I read young adult literature (sometimes called YA or KidLit) and see the movie versions of these books all the time, even though, according to the American Library Association, YA is for people ages twelve to eighteen -- a demographic I haven't been a part of for many years. I like YA stories -- whether in film or literature- - because they feature characters who possess that indomitable spirit of optimism that hasn't been tarnished by age. Their journeys may be fraught with the angst and loneliness that accompany adolescence, but the pain is a necessary price to pay. We hate that Harry Potter is orphaned, forced to live under a staircase, and bullied in school. But we know his trials and tribulations will be worth it in the end when he finds himself and vanquishes evil in the process.
The Hunger Games is definitely a different story.
My students have been reading The Hunger Games since its release and it's even on some our schools' syllabi, but I took a little longer to get around to it. I knew I would eventually read the book and see the movie, and I knew, given its popularity, my students' obsession with it, and its YA perspective, that I would undoubtedly love it. The problem is, I don't.
The Hunger Games tells the story of a dystopian North American future in which "The Capitol" -- a bright metropolis where appearance is everything -- subjugates twelve surrounding districts whose citizens are kept in something close to serfdom. Each year, as a reminder of the Capitol's power (and to punish the districts for the crimes of rebellion committed by their forbearers), a "Reaping" is held, and two children between twelve and eighteen from each district are randomly selected as Tributes to compete in the nationally televised reality-TV-gone-wild Hunger Games. The winner is the last Tribute standing, who will get wealth, fame, and a life of leisure as a reward ... for killing the other kids.
The book's author, Suzanne Collins, richly renders the penurious world of 16-year old protagonist Katniss Everdeen. The juxtaposition of the poverty of the districts and the wealth of the Capitol is painful. As we read, we feel the weight of Katniss's responsibility to find food for her mother and younger sister, and sigh in a resolved "what else can you do?" kind of way when she sacrifices herself and volunteers to take her sister's place in the Hunger Games. Then, just when you think that this brave new world can't get any worse, Collins takes the reader into the arena -- a massive forest in which the games occur -- where these children must kill and all but one be killed. The arena is so deadly that moving before the starting whistle (in this case a gong) will set off landmines at your feet. Within a couple hours of the games' commencement, eleven of the twenty-four Tributes (note, they're almost always referred to as Tributes instead of children or teens) have been killed, by the other children, in what was described in the book as a "bloodbath."
And this is where my problem with the book lies.
While the action kept me turning the page, I couldn't get past the fact that these are children who are not only dying, but doing the killing. Even Katniss isn't above the fray, as she kills four Tributes herself. In one particularly harrowing scene, one boy murders a twelve-year old girl by trapping her in a net and thrusting a spear into her stomach; Katniss retaliates by killing the boy with an arrow to his neck. While not every death is played out this graphically, for me the idea that these kids are killing each other eclipses any other theme that might have been present. It's just too evocative of Derrion Albert, who at Katniss's age was beaten to death by five other teenagers outside of his high school a couple years ago, or of the more than five hundred Chicago youth murdered, mostly by other children, since 2008.
I support the First Amendment and youth literacy too much to throw in with the critics who have called for The Hunger Games to be banned, and I think kids can handle the violence anyway. But I believe the book should be approached with caution -- especially since publisher Scholastic categorized the book's reading level as between 5th and 6th grades. Apparently, the filmmakers feel the same way, as the movie adaption pares down the intensity of the violence, and many of the actors playing the "kids" look as if they are old enough to drink in real life. The film version's rating is PG-13, but I think even high school students would be best served by some guidance when traversing Katniss's world.
I'm nervous that the power and opportunity created by the worldwide phenomenon of the book and film will be squandered. With The Hunger Games and its sequels topping bestseller lists, the first film's inevitable box-office bonanza, and entertainment producers looking to capitalize on the current craze, what lessons are we drawing? I worry that not everyone reading the book or seeing the movie understands that the Capitol is wrong for creating the games, the citizens are wrong for watching them, and the kids are wrong for killing in them. I fear that in the rush to embrace the "games," people will forget that that the point of the Hunger Games is for kids to kill kids.
When I shared my concerns about the book and movie with a fellow high school educator, he agreed that the Tributes seemed just as, if not more, concerned with their celebrity and ability to manipulate the audience than with the fact that they were killing each other. In fact, this complicity in the process isn't even suggested as a story line. The real offense might not be that there's violence, but that it doesn't bring about any reflection or doubt on the part of the children doing the killing. While Katniss's ultimate triumph is hailed as a victory over the establishment, the book never explores another option: to have the kids subvert the entire process by not participating at all. What would have happened if all the Tributes just refused to kill? Fighting to the death in the games is presented as a given, a necessary evil of life (or rather death), in the arena. In establishing rules like these, responsibility is lifted from the kids', and our, shoulders. If we blame the establishment, everyone is innocent. What's more, the book and film call for us to root for a winner, yet never force us to question that when we cheer for any Tribute to win the Hunger Games, we are also, therefore, cheering for the other children to die.
To celebrate the release of The Hunger Games movie, there have been library parties planned in which readers will dress up as characters from the book. Teachers' lesson plans include mock Hunger Games complete with "Reapings," Tributes, competitions, and victors. I'm guessing there won't be any murders at these parties or in these classrooms, but while these reenactments are taking place, somewhere in our country a child will undoubtedly be killed at the hands of another child. Our complicity in the violence shown on the nightly news may not be as direct as that of the citizens of the Capitol, but it's only through our inaction and misconception that there's nothing we can do about it that such violence is allowed to continue.
By focusing on action at the expense of introspection, the book and film miss an opportunity to teach a real lesson about cyclical violence, the role we all play in perpetuating it, and our responsibility to make the right decisions. The Hunger Games could have taught us that we don't have to engage in violence or kill; that even when the odds aren't ever in our favor, we can just choose to not play the game.
Follow Tim King on Twitter: www.twitter.com/TimKing1
'The Hunger Games' premiere draws thousands of starved fans
'Hunger Games' star Liam Hemsworth 'embarrassed' by girlfriend Miley Cyrus ...
'Hunger Games' May Squeeze Lions Gate Short Sellers
'Hunger Games' workout: Should you train like a tribute?
'Hunger Games' Soundtrack: The Secret Sisters Sound Off on 'Tomorrow Will Be ...
Hoards of Hunger Games fans have an appetite for merchandise and social media ...
'Hunger Games': Worst case scenarios
http://news.moviefone.com/quora/does-the-hunger-games-set_b_1381320.html
The problem is the book does not even entertain a real conversation about it (emphasis REAL). You mean to tell me that not only are people oppressed in this world, they don't even bother to have an intelligent discussion about their plight? That's the nonsense part of these books. They have no choice AND they don't even contemplate one? It just seems as if no one has a brain or the semblance of conscience in this book. One can act contrary to their morals, it happens often. I just don't see any moral misgivings attached to their actions when I read the book.
IMHO, the book isn't sending a poor message, because there isn't one to be had. In fact, I think the level of discussion about the book (to which I am now obviously guilty) is giving too much weight to a book that doesn't deserve it. It's real contribution is promoting literacy. Let it be read, let it be enjoyed, and then led it fade, as fads do.
Question: What happens if someone takes off their shoe and throws it right before the starting whistle?
On the basis of this quote, I think the author could have used some guidance from me when I was in 5th grade.
I think this is a great topic for parents and teachers to discuss with teens/young adults who have read/seen THE HUNGER GAMES, but the premise of your essay puts too much of the burden on a people who still have much more in common (in terms of brain chemistry, decision making abilities and behavior) with children than adults.
Also, an author writes the story he / she feels they need to tell. It's not up to us the readers to put all our PC issues into it. The teenagers in Panem could NOT choose not to play the game, and it was Ms.Collins choice to write the story that way. IF Mr. King wants a different story, he needs to write it himself.
The one thing I will say he makes some sense on is that we have this kind of violence in our society and we allow it to continue by our ignoring and disengagement of inner cities across America . Teenagers do kill each other daily in the US, and rather than address the issues of poverty , we keep spinning our wheels doing all sorts of useless things ( like focusing on gun laws here in Chicago that don't keep anyone safer or keep any guns out of the gangs) . But again, the teenagers of Ms. Collins' book were not killing each other because they were poor, but because they were forced to.
In Chicago, over 500 youth were killed since 2008, mostly by other teens. Among the killers and those killed were kids who were approached by gang members who told them “If you don’t join my gang, I will kill you and your family."
This is the type of situation that the Tributes face. The Capitol will kill them and kill their families if they don’t agree to kill for the Capitol. But the fact that they are in a “no-win” situation, doesn’t mean that they don’t have a choice. Their choice is: do I commit murder in order to save myself and family or do I refuse to kill and risk my own death and that of my families?
We know what the Tributes do, but we’re not made privy to the introspective process that got them to decide to kill the other Tributes; it therefore seems like there is no decision made, and no moral struggle taking place. In not exploring this question, there’s a missed opportunity for readers/viewers to more deeply relate to the characters and in doing so engage in some self-examination as to why or how we make decisions in our own lives, even “no-win” ones.
Every book can’t explore every topic. The observation I was making in my post was that the moral dilemma the Tributes face is a topic I wish the book had explored more deeply.
I also regret the lost opportunity for young readers to ask the important questions. We need to remember as parents, aunts, uncles, friends -- they are all still LEARNING to be adults -- they are not there yet! Before recommending this series or others like it, ask, does this story help them grow as well as entertain them?
I would be interesting to see how these same YAs (as well as some adults) would react to "Lord of the Flies". It was required reading when I was a junior in HS. It probably has more to say young people today concerned with issues like bullying, than the Hunger Games. Can you envision library parties organized around LOTF? The mind boggles!
As most of us know, children forced into the role of warrior, guardian, provider, even avenger, is sadly not new to the human species. . , but I'd like to believe that we've come a little way out of the cave. That far from glamorizing child violence, and making it valueless entertainment, we are capable of crafting entertaining AND meaningful tales for YA.
If there is any lasting value in this series is that it prompts discussions like this. Thanks for your insightful comments, Mr.
I was born in Burma. Even though my family was well-off, I had a governess who had 9 siblings, an alcoholic father, and a mother with cancer. I've seen starving people and families who are doing everything and anything to survive. These sufferings and injustices in the world are what LEAD The Capitol and Panem as it is in the book.
And finally, in the end, this is a book about maintaining who you are, your beliefs and whom you love, in a world that will do everything to change you and take away everything from you. This is a book about LOVE. And I am damn proud to say that I love this book, I love the movie, and I love Suzanne Collins for being BRAVE and BRASH enough to bring these issues to light.
And I love the fans whom actually UNDERSTOOD the underlying message in the end.
Yet sometimes, we need to separate the personal from the work itself, to gain perspective on the work itself, and this is what I suspect some are doing here. All to often we read into a work of art/fiction and see what we wish to be there. And if what we see of bekleive to be there, or not, does not coincide with yours, we should not be shouted at in capital letters, or inferred that somehow we are stupid!
That said, I do not agree with your interpretation, but I appreciate your well-thought out comments, and can see where you are coming from. But your truth is only truth for you . . .