My poor, dear friends are probably sick and tired of hearing me rehash again and again my qualms about and my support for The Hunger Games. And I can't say that I blame them. Round and round I go. The Hunger Games Trilogy has captured my attention and make me contend with it. I love digging for the worldview behind a story. But, THG is something more; it is quite complex and worthy of even further discussion. For that reason alone, I adore this series. After reading this review however, you may ask yourself: "This is what she calls adoration?" What can I say? This series challenged me to ruminate further.
Despite having finished The Hunger Games trilogy by Suzanne Collins and seen the movie come to life, my jury is deadlocked. Half the jury is soundly in favor of The Hunger Games; they cheer loudly for dystopia, love a well-written, fast-paced story, and relish the philosophical knots. The other half is conflicted; they worry for those who don't consider deeply enough, believe the message isn't clear enough, and suspect that THG attempts to justify murder. In the end, my thoughts, at times, seem too muddled to make a comprehensible decision. While the moral philosophy of these books is in question, I have not encountered a series this poignant since The Lord of the Rings. Certain elements of the book trouble my conscience, but Collins communicates the evils of despotic government in an unforgettable way.
 |
| Katniss and Prim |
The Story:
Sometime in the future, the North American political landscape has changed. In the country Panem, the dictatorial Capitol rules over the Districts. Years ago, the thirteen Districts attempted to overthrow the Capitol. In crushing the rebellion, the Capitol destroyed District 13 and instituted the annual Hunger Games to remind the Districts of the price of disobedience. Each year, two adolescent tributes, one male and female, are chosen in the Reaping and sent to fight to the death in the arena for the entertainment of the Capitol citizenry. During the Reaping, Katniss Everdeen watches as her twelve-year-old sister, Prim, is selected. Without hesitation, Katniss steps forward and volunteers. The game has begun.
Pondering the moral philosophy of the Hunger Games:
Katniss' sacrifice for Prim seems noble (and is). However, by agreeing to participate in the game, she has implicitly acknowledged their rules as morally upright - or at the very least, morally neutral - like painting your room yellow. Yet, Katniss' soul is vexed; tormented, she ruminates about the atrocities that the Capitol forces her and her fellow tributes to commit. However, the truth is that "The Devil Made Me Do It" is not acceptable. We are ultimately responsible for our own actions - regardless of what the higher authority requires of us. The Capitol's arena requires one to kill another so that the former might live. Yet, the desire that others should die in your stead isn't following the Biblical model of self-sacrifice (excluding self-dense and the like). In fact, this idea flows from Satan's seed and the Fall. I determine good and evil. It is ultimately an outworking of self-worship.
 |
| President Snow |
The above being said, Suzanne Collins has a knack for manifesting the effects of sin. Katniss and Peeta may have survived the arena, but they are not without scars. Suffering from nightmares, these teenagers are traumatized by the atrocities they saw and committed. Peeta himself confesses that no one leaves the arena unless they are a murderer. Our heroes capitulated to the Capitol; they fought in the games. But they do not rejoice over it. It reminds me of The Lord of the Rings. At the end of the story. Do you remember? Middle Earth isn't the same. The characters have been affected by the evil they saw and experienced. Frodo said it best, "How do you pick up the threads of an old life? How do you go on... when in your heart you begin to understand... there is no going back? There are some things that time cannot mend... some hurts that go too deep... that have taken hold." (As an aside, it makes me think of heaven. Where there will be no more pain. Or tears.)
 |
| Peeta |
Collins' series is not primarily a commentary on communism, however. In fact, it's primarily a commentary on the similarities between our culture and Roman culture. (More on that subject below...) And she's not subtle about it. From character's names (Caesar, Cato, Plutarch - to name a few...) to the "arena", to the direct statement of "panem et circenses", she hits you over the head with a two-by-four. Frankly, I admire her for that. There is a time for subtlety, and there is a time for bluntness.
Collins has much about which to be blunt. Katniss oldest friend, Gale, believes that in order to battle a repressive government, like the Capitol, you must play their game. But, Katniss has played their game - literally. And she experiences the heartbreak and tragedy that come the hard way. Fighting evil with evil is not the answer. A resounding statement in the THG made grimly obvious by terrible consequences.
 |
| Gale |
Thoughts on the film:
The best compliment that the movie deserves is its faithfulness to the source material. (I can see cheers and glares all directed at me. Just from that one statement. :) But, as I watched the movie, I grew increasingly disturbed. It was one thing, I found, to read this book and examine its worldview, and entirely another thing to watch it on the big screen. Suzanne Collins compares the Capitol citizens watching the arena to American watching reality TV shows. Both groups delight in the pain, anguish, and torment of others. Cultures of death and destruction - all neatly packaged as entertainment. As I sat through The Hunger Games film, I couldn't help but wonder if the joke was on me. After all, I paid my money. Purchased my ticket. All to see the show.
Conclusion:
Sometimes, it is clear to me that I am too hard on THG. A story must have a beginning. A place where the characters may not necessarily understand the truth. Or perhaps they comprise where they should stand firm. But this is not a reason to reject a story outright. Within the Christian worldview, we understand progress. Growth. Maturation. (Dare I say sanctification?) So we must ask questions such as: How does the author treat the failures of his creations? With applause? Or condemnation? Do the characters learn from their mistakes and sins? Do they develop? Collins doesn't leave Katniss stagnant. Katniss grows in wisdom and understanding. For this reason, the Katniss' journey is remarkable and worthy of a second look.
________________________________________________
Other thoughts on The Hunger Games Trilogy:
WORLD Magazine on the movie
Redeemed Reader on the book
Redeemed Reader on the movie
Doug Wilson. Again.
Kevin Swanson - Generations with Vision Again:
I think of books like this and 1984 from a Van Tilian point of view. Orwell and Collins have gained just enough light from nature to recognize the inherent contradictions of humanism, but at the point of decision they just adopt another form of humanism to combat it. From that point of view, there are things to like and things to dislike about novels of this kind.
ReplyDeleteSwanson's points are well made. Although in the history of the Reformation there were the John Ponets who said that even private citizens should be able resist an unjust government with violence, Calvin and Rutherford and Junius Brutus all agreed that violent opposition was only possible if led by a lower magistrate. Why? Because Rom. 13 makes no distinction: every duly elected official is a minister of God, and thus the lower magistrate has just as much authority to defy evildoers above him as he does to defy those below him. In The Hunger Games, there is no such lower magistrate, and so the only Christian choice that Katniss has is to defy the games completely and hold out until a lower magistrate can be found. Or to escape. She does neither.
But we are more like the Romans than we would like to admit. In actual fact, a gladiator was a highly trained individual who took time and money to build up as an entertainer. Most of his moves were choreographed. It was only when the emperor or the crowd demanded it that a gladiator--and the investment he represented--was killed. Most of us realize at some point that reality TV is actually quite artificial, even choreographed. The producers recognize where the will of the crowd is drifting and change the rules to exploit it. The only difference between it and the stage is that there is the real risk that the audience could demand the contestants' "death"--a humiliation on camera that won't get edited out. Maybe we as Christians should be doing a better job of opposing reality TV, the way that our forebears opposed the gladiatorial games.
Thank you for that, Laura! I really enjoyed reading your thoughts on the Hunger Games. I don't know if you do blog awards, but I tagged you for one at the Welsh Family Blog. :D
ReplyDelete~Emily :)