On Tyrants & Tributes : Real World Lessons From The Hunger Games discussion
This topic is about
The Hunger Games Trilogy Boxset
Introduction Questions
>
What theme or issue in The Hunger Games trilogy is most relevant today?
date
newest »
newest »
message 51:
by
Trent
(new)
Dec 16, 2013 09:07PM
I argue that the theme of a focus on mass media entertainment plays a significant role in placating otherwise restless populations. The upscale populace in the capitol swoons in ignorance for any compelling entertainment from the tributes, and the outlying districts watch in quiet complacency. In America, "reality" shows, and even professional and collegiate athletics serve to placate people into cheering for their hometown, focusing on trophies and winning. While life and death is not (yet)actually a part of today's entertainment, it certainly is portrayed almost constantly. All this "reality" programming distracts citizens from the fact that they are losing their freedoms in favor of "security" and comfort.
reply
|
flag
Mockingjay spoiler ahead: I like the exploration of too much government. There's an overarching theme that the government from the Capitol is bad. I think we can agree that Snow's administration is malevolent. Katniss criticizes District 13's level of government as well, even though we're supposed to see Coin's administration as benevolent. I don't know if it was something Collins intended...
Oppressive class systems for sure. If you think it's not going on in your backyard, wake up. The you have the wasteful decadence of the Capitol. A vomit-inducing drink in a pretty champagne flute so you can taste everything. If you've watched the news lately this whole idea of "affluenzia" has come up. The Capitol personifies this to a T. Normal people from te districts know it is wrong to kill these innocents, but it's a family spectator sport there.
Introduction Questions > What theme or issue in The Hunger Games trilogy is most relevant today? The peoples feeling of defeat. The idea that they lack the ability to fight the government. We start with the 74th annual Hunger Games. It is still accepted that the rebellious territories need to be kept in check for their grandparents crimes.
Some of the territories embrace the games and train for them others view it as a death sentence but none refuse to participate.
If reminds me of those who complain about our current government but refuse to do anything to actually change it. Some of the move vocal critics turn around and refuse to run for office, work for worthwhile candidates, or even vote. They complain about how the system is broken and no one cares while they themselves don't care enough to do anything. All the you can't fight city hall, two sides of the same coin, lesser of two evils, third parties can't win, their all bought and paid for, no good person could win, excuses add up inaction and acceptance of the status quo.
Are those who refuse to fight today going to be anymore courageous when things get worse? Is it that hard to imagine a system where our society would accept having our children dragged away for some semblance of peace and security?
I think that It's the concept of "bread and circuses." People are so wrapped up in getting free phones, free health, welfare, people are becoming more and more dependent on the government, and fail to see that they're rights are slowly being stripped away.
Jeffrey wrote: "How the politically-connected use media to manipulate the masses, or how they use politics to centrally plan the lives of citizens."Reminds me how the media manipulated the last election.
Kerrie wrote: "I think that It's the concept of "bread and circuses." People are so wrapped up in getting free phones, free health, welfare, people are becoming more and more dependent on the government, and fai..."I wrote on this earlier and I'm going to quote from what I wrote then.
I don't agree with the assertion that welfare has anything to do with "bread and circuses." In our world people who are poor enough to need (or think they need, whichever concept fits your POV) welfare are not what "bread and circuses" is referring to. People who are that poor are just trying to get their basic needs met, and those of their family. You could argue that their rights are being stripped away because they are so poor they don't have time to think about anything else but trying to feed and house themselves and their families. You could also say that they aren't going to question what the government is doing for fear of possibly losing the help they need. I also really don't think that believing that health care should be affordable and high quality has anything to do with a "bread and circuses" mentality. Free cell phones? Well I would say that people who have the "bread and circuses" mentality probably have the most expensive cell phones, not the cheap ones you can probably get for free through an assistance program.
On the other hand I would say that the "bread and circuses" mentality has more to do with excess, having way too much, wasting, conspicuous consumption. In my opinion, in the books, "panem et circenses" or "Bread and Circuses" refers to the privileged position of the citizens of the Capitol (and possibly the career districts 1 & 2, maybe 4). Because they are well fed and entertained, they don't care about their political responsibilities and they have no desire to change the political or social system. They are completely desensitized to the suffering of the districts because the current system benefits them to no end.
In contrast the people of the districts do not benefit from the government's bread & circuses. Instead they are the ones being exploited for the entertainment of the rich. The only help the poor in the districts get from the government is the tessarae, which do not really help, but are just another thing to make the odds worse for their children in the Reaping.
If anything, welfare is most like the tessarae. I think we could agree that both have the negative consequence of dividing people and causing resentment. But I can't blame the poor for that.
Again, again, again, my opinion. :)
Here's an interesting question: who is more dependent on the government in Panem: the people of the Capitol or the people of the districts? I think there are many ways to think about it, and no one correct answer.
Kelli wrote: "Kerrie wrote: "I think that It's the concept of "bread and circuses." People are so wrapped up in getting free phones, free health, welfare, people are becoming more and more dependent on the gove..."Kelli- I agree. From my perspective, the bread & circuses analogy points towards the people of the Capitol, the privileged elite who love what the Panem government provides for them. Snow and his government actually use a two-pronged approach to maintain their power. Bread & circuses is their strategy for the Capitol & maybe the more privileged Districts. Violent oppression, resource exploitation & welfare dependence (via the tessera) is their strategy for the remaining Districts.
I see the main theme is the capital being a totalitarian government. They have achieved total control in the people by having them live in fear. They have surveillance that tracks everything so nobody feels safe. People are not living in free, they are living in a cage. They relates right now to the NSA scandals.Also the government is extremely double sided, if someone in the capital makes a mistake it is laughed off, but if someone say in district 12 says even something wrong or disrespectful about the government it could cost them their life. For instance if Hillary Clinton was a more "normal person" would she have been held more accountable for the Benghazi attack? She says "What difference does it make now?" After everything she was given the National Constitution Center's Liberty Medal for her years in public service and her work on human rights. It seems like everything was swept under the run and forgotten about.
I would say that the most relevant theme of current events is the rise of the liberty movement or what the movies say is the resistance. There is a rise in the liberty movement that is all over the nation and yet people aren't seeing it in Main stream media. The scene when Katness seen the town on fire or people rebelling reminds me of what Brazil is going through right now. The liberty movement isn't being mentioned over there but the crowds are being fed up with the government and what it does or doesn't do. Same with here how the certain events are not being shown because to promote certain agendas. There are tons of events in which the liberty movement should have hit the news yet non doesn't event get spoken from by any outlet. Only things that concerns politicians like Sandy Hook for gun control or the Syrian war for another reason to wage war over. That's it. No one ever talks about the rethink 9/11 with a group full of 1200 architects and engineers and how they proved or shown mathematically that it would be impossible for building 7 to come down from one beam. Same with the rest of the buildings. What about the navigators in Obamacare who will have access to all of your information if registered on Obamacare? Those people don't even have to have a background checks for christ sakes. They just need to take something online in order to be eligible. Just ridiculous. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7tSfw...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuUyO_...
The roles of agitprop and the hidden (and sometimes not so hidden) deadly force behind government.
A recurring theme throughout science-fiction works is that of "The Other," which Ursula K. Le Guin defines as "the being who is different from yourself." ("American SF and The Other" in
The Language of the Night
). The Other sometimes manifests itself in sci-fi through human interactions with non-humans — e.g., aliens, intelligent machines, etc. — but very often "otherness" is manufactured between groups of humans as well. I see a big theme of The Other in The Hunger Games, primarily between the Capital and the Districts. Partly this is seen in the extravagant lifestyle of the Capital as opposed to the modest lifestyles of the Districts, but it is also in the very language used to talk about the pre-story rebellion: YOU rebelled against US, and now WE rule over YOU.
Otherness also appears among the Districts themselves, and the otherness is fostered and encouraged by the Capital to help keep the Districts subjugated. This is why I think the scene where Katniss tenderly takes care of Rue's body is so powerful, because it shows a rejection of the Capital's attempt to define otherness based on incidental locality. The theme is reinforced in Catching Fire when you slowly realize that tributes from multiple Districts are working together, along with a few folks in the Capital, to get Katniss out of the games.
The feeling of hopelessness that the government perpetuates in the districts: the people will never rise up from their circumstances. It's always been this way and always will be. The Hunger Games are your fault: if only you had recognized that the Government knows what is best for you from the beginning and never revolted. Don't question the government.
James wrote: "Learn Liberty Academy wrote: "We would love to hear your first impressions about the most important themes in the Hunger Games series!"It's great so far! I like the content!
I am a little confus..."
I agree with you if you look at a country like US or some EU countries, but if you look at the world it is different to be poor in Somalia or to be poor in US, for example. That way there are different
welfare or protection from the States and poverty in different countries have different meanings.
If you look at this map http://blogs-images.forbes.com/evaper... you can see how is diveded the world and one of the reasons that creates this situation is the policies that developed countries impose to developing countries as well as custom duties or bureaucracy that makes for them difficulties to trade.
The idea that the government has complete control of the people, through surveillance and propaganda, is what stansd out and disturbs me the most in the Hunger Games series. Also, the Revolution is a very important turning point, as well.
One good example of the U.S. government's use of violence to cause fear among its subjugated population is the CIA's use of drones to carry out "signature strikes" that targets people it assumes are terrorists through surveillance without due process in another state and calling it "imminent threat". According to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, it has been estimated that 178 children have been killed in Pakistan and Yemen due to indiscriminate killing through the use of signature strikes. These actions doesn't relieve tension but creates them. Washington's double standards mean that US military intervention is defined as "self-defense" while an enemy retaliation is considered "offensive". U.S. military interventions have been around 75 times ever since the end of the Second World War. What are your opinions regarding this situation?
I believe the most relevant issue in our world today is the fight for freedom versus the oppressors which in modern world words is called warfare. The oppressed thousands of years ago was the bible lands which during the roman empire controlled much of the western half of Europe, Asia, and Africa.
One of the lessons of the Hunger Games that is relevant to life is how people believe that the higher classes are more important than the lower ones, when its said all is equal by our creator.
I would have to say the most important themes that struck a chord with me were the aspect of war and how both the Capitol and District 13, though kind of "opposites," were able to easily spiral into justifying the need for violence and loyalty to the state.
The things that occur in the hunger games that is most effective today is warfare. warfare takes many lives fighting against or for the oppressed people.
I think that the most relevant theme is how in the hunger games everything was on surveillance. I think especially nowadays with all the terrorism going on our private lives aren't so private. You just get that feeling like some dude is watching you on a camera.
I see the poor and homeless every day who have given up, sacrificed their freedoms, for whatever reason, either willingly or unwillingly, to be more dependent on others for their basic needs. Yet, there are elite in our society who just walk by these others, looking away as if they don't exist. I find it difficult to resolve the balance between liberty and power. I see some who live with very little freedom but have the 'security' of a free meal each day. I wonder what would cause a person to give up so much of their freedom. Some are slaves to drugs or mental illness but not all.
I've just finished re-reading all three books and, in addition to the narrower focuses of government, media, liberty vs. security and the like, I think there are some very important examinations going on of bigger ideas, of values gone missing on the whole in a society. The two that stand out to me the most are the lack of both integrity & compassion in Panem. They have become rare, almost extinct, even. Uncomfortable parallels to the absence of those two values in modern Western society could be drawn.
For me, this leads to my biggest challenges with the US- the same systemic lack of integrity so glaringly obvious across the Capitol & all 13 Districts of Panem. It's in the media, in the government, in religious institutions, in public discourse, and in business and the economy, as well.
As far as compassion is concerned, its importance to me as a personal and cultural value is why, even though I agree intellectually with some libertarian theory, I would never consider myself capital-L Libertarian. American Libertarianism completely lacks compassion from my perspective.
I think class struggle is the obvious theme, but underlying that is the individual versus the state, and the suppression of the individual.Gale wants to run away, he wants to escape the system. Katniss wants to defeat it.
The book is riddled with themes, censorship, just war, revolution, etc. However in my opinion the most important of these themes is ultimately the individual versus society.
Curtis wrote: "A recurring theme throughout science-fiction works is that of "The Other," which Ursula K. Le Guin defines as "the being who is different from yourself." ("American SF and The Other" in [book:The L..."*****
(somewhat spoilery for all 3 books but not explicitly)
I definitely agree with what you've written here Curtis. We learn from Katniss that the Capitol wants the districts to distrust each other. They know very little about each other and are supposed to see each other as rivals and as a threat. They even want the people in each district to be divided internally through the tessarae - the resentment of having to put one's name in more times in the Reaping whereas the more privileged don't have to. They're both in an awful situation, now even worse through internal division as their day to day life outside of the Reaping is strained further.
Katniss totally flips this district to district distrust and ignorance when she teams up with Rue - who is supposed to be an Other, someone she shouldn't care about, and want to eliminate right away. However she doesn't buy into this - and becomes fast friends with Rue - learning about District 11 and her life there, gathering and hunting food, and learning and sharing information as they make that short period together one of friendship and care. I think this represents one of the most important developments in the books. At the beginning of the first book, Katniss tells the reader that she cares about one person, and one person only, Prim. Their relationship is wonderful, of course, but starting with Rue, she expands her circle of care, shall we say, to Peeta, the people of District 12, the people of District 11, to the people of the districts in general, to her allies in the 75th Hunger Games, to all of the people of Panem, even the children of the Capitol, in book 3. She goes from her principal concern of feeding her family to the huge and overwhelming concern over her influence over all of Panem, and all that that entails.
Of course it's too much for any one person to handle as we see but I really think it's quite beautiful how she opens her eyes to humanity, and the dignity of those around her, instead of closing them and being totally consumed by hate, as we see some characters do.
I'd even go so far to say that one of the main journeys Katniss goes on is taking the Other and letting them in to her circle of concern and care, to the point where they are no longer the Other to her. Like I said it's not enough in the end to make everything end with a pretty bow on top but I think it's one of the best lessons we can take away.
One interesting thing I just remembered is how Katniss sees the citizens of the Capitol, who are an Other to her (though not an oppressed one as the rest are). She reacts with a lot of initial disgust which is totally justified of course but she later comes to understand why they are the way they are - like children. She even says that she would probably be just like them if she had been born in the Capitol. That's quite a remarkable insight for someone who is forced to go into the Hunger Games twice by the very system the Capitol upholds. It doesn't make what they do OK, but wow, if we all tried to understand each other like that, how amazing would it be. She rightly puts the blame on the people who are really in control in the Capitol (Snow) and not the "children" (Effie, Venia, Octavia, etc.). "Remember who the real enemy is."
I would say surveillance also, people know a little to much.
I think that the most relevant theme is how the people struggle against a government but couldn't do anything about it
I can't say I know this is the most prevalent theme, but the one that pops out to me is the fear of terrorism and being labled as a terrorist. Our actual government maintains control over us today in many ways, including excusing the loss of freedom by saying "we have to do it to keep you safe". Some people are convinced, because their nationalism is played to, some aren't, but go along with it anyway because of the second way, fear of being labled a terrorist. Pretty much any dissenting opinion can be found if it's in text, online, a phone call, email etc and it keeps people from bringing up incendiary topics, as well as from question what's going on. Either you stay in line because you don't want to be labled a terrorist, or your stay in line because you belive that will protect you from terrorists.
Kelli wrote: "*SPOILERY FOR BOOK 3 - MOCKINGJAY*For me personally one of the most relevant themes in the THG trilogy is the consequences of violence and war. From the intimate scale of our own lives to the ..."
I also considered use of drones to double tap targets (and consequently injure first responders) to be a relevant issue in the story. Does anyone know if Suzanne Collins was trying to say something specifically about drones? I have the strong suspicion that she was, as Prim is really integral to the story; she is the impetus for Katniss entering the Hunger Games. Being that protecting Prim was Katniss' primary motivation, the causes by which she fails to protect her would also seem pretty important.
Tate wrote: "Kelli wrote: "*SPOILERY FOR BOOK 3 - MOCKINGJAY*For me personally one of the most relevant themes in the THG trilogy is the consequences of violence and war. From the intimate scale of our own..."
Tate, I think that's a great question.
I am trying to find out when double tap drones started to be used.
Mockingjay was published in 2010.
We know that the Bush administration (which ended in 2008) started the use of drones, and the Obama administration has accelerated their use many times over.
I can't find any date for when double tap drones started to be used.
I don't think anybody knew about them until 2012, when the first articles I can find were written.
I'm sure those responsible didn't want anybody to know about them, but eventually people had to figure it out.
I think based on that, Suzanne Collins was writing based on her own imagination, because I don't think anybody was aware of them being used in this specific application in 2010.
In that case it's really really tragic that they are being used by a country in 2012-2013, one that claims to be promoting "freedom and democracy," and not one hundreds of years into the future like Panem/District 13 when the world has really gone to pot, if you know what I mean.
I'm not sure if this has been addressed, but an important theme that really sticks out to me is family. There are very few dystopias with a clear and influential familial presence, and the fact that The Hunger Games possesses this is really saying something. Katniss volunteers for Prim and acts throughout the series in order to keep her safe. This displays that despite the oppressive dystopian setting, there is still solidarity within a family unit.
Tate wrote: I also considered use of drones to double tap targets (and consequently injure first responders) to be a relevant issue in the story. Does anyone know if Suzanne Collins was trying to say something specifically about drones? The use of secondary devices is a pretty standard counterterrorism consideration. If she was inspired by the Iraq war, she might be thinking about IEDs.
The issue that is more relevant today is the way people go to revenge on others like president Coin. President Coin was going to punish the capitol with their own Hunger Games against them instead,but doing this would make matters worse. Revenge is not the answer so i believe the golden rule must not be violated because when you do this you will go astray.
I think the most prevalent theme is the general treatment of civilians by the government. In the books/movies, President Snow has absolutely zero remorse for his actions against the innocents. The only thing that man cares about is power. I feel like some politicians are approaching that level with their disillusionment of life outside of DC. Laws are passed that they are told will help the little guy, and make operations for businesses more 'fair' to some companies. These laws actually serve to directly harm the people the politicians are elected to represent, and they rarely, if ever, recant their actions.
