thank you to netgalley for giving me this arc for an honest review. and boy will it be honest.

unfortunately to be honest, i will have to give specifics and possibly spoil parts, but i'll keep that to a minimum. however, as a SPOILER-FREE REVIEW, i will say this is the worst book i have ever read and i did not enjoy a single second of it. as a retelling, it was unbearable to read, especially as someone who knows an unnecessary amount about the iliad specifically, but even if it were to be an original story, i don't think i'd enjoy it very much.

this is a topic i know very well, both mythologically and historically, so i'd like to say i know what i'm talking about when it comes to specific details. it's something i was raised learning as both history and religion and it's something i'm actively studying in college. while i would not consider myself an expert and things could obviously be different, however as far as i know, even for a retelling, so many things were wrong in the worst way possible.

past this point there will be spoilers, they're kept to a minimum and as vague as they can be for certain points, however there are some specifics so if you don't want to spoil the book for yourself, then stop here.

i will say to start, i thought portraying achilles as a trans woman was incredibly interesting and something i don't have a problem with. portraying any of the historically cisgender characters as trans, really, was interesting and made the story interesting. that's really it though, everything else was bad. sorry in advance.

the first wrong thing that really stuck out to me was the usage of transliterations of names and cities rather than spelling it the common way. now, that's not that bad in itself, but there were incorrect transliterations, as well as ones that didn't read how they should in english. multiple times, it's stated that the masculine version of achilles is 'akhillewos' and the feminine version is 'akhilleas' which, yes, but also no. the way achilles/achilleia is spelled in greek, the inclusion of certain letters (such as the k rather than a c, despite the letter being ch in greek, or the w when there is no omega in the spelling, or the s at the end of the feminine version) makes that transliteration incorrect. it would have made more sense to refer to her (her being achilles within the book) as achilleia, as the greek spelling has no s on the end of it. it's the same with briseis- brisewos in the book. not only is the transliteration incorrect in the same way as achilles, but briseis in the iliad has a father of the same name, briseus, and that spelling definitely could have been used. the inclusion of the w specifically makes the pronunciation seem different for those who aren't familiar with greek or greek spelling (granted compared to the greek spelling it's still wrong, but my point still stands).

while i can appreciate the inclusion of the actual area's history, making it known that troy was a hittite city- as someone who's a classical studies minor, i know quite a bit about the hittites- i feel like that inclusion of multiple cultures, the achaians, hittites, egyptians, and amazons as a major role (for some reason), got to be too much. and while i think using the names of the figures from their cultures- alaksandu, antusekuririya, and more- i also think that it's... unnecessary and can possibly be confusing for people who aren't as familiar with the iliad or aren't familiar with ancient history. people who are just reading this casually and aren't familiar with history or only know the basics of the iliad aren't going to know that paris' name was alexander, and they most likely aren't going to know that alaksandu IS alexander. while i personally know the historical aspects and knew who was who, not everyone will.

going back to the characters such as brisewos and antusekuririya- andromache, hector's wife- as well as helen and clytemnestra (who was only mentioned but the mention is enough to have her included), i genuinely do not understand the purpose of changing where they were from. helen and clytemnestra, to start, were both spartan princesses born to leda and zeus and leda and tyndareus respectively. making helen a hittite and clytemnestra minoan- or of minos' bloodline, at the least- serves no purpose. it's the same with brisewos and andromache, briseis within the iliad was hittite, coming from a village outside of troy, not an amazon. and, while andromache shares a name WITH an amazon warrior, the andromache married to hector was not an amazon. while it's not the worst part of the book in the long run, to me changing where they're from serves no purpose to the plot and those are things that could have stayed the same and the story would have gone just the same.

while this is on the topic of changing things, the biggest issue with this entire book was the changing of the relationships between the gods, as well as the roles of some of the gods. that's something that has always been a pet peeve of mine and i hated the book so much because of this reason specifically. to start, making achilles the daughter of athena and making thetis a mortal serves no purpose. she could have been a demigoddess as the daughter of thetis too, making athena her real mother was a questionable choice that i can't say i understand. making aphrodite not only the queen of heaven and 'the great mother', but the mother of zeus, ares, and hephaestus, as well as the titans and the adopted mother of athena and hera was something that i hated. instead of including gaia, the literal mother of the earth and mother of titans, the role of aphrodite was completely changed, therefore changing the roles of the other gods. poseidon is completely separate from them, not related at all despite being the brother of hera and zeus (as well as hades and hestia, who were not included in the iliad either) within mythology. zeus, then, is the brother of ares and hephaestus, and his role, along with the other two, is changed as well. as someone who has been raised pagan and is still pagan with a leaning towards hellenism and the greek pantheon, this drastic of changes is unacceptable and a further reason as to why people who are not pagan should stay very far away from using the greek pantheon (i've had enough, this is something i refuse to change my mind on now). there are other parts with the gods, such as equivalents within other pagan pantheons that are incorrect, however that in itself is a topic that's disputed so i'm not touching on that.

also, something i refuse to think about longer than i have to, the relationship between agamemnon and achilles was weird and honestly made me uncomfortable. the troy (2004)-ification of achilles and patroclus was, in my opinion, already a bad way to go, but then making achilles and agamemnon have a sexual relationship was even worse. i know it was most likely a power thing, showing just how powerful (and girlboss) achilles was, but i just hated it.

along with that unfortunate relationship, there was the pregnancy. i think including that was a flaw in itself, not because i hated the pair and the pregnancy itself, but because it showed how rushed the story really was by having that timeframe. the iliad and the trojan war takes place over a span of ten or so years, yet i'm expected to believe the (almost) exact same events happen over the span of ~9 months in this? paired with the excessive amount of boat travel they do, i think including the pregnancy compressed the entire thing into a smaller frame of time and made it feel rushed but also drug it out much longer than it needed to be. the fact that it was a much shorter time frame felt wrong when patroclus was killed too, with achilles just rushing out to the battlefield right away rather than grieving her cousin for days on end, something that every iliad adaptation has achilles do regardless of regardless of how their relationship is presented in the book.

now, i think meryapi as a character is very fun, she was probably one of the only parts of the book itself i enjoyed. the relationship and sisterhood between her and achilles was lovely, however using that as the driving force for achilles to stop fighting seemed... wrong. yes, they were friends, but achilles stopping to fight because of her death not only made brisewos almost pointless as his iliad equivalent- briseis- is the reason achilles stops fighitng in there, but also just felt wrong because at the end of the day, meryapi wasn't her wife. not only that, but achilles going against her and patroclus' wishes until much later felt wrong, if the two were that close, i believe achilles would've followed her wishes and performed the burial rites as she had planned and as patroclus had wanted when she first died. that detail was strange to me, especially since they weren't lovers in any way and were, at the end of the day, just friends.

the very end of the book was strange to me, i admittedly lost the entire plot by that point. the death of the gods, the dead characters becoming one big amalgamation of things, the moon (for some reason) were all very confusing and didn't feel right. at that point, i was just happy to be finished with this book which could play a part in my confusion, but i genuinely do not understand it regardless of my enjoyment of this book.

i know that there are things i'm forgetting that i had an issue with, but i also think that's more than enough to make my point. there were minor things, like the magic or including akenaten as a historical figure despite no one knowing who exactly he was until very recently (in terms of archaeological discoveries that it), but i don't think i need to go any further into this review with how much i've already said.

i think, maybe, it could've been a good story with original characters. although i stated at the beginning i wouldn't enjoy it as an original either, i do think i'd enjoy it a little bit more just because it would have a lack of historical and mythological details to compare it to as opposed to being a retelling of the iliad. i definitely think as an original story, it would have been an incredible trans epic, again it would have no historical equivalent or historical facts and details to compare it to. while it was a good story in the way of an incredibly strong and powerful trans woman going against essentially everyone and coming out on top in a way, i think the rest of the story, along with this being a subject i know more about than anything else, ruined it for me.

WRATH GODDESS SING is one of those books where it doesn't even matter so much if it's good because it's so committed to its over-the-top project that you don't even care, but it also happens to be AMAZING. I couldn't put it down, and as someone who has read a lot of ancient and classical historical novels and retellings of the Trojan War (and, apparently, one of the few people on the planet who's never found Madeline Miller to be anything special), believe me when I say that I wasn't expecting to be as blown away by this book as I was. Just... wow. WRATH GODDESS SING and Nghi Vo's SIREN QUEEN are the two best new 2022 titles I've read so far and nothing else has even come close yet.

An author's first novel is always a little clunky, but I've never read one that shone with such promise as Wrath Goddess Sing. While the phrasing and pacing need a little polish, the story, characters, ideas, and raw emotions of the work shine through.

I think the most impressive thing about the story is how well Achilles works as a protagonist. Her perspective-- flawed and obviously biased-- somehow also makes the world feel more full. Nailing an unreliable narrator's point of view is a hard thing to do at the best of times, much less for an author's first go.

The blend of mythology, archaeology, classical paganism, and science weave a gripping story in a fully-realized world. Upping the stakes of the Trojan war is fantastic. The view of history this novel pulls out to include is excellent. This is a book I'll reread time and time again.

I absolutely loved the spin on greek mythology in this book! I love the trans representation and how Achilles is portrayed. She is strong, independent and fearsome. Such a wonderful story and I would prefer this version over Song of Achilles!

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say this is likely not the fantasy you're expecting, but it's the fantasy we all deserve. Maya Deane manages to take familiar, some might even say tired, old tales of classical mythology and gives them new life and new meaning. Wrath Goddess Sing utterly transforms the familiar in a story that incorporates themes of transgender identity, personal trauma, faith, love, and war.

Portraying Achilles as a transwoman is only the stepping-off point for the tale, but the opening chapters hit hard. There's a power and a beauty to the transgender community as Deane portrays it, outcasts who've embraced a found family, and the way Achilles' divine transformation changes her fate, even as it destroys her relationships, is the emotional heart of everything that follows. Granted, there were times where I resented that transformation, as it shifts something grounded and relevant into something fanciful, but that says something all on its own.

While this is, ostensibly at least, the story of the Trojan War, it's a version unlike any you've ever read before. It's less about the lust for an impossible beauty and more about the hunger for power. Deane looks at what it means to be divine, to be worshiped, to have mortals fight for you . . . and to die for you. It's like a high-stakes game of poker, but one where the currency is the power of human lives rather than anything financial. Helen is a bit much, especially at first, over-the-top and completely unlike what the legends have led us to expect, but I love what Deane has done with her, establishing her as a worthy foil for Achilles.

As for Achilles, she's a tough protagonist to follow. She's difficult, selfish, brooding, and often petty. I found myself furious with her as often as I was worried for her, and I don't mind saying that some of her decisions (or periods of indecision) left me exasperated. Ironically, for a story that has a lot to say about the transgender experience and the privilege of passing, she's more masculine as a transformed woman than she was as a transgender one, especially when contrasted against the likes of Damia and Melia, transwomen from different stages in her life, one a friend and lover of her found family who rejected her for no longer being kallai, and the other a slave-girl she once rejected (and still cannot befriend) for being kallai herself. In many ways, I'd argue that the Egyptian sorceress Meryapi, friend and ally of her extended family, is the heroine here, a wonderful woman whom I did admire, did love, and did cheer for every time she appears on the page. She supports Achilles, sacrifices for her, and acts as a role model of powerful, self-confident femininity - without getting into spoilers, how she deals with certain aspects of womanhood are a wonderful contrast to how Achilles does the same.

My favorite scenes in the book are those that have nothing to do with Troy or the war. The transgender kallai community on Skyros, complete with their underground ceremonies, is something I wish we got more of. I could read a whole novel about them, their lives, and their loves. Topping even that, though, is the journey that Achilles and Meryapi take into the heart of Egypt, a quest that is equal parts epic fantasy and treasure hunting adventure, with some of the most thrilling moments in the whole story.

The last act of the novel is a tough one, marking a significant change in tone and emotion, with a great deal of darkness, sorrow, hopelessness, and anger. It's heavily influenced by the magic and mythologies of the tale, but it's also somehow the most human part of the story. I honestly wasn't sure where it was leading or how it could possibly end, and it does become more complex and spiritual than I expected, but I have zero qualms with how it all played out. Wrath Goddess Sing is a beautifully written book, complex and layered, with characters who breathe new life into legends.