Hunger Games: Catching Fire.

[alexandral]

I am sailing fairly quickly through "Hunger Games" trilogy, mostly because I promised myself to listen to THE WHOLE OF "Vorkosigan Saga" next and all the books are ready and I can't wait!

I feel very apologetic because I know so many of you on my friends list love the trilogy, but "Catching Fire" (the second book of the trilogy) left me not very impressed. I AM SORRY. But I must tell you the truth. :D



The first book of "Hunger Games" trilogy ("Hunger Games") had a really good idea, even though this was something that Susanne Collins can't be given the full credit for (in my opinion) because even if you take "Battle Royale" out of the equation there is also "Running Man" and "1984". This idea worked really well in the first book, but the second book (Catching Fire) feels like rehashing of the same story. Inventing the way to send Katniss and Peeta back into the Arena felt contrived and unexciting.

Plus there were a couple of points I found particular problematic:

1. Worldbuilding.
I waited for some of the more cumbersome aspects of the Hunger Games Universe to be explained in the second book but there was no explanation:

- Why do we have so many Greek/Roman names and terms? Where have they come from? This feels like pseudo-Chinese used in Firefly without any explanation as to how it has become so popular. How Greek/Latin language has become so commonly used in USA? I feel I need an explanation.

- Why in the world that seems to be highly technologically developed people are still using coal? Why are they using manual labour? Also, when technology is developed well enough the production of material goods becomes very cheap which leads to the overall increase in the quality of life. This is the law of technological development. Why not in Panem?

2. Love triangle

I have heard that "Hunger Games" is anti-Twilight. I agree to a certain degree because Katniss, in some ways, is anti-Bella (apart from the "boy magnet" quality they share).

But I must point out that the love triangle part of "catching Fire" is taken out of Twilight. Some of descriptions of Gale's hot skin being warm and sunny made me think directly back to Jacob, the hot blooded werewolf.

I think I have made my mind up about love triangles. I do not like them. All that "blah blah blah, it feels so good to be kissing Gale" and "blah blah blah, I like Peeta sleeping with me and holding me too" is just so.. not my thing at all. I want Katniss to make her mind up as soon as possible. I am getting close to becoming annoyed; this is so not my thing.

For the record, my money is still on Peeta to "get the girl" at the end.

3. I am getting a little bit tired with too many descriptions of various frocks and jewels Katniss "is made to wear against her will".

This is not a fashion magazine! Continuous lavish and loving descriptions of dresses and outfits make the author look hypocritical because she tries to criticise consumerism, in the same book. I hope to see less of descriptions of various outfits and more of character and worldbuilding development in the book 3, "Mockingjay".

Overall, after two books I rate this series 7/10, mostly because the first book was really good. I am giving the series some time and may be everything will be explained in the book 3 and the love triangle will be resolved soon.

But I definitely don't understand why so many people are so in love with this series (I would really appreciate any explanations). WHY??????????

For me, the series feel like a patchwork with the best bits taken from various sources (for example, Rue's death scene brings Ophelia painting to my mind, etc.).

PS: Somehow reading "Catching Fire" made me appreciate "Harry Potter" much more. I think Harry Potter is a much better series, especially in the worldbuilding sense. You might see me eating my hat and admitting that may be I have always been a bit unfair to "Harry Potter". :D

Comments

[fauxkaren.livejournal.com]

I loved the series. I picked up the trilogy from Waterstones last year when they were on sale as part of Waterstones 3 for the price of 2 deal. Why do I like it? Idk. I just think they were a LOT of fun to read. I couldn't put the books down. I read all three books over the course of two days, staying up until 4 in the morning, reading on the Tube, reading as soon as I got home. It's written in the first person present tense which I think really sucks the reader in. There are a lot of interesting themes and motifs in the book about being oneself, surveillance and performance. Plus, I've always been a fan of dystopias.

But the reason I think I really love the series is that, in the end, it's not really about a dystopia. That's just the setting (which is why I don't care that the world building isn't in depth. That's not the point.). The books are really about Katniss, her psychology, and her character journey and growth. This is also why I don't mind the love triangle. The love triangle isn't about which of the guys wins the prize (aka Katniss), but rather the triangle is a way through which Collins could explore what Katniss thinks she wants vs what the Capitol wants vs whether she's just rebelling against the Capitol vs what Katniss REALLY wants.

Rue's death scene brings Ophelia painting to my mind
I think this is kind of unfair though. Ophelia commited suicide and it was via drowning and she was all alone and is offstage. Rue was impaled with a spear and dies as Katniss sings her to sleep. The only common theme is the flowers. Nothing about the way her death is portrayed is similar to what Shakespeare wrote.

To answer some of your questions, the Latin names are only used by people in the Capitol. And imo, that's just symbolic of what the Capitol represents (aka an empire that relies on it's colonies, or in this case districts, to survive and exploits them). Plus, it also helps tie into the idea of "panem et circenses" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses) which is pretty much the entire idea behind the Hunger Games and how the Capitol maintains its power. As far as technology goes, it seems like technology IS highly developed, but the advanced technology is purposefully kept from anyone who isn't part of the Capitol. So I suppose you can imagine that only the people living in the districts use the coal. And maybe this is all part of the Capitol's grand oppression scheme. But really I think it's because Collins wanted to evoke a certain area of the US where coal mining is the main industry.

[singing-tree.livejournal.com]

I argee with you on Catching Fire being weaker than the first book. Also, I never liked the romantic part of these books.

I'm really looking forward to your thoughts on Mockingjay, which I thought was pretty boring despite that so many things were going on.

[fivil.livejournal.com]

I kinda agree with you about a big bunch of these.

I think my own fascination/liking of the series was increased by the fact that they were the tall drink after a long drought - I don't read fiction much, prefer non-fiction (especially as politics, sociology, all these things are my biggest current interest) so when I picked up the first book based on some recs and it was REALLY engaging, I was just thrilled. It felt good to read some fiction again. So that was a very personal reaction, and I loved the first book most out of all of them.

I also hate love triangles. :| I didn't mind it so much in here because my investment was more to do with the plot than who Katniss ends up with. But yeah, I hear what you're saying on that. I didn't mind it so much in here because it was clear survival was her #1 priority, the fact she even had to think about the boys was secondary pretty much all the time.

I think the descriptions show these are YA and meant to attract teenage/slightly older girls who want to imagine glorious clothes and the like. It's pretty escapist.

Also, when technology is developed well enough the production of material goods becomes very cheap which leads to the overall increase in the quality of life.
To me the idea is that Panem is like a highly polarised version of our world, in some ways. We've got richer countries and regions using the products that some other places make. Of course, we haven't got strictly guarded special regions for every product, be it fish or grains or minerals. But we've still got them, and there's still use of manual labour in factories (a lot of it grossly exploitative, I'm thinking sweatshops etc).

I can see how Collins' version of this idea is simplified but also confused by having just one region who use most of these products actively (Capitol) - and that's also the place that's highly, highly technologically advanced, whilst exploiting the other districts.

I liked the world-building but since my reading process was characterised by speed, not slowly taking everything in and mulling it over, I didn't really start thinking deeper about the inconsistencies. I think honestly that's why I liked it. It was a great reading experience for me, and I'm excited to watch the films, but unsure whether I'll ever end up re-reading the books.

I've actually thought about gifting my copies of the books forward because I'm not that fanatic. I'll re-read HP books and a bunch of other faves, but this trilogy I probably won't be needing. Sadly one friend I borrowed the books to already bought her own copies! Ah well. And the only teenage girl I know probably wouldn't know English well enough to read them..

[stoopid-silly.livejournal.com]

Definitely agree with you! I enjoyed the first Hunger Games, but the second two really annoyed me!!

[marinshellstone.livejournal.com]

I feel the same way. While I could appreciate the first book, I didn't find the idea very original because we've seen the same theme done before in numerous different ways throughout pop culture.

I also really dislike the Twilight books and don't understand the deep passion and love some people have for that series.

Harry is worlds away in terms of quality!

[kem-viva.livejournal.com]

Agree with pretty much everything you said, and imo it just got worse in Mockingjay. There is sooo much left unexplained and most of the characters are underdeveloped. I also found Katniss got pretty unbearable by the end of the series. I think in the end I would give the series 6/10.

Harry Potter is really much better :p

[lydzi.livejournal.com]

The chinese in Firefly felt right to me in the sense that it was bound to be in the future since chinese was one of the most spoken language in the world. The expansion can be effective in a way.
I'm not sure if I'm making sense here but I remember finding this quite witty from Whedon to make it possible in this uchronie.
The all Greek Latin is to go with the all thematic. Empire, colonies and the all "give them bread and games" attitude of the Capitol.

Now you have some very good points ^^. And omg I bloody HATE love triangles. It makes my skin crawl tbh. But I feel like I'm one of the very few who never saw one in the HG trilogy. Idk. It was always very obvious to me that what she was taking from Gale was very different that what she was with Peeta. Adding the fact that Katniss is just a stubborn person and that she wasn't taking the all "get married to Peeta and shut up" the easy way made it even more obvious in my book.
Probably why I wasn't too bothered by this tbh. But you'll see. Lol I can't fanthom to what will be your reaction to a certain plot in book 3. To be really honest, it was the only plot I actually truly rolled my eyes at. We'll talk about it later XD.

This all uchronie is flawed, I think we can all agree on this but I still found it very gripping and the characters are too compelling for me to pass on.

[intermezzo]

alsjdalkjsdlsadj THE VORKOSIGAN SAGA, OMG! LASKJDKLASDKFADSH MILES! AND IVAN! And...and...EVERYONE! ALDJASKLDjALD ANSDKASJDJKHFAKJDG JASDGKJAGSDKJAGSJFKA SKDHGASKDJGJAKSDG JADGKJAGSDJKAS GDKJAFHKJAGSDKJSGADaljhdlkasdlLAHJDLKAH
Excuse me if i'm stuck in capslock-land, but it's one of my favorite things EVER. It got me through you-know-what. And as silly as it sounds, but I kept thinking "if Miles can do it, so can I".

Anyway, a couple of weeks ago, I was reading Lois McMaster Bujold's blog and she said she finished the new book, which will be aaaaaall about Ivan. I am SO excited, you have no idea!

Re: The hunger games. I think you might like Mockingjay more than Catching Fire. Me? It was the opposite. I liked the first book a lot (it was my favorite of the bunch), then came Catching Fire and then Mockingjay, but I won't spoil you with why I think so until you're all done with the trilogy.

Why in the world that seems to be highly technologically developed people are still using coal? Why are they using manual labour? Also, when technology is developed well enough the production of material goods becomes very cheap which leads to the overall increase in the quality of life. This is the law of technological development. Why not in Panem?

The way I read the whole thing? It wasn't about coal at all. Or about the technology or economy for that matter either. Technology was kept away from the people of the colonies to keep them in check and "ignorant", if you pass me that term. It was a way to control them. Why, then, a technologically advanced society would choose coal, of all things, and not, say, enslave poorer colonies by having them build something useful for the Capitol? I think it was yet another way to control them. For the ppl in the colonies what went on in the Capitol was more of a vague feeling. They knew the Capitol had it all, from technology to money and power, but it was more of a vague notion imho, not something they could very well imagine and that's because the Capitol kept them in the dark. And don't forget how isolated each colony was: from the other colonies and from the Capitol as well. I actually thought this bit of worldbuilding wasn't as faily as you find it. Is it perfect? Nope, but I could buy it.

Also? It's possible you anad your friends have talked about all this already. If you did, sorry. I'm too tired to read everything. Sorry, sorry. *hangs head*


PS: you know hwat I loved about the series? The twists. Maybe other readers appreciated them as well.

PPS: okay, I re-read my reaction to Mockingjay and I take it back. You might find it more irritating than CF.

[embitca.livejournal.com]

I'm writing to agree with you. And the story that Hunger Games reminds me of the most is The Long Walk by Stephen King (but I haven't read Battle Royale). Basically Hunger Games = Extremely Derivative.

I read the first book and thought it was okay. I didn't bother with the other two because the I just didn't find the first one compelling enough to continue.

Of course, I've never been able to get into Harry Potter either so I feel like an alien sometimes with my total "meh" to some really popular series.

[wildtiger7.livejournal.com]

I stopped reading the Hunger Games series after book two. It wasn't for me. Mainly, because Katniss was so naive when everyone else wasn't. And like you, I'm not a fan of love triangles, either (though I did really like Peeta).

[geeklee.livejournal.com]

i had to post even though i should be finishing a paper.

i agree with you totally about it all. i prefer the first book of the trilogy by far. i usually do since, like you, world building is extremely important. when questioned about the sparse details about panem, the Capitol and the other districts, collins said since katniss didn't know, we can't. i'm afraid that only solidified my dislike of first person narrative. left with only the words on a page, they have to be reliable and encompassing.

for many, hunger games is about katniss. period. for me, it was about katniss and her world. so i was in love with the series during the first book but became less and less so as the books progressed. that's all i will say so i don't spoil anything for you. i look forward to hearing what you think of mockingjay, which i disliked the most, due to its hurried pace and katniss' journey. i will say that collins doesn't shy away from being real and is definitely trying to give her opinion of things to her readers. that's why i agree with one of your flist who commented Collins is trying to develop anti-consumerism and anti-exploitation themes in the series.

collins is pretty heavy handed with her opinions which are a down and dirty look at a lot of how trivial we've become as well as how ruthless we can be. for that reason, i recommend the trilogy to all the students willing to pick up the books. it is a wonderful starting point for so many discussions. so while i love the series because of what i can do with it in a classroom, i don't love the series.

btw, one of the biggest discussion points we have is the final scene of hunger games. do you believe katniss wanted to use the berries as her final act of defiance against the capitol or to try to force their hands to spare both her and peeta? of course there is no right answer but it is interesting to hear people's thoughts.

as for your thoughts on technology, the books make me think of third world countries where the rich have all the comforts of the west but the poor have very few. i mean most countries in south america and africa live exactly as the people of panem. well, minus the games. sometimes.

your thoughts on harry potter intrigued me. i do like the series, again, because i think it is an interesting read for young adults. having them grow along with harry is interesting so i usually have them read the first 2 books one year, then the next 2 and the last 3 the final year. i agree the world building is rowling's strong point (i liked the series much more than hunger games, tbh) but i don't think the books are classics in the real sense of the word. i am curious about how they will weather over time.

Lurker coming out to say hi! :)

[joie-de-vivre3.livejournal.com]

I got to your blog from mookiehyun's LJ and have been enjoying your various LJ posts especially ones on books since you often went into such awesome depth, so thanx for that.

I would like to come out of the woodwork to defend "Catching Fire"'s honor. I hope you don't mind. :) "Catching Fire" is my favorite book of the series since I find the first one's similarities to "Battle Royale" too uncanny. I'm a fan of both the movie and the book of BR so reading Hunger was like being hit with waves of deja vu. I know fans of the books argue that most plot lines are recycled works but there are still the details. I mean Collins even have the perky announcer from BR the movie in the role of Elfie. However, I also think that while BR is more of a study on the human psyche, Hunger is more of an adventure kind of story. So "Catching Fire" was more original to me, I enjoyed her creativity with the Arena setting and I love the whole strangers bonding together to survive kind of thing. The 2nd book was pure fun for me. I didn't have your same problems with the world building since I agree with a commenter up there about coal = electricity. I didn't even realize that Hunger Games is set in the U.S. Was that ever stated or just implied? I kinda breezed through the books so details escape me.

The love triangle is laughable because it's so weak that it barely existed for me. What annoys me the most about the third book is how Collins resolved that issue. She did a character assassination to resolve that burning fandom question "Peeta or Gale?" which I thought was completely poor plotting and writing on her part. I do like the ending a lot though which I know lots hated. It was only then that I feel Collins deliver any kind of messages through her series.

The books are easy reading. They are concise and condense enough to keep you interested because it's pretty much a case of BAM! BAM! BAM! of things happening. But I find the series to lack depth. I get no emotional resonance after finishing it and have no desire to go back for re-reading. Harry Potter, on the other hand, I reread almost every single year and it's still engrossing each time.

What I appreciate most about Hunger Games tho is how Collins put in a girl as the main protagonist in elements often navigated by a heroic male. I love how kickass and competent she is in most aspects of her life. I love that she was driven from the get go not because of a romantic love but a deep love for her family and her district. I also like how the majority of her actions are driven by basic human decencies.

And wow long comment is long. Sorry about that!