Mockingjay
discussion
SO AFTER FINISHING THE THIRD BOOK I STILL HAD A QUESTION THAT WASN'T ANSWERED VERY CLEARLY...DID THEY DECIDE TO DO THE HUNGER GAMES WITH THE CHILDREN OF THE CAPITOL OR NOT???
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Rosa
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Dec 13, 2011 11:21AM
I REMEMBER THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE HELD TO A VOTE BUT IT WASN'T VERY CLEAR TO ME,WHAT THE VOTING OUTCOME WAS.
reply
|
flag
President Coin put the question of whether to hold a Hunger Games with the children of the Capitol to a vote by the victors. Most notably, Peeta adamantly voted against the idea, while Katniss (who did it "for Prim") and Haymitch casted the last two votes in favor of the Games, carrying the motion. But thereafter, Katniss assassinated President Coin and (I assumed) the heinous idea died with her. But you're right, there was no clear answer to that question.
Yeah, it wasn't exactly answered, but I think it was pretty clear that they didn't do it.Coin wanted to do it for vengeance.
Katniss(and Haymitch) voted yes to throw Coin off. When Katniss says "for Prim", she was planning on avenging Prim with Coin's death, since she was convinced Coin sent Prim there to die.
But with Coin gone, none of them would be advocating another Games. Except maybe that other girl, Johanna(?).
The new president(forget her name), though, wouldn't have allowed it.
While in the end Katniss was unfeeling I think she would have not had any children had the games still been an event. With both her and Peeta surviving their kids would have had to go.
it actually says at the end that there were no more games...though I do recall that it wasn't ENTIRELY clear whether that meant before or after the initial "revenge game" they voted for...but I assumed that it meant there were no more after katniss' 2nd one.and the new president was paylor
personally I think with the death of Coin, Paylor becoming President...there were no more games.
Kristen wrote: "Yeah, it wasn't exactly answered, but I think it was pretty clear that they didn't do it.Coin wanted to do it for vengeance.
Katniss(and Haymitch) voted yes to throw Coin off. When Katniss says "..."
That was how I interpreted it also. After Coin's death, I don't think there were anymore Hunger Games.
They did not proceed with a new Hunger Games for the next generation...Katniss just played along with Coin because Katniss wanted an opportunity to kill Coin for setting Prim up to be killed. Haymitch relaised what Katniss was planning and went along.
The victors were given the task to choose between Hunger Games using Capitol children OR kill everyone who holds a Capitol citizenship. My first thought was that Katniss and Haymitch voted "Yes" to the Hunger Games because it would mean less number of people dead. I mean, about a dozen or so dead in comparison to hundreds, which may or may not include the Capitol characters who joined the rebel side. We will never know right? Collins ended the book without explaining much and Katniss is an unreliable source of information sometimes.
Karenina wrote: "The victors were given the task to choose between Hunger Games using Capitol children OR kill everyone who holds a Capitol citizenship. My first thought was that Katniss and Haymitch voted "Yes" t..."Now that you say that, I think I do remember it being an either/or type of thing. And I think I had that thought initially too, but then I realized that Katniss would never want there to be another Hunger Games with anyone.
I think as soon as she heard the choices, her goal was always to kill Coin. Partly for vengeance (mainly that, I think. I don't think she could just murder anyone for their intentions), but also to stop Coin, who was no better than Snow.
She knew that things would never change if she were in power.
That's actually one reason I really like Katniss at the end. Alot of people think she got weak or whatever, but I love that she was willing to put aside her own mission and revenge (to kill Snow) in order to stop coin, for everyone.
Of course, there was a personal aspect of revenge with Coin too, but killing Snow fueled her for so long and she just gave it up for the good of everyone else.
I think in the end, Collins really wrote against not only Snow and Coin, but everyone that the characters of Snow and Coin embody. I mean, people who views life as dispensable.
They decided they would do it, but it doesn't give any further details. i think when they make it into a movie they will show it. but in the book, they just show the vote.
Kristen wrote: "Yeah, it wasn't exactly answered, but I think it was pretty clear that they didn't do it.Coin wanted to do it for vengeance.
Katniss(and Haymitch) voted yes to throw Coin off. When Katniss says "..."
This is pretty much how I saw it too. I think Katniss wanted to convince Coin that she was on her side so she could later kill her. Once Coin was killed, I don't think they went through with it.
All the arenas used for 75 years of Hunger Games were destroyed. There were no more reapings, no more games.
I didn't quite understand that the first time I read Mockingjay either, but there was no final Games. Katniss was in fact trying to trick Coin while already planning to kill her. She saw that if Coin was also advocating the Hunger Games, she would be no better a president than Snow (we also see this in Coin's maltreatment of the prep team, etc.), so she voted yes "for Prim" to make Coin think it was because she blamed the Capitol for Prim's death when in fact she blamed Coin and was probably only going to kill her because she believed that Coin had killed Prim. Haymitch understood that Katniss had a plan, which is why he voted with her. There were in fact no more Hunger Games.I really can't explain this that well, but if you read The Girl Who Was on Fire: Your Favorite Authors on Suzanne Collins' Hunger Games Trilogy, that book explains it a lot better. I recommend it for any Hunger Games fan anyway.
No, in the epilogue it was stated that the games were over forever, and i assumed that was for everyone including the Capitols children.
not surei never thought of that though
they did because katniss told theem to
They stopped them, but with a final game of all the capital children
I really think so, i think they actually voted it for a yes. I have a really good memory. and i am almost definatly sure they followed through with it.
But i dont have the book with me to check...
oh... ok. Thanks for reminding me.
I think at the very end when talking about Katniss and Peeta's children it is pretty clear they would not know about tributes or maybe even the role they played in the world they were living in now. This implies no games anywhere.....
I think that after she killed Coin, it was decided no because she was just turning Panem again into the way Snow ruled over it
No! After Coin died the new president decided aganist it.
Jo wrote: "All the arenas used for 75 years of Hunger Games were destroyed. There were no more reapings, no more games." yup that much is clear
I don't think so because coin died and all the arenas were destroyed.
When Coin was shot the idea died along with her. So no.
Rosa wrote: "I REMEMBER THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE HELD TO A VOTE BUT IT WASN'T VERY CLEAR TO ME,WHAT THE VOTING OUTCOME WAS."The answer wasn't stated plainly, but when Katniss pauses before saying "for Prim" she means that she is going along with this to get on Coin's side so that she can shoot Coin. I believe that she intended to murder Coin ever since that conversation, and Haymitch understood this (which is why they made so many references to how very alike Katniss and he are) so he said that he's with the Mockingjay, not that he's in favor of the idea. So no, they never would have held the Games, it was just a crazy idea that Coin came up with, and besides, the majority of the victors didn't want it (despite what they may have said).
Don't kno but j wonder what the kids names are is it blue eyed brown haired girl and blonde hair grey seam eyed boy? Idk there's a lot she doesn't explain that could leave questions in your head just have to wait till November 2015 I guess..( when the 2nd part of Mockingjay comes out)
they decided not to...
Yeah I got the impression the idea died with Coin, or at least the serious proposal that it should happen.I think it was an exploration of/nod to the idea that when the oppressed rise up and take power they become the oppressors, in revenge or whatever... Swapping one regime for another.
Shanna wrote: "Yeah I got the impression the idea died with Coin, or at least the serious proposal that it should happen."Yep. That's what I thought too. The book would have said so if there was a 76th Games.
It is kind of confusing, isn't it? Well I thought they were just doing it one year and then no more but thensomething someone else said made me think they were doing it with the Capitol kids every year but I think that they decided not to do that that was totally a Coin thing and since Coin did not become president (and would not have been a good one) they did not do that.
I don't think so. I think Katniss killing Coin nixed this plan.
I think that they decided not to do it, because i think Katniss only agreed to do it to see if Coin was really good or evil.
there where a lot of unclear and loose ends. the whole series was ended to fast for my liking, as though she didnt have time to really finish it so she just threw and ending on it when she should have spent another couple chapters tying it all up. but I still Love the series. And i think that the Capitol Games were never held.
I believe Katniss killed President Coin to prevent the games from happening again. She realized when the proposal was done, that things really weren't going to change with the change in high command. Snow and Coin were pretty much the same thing so she killed Coin to finish it all.
No. Katniss and Haymitch just voted yes to get Coin to believe that they were on her side. But really, they both knew that Coin was no better than Snow.
Nicole wrote: "No. Katniss and Haymitch just voted yes to get Coin to believe that they were on her side. But really, they both knew that Coin was no better than Snow."Took the words right out of my mouth.
I always thought that whole scene was Suzanne Collins' way of keeping things open for another sequel. I wouldn't be surprised.I also sort of wonder if Collins knew how she was going to end the book before she did. The entire third book felt like she was writing without a clue, and just desperately trying to find a way to wrap things up.
It was Coin's idea, and the idea died with her. When she told the last HG Victors "We have failed to reach a consensus ..." she was indirectly saying her own subordinates -- cabinet ministers or officers of the District 13 army or both -- rejected the idea, so she was looking to the Victors to revive it. When Katniss shot Coin, the prospect of a 76th Hunger GAmes was nixed.
No. Coin was assassinated by Katniss. Paylor was given power. In the end, it talks about the Hunger Game arena turning into a memorial.
It's theorized that human history moves in cycles of power: the oppressed overthrow the oppressors, become the new oppressors, get overthrown, and so on. This was the point of the ending: under Coin's leadership, 13 would have simply become the new Capitol. Coin was ruthless to get power, sacrificing children to get her power in much the same way Snow sacrificed them to keep his power. They were no different. Katniss realized this, and with one last arrow, broke the cycle. As Plutarch says, this could be "the time it sticks. We could be witnessing the evolution of the human race".
No they were not conducted even though the vote for it won. In the end they say the arena was destroyed and a memorial was being built.
No, because Coin died. Katniss killed Coin because she realized that what Coin was doing was like what Snow did and she didn't want that for anybody else.
Plutarch explains late in the book that the idea died with Coin. "Everyone agrees [at least now] that the terrible things of the past should not be repeated."
