Allegiant
discussion
The faction system doesn't make sense (SPOILERS)
date
newest »
newest »
Well, not exactly. They are the product of genetic experimentation, but it had nothing to do with the factions. The factions were formed later as a way to attempt to develop and weed out the Divergents.
But I agree. There are a bunch of plot holes, including the idea that people can be defined by one primary characteristic.
People's genes are modified to remove certain negative traits to boost the opposing positive trait (i.e., removed cowardice to make people more brave). The idea backfired because removing the one negative trait actually just enhanced a second negative trait - without cowardice, people just turned into mean jerks.These backfire people had "corrected" genes inserted to reverse what had been done, and were then locked up in the city to wait out the generations for this to take effect. (Research fail: This is not how it works.) The divergent are the "genetically healed" individuals, the ones whose genes have become fully corrected and normal again; everyone else continues to have the screwed-up gene for the abnormal behavior.
The factions were added to help facilitate the behavioral correction through psychological reinforcement, but this actually makes no sense because the factions are based on encouraging the same behavior that they're trying to reverse. Think about it: They messed with people's genes to repress cowardice, and this turned people into jerks, so how are they going to fix the jerk behavior by creating a Dauntless community that encourages a lifestyle of repressing cowardice again? It makes no sense, and my best guess is that the author got so turned around in her last-minute retcon of a backstory that she forgot which way was up. Also, the idea of grouping people into factions according to their personality "damage" would just make the genetic problem worse, since most people would end up reproducing with others with the exact same damage as them. It was bad enough that all of the damaged people were shut up in the city together away from non-damaged people; isolating them even further is just the icing on the illogical cake.
You know what really annoys me? That the whole (stupid) genetic explanation was the author's way of explaining the biggest plot hole in her story's premise: the idea that people could have one personality trait. What's special about a divergent person? That they have complex personalities? Isn't that just a regular person? A person would have to be something other than human to actually have a single trait to their personalities, like a cartoon or something. Is everyone else just a cartoon, a caricature? Why are the others supposedly defined by a single personality trait, especially when they clearly have regular personalities like the divergent? I mean, a Dauntless person isn't devoid of kindness or intelligence, for instance. What makes them able to be pigeon-holed into one faction and the divergent are not?
Roth managed to come up with something that could have been a reasonable, albeit lame, science fiction-y explanation: the difference is in a genetic mutation that makes the non-divergent something other than a regular human, makes them act differently than regular people. That could have served as an answer if the story had actually followed through on the idea that the genetic difference actually mattered, but it didn't. The story pushes the message that genes and biology don't matter, we all are who we are and we're all in charge of what we do and what kind of people we become - all true and correct, but it kind of cancels out the answer to the plot hole. If genes do not really have anything to do with how a person acts or what their personality is, then why do the non-divergent make choices and actions that are obviously different from the divergent? Why do they answer the aptitude test "questions" with answers that firmly place them in one faction while the divergent do not? Make up your mind, Roth. Do genes have anything to do with people's behavior or not? Why bother explain the difference with "it's DNA" if we then make the point that DNA doesn't actually matter at all?
So, yeah, the faction system doesn't make sense. The concept of divergent versus non-divergent people doesn't make sense. Very little about the premise makes sense or ever did, and most of the "explanations" in Allegiant feel like the author herself only just now noticed this fact and was scrambling to correct it all - and succeeded in making it all worse.
The problem probably is that Roth clearly didn't look up anything about genetics before deciding that the plot would revolve around it.
The way I think of it, the factions themselves have no single trait. For example, it must take some bit of bravery and or selflessness to be in Candor; telling the truth all the time knowing you might get in trouble takes guts. The erudite are selfless too, as they do all the research and share their discoveries with other factions. As it's mentioned in Divergent, bravery and selflessness aren't all that different, meaning Dauntless and Abnegation go together really well. As for Amity, it must take a lot of self restraint to be nice to everyone all the time, and the fact that they have no leader shows to me at least that they do possess some Abnegation traits as well. As for the genetics thing, I guess J.K Rowling says it best “It matters not what someone is born, but what they grow to be" If genetics were the sole deciding factor on where a child ended up, there would be no transfers. The child is influenced by his/her parents and society, but ultimately it's up to him/her to decide where he/she wants to stay or go. The genetically pure/impure crap made no sense to me, and therefore I choose to ignore its existence.
Probably went a little off topic here, but had to let it out.
I get the feeling Roth hadn't been planning this gene stuff at all. Then she got to Allegiant and panicked.
I believe she said she struggled throughout the series to come up with some scientific explanation for divergence, because she realized belatedly that everyone should be divergent, because, duh, all people have multi-faceted personalities. She finally came up with the brilliant idea that divergence would mean nothing at all, that you're just a normal regular person and there's nothing special about you. I think she then developed the backstory around this idea, which is why the whole explanation comes off as something she made up at the last minute. Because she did. It's kind of sad - she probably thought she hit on something truly brilliant, was probably so proud of herself that she managed to come up with an idea that both explained the divergent thing and provided an explanation for everything about the city and the story. And not one editor or peer reviewer could bother to tell her that her brainchild made no sense whatsoever, that she was apparently so deep in the tunnel vision of her new idea that she failed to see that none of it fit with the rest of the story that she'd already written. Oh well.
Lauren wrote: "I believe she said she struggled throughout the series to come up with some scientific explanation for divergence, because she realized belatedly that everyone should be divergent, because, duh, al..."Yeah, that sounds about right.
My problem with this series is that the faction system really makes no sense as a form of social organization or social control. That's where it fails in comparison to the Hunger Games series, whose structure of social/political/economic/military dominance actually makes sense and draws upon examples from many historical regimes.Just imagine putting all the smart people in one room, the honest people in another room, the reckless people in a third room, the caring people in a fourth room, and the selfless people (who aren't the caring people?!?) in a 5th room. Forever! And then assigning the entire structure of particular social organizations only to people from one of those rooms. The idea that this system, which seems designed to maximize conflict, would be done in the name of peace, harmony, or stability strains credulity.
Plus the redundant testing phase which seems irrelevant since you can still choose whatever faction you want to join anyway, and you can even lie about what your test results recommended (unless you're Candor, I guess).
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
This would insinuate that a lot of these characters should be one-dimensional. But they're not. Looking at all the "genetically damaged" characters, they're all multi-dimensional. They all exhibit a combination of these five traits. Even Tris tells Tobias that there's nothing wrong with him.
On top of that, I don't think genetics define a person's personality. It may influence it to some degree, but it's not set in stone.
So, isn't this contradictory? I just don't understand how all of it comes together and makes sense. Does anyone agree with me?