The Hunger Games (The Hunger Games, #1) The Hunger Games question

Hunger Games Controversy
Tony Do Tony Jun 10, 2013 08:14PM
When the book was first written and published, there were major controversies on the story line. Some readers say that the selection of Katniss Everdeen of staged and that she was going to be chosen from the beginning. After the government found out about her hunting, instead of killing her, they decided to fill the selection bowl with her sister. Knowing that she would either volunteer for her sister or watch her sister die,she would suffer no matter which choice she picked.

Everyone knew she was going to be chosen or picked either way or there would be no story. Seriously it would be boring if she wasn't picked and was on the sidelines. And then they would complain about how she never did anything and that she should have been picked or volunteered. The whole point of stories is that something is happening to that main character, not watching the action.

What about Gale? He hunted with her and was just as culpable.

Tony, It's really all about where the author chose to start the story. The story could have started at the selection ceremony and everything prior treated as back story. That option, however, would have strained credulity. Another way to look at it is if the "hero" does not take the challenge there is no story. Joseph Campbell makes this point over and over. There is a scientific principle that states that the mere act of observing something changes it. The same principle works in writing. There is no story to write about if the hero does not take the challenge. Therefore, the hero must take the challenge.

Did anyone else know that Katniss would be chosen? Was the selection rigged in the spirit of developing an interesting and telegenic fight? It doesn't matter to book one. It might matter in book two. It might not. The story works either way.

back to top