Mockingjay
discussion
Katniss's reasons behind saying yes for another Hunger Games. Would you vote "yes" or "no" to having a Hunger Game for the Capitol and why?
I wouldn't. I believe it was a horrible thing to do to the Districts. No-one should be forced to include in something like that. It's not right for anyone. I know the Capitol has done terrible things but the Hunger Games is wrong.
I understand Katniss had reasons. Loyalty to Coin and deep grief over the loss of Primrose, but still, I think if I'd been in her position I'd not have done it. It's not right.
It was a strategic vote. This way she could be in the same place as Coin, but with a weapon and not be suspected that she intended to kill Coin. Coin always struck me as someone who was willing to do anything to get what she wanted.
I would have voted yes the Capitol should get a taste of their own medicine and it would be a perfect way to end the war
Having just finished the book an hour or so ago, I generally liked the ending, but I found this portion to be the biggest leap and completely puzzling for Katniss as a character.My initial instinct was that she said yes only for the small bitter taste of personal vengeance of a yes against the Captiol, not actually wanting it and thinking Haymitch as the deciding vote would realize that and know she wanted him to vote no. But nothing after Haymitch's yes gives any sort of indication to Katniss's reaction of the outcome one way or the other.
The idea that she just wanted to gain Coin's loyalty for later is plausible enough, but Haymitch's vote is completely irrelevant to that. Making his yes and both her thoughts of hoping Haymitch understands her feelings and the proceeding non-reaction, positive or negative, seem uncharacteristic. Up until that point she seemed very adamant about defending the Captiol citizens, knowing they simply grew up on it and don't know better; placing the fault with Snow.
Both Katniss and Haymitch lost nearly everyone they loved because of the Capitol's cruelty, and they wanted revenge. While Peeta lost a lot of his family, they were distant, and it wasn't a direct kill by the Capitol. Also, Haymitch and Katniss have an "eye for an eye" mentality, while Peeta doesn't honestly care about vengeance, he cares about humanity. Katniss voted yes because she was shocked, angry, and sad due to Prim's death, and wanted some sort of retribution.
If I were Katniss, after enduring the pains of the Games, watching my sister die, a bunch of other people die, not forgiving Gale, and all this other hell going on, would I want to sentence 23 Capitol children to death? To me, that is a plain sick idea. I would NEVER vote 'yes', I'd do 'no' hands down. It is also plain immoral! Your voting on annually killing 23 kids??? That. Is. Wrong. Katniss was all mentally on crack basically after Prim's death. I suppose she wanted to avenge Prim's death. Or Katniss did it to prove her loyalty to Coin, like maybe before she decided she wanted to stick an arrow through her head (lol).
Or maybe it was that Coin WAS trying to warm up to Katniss. As, saying "Oh, hey, since your sister died, would you like us to kill all these other children, to show them the pain that was put on you?"
Honestly, I don't know. I guess I bring up some pretty weak points, but I don't know why Katniss said 'yes'. There are plenty of different possibilities, and there isn't really one unanimous reason for why she said so.
Katniss would have NEVER said yes to avenge Prim! She is one of the only rebels that think capitol people are not entirely to blame for everything! remember how she saved her prep team and how Gale didn't understand why she didn't hate them.There is an ulterior motive. I think when Coin proposes another HG, she realizes it was really her who ordered the bombs and Prim being there.
She's been in two games already, the 74HG and the QQ, and the war was just as one more HG to her! They prepped her, put her on TV and put her in another arena (the capitol) to fight to the death with horrible traps and mutts. So when she says yes...for Prim, it's like she's agreeing to go in again, volunteering again, only this time to take out Coin.
I don't think she had a plan or anything. Her only motivation since the QQ had been to kill Snow, but now it changed to Coin, when she realized she was only a new version of him. Opportunity presented itself during Snow's execution, and she took it.
Tell me something, I'm I completely nuts?
I agree with Kristine (and others). Katniss did not think there would be another Hunger Games with the Capitol kids because according to her plot President Coin would be either dead or overthrown before it could happen. That said, I found her yes vote shocking at the time I first read it.
No. The simple answer- because it's wrong. We can figure something else out. But no, the Hunger Games were wrong.
I don't think she should have said yes. I understand that she said it was for Prim but, that just makes her like President Snow or Coin. She is basically recreating history they were so desperately trying to get rid of. When they did, she had to go and start it up again. That's my opinion.***I would vote no... But we can never know until you are placed into that situation where your heart really lies.
I would totally vote no but I think she voted yes for two reasons. One was to obviously avenge all of the fallen tributes as well as her sister(we all know KAtniss is not the sweetest of heroines so I could see her taking this approach). HOwever, the second reason I could understand would be to get Coin on her side so she'd find a great time to kill her
So my interpretation was that in silently communicating with Haymitch and saying yes, she was remembering who the perceived real enemy was as he always reminded her, and voted yes in order to keep Coin from stabbing her in the back by appearing submissive - Coin didn't appreciate Katniss challenging her. She then used that trust to stab Coin in the back before she could do the same to, well, everyone.
Well i guess i will just admit it I am revengeous and will avenge the wrong done to me or my friends! but when we think abt it the ADULTS in the capitol were the ones responsible and not their children who dont even understand the cruelty of their parents! Well having the children participate in the hunger games will be just pointless and senseless i think that that just how these ppl revolted the capitol children might too revolt some day and the cycle begins all OVER AGAIN.......
This gets missed a lot. Mostly, I think because the victors don't seem to pick up that it's not a choice between Games or no Games. It's a choice between having a Games or killing the entire Capitol population. Coin doesn't give a third option to do neither of these things. It's one or the other. Coin says 'what has been proposed is that in lieu of eliminating the entire Capitol population, we have a final, symbolic Hunger Games, using the children directly related to those who held the most power.'
So when Peeta, Beetee and Annie vote for no Games, they are voting, by default, to killing the entire Capitol population. Johanna and Enobaria also don't think about the Games as the least destructive option when they vote as they focus on revenge instead.
It's only Katniss who picks it up. Either way they vote, the victors are screwed. It would be down on record that they either supported the annihilation of the entire Capitol population or another Games.
Katniss says, 'Nothing has changed. Nothing will change now'. Not while Coin and her regime are in power anyway.
Katniss has to go along with Coin's plan (it's she who suggested another Games) to make her believe that she has Katniss's support. It's this that leads Coin to believe that she's safe to be in firing range of Katniss's arrow.
1. Katniss never would have wanted another Hunger Games. She said yes when Coin asked her because she needed to show loyalty to her, and it was obviously what Coin wanted. Haymitch knew it too, and agreed because his vote was the deciding factor. He not only gave Coin what she wanted by deciding the majority but probably, at least temporarily, saved Peeta. Besides, if Coin wanted another HG she would have had one whether or not anyone agreed to it, she didn't need their votes, she just wanted to see what they would say. 2. Katniss already knew through Snow that Prim was killed with bombs used by Coin. Even if Coin was not specifically targeting Prim or Katniss (though she probably was), she was targeting a large group of children. Even if Prim had lived, Katniss would have still understood that children were the bombs target and that the bombs came from the rebels. She was already against Coin, but that would have solidified her decision.
3. Katniss saw that Snow was already dying when she met him in the garden. She knew that Coin allowing her to kill Snow publicly was just another "Mockingjay" stunt, to show Panem that she was loyal to Coin. I think the meeting in the garden was the turning point for Katniss in that she realized her drive to kill President Snow was actually her drive to end the corruption as a whole. Seeing that Snow was no longer in control of that corruption and knowing that Coin was capable of it made her realize that she didn't need revenge on President Snow as a person, but on what he created and what Coin was obviously (to some extent) willing to let continue.
katniss sayed yes NOT to get coins loriety because we were in her head it was revenge percony would I do this if I went though all she went though but I would like to remind you that it is only this year one year than thats it if you read it it said that it will only be done once
I can understand why you would vote yes, but I'd say no. For obvious moral reasons but also for more then that. The kids in the capital were raised with those beliefs that things were fine the way they were, hunger games were the norm. It isn't their fault, so they shouldn't be punished. The people at fault are the ADULTS in the capitol, not the kids. I think there are other ways you could solve that problem without any violence at all.
true but it is also punishing the auldts but as I said it will only happen once
No way! Katniss would never vote for another HG! Not even once!!Remember
I would say no because if you say yes you are only sinking to their level. They may have done some terrible things, but you are just as bad as them if you make them endure all that you have done. If you have a hunger games you may decide to do it all over again and then you will go back to where you started only the places would be reversed and you will enter an endless cycle of war.
I understand what Katniss was going through but it wasn't the capital's children fault. They are all innocent and it was only a few people who were the really evils
CanaryK wrote: "I definitely thought Katniss said yes just to gain Coin's trust. I saw Katniss's "Yes... for Prim" as a tip-off that Katniss wasn't being honest -- after all, Prim is supposed to be one of the kind..."She said yes to stay on Coin's good side, but she was already plotting in her mind that Coin had to be eliminated, or they would never be rid of the Hunger Games.
Another Hunger Games was given as an alternative to killing all Capitol citizens - that would have included children that would have been selected for the Games. It was one or the other. Victors couldn't abstain from voting. Peeta, Annie and Beetee actually voted for all Capitol citizens to be killed.
Most of the answers to the question of “why did Katniss vote yes” are answered by saying it was to gain Coins' trust to assassinate her. I have a hard time with this because how could she know that it would lead to an opportunity to kill Coin? And why would a no vote cause so much distrust of Katniss from Coin? Also Petertr makes the best point
: "The thing is, when you read it, it doesn't seem like Katniss makes the decision to kill Coin until AFTER she sees Snow "against the wall" and reconsiders the "we won't lie to each other" agreement."
- He’s right. Why does she have a hard time reconciling if Snow is lying or not, AFTER the yes vote, just before she kills Coin? This line makes it seem like it was a spontaneous act.
I wish it would wrap up as tidy as all the other comments would like it; but not knowing when an assassination opportunity would present itself, and the mulling over whether or not Snow is lying, make it hard to accept that her yes vote is an attempt to assassinate Coin. But then that would mean that she voted yes out of spite and revenge. Not only does that seem out of character for Katniss, but also, her internal monologue just before she votes yes, indicates that she is disgusted with the idea of another Hunger Games.
I suppose that she only wanted Coins trust at first, but to what end? Was the inclusion of Katniss recounting the “let’s not lie to each other” conversation a mistake on the authors part? I really need to know so I can stop thinking about this horribly depressing book.
I also believe it was a strategy on Katniss part to get closer to Coin with a weapon to be able kill her. She wouldn't have been able to kill her otherwise with all Coin's bodygaurds protecting her. Even if she said No, there would have been no way to guarantee that Coin wouldn't have gone ahead with the games anyway and become the new president Snow, so she tricked her.From her experiences, she seen power hungry leaders show no mercy and not be submissive. Suggesting to continue the Hunger Games was Coin's final nail to making her a target.
Yes, but then why was she reconciling if Snow was lying AFTER she voted yes, just before she kills Coin?
Everyone's here arguing over plans and everything and I'm just sitting here ... like ... Katniss suffered from posttraumatic stress disorder. That sort of thing makes people behave slightly to majorly irrational. Consider that maybe at the time Katniss wasn't in her right mind.On the other question:
I don't think it's entertaining to watch teenagers kill each other therefor my answer would be 'no'.
Honestly... I think Katniss was in the wrong... I was wanting to start wailing and yelling No! Of course it was like oh dark thirty when I was reading it so I had to put my kindle down and scream into my pillow for a few minutes... Yeah it upset me THAT much that Katniss... The character I had come to adore would do something so awful. She had seen a child as young as Prim die in the games, she held Rue in her arms and sang to her as she died. She basically said she was willing to die for Prim in the first book why she volunteered in the first place. It was just... Saddening to see. I was glad Katniss had been faking it.
I read this book a long time ago, and have just reread it.It makes so much more sense now!
She is not voting for another Hunger Games. All through the books that is her one unfaltering virtue, standing up for people who can't. Not only Prim, any character being pushed around she steps up! Rue in the games, Gale at the beating, her prep team on 13, Wiress when she's been bullied by Johana. Why should she stop now? She is the only character that defends the people from the capitol!
It clicks when Coin proposes the new games. She had her doubts about her before, but now she understands that Coin's just another version of Snow, so full of greed that nothing will stop her. Katniss says just before voting "Nothing has changed. Nothing will ever change now."
I'm sure she didn't have any plans to kill Coin there, but she knew she had to do something. In my mind her voting "yes, for Prim" she was really saying yes to another game, another arena with the tributes being herself and Coin.
Ian wrote: "Yes, but then why was she reconciling if Snow was lying AFTER she voted yes, just before she kills Coin?"When Katniss was pointing the arrow at Snow, she remembers what he said about them promising not to lie to each other. And she switches her aim to Coin because pretending he's the target is the same as lying so she shifts her aim straight away when she remembers the promise because she's the kind of person who tries to keep her promise if she can.
And I like to point out other things, especially to people who thought she wasn't in her right mind. She was completely rational and sane. She didn't want another hunger game, she was pretending because she realised pleas of mercy 75 years ago was ignored and it would happen again. Proof below
During the meeting with Coin about having more Hunger Games, she's upset that nothing would change, and she thinks about her answer which means it's not an irrational answer.
She thinks about 75 years ago and wonders if there were pleas of mercy that were ignored by the calls of revenge. And when she realises nothing changes, it also means just like 75 years ago, pleas of mercy during this time will also be ignored.
And when she thinks of whether Haymitch truly understands her or not, she was hoping he would and support her and say yes to trick Coin. Because Haymitch didn't want another hunger games either, but he said Yes because he understood who Katniss truly is and what her motive is. I also think Haymitch's test is also a test to the readers, who really should know better because we're in her head.
After being manipulated by others, she learns to manipulate the situation herself.
It's really obvious that she never wanted another Hunger Games. And people who misunderstood her, need to read the ending again.
I don't think that it has anything to do with Coin. Katniss din't go up there planning to kill Coin instead of Snow. She went up there confused by what Snow had told her and only killed Coin because she realized that Coin was responsible of Prim's death
I say no, because by saying yes you would be no worse than the capitol. I suppose grace is the main thing, because you're "forgiving" them by treating them so much better than they had treated you. By saying yes Katniss was no better than Pres Snow, and I say that sadly because it IS sadly true. She became a murderer; however much I love Katniss, I was angry with her saying yes, and tho I do understand why she said it, I don't agree.
But she doesn't really agree!Just two lines before saying "Yes for Prim" she is in "despair" thinking "Nothing has changed. Nothing will ever changed now."
It's like she's answering to another question, one made by herself.
I'm sure she didn't know what she was going to do, but she knew she had to do something to stop it.
Now, SC really should have been clearer about this because it's been a real debate as to what she was thinking from the start.
My advice is to go read it again!!All the book!
The first time I read it I was just soooo angry (mainly at not having more "growing together"). But then I read it again a few weeks later and got it much better. Made more sense. Liked it so much more!
Absolutey not. Two wrongs don't make a right and treating them with the same cruelty would make them just as bad.
No. That's the answer I would have chosen. The thing about Revolutions: those rebelling will likely take on the tactics of the ones they rebel against. By supporting another Hunger Games: then Katniss is basically supporting yet another Capitol. Only difference is that Coin and District 13 replace Snow and his cabinet. By supporting The Hunger Games: Everdeen has become just as worse as the people who started The Hunger Games in the first place.
Whether her intent to kill Coin was present, or not. Regardless: she showed she's willing to make 24 more children suffer like she did because of what their parents did.
All because her younger sister died. If I lost someone I loved I would want revenge...but to make others suffer: that's where I draw the line.
Regardless of Katniss' actions afterwards: I have forever lost all respect for her.
Andrew wrote: "No. That's the answer I would have chosen. The thing about Revolutions: those rebelling will likely take on the tactics of the ones they rebel against. By supporting another Hunger Games: then Ka..."
She did it to trick Coin, if she said no, she would never be able to get near Coin again, and she wasn't allowed her weapon near Coin either up to this point.
Even if all the group apart from Coin said no, Coin would still go ahead with it because she's just like Snow. Katniss realised that this same discussion probably also happened 75 years ago, that if there were pleas of mercy they were ignored.
.so she pretended to agree so she could get a chance to assassin Coin. She knew killing Coin would stop the Hunger Games for good.
Katniss killed Coin because she realized that Coin had become just as bad as Coin because Coin killed Prim. We don't know that they never had at least one more Hunger Games, it never tells us that one more didn't happen. She killed Coin for revenge, not to prevent the Hunger Games from happening again.
Katniss killed Coin because Katniss is smart and it goes against her character to have innocent children killed. I have posted proof and passages above that shows what she was thinking in that meeting. It wasn't about revenge. At least Haymitch understood her without even being in her head.
I vote yes because I want another Hunger Games book.
The best part of seeing Mockingjay part 2 in the theaters was hearing all the people gasp when Katniss said yes.
And no, I could never sentence someone, much less 23 people, to a death sentence that awful.
And no, I could never sentence someone, much less 23 people, to a death sentence that awful.
I would vote yes, only to see on the Games those people who always did nothing but rejoice and smile in the death of those poor young men and women who didn't have a choice, but to turn into deadly enemies, all the while the Capitol people remained safe at home, not feeling for a second the starvation or the fear that day and night chased the poor tributes, both in and out of the arena. I know that the sole idea of the Hunger Games is barbaric, but they needed a spoonful of their own medicine, perhaps in a version in which they didn't fight to the death (but without the tributes knowing they were in a non-lethal version).
So, with a few conditions, I'm with Katniss, I would have voted yes. One last blow, and the Games are off forever.
Luzma wrote: "Katniss would have NEVER said yes to avenge Prim! She is one of the only rebels that think capitol people are not entirely to blame for everything! remember how she saved her prep team and how Gale..."No your not nuts I definitely agree. I also think that there's no way Coin would've let Katniss execute Snow if she had said no, because Coin would've realized that Katniss didn't trust her and killed Snow herself. When Katniss is giving her list of demands and says I kill Snow, Coin told her she would flip her for it. Meaning Coin could've decided to kill Snow if Katniss said no. I also don't think the Capitol Games would've happened since Coin didn't have the chance to make the announcement about it. :)
Andrew,If you are thinking Katniss is just like Johanna then you need to read the book again. Tell me, if she wants revenge why does she seem to deplore the idea so much in her head? Coin already sees Katniss as a huge threat even before this scene. Other people have already explained what Katniss was thinking.
This link here does a good job of analysing each character's motives in that scene:
http://www.hogwartsprofessor.com/mock...
What do you think were Katniss's reasons behind saying yes for another Hunger Games? i think that she had a plan and that she was going to go through with the plan and then said no i am just going to come up with a new plan and that plan would be to kill coin. Would you vote "yes" or "no" to having a Hunger Game for the Capitol and why? if i were any of the victors i would have voted yes to the capital hunger games. the capital had killed a lot of other kids before me and they would keep on killing more kids. i would have been like johanna and immediently said yes. they kill the victores family and loved ones also. there were multiple districs that got bombed.
I say yes. It's their fault for making all these deaths happen.
I would vote no! Think about how much suffering she went through the capitol kids don’t deserve that no one does!
Charlotte wrote: "I would vote no! Think about how much suffering she went through the capitol kids don’t deserve that no one does!"True. But it is reasonable she said yes because of Prim.
Honestly I think no because it'd lead to pointless chaos and murder, and if Katniss, and the Capitol itself for that matter, wanted to be the better person, they'd choose the peaceful route.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Good point. But I personally would be really... Annoyed (for a lack of a better word) If they had killed the person I was fighting for all along. I would free the country, that counts, but Prim was the original reason to fight. And they destroyed it.