#reinterpretations

But lately I've found myself on another kind of reinterpretations. people who sing the song from Jolene's point of view. And the angle is very different.

First note, so far everyone I've seen has called the unnamed narrator of the original song "Dolly". Apparently everyone's up and decided Dolly Parton was singing as herself.

The other point is, pretty much all the songs I found fall in two camps(except one):

"this guy is a cheating bastard. I don't want him and you should leave him" ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTh31aVIlJQ, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_OcGTay52Y, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmMAg3b9Cng, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tRQEf_VCpc[only version so far that doesn't name 'Dolly'])

"Oh, my sweet summerchild. I'm not pursuing him, it's YOU I want" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tMWOGU9RTE, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ne1CcFipXs, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moYfYC3rQBs)

And my only exception so far (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXHZUnY6e6Q) is Jolene saying "yeah, don't worry. he only has eyes for you".

That last one conflict somewhat with the evidence provided in the original, but in general I'd it falls well within the general trend here. Which is, people have decided that Jolene's got a bad rap here, and she is a better person than 'Dolly' thought. It also, and I think that's generally the starting point of all of them, brings back into focus the responsability of 'Dolly' 's man.

That guy has agency after all, and 'Dolly' seems to almost see him as a victim to the viles of that grand Jolene devourer of men (take note how we circle back to the evil goddess angle, since both interpretations stem from that same blindspot of the character)

Even the one song I've seen that uses the man's point of view (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbVlqKCx4CQ) says "Don't attack her, it's my fault so hold me responsible for it"

I feel I have to note this down, even if it doesn’t get seen by anyone. Short as my stint of ‘I love everything about Lore Olympus’ has been, I’ve noticed plenty of people being angry over how Greek mythology is being interpreted in Lore Olympus, claiming that it sullies the original myths (which they think don’t need to be reinterpreted) and it misrepresents the mythology as a whole. Furthermore, it has been claimed that achieving commercial success in misrepresenting the myths could potentially mean that reinterpretations such as Lore Olympus will overshadow the original myths and wrong ‘lore’ will be passed on as ‘true’, which will mess up the knowledge passed on to future generations. 

This is not a new problem - reinterpretation of stories, folklore, myths, and anything of content is far from being a new phenomenon. While I lack deeper knowledge of Greek mythology, I am still aware that myths rarely have just one version (in fact, they often have multiple versions) and that reinterpretations - both official and non-official - happen. In my opinion, the problem for those who dislike the attention Lore Olympus is getting, is not just the reinterpretation, but the potential possibility that the reinterpretation will gain a life of its own and the original myths will pale in comparison. This is an understandable fear, but the solution to this is not a ban on reinterpretations or scoffing at people, who do like reinterpretations, but educating - calmly - your peers that original Greek mythology and mythological interpretations are two different things and should be accepted as such. Reinterpretations of modern entertainment has also been an issue, with people being upset over new versions of their loved TV series, movies, etc. being released. There are plenty of examples, where new versions or interpretations of existing content have been released and someone is always unhappy about it - examples are Pride and Prejudice (Colin Firth version vs Keira Knightley version - both of which I love, because I think they’re different and yet they still tell the same story); Jane Eyre (I was so upset over the Mia Wasikowska version, as I loved the 2004 version, but I have grown to love it and have discovered that plenty of people absolutely hated the 2004 version); different doctors in Doctor Who etc.  Key term is - don’t hate what people like, unless there is a reason for it such as promoting abuse or unhealthy relationship/life patterns etc. While Lore Olympus is not perfect, it probably won’t have the potential to create similar damages to how people view Greek mythology as for example Fifty Shades of Grey did to BDSM community, after which plenty of people seem to think that FSOG is the true representation of explorative sexual relationship. However, if people accept that FSOG is not a true representative of BDSM kinks (and don’t promote it as such) and still like it, then who the hell am I do judge them for it? Personally, Ithink FSOG is a poorly written crap with even poorer sex within, but arguably lots of people like it and enjoy it and I keep myself out of their enjoyment. This is not just about Lore Olympus, although I used it as an example. I noticed the same about Anne of Green Gables reinterpretation (which I thought was fantastic! And I love both ‘Anne with an E’ and the original Anne of Green Gables movies) and Harry Potter. Don’t get me wrong - I loathe Cursed Child, but I cannot undo it and there are people who enjoy it. I simply choose to ignore that part of HP lore and focus on other aspects that I love in the fandom.

The Halls... the halls were still under renovation by their inheritor.

One visiting the Halls would find them to be in an unusual state... not stone, but rather a hard, dense wooden bark covered every single surface, still growing and inching its way further and further in towards the deepest, darkest reaches of the ruins.

Holding a tree, near the physical entrance to the Halls, was the shaman himself... eyes closed in meditative focus... each breath he took furthering the spread of Rowan wood through his halls, bit by bit, guiding and shaping it to mold into every crack and crevice, support the crumbling foundations and fortify it.