Review - The Hunger Games
Feb. 8th, 2010 01:25 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
wilderthanThe Hunger Games (Suzanne Collins)
I've been intending to read The Hunger Games almost since it first came out, with the slow rumblings of everyone starting to talk about it. I was interested, but a little sceptical, and that attitude held through most of the first part of the book. "So far, so very dystopic," I think I said. Which is true, the set-up is quite typically dystopian, I could at that point have compared it to plenty of other dystopian novels and wasn't much more interested -- not turned off, since I like dystopia, but not hooked on it. And then, at the end of the first half, suddenly something clicked and I began to flail... and I haven't really stopped. I really hope I have the ebook of Catching Fire, like I think I do.
It's hard to say exactly what did finally catch my attention fully. The romance between Peeta and Katniss is uncomfortable, and it's horrible to realise how oblivious Katniss is and how trusting Peeta is of her and her intentions. The build-up is nice, with Peeta giving her bread when she's younger and his reveal at the interview, and so on, although it's maybe a liiiittle obvious. I would've liked to have to work for it a bit more.
There were two things that bothered me about it, though they're linked. One was that, despite Peeta and Katniss's humanity and sympatheticness, most of the other Tributes were de-personalised and they were perfectly happy for them to die. I know it's a whole different world, really, where you know from a very young age that if you get picked for the Hunger Games, you have to kill or be killed. But it still didn't ring quite true -- caring so much about Peeta or Katniss or Rue, when Foxface's death was barely remarked upon. Which ties into my sense that for all they both survive the arena, against the rules, there's not much rebellion in it. There doesn't have to be, of course, but I guess I've come to expect dystopias to end with the downfall of the government. It doesn't feel quite satisfying if only one or two people survive and cheat the system, and there isn't any sense that the system will eventually fall. Of course, this is the first book of a trilogy, so maybe the sense of rebellion will grow, but Katniss's rebellion against the Capitol is so camouflaged and talked down after the Games that it doesn't feel like it's going to develop into anything greater than a small personal defiance.
I'm interested to see what happens, in the next book, about Katniss and Peeta -- and about Gale, too. It'd be nice if Katniss and Gale could go on being friends without romance, but that's my fondness for loving friendships in fiction showing, without any real conviction it's going to work out that way...
I've been intending to read The Hunger Games almost since it first came out, with the slow rumblings of everyone starting to talk about it. I was interested, but a little sceptical, and that attitude held through most of the first part of the book. "So far, so very dystopic," I think I said. Which is true, the set-up is quite typically dystopian, I could at that point have compared it to plenty of other dystopian novels and wasn't much more interested -- not turned off, since I like dystopia, but not hooked on it. And then, at the end of the first half, suddenly something clicked and I began to flail... and I haven't really stopped. I really hope I have the ebook of Catching Fire, like I think I do.
It's hard to say exactly what did finally catch my attention fully. The romance between Peeta and Katniss is uncomfortable, and it's horrible to realise how oblivious Katniss is and how trusting Peeta is of her and her intentions. The build-up is nice, with Peeta giving her bread when she's younger and his reveal at the interview, and so on, although it's maybe a liiiittle obvious. I would've liked to have to work for it a bit more.
There were two things that bothered me about it, though they're linked. One was that, despite Peeta and Katniss's humanity and sympatheticness, most of the other Tributes were de-personalised and they were perfectly happy for them to die. I know it's a whole different world, really, where you know from a very young age that if you get picked for the Hunger Games, you have to kill or be killed. But it still didn't ring quite true -- caring so much about Peeta or Katniss or Rue, when Foxface's death was barely remarked upon. Which ties into my sense that for all they both survive the arena, against the rules, there's not much rebellion in it. There doesn't have to be, of course, but I guess I've come to expect dystopias to end with the downfall of the government. It doesn't feel quite satisfying if only one or two people survive and cheat the system, and there isn't any sense that the system will eventually fall. Of course, this is the first book of a trilogy, so maybe the sense of rebellion will grow, but Katniss's rebellion against the Capitol is so camouflaged and talked down after the Games that it doesn't feel like it's going to develop into anything greater than a small personal defiance.
I'm interested to see what happens, in the next book, about Katniss and Peeta -- and about Gale, too. It'd be nice if Katniss and Gale could go on being friends without romance, but that's my fondness for loving friendships in fiction showing, without any real conviction it's going to work out that way...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2010-02-08 05:57 pm (UTC)Apparently book 3 of the trilogy is due later this year.