Einstein's Firefly’s Comments (group member since Dec 15, 2013)

Einstein's Firefly’s comments from the On Tyrants & Tributes : Real World Lessons From The Hunger Games group.

Who is you favorite character? Why? Mine is Cinna because he is very brave for being one of the first rebels in the capital. And I love how he took something that the capital did to glory-fly the tributes and the games and turned into something statement making, rebellion creating.

I think the separation of the districts has a big role in keeping the citizens from rebelling. Because if you can only talk/hangout with people who are being taught the same thing, you don't get fresh ideas, which probably helps the Capital propagandize everyone further. And you can only organize a rebellion within your own district.
I kind of think the separation of the districts was successful. On one hand it wasn't successful because, obviously, the rebellion won and almost every district citizen came together. On the other hand, things would probably still be like they were before Katniss, if Katniss never volunteered for Prim.

Kelli wrote: "Cinna is one of the first and most influential of the rebels, he just uses a different medium to express himself ..."

I think one of the quotes that best states this in the books is: "It crosses my mind that Cinna's calm and normal demeanor masks a complete mad man."
Because, in a way you have to be a complete mad man to be one of the first and most influential rebel, especially if your one of the rebels in the Capital. Cinna is my favorite character in the trilogy. I think the reason why is because he takes something that the capital uses to 'fatten' the tributes, as Kelli put it, and he turns it against them in a way they didn't think of. Cinna lit Katniss on fire, which in turn started the rebellion.

The quote that best reflects the message of the Hunger Games in my opinion is:
“There’s almost always some wood,” Gale says. “Since that year half of them died of cold. Not much entertainment in that.”
It’s true. We spent one Hunger Games watching the players freeze to death at night. You could hardly see them because they were just huddled in balls and had no wood for fires or torches or anything. It was considered very anti-climactic in the Capitol, all those quiet bloodless deaths. Since then, there’s usually been wood to make fires."

I think that one tells you the Capital only wants a show and the more action, the more violence and killing, the better... I think it's supposed to make you realize that the Capital doesn't care.

And my two favorite quotes are from Mockingjay:

“It must be very fragile, if a handful of berries can bring it down.”
I think it's a very good, sarcastic point.

“Fire is catching! And if we burn, you burn with us!"
I think this one is when she realizes she is the Mockingjay and she is apart of the rebellion.

I think that the Tributes are given stylist and dressed elaborately so that the Capital citizens, who are the ones supporting the president and are the "children", don't see the games for what they really are. So that they see it as an event to discuss fashion, to wonder how the stylist did the outfits, to gossip, not as an event where the Capital is sending people to battle to the death. So basically it's a way to further propagandize the Capital citizens. Or maybe the Capital does it so that the Tributes want to be Tributes, so that they volunteer as Tribute, and see it as an honor instead of what it really is. And that would appear to only work with the career districts since they train for it even though that's not allowed.
The only event that kind of reminds me of the hunger games is the way actors dress up for award ceremonies... Except they don't battle to the death afterwards.

I am assuming that the answer your looking for wouldn't be start a rebellion.

The whole reason for the Hunger Games is for the citizens to fear the government, for the government to have complete control. So a replacement/solution (asumming the Capital wouldn't just forgive the citizens) would have to come up with something that the everybody would still fear... Maybe a stronger presents of police and harsher laws.

But the whole problem with this is, how does the Capital make themselves still look like they care? Because part of the Hunger Games is that the winner is rewarded, and the citizens that put their name in the bowl for reaping get food.

And as for the entertainment part of the Hunger Games, it's like what Monkeybench said, it's easier to come up with something more compelling than the Hunger Gamers to watch.

On a complete side note, does anyone know why it's called the Hunger Games? Is it because the Capital is hungry for more games?

She is just someone trying to fight for what is right, isn't that what being a hero is? It's not about whether your perfect or imperfect, flawed or un-flawed (because let's face it, is anybody truly perfect?), but it's about whether your doing whats right, putting others ahead of yourself, it's about whether you have the guts to do what other aren't.

Kelli wrote: "Here is a great interview where she discusses the creation/concept..."
That is a good article by the way :)

Wow... this article is awesome! Before I read it I really didn't give much thought to the buildings, besides that they are looming over the people, almost as a statement.

I do think that the artists behind the Hunger Games film are embedding Collins message in the building they created (personally I think that they have to so that you get a picture/world most like the one in the book). If anything this article backs that train of thought up... by taking parallels from buildings that were proposed by totalitarian rulers, it's just another way to show the rule of the Capital.

After reading the article, I think that the set design conveys the warnings that are found in Collins's novels.

Will wrote: "I feel like I probably wouldn't take a substantial action unless I was facing a directly noticeable personal loss. Something in the form of threat of physical harm to myself or a family member would likely draw a response..."

I agree with that, I think that was spot on. But I'm not alright with letting the loss of smaller liberties go for the sake of convenience or not making a scene. I say that because in my opinion, that's what's going to start the loss of bigger liberties. When people start to ignore the loss of smaller liberties they may not notice when bigger liberties are taken away too. So I'd most probably peacefully protest when I notice the loss of liberty, and I'd probably join a revolution group, or something along those lines, if something were to happen to my family.

Sometimes I think this is changing who we are, just because it seems everyone wants everybody to know what they are doing... and if its changing who we are isn't that the same thing as changing how we behave?
I think this is both something we choose and a sign of control. It's something we choose because we are the ones on the social media sites, we are the ones buying phones with GPS features, and we are the ones posting selfies. I say it's also a sign of control because all of this information about you, even if it's a tiny little piece, is out their on the internet... and someone could use that to against you. Another thing that is a sign of control is what the NSA was (and probably still is) doing. They didn't tell us they were doing that, they even lied to congress about it. So, if our government doesn't trust us, granted it was clasified and they're doing it to potentially stop terrorist attacks (bread and circuses?) isn't that a sign of control/oppression?
I think that we are both the watched and the watchers. I say watchers because just look at how close we pay attention to actors, musicians, and other famous people. And I say watched because we post every single thing we do on the internet, our emails and phone calls are being monitored, and it seems everywhere you go there are security cameras.

What Collins is suggesting in the way President Coin and District 13 are portrayed compared to President Snow and the Capital, I think is supposed to show you that they are basically two sides of the same coin, even though Coin and Snow aren't exactly the same they still have some the same qualities.

I think it was important to see Katniss and Peeta living their private lives, that we don't see them trying to help shape the new system. Because even though you'd guess that they wouldn't make a 'power grabbing' choice, its still important to see that.

I think that you guys are right. For Katniss and Peeta it wasn't propaganda that made them start to stand up against Snow. But that being said I do think that it wasn't just a fight for independence that motivated them. I think it was a combination of fighting for their independence and liberty. Because if you think about Katniss didn't just want to be able to make her own choices and be left alone, she wanted to be able to do and say what she wanted without worrying about the repercussions that would bring.

I'm a homeschooled freshman in high school. I am planning on learning about business and baking so one day I can open a bakery.

After reading these articles and watching the videos I think that it does make the Hunger Games trilogy a more compelling series. It turns it into something to really think and wonder about instead of reading it and just thinking about it like another book.
Also with the focus on liberty and power in the books, some could look at this trilogy as a sort of warning of what the future could look like if we don't get more involved in the news, or pay more attention to what the government is doing.

SPOILER ALERT:
Mine would be in Mockingjay when she's filming the clip to put all over the Capital, and says "If we burn, you burn with us." Because I think that is the moment when she realizes, she really is apart of the rebellion, that she is the Mockingjay.

I think it would be that they broke everybody into different districts. They separated everybody into classes... The queen bee and the little worker bees.