separated, then reunited at the end of the book. That is most of what we, as readers, get to feel of the maincharacter's romantic life.

I would recommend this to someone who likes fiction stories based on Mythology, not to someone who enjoys romance novels.

I liked the idea of the book and I enjoy Greek tales. However, I didn't love any one part of this story. The book blends together and feels even toned. I was no more intrigued in the middle of the storyline as I was when first starting it or when I finished the last chapter.

I'm not a huge mythology fan, but I adored song of Achilles, so I have been trying a few more books. I enjoyed the story though it was pretty slow in some parts. There was an error in the book calling Eros "eros" instead of cupid from psyches perspective before she knew him. The romance was also slightly lacking in depth for a romance book.

I always love a good retelling be it Greek mythology or fairy tales, and this does a great job in telling the story. It took a Greek myth that people would know and created a modern story in the genre. I enjoyed how good the plot was and worked in the Greek myth going on, it kept the spirit and be its own thing. The characters were great and worked in the universe set. I loved the way Luna McNamara wrote this and am excited to read more from her.

"Don’t toy with Aphrodite,” I warned my sister. “No good will come of it.”Eris tilted her head, a dainty hand covering her mouth. “I’m not seeking your advice, sweet brother. I’m merely warning you. Aphrodite promised Paris the hand of the most beautiful woman in the world, and I wouldn’t want it to be that human girl you’re keeping as a pet. Psyche, I think her name is? Watch her closely, dear brother.”

I thought this was a pretty good read. I didn't know if I would get into it since I'm not a mythology buff, but it was interesting and compelling. I think our patrons will enjoy it as they have also been enjoying other mythology retellings.