I did not first hear about The Hunger Games until the fans of the books pulled the movie out of the mess of other movie trailers and into the spotlight last year. Upon reading the first book before seeing the movie, I was duly impressed. (I also believe the movie is fantastic, but since this AtRN is about the books and not the movie, that is perhaps a discussion for another day.) I then resolved to finish the trilogy--even though I had heard some troublesome dissonance about the last two books--as soon as possible.
Well, "as soon as possible" turned into "months later," but I've finally gotten around to consuming the entire series.
I have heard many different opinions on the trilogy. Some say the last two "suck." Some say the second "sucks" and the third one is "better." Many lament that the books are good "except for the damn love triangle." Most people agree that the first is the best.
Before I delve into my AtRN thesis for The Hunger Games, let's just get my very quick opinions of the three individual books out of the way:
- The Hunger Games (the first book) is fairly superb. It is engrossing, well-written, and overall has excellent balance to its numerous aspects.
- Catching Fire is certainly the weakest of the trilogy, and suffers the most from Collins's selected writing style for the series. I would not go so far as to say it "sucks," but the book sadly places itself in the tired category of the "weak-but-unfortunately-necessary-second-book-in-a-trilogy." It is in no way a horrible book, however.
- Mockingjay, though not as strong as The Hunger Games, surprised me with its satisfying end and left me with a pleasant association with the entire series. In that way, I'd say it's highly successful, and a worthy end to the trilogy.
Although I have issues with the second (and somewhat the third) books, clearly I am far from condemning them as some readers have. This is because I believe readers of The Hunger Games often suffer from what I am calling Reader Expectation vs. Character Reality, a problem I find increasingly in modern audiences and have even caught myself succumbing to.
What is Reader Expectation vs. Character Reality, and what does it have to do with The Hunger Games trilogy? Read on after the break to find out!
I am a fan of Hank and John Green of Youtube vlogbrothers fame. In one of my favorite videos, John Green (author of such exceptional books as The Fault in Our Stars and Looking for Alaska) mentions how many people dislike The Great Gatsby by Scott Fitzgerald because of its lack of "likable characters." As John Green states, "I don't know where people got the idea that characters in books are supposed to be likable. Books are not in the business of creating merely likable characters with whom you can have some simple identification. Books are in the business of making great stories that make your brain go all ajd;lakfjd;aldkfjsl."
This falls into the phenomenon of what I have decided to call Reader Expectation vs. Character Reality.
Many people read books as a form of escapism, and thus characters often come to be viewed as not who they actually are but rather who the reader wants them to be.
This idea is similar to that of author wish fulfillment, in which an author writes in a character that is a copy of the author his/herself, but instead of being an accurate representation is rather an idealized version of that author. It can also be seen in what is known as the Proteus effect, when people create digital representations of themselves (avatars, Internet personas, etc.) and subconsciously “improve” or idealize their looks and personally and expect people to treat them accordingly.
When people read books with these tendencies, it is difficult for them to take a book for what it is. They do not want to see the main character struggling and acting cruelly or foolishly. They do not want ambiguity and frustration. They want confidence, clear lines of good and evil. They want a hero who is self-assured and can get the job done like a superhero come to save the day.
Why? Because we want to believe that we would do the same.
I was talking to someone I know who said that his friend didn't care for the first Hunger Games book. Since the first is pretty much across-the-board popular, I was curious and asked why. He said that it was because she was frustrated with Katniss (and probably the other characters) for going along with the system instead of trying to work against it.
It's a classic example of Reader Expectation vs. Character Reality.
The Hunger Games trilogy is written with a brutal realism and honesty which I believe catches people (including myself) off guard.
The truth is, we as humans do not easily turn to rebellion and revolution to overturn an unjust and cruel system. We are more likely to make the best of a bad situation than we are to look for ways to change it. (This is an important theme in my own graphic novel, Everdusk, and I am becoming increasingly interested in the topic.) As a real life example, even the American War for Independence did not come about as swiftly as many believe; there was much deliberation and leaders in America trying to fix the colonies' relation with the British Empire, and war was a last desperate act after other appeals and methods had been attempted.
In The Hunger Games movie itself, President Snow even mentions, "Hope. It is the only thing stronger than fear. A little hope is effective; a lot of hope is dangerous." As horrible as most people's lives in are in Panem, they are not terrible enough that these people would rise against the Capitol. They still have that small bit of hope--not necessarily that their situation will improve, but rather that they will be able to survive and still find some meaning in their lives. Though their lives are dismal, they know what to expect. It is familiar. It is comfortable.
A revolt against the Capitol is not familiar. It is the unknown, and far more terrifying than hoping you'll get food on the table each day. It takes great desperation or great hope to force a person into the unknown, and Katniss and the people of Panem simply do not have either during the events of the first book.
Now, these are some general statements about the first book that are leading up to some more specific points about the trilogy. In order to not make this review obnoxiously long, let's save the rest of the review for Part 2, in which we will dissect Susan Collins's writing style from Katniss's point of view, and how it also ties in with the Reader Expectation vs. Character Reality that many readers fall into.
I am a fan of Hank and John Green of Youtube vlogbrothers fame. In one of my favorite videos, John Green (author of such exceptional books as The Fault in Our Stars and Looking for Alaska) mentions how many people dislike The Great Gatsby by Scott Fitzgerald because of its lack of "likable characters." As John Green states, "I don't know where people got the idea that characters in books are supposed to be likable. Books are not in the business of creating merely likable characters with whom you can have some simple identification. Books are in the business of making great stories that make your brain go all ajd;lakfjd;aldkfjsl."
This falls into the phenomenon of what I have decided to call Reader Expectation vs. Character Reality.
Many people read books as a form of escapism, and thus characters often come to be viewed as not who they actually are but rather who the reader wants them to be.
This idea is similar to that of author wish fulfillment, in which an author writes in a character that is a copy of the author his/herself, but instead of being an accurate representation is rather an idealized version of that author. It can also be seen in what is known as the Proteus effect, when people create digital representations of themselves (avatars, Internet personas, etc.) and subconsciously “improve” or idealize their looks and personally and expect people to treat them accordingly.
When people read books with these tendencies, it is difficult for them to take a book for what it is. They do not want to see the main character struggling and acting cruelly or foolishly. They do not want ambiguity and frustration. They want confidence, clear lines of good and evil. They want a hero who is self-assured and can get the job done like a superhero come to save the day.
Why? Because we want to believe that we would do the same.
I was talking to someone I know who said that his friend didn't care for the first Hunger Games book. Since the first is pretty much across-the-board popular, I was curious and asked why. He said that it was because she was frustrated with Katniss (and probably the other characters) for going along with the system instead of trying to work against it.
It's a classic example of Reader Expectation vs. Character Reality.
The Hunger Games trilogy is written with a brutal realism and honesty which I believe catches people (including myself) off guard.
The truth is, we as humans do not easily turn to rebellion and revolution to overturn an unjust and cruel system. We are more likely to make the best of a bad situation than we are to look for ways to change it. (This is an important theme in my own graphic novel, Everdusk, and I am becoming increasingly interested in the topic.) As a real life example, even the American War for Independence did not come about as swiftly as many believe; there was much deliberation and leaders in America trying to fix the colonies' relation with the British Empire, and war was a last desperate act after other appeals and methods had been attempted.
In The Hunger Games movie itself, President Snow even mentions, "Hope. It is the only thing stronger than fear. A little hope is effective; a lot of hope is dangerous." As horrible as most people's lives in are in Panem, they are not terrible enough that these people would rise against the Capitol. They still have that small bit of hope--not necessarily that their situation will improve, but rather that they will be able to survive and still find some meaning in their lives. Though their lives are dismal, they know what to expect. It is familiar. It is comfortable.
A revolt against the Capitol is not familiar. It is the unknown, and far more terrifying than hoping you'll get food on the table each day. It takes great desperation or great hope to force a person into the unknown, and Katniss and the people of Panem simply do not have either during the events of the first book.
Now, these are some general statements about the first book that are leading up to some more specific points about the trilogy. In order to not make this review obnoxiously long, let's save the rest of the review for Part 2, in which we will dissect Susan Collins's writing style from Katniss's point of view, and how it also ties in with the Reader Expectation vs. Character Reality that many readers fall into.
No comments:
Post a Comment