Allegiant
discussion
So many questions not resolved..{SPOILERS}
Another thing: We never actually learn why Caleb betrayed Tris; it is merely presented without explanation
I had most of those questions myself (and more). Honestly, I think they're just a bunch of plot holes. The entire premise of the story is flawed because the conditions in Chicago which led to the rebellion and overthrow of the established system in only a few generations, were the exact same conditions present in the rest of the country. Times a million.
Supposing the GDs were actually treated this way for a while, they would have risen up and overthrown the government long before Tris is ever born.
Also, they're contradictory on whether they involve themselves in the actual experiments or not. On the one hand, they keep themselves out of almost every aspect of the experiments, even allowing for the mass murder of Abnegation and calculated hunting and killing of known divergent people, but they can involve themselves to send in Tris' mom and to give Jeanine the serum that allows her to control Dauntless and kill Abnegation.
Just doesn't make sense.
***SPOILER****
Annnd, at the end, it was completely contradictory for David to so easily kill Tris. Especially when he didn't know what she was trying to do. He had no way of knowing that she planned to used the memory serum on him and from a scientific standpoint, he should have been completely unwilling to have her killed, since she was literally the pinnacle of his entire life's work - being super divergent as she was.
Realistically, he should have used a taser or tranquilizer or something. Maybe even shot her in non-lethal places, like her arms or legs so she couldn't accomplish whatever her goal was.
But as for your question #6, I believe the implication is that when the Chicago experiment failed, the rest of the experiments were to be shut down.
David said, in that meeting Tris went to, that the experiments were in danger of being shut down if there was one more setback. Which was why they were going to reset everyone in Chicago to avoid the war they were about to get going.
As far as anything else in the country, we have no idea. Which is irritating.
Matthew wrote: "Another thing: We never actually learn why Caleb betrayed Tris; it is merely presented without explanation"It is actually stated somewhere that Caleb was swayed by Jeanine into believing that what she was doing was right. He says something to Tris like "you have no idea how persuasive she can be"
But I think it's a flaw actually. I find it hard to believe that almost any of the Erudite would blindly follow Jeanine. It's especially hard to believe with Caleb. I don't believe he just didn't care about his family. I think he did love them, but that whatever the mission Jeanine had, was more important. The idea of sacrificing for the greater good.
But I think Caleb would have needed actual evidence before he betrayed his family. He would have needed to know everything before he acted as he did.
Even accepting his naivety initially, after his parents were killed, he would have acted differently and not betrayed his sister. At least not without some really good reasons.
I read what the author had to say about the ending of the book, and I have a new found respect for it. It was actually all well written and makes sense.
I read what she said about it too, and it's still a weak plot. I think it had alot of potential, and the effect she was going for was really good, but because the plot was so full of holes, the attempt fell flat. No matter how you spin it or what Roth has to say for why she wrote it the way she did, there were way too many things that contradict and don't make sense.
Theresa wrote: "9. Bad genes don't beget good genes. Mutations have to occur and it would take more generations than have passed for this to occur.."I don't think they were proposing that bad genes produce good genes. I think it was more the idea of isolating them from each other. And it had been several generations since the start of their experiments. Supposing that 1/4 or so of the original population was divergent, it's not too far fetched to imagine that there might be a semi-large divergent population at the point that the book takes place.
But of course, we have no idea how they went about doing this.
"If they're so scientifically advanced, why do they all have very 20th-21st century medical issues with no treatment (paralysis, traumatic brain injury, etc.)? "
There are still many age old diseases we have no cure for. Like rabies. Just because something has been around a real long time, doesn't mean there will absolutely be a cure for it in the future. No matter how advanced science becomes, I doubt we'll ever see a realistic cure for paralysis or brain damage.
Why did Tobias trust Tris not to sacrifice herself when she's NEVER shown herself to be trustworthy in that department before?
Well, to be fair, she did have a complete change of heart on that, and Tobias knew it. It was never a question of if Tris would sacrifice herself if it became necessary. I'm sure he expected that much. But she wasn't purposely reckless any longer.
At least, not in her mind. It's arguable whether her actions were pointlessly reckless or not.
Of course, I still think the way it turned out was one of the major flaws.
does anyone else feel like the last of the new divergent novellas from Tobias' pov is going to be about him falling for another girl? if i'm right, i'm going to be sick
"I don't think they were proposing that bad genes produce good genes. I think it was more the idea of isolating them from each other."Actually I think the idea of bad genes eventually producing good genes is precisely what they were doing, which is preposterous. If you isolate this population comprised entirely of one type of people (genetically damaged) and they are forced to reproduce with only each other, the problem will never go away. They will eventually cause mutations that turn into entirely new problems -- *not* revert back to "pure" genes. The whole experiment was ludicrous.
Now, let me try to answer the OP's questions:
1. Veronica made this whole backstory up after the fact and didn't think of the plot holes it created.
2. Veronica made this whole backstory up after the fact and didn't think of the plot holes it created.
3. Veronica made this whole backstory up after the fact and didn't think of the plot holes it created.
4. Veronica knows nothing about world building.
5. Veronica made this whole backstory up after the fact and didn't think of the plot holes it created.
6. Veronica was too concerned with the main character achieving the symbolic ending she'd planned that she did not bother to put it into a situation that actually mattered.
7. Veronica knows nothing about science and was not even paying attention to the lame backstory she was writing.
8. Veronica knows nothing about worldbuilding.
Lol, true true, Lauren."Actually I think the idea of bad genes eventually producing good genes is precisely what they were doing, which is preposterous. If you isolate this population comprised entirely of one type of people (genetically damaged) and they are forced to reproduce with only each other, the problem will never go away."
We really don't know enough information to know one way or another. It sounded to me like they were trying to isolate the genes. Which is why they wanted Tris' mom, and why they were supposedly so concerned with the existing divergent population.
I don't think started the experiments with all "damaged" people. When they started them, they had the ability to decide who would start them off and reproduce. People like Edith Prior who were happy to change their situation and who were hand picked like Tris' mom.
I think they probably had a good number of divergent people and/or people with the potential for producing divergent kids. Or at least, people they suspected of those things if they weren't that scientifically advanced yet.
Even without screening, a random sampling of people picked off the street would have a good chance of having at least a few divergent people in the group.
At least, that's what makes sense to me. Clearly there's alot that doesn't make sense in this story.
But if they assumed that you could get healed genes from damaged genes(the way you're saying), there really wouldn't be a need for the experiments at all. They'd assume the problem would just work itself out eventually without any help from them, and it wouldn't be the crisis they believe it to be.
Maliha wrote: "does anyone else feel like the last of the new divergent novellas from Tobias' pov is going to be about him falling for another girl? if i'm right, i'm going to be sick"I think I read somewhere that all the novellas are before or during the time span of the series.
I wouldn't be opposed to seeing Four have some sort of happiness later on though. It's pretty depressing if he just shuts down and mourns Tris the rest of his life.
The big stupid info dump explanation says that they had genetically damaged people come forward, inserted "corrected" genes into them (whatever that means), put them into the controlled environments and let them settle in "for the long haul" with the hope that the genes would heal through the generations.
Lauren wrote: "The big stupid info dump"What is that?
Well, if that's true, I give up, lol It's just too big a mess to even try to figure out.
There is simply no making sense of anything in this book.
I'm getting that idea, yeah.
I agree. With a little thought, the story could have been much better.There is only preventative medicine for rabies, not a treatment. If you get it, you will probably die.
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/rabi...
"medical science is on the cusp right now of breakthroughs in TBIs and spinal cord injuries"
I guess it depends on the extent of the injury you're talking about. Every person is going to be unique. In the future, there may be some treatments developed for some more minor paralysis, but I doubt your average quadriplegic will ever regain the use of their legs. Sadly.
The same with severe brain damage. Some things more minor are similar to a disconnected wire in a computer and the more severe things are comparable to a wire that is completely severed and in need of complete replacement. Brain damage would require the growth of completely new cells and who knows how much improvement the person will ever show. At least in adults. Kids can be incredibly resourceful.
I'm not trying to be completely pessimistic. But realistically, that's my guess.
I think when she submitted her first manuscript for Divergent, the editors did tell her to go back and work on the worldbuilding and re-submit it.The lack of worldbuilding in the first two books (I shudder to think of what her first draft looked like) was very obvious but it was not terribly distracting because the story focused on the characters and the live plot. In Allegiant, the curtain was lifted, so to speak, the backstory was put front and center and the nonexistent worldbuilding was put on display for all to see.
Worldbuilding is super-important because it's what makes the story real, it's what makes it believable, and it's what makes the characters' struggles understandable because you can envision and accept the world that is creating all these problems. In Divergent and Insurgent, the world was not terribly fleshed out but I could still accept all the drama and danger within the confines of the world we were given. In Allegiant, I could not accept any of the conflicts -- including The Big One at the end -- as believable or important because the entire world that was finally explained and presented just made no sense in and of itself.
That was one of the things I was most disappointed with. I wondered from the very beginning of Divergent, "what's outside of Chicago?" While waiting for Allegiant, I was sure we'd finally get a satisfactory answer and have it all come together....not so much.
Lauren wrote: "Now, let me try to answer the OP's questions:"HAHA! I love you, Lauren! XD
And as a side note about the scientific justification for why these experiments were needed in the first place, I have to ask an important question.
If they were scientifically advanced to remove the genes that caused aggression, dishonesty, stupidity, etc, etc, then why could they not use the same technology to engineer people with the genes added back in?
My other problem with this book was the fact that most of the time I COULD NOT tell who's POV it was. Unless something clued me in, like Tris mentioned Natalie or Tobias mentioned Marcus, I had to flip back and see whose POV it was. Am I the only one?
Theresa wrote: "Sarah wrote: "My other problem with this book was the fact that most of the time I COULD NOT tell who's POV it was. Unless something clued me in, like Tris mentioned Natalie or Tobias mentioned Ma..."I know, so did I, in Free Four and the Transfer. But for me, he sounded different in Allegiant and it was very confusing. :)
The conflict between Marcus and Evelyn was resolved within one page...it really bothered me.
ok I finally read it. I cried when tris died. the ash scattering was sweet but it's weird they waited so long to do it. i'm happy for tobias getting his mommy back. i'm happy that tris didn't lose her memory or sth. I don't hate caleb anymore - if he had gone instead of tris, david would have killed him and everyone would lose their memories, and I've had enough of that. tris didn't sacrifice herself for caleb but for the people so I liked the ending. still wish she lived but you know what I mean.god I hope the tobias novellas won't end with tobias and nita or some other chick getting together because everyone else pales in comparison to tris.
and I don't think they had sex. they would have thought about it, even innocently, and it would have been obvious.
Maliha wrote: "ok I finally read it. I cried when tris died. the ash scattering was sweet but it's weird they waited so long to do it. i'm happy for tobias getting his mommy back. i'm happy that tris didn't lose ..."I think all the novellas take place before and during the series.
I found it hard to believe that Tobias would be willing to erase his memory with the serum to escape his grief. Isn't that cowardly? I know Christina talked him out of it but I do not see the Tobias we know even considering that idea.
The Tobias in this book had absolutely nothing in common with the Tobias we knew in the other two, so I guess it fits.
Sure, but when you lose the person you love, you aren't really yourself anymore. At least for a while. In this case especially, she was the only person he had in the world since his parents were horrible people. And it was a total shock.
Someone in that much pain just wants relief from it, they don't necessarily care what form it takes.
The only part I find truly unbelievable about that is that Tobias wouldn't want to forget that she existed.
Kristen wrote: "Sure, but when you lose the person you love, you aren't really yourself anymore. At least for a while. In this case especially, she was the only person he had in the world since his parents were h..."
I agree, it seems Tobias would never have gone through with it
For anyone still questioning the genetics in this book, please google or go to Wikipedia and look up "founder effect." When you isolate a small population on an island or within a fence and have them breed over generations, bad genes actually get locked into the population and become more frequent...They don't heal themselves.This is very, very basic genetics that rudimentary research should have encountered prior to publishing.
Everyone's assuming that they started with all bad genes and it never says that. Now I'm not defending Roth's science and logic in this book. Lord knows it was pretty bad. But everyone in the country wasn't 'damaged' when they started the experiments. And it's possible - probable even - that they started with a good number of 'healed' people. Which means that it's likely they would receive a healed population several generations down the line.
Kristen wrote: "Everyone's assuming that they started with all bad genes and it never says that. Now I'm not defending Roth's science and logic in this book. Lord knows it was pretty bad. But everyone in the coun..."
Actually it does say that. The city experiments were for people with damaged genes. After the Purity War, they specifically asked for people with damaged genes to come forward (I doubt it was EVERY "damaged" person in the country, though, just volunteers) so they could stick them in the controlled environments "for the long haul" and wait for leprechauns to turn them back into a regular people. The people in the country with "pure" genes were not included in this. "Pure" people didn't need to be fixed.
Come to think of it, they should have had a controlled city with "pure" people. I do not understand the point of introducing the faction variable into these cities with people who are already genetically predisposed to behaving this way (except, you know, to half-ass an explanation for why the faction society exists). If they really wanted to see if it's our DNA or our environment, they should have had one city with all pure people living in a faction society.
Kristen,Google Founder Effect. It doesn't work like that. If you close in a population with a bad gene and only let them mate with people in that closed area, the bad gene becomes entrenched, not healed. You have to have genetic diversity (new people to mate with) for a particular trait to become less prevalent over generations.
Genetics does not work like a quarantine. You can't isolate it and hope it will go away.
This story should have been a psychology or sociology experiment rather than a biology experiment. She would have been on firmer ground logically, and it would have been a much more compelling story.
It could have been a psychology experiment to determine the roots of fascism by setting up one group as intellectually superior over all others. It could have been a social psychology experiment on scapegoating based on personality traits.
"This story should have been a psychology or sociology experiment rather than a biology experiment. She would have been on firmer ground logically, and it would have been a much more compelling story."I sooo wish she had stuck with something like this. The only reason, I believe, she went a scientific route was because she needed to find some way to explain why divergent people were different. Apparently she couldn't think of some reason rooted in psychology that would explain why some people have an aptitude for multiple personality traits and some have an aptitude for one. It occurred to her that her premise made no sense because every human being is multidimensional. So she came up with this nonsense to say that it's just something found in DNA and it means nothing about who you are.
Brill.
When I read about the divergent, I assumed that they were gifted in a personality trait called intuition. Tris was able to intuit that the simulations weren't real and intuit ways to destroy the simulations. People who are highly intuitive are able to mimic other personalities, which would explain being comfortable in multiple factions.
Lauren wrote: "Actually it does say that. The city experiments were for people with damaged genes. After the Purity War, they specifically asked for people with damaged genes to come forward (I doubt..."Where specifically does it say that they started the experiments with only damaged people? I don't remember anything like that mentioned. I loaned my book to my sister so I can't look it up. But all I remember them saying is that they started these experiments to produce divergence. The details of how precisely they went about doing it were all vague if I'm remembering right.
Mary wrote: "Kristen,Google Founder Effect. It doesn't work like that. If you close in a population with a bad gene and only let them mate with people in that closed area, the bad gene becomes entrenched, no..."
I never said that would work. And I get that an all damaged population would only strengthen the damaged traits. But what I'm saying is, I don't think they started with all or even most damaged people.
Kristen wrote: "Mary wrote: "Kristen,Google Founder Effect. It doesn't work like that. If you close in a population with a bad gene and only let them mate with people in that closed area, the bad gene becomes e..."
It's explained when they meet David for the first time, when he says:
“They called for genetically damaged individuals to come forward so that the Bureau could alter their genes. The Bureau then placed them in secure environments to settle in for the long haul, equipped with basic versions of the serums to help them control their society. They would wait for the passage of time—for the generations to pass, for each one to produce more genetically healed humans. Or, as you currently know them . . . the Divergent.”
I really can't believe that she did any research for this novel...It feels like she made a rough draft but didn't get time to research all the facts so this the version they ended up publishing.
But what I'm saying is, I don't think they started with all or even most damaged people. They did. Andi quoted the exact passage above.
Weeeell, maybe when they altered them, they began the healing process towards divergence. Like whatever they did was some sort of antibody to the damaged genes that took in some and not in others. Possibly one that went in stages with each generation so it wouldn't show up for several years. Or maybe they introduced a new gene that would eventually work it's way into dominance.
I mean, Tris is basically the pinnacle of what they were trying to do, but she's still different from David and the others who never had their genes touched. She's still a product of altered genes.
I'm just playing devil's advocate here and trying to figure out what the heck Roth was picturing. But I still think it's a big mess. Just for the record, lol
"I really can't believe that she did any research for this novel...It feels like she made a rough draft but didn't get time to research all the facts so this the version they ended up publishing. "
Yeah. Either that or she was just so focused on where she wanted to story to wind up that she couldn't be bothered to make a coherent way of getting there.
Not much research would have been needed actually. Just some thought.
I think she just made up a bunch of nonsense in her head.
Don't over think it, just enjoy it while it lasts. Veronica Roth is smart enough to have reasonings for what she wrote.
Surprise! Writers aren't infallible.
Kristen wrote: "Weeeell, maybe when they altered them, they began the healing process towards divergence. Like whatever they did was some sort of antibody to the damaged genes that took in some and not in others. ..."No, just no. Genes are in the nucleus. Antibodies can't get in there.
And this is still poor worldbuilding on V. Roth's part. If she wanted to set this up as a gene therapy experiment, she would have needed to up the medical technology in this world she created. Given the paralyzed girl bionic limbs, for example....and saved Uriah....Oh, but then if she saved Uriah, she wouldn't have been able to let Tris die from a simple gun shot wound. Scratch that.
Here's how the author should have handled the genetic damage issue...The Bureau infected rats with a virus genetically engineered to carry the human divergence gene. The virus was transmissible to humans through bites and exposure to rat droppings. This would explain the highest level of divergence in the factionless community (who lived alongside the rat population) and the second highest level of divergence in the Abnegation community (who spent their time serving the homeless). Since the rats had run of the community, there would be occasional transmission to those in other factions, but not as common. This also would explain how divergent parent(s) did not result in divergent offspring....the gene was introduced but not part of the germ line (except for those entering the experiment with the germline mutation).
Sarah wrote: "My other problem with this book was the fact that most of the time I COULD NOT tell who's POV it was. Unless something clued me in, like Tris mentioned Natalie or Tobias mentioned Marcus, I had to ..."I had the same problem. If I walked away from the book for a few hours or a day or whatever, I would not know who I was reading. I usually just assumed it was Tris because I'd forget about there being 2 POVs, and then Tris would get mentioned and I'd realize it was Tobias. Confusing.
I loved these books but it feels like Veronica didn't really think everything out that well?
If you think about it, everyone is divergent. Everyone has been kind, smart, brave, selfless, and honest at some point. Why couldn't it end with that realization?
Kristen wrote: "I had most of those questions myself (and more). Honestly, I think they're just a bunch of plot holes. The entire premise of the story is flawed because the conditions in Chicago which led to the..."
Totally agree with you about David.First when she finds Tobias in the simulation in Divergent they have a knock down drag out fight and he has a gun,but yet she manages to survive.Her just leaving her gun was way too convenient and I'm supposed to believe a non Dauntless trained person in a wheelchair is going to take her down so easily.
Sarah wrote: "My other problem with this book was the fact that most of the time I COULD NOT tell who's POV it was. Unless something clued me in, like Tris mentioned Natalie or Tobias mentioned Marcus, I had to ..."No you're totally right on.They sounded too similar and it became very repetitive.Everything I came to know and love about Four was destroyed in this book.
Emma wrote: "The conflict between Marcus and Evelyn was resolved within one page...it really bothered me."Not to mention does anyone really believe that Evelyn would just give up all her years of plotting and planning to be with the son she cared so little about?
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
1. Why side with Jeannie to kill a bunch of the abnegations when they could've just used the memory serum to make those who knew forget about the video? Why why the government even side with Jeannie(a known divergent killer) when they could've solved the problem themselves.
2. Why send in Natalie Prior to resolve the issue to the murder of the divergent if they could've just used the memory serum on him?
3. How did Natalie Prior even resolved the issue? Did she cause Heckor? heart attack?
4. What's going on with the outside world? Is what's going on happening just in the United States? If so, why no one stepped in?
5. Why would the government willing choose to go after an issue that is not the cause of their problems and sacrifice everything (the economy, lives, stability) to solve it?
6.Compared to what's going in in the rest of the nation, the victory that they achieve was only a small one. What's going to happen when the government learned what happened in Chicago?
7. If the government is capable of creating those serums and so advance in science, why not use resources to actually fix GD genes instead waiting for generations for the problem to fix itself.
8. When we first meet the people on the fringe, they didn't trust the Genetic Welfare people or the Chicago people, they feared them. So why would the people in the fringe even consider trusting the Genetic Welfare people or even the people in Chicago?
I'll stop at eight for now. When I started to realize the author was going to leave a lot of questions unanswered, I wondered if she did so on purpose or not. Since I found no indication of a fourth book,I wonder if she was going to do a spin off. Same world and time, but different set of main characters (Ones that don't unnecessarily die. Sidenote: I called Tris death the second I saw Tobais had a POV). If she didn't do it on purpose, then I'll be hesitant to ever read a book written by her again.