Mockingjay
discussion
Katniss approving another hunger games at the end?
date
newest »
newest »
I understand now what you are saying. God damn I read five books in one week. Hard to remember EXACT WORDS. If I were to be honest, The hunger games was not my favorite series. Divergent and The Mortal Instruments were.
Victoria wrote: "Sir, I have read the books. If we want to be punctual I have read the second book, Catching fire, 3 times. You do not know me and do not understand what I am saying. Its is not right for her to hav..."I know what you're saying buddy, and you're wrong.
She didn't want another hunger games, that is clear. So maybe if you think about it quite closely you will understand.
Don't fight fire with fire? You have no fire buddy.
Punishing and enslaving the innocent is what started and embedded the Capitol-inflicted atrocities in the first place.The suggestion by Coin was immediately appalling to even the victors (at least most of them) who had been personally and profoundly victimized by the Games.
The suggestion of a Capitol-kids Hunger Games as a means of punishment-by-proxy was the nail that sealed Coin's coffin. When Katniss has concrete evidence that Coin was simply another Snow, she put an end to it. Which is precisely what needed to be done.
Katniss' "yes" vote was a ruse to enable her to assassinate Coin. This is why we see the paragraph in which she says she weighed her choice carefully, and would find out just how well Haymitch knew her when she announced her vote. Haymitch, too, knew that she could not vote "NO" and retain her own life (she was already too much of a threat to Coin's political power). Her *only* option to end the Hunger Games forever was to vote "yes" so that she could still be out on that platform and in a position to ostensibly assassinate Snow, but in reality assassinate Snow's replacement.
When she added "For Prim", we knew for sure. Prim lost her life trying to RESCUE Capitol children - she would not have approved of killing them. The "For Prim" was a message to Haymitch that the vote she cast had two meanings. Haymitch signaled that he understood her message when he himself did not vote "yes" - instead - he said "I'm with the Mockingjay" - meaning - he's with the true rebel leader who would never allow Coin to rise to power.
Had Katniss voted "no", she immediately becomes a threat to Coin. The rebels would follow the Mockingjay, in terms of electing new leadership, and Katniss would *not* support Coin. Coin knew she was (politically) dead in the water if that happened. Once Katniss has no value to her - or worse, is an actual threat to her power - Coin would have her killed.
In other words, Katniss wasn't voting "yes" to another Hunger Games. She was voting "yes" so she could have the opportunity to end them once and for all. It was, in my opinion, Katniss' finest hour.
Where's your fire buddy? I Can keep going if you want
Im not reading that whole thing hun. I UNDERSTAND I JUST HAD TO RE THINK. CALM YOUR ASS DOWN.
My ass is calm. That last post is for people like Demosthenes that thinks its just ridiculous for people to think she didn't really want another hunger game. Its all there in the wording.
well this is just a book and its to early for this
Victoria wrote: "well this is just a book and its to early for this"Well I love books and its too late for this. :)
I love books but they are books. I learned that the hard way when I was young as did most people. This stuff can be realistic but it is fiction. Books are something that appear out of a thought. When you put all those thoughts together it becomes a book and unless your writing an auto-biography they will never become real. Well.... unless a country decides that this will happen again and They will have The hunger games. Which is very unlikely.
But what about what she said? That she did it for Prim?I have a slightly different account from the explanation that makes it like sound as a rational plan between Katniss and Haymitch to pretend support to the idea just to kill Coins.
My account is this:
When Prim died, Katniss realizes that everything she went through had been in vain, because the games, the war and the klling were all to her inevitable consequences of her standing for her sister's life, which proved not able to be saved in the end,
Then, she has a mental meltdown and talks to Snow, and gets convinced that thinks never change, that good cannot overcome evil, that Coin is the new Snow. So she gives in, for the first and only time, to the badness that comes within the desire of revange.
Then, she goes to shhot Snow and only then does she realizes she could get Coin to, reversing the helpless feeling that came with her sister's death, regenerating her morale.
Of course we know she will try ro commit suicide after that, and then de dandelion comes to protect her which could be seen as a way of saying she is forgiven for the bad rhings she had done trying to do good ones, to others and to him.
I had given such a possibility some consideration. The way she recounts her conversation with Snow shortly before, how he has said they agreed never to lie to each other, and her last words of inner monologue before shooting Coin was "he's right. We did." That would be consistent with her realizing at that moment that Snow was right, Coin killed Prim, and so she would take her out as well.There is one element that pushes me over to the side of her knowing what she was doing when she voted yes, however.
After she votes yes, it is 3-3, and it goes to Haymitch to break the tie. Something I missed when I first read it is Katniss' interior monologue right before Haymitch votes: "...I can feel Haymitch watching me. This is the moment, then. When we find out exactly just how alike we are, and how much he truly understands me." There is something going on, some calculation she is making, something for Haymitch to read into.
And then he says "I'm with the Mockingjay." It doesn't seem to me like she has lost it. It seems to me like he understands something about what she has done, like he can tell there is an actual reason she voted yes, not simply that she had faltered (if that were the case, he could have stopped it by voting no). He didn't simply vote "yes" (like one might do if doing it for his own thirst for vengeance). He was with the Mockingjay. And the fact that he's with "the Mockingjay" and not simply Katniss says to me that he sees some higher purpose. He isn't following a girl who lost the only thing that mattered to her in life. Instead, he was "with the Mockingjay"; he was following the symbol of freedom and justice, in contrast to the wolf in sheep's clothing, Coin, who is a tyrant and a sociopath.
That very brief reflection of Katnisses, and Haymitch's reaction, all packed in just a few sentences, adds a layer of symbolism and complexity.
Well, you can know that Katniss isn't like Peeta, and soft and thinking of nice ways to do things. She likes revenge and seeing people who have caused her pain have pain. So that's why she wanted the Capitol to have a Hunger Games. She just thinks revenge and spying and all those other things.
Joseph wrote: "I had given such a possibility some consideration. The way she recounts her conversation with Snow shortly before, how he has said they agreed never to lie to each other, and her last words of inne..."You made very interesting points, thank you to providing me with some new thoughts about that.
It is interesting how, at some point of the story, Katniss starts to refrain from feeding the reader with her innermost thoughts. For instance, she does not tell us she loves Peeta, although it seems reasonable that at some point of the story she has figured that out. She has also showed many times she has learned to manipulate people, like when she said she would kill Peeta if it came to it, because she agree with Johana that he is gone (Johana probably said the opposite, that he was changed but still the same person, like themselves).
So, I guess we would have to admit that if she had all those things planned out, she kind of manipulated the reader as well into think otherwise, like myself.
One last thing: what about her misencounter with Haymitch just before that, when he pissed her of by asking if she was having "boy problems"? Do you think it counts as an indication or demisal of this account of a new rational Katniss, the one Haymitch had once believed that could not do the plans to overthrow the Capitol for being too impulsive?
I hadn't given much thought to that previous encounter. Re-reading it now, I would say it looks to me like that misencounter sets the stage for what happens during the vote and the whole "this is the moment then...how much he understands me..." She points out in the misencounter it hurts her really deeply but she didn't know why. I would venture to say that the voting scene explains why she was so hurt - she thought of Haymitch as someone who really understood her. When he made that crass comment about boy problems, it ostensibly demonstrated a lack of understanding. That was about a small thing; the vote is where push would really come to shove. He acted like a jackass before, but this would be the big thing that would show if he really understood her or not.
As far as rational vs. irrational Katniss, it's tough to say. She was emotional, sure. But that might lead to deeper thought later. And speaking of deeper though, I noticed something just now when reading through again (that I missed the first time): when it is her turn to vote, after lamenting how nothing will ever change, but immediately before voting yes, she says "I weigh my options carefully, think everything through." She definitely was thinking about something.
Also, when she said yes, she points out that she keeps her eye on "the rose." I can only assume she means the rose that Snow always had on him, since she was mind-talking about how she could still smell it when the voting was going on and she was lamenting how nothing would change. She was thinking about Snow. A lot of symbolism could come from the fact that she was "keeping [her] eyes on the rose" when she said yes. She might have been thinking about what Snow said and how it was Coin who killed Prim. She could have been thinking about how Coin really is no different (especially since that was what was implied when she talked about smelling Snow's rose perfume when they were voting on the new hunger games). It seems to me like Suzanne Collins was trying to make us see something (which to be fair, I totally missed the first time I read it lol)
I like and could almost agree with everything you say. But there seems to be one last piece off for me:The entire argument is based on the premise that she had to say yes to the games in order to kill Coin, and once Coin was killed the games would be cancelled.
I might have been having a blind spot here, but I do not see an imperative connection between those. I mean, had she said no, would it prevent her from shooting Coin? Was it not risky that, even after Coin was dead, the games woul be carrued on?
And where is it written that they were actually cancelled in the book? For my self, I find it to be an assumption, not spelled out.
The point I was trying to make about Katniss being so secretive to the reader was that she does not inform us when did she decide to kill Coin.
Perhaps I will try to read it over, but it is hard to find a firm ground on this.
Anyways, thanks dor your comment.
Andrea wrote: "I like and could almost agree with everything you say. But there seems to be one last piece off for me:The entire argument is based on the premise that she had to say yes to the games in order to..."
If she didn't vote yes she would have been killed. She was seen as a threat.
Daniel wrote: "Andrea wrote: "I like and could almost agree with everything you say. But there seems to be one last piece off for me:The entire argument is based on the premise that she had to say yes to the ga..."
Wasnt she already on her way to the final kill? And didnt she intent to kill herself afterwards anyway?
Andrea wrote: "Daniel wrote: "Andrea wrote: "I like and could almost agree with everything you say. But there seems to be one last piece off for me:The entire argument is based on the premise that she had to sa..."
I don't understand what you mean.
If she voted no, Coin would have had her killed before she went to execute snow. She would have never had the opportunity to kill Coin.
Daniel wrote: "Andrea wrote: "Daniel wrote: "Andrea wrote: "I like and could almost agree with everything you say. But there seems to be one last piece off for me:The entire argument is based on the premise tha..."
Can you give some evidence on that?
i think she's kind of right
Andrea wrote: "Daniel wrote: "Andrea wrote: "Daniel wrote: "Andrea wrote: "I like and could almost agree with everything you say. But there seems to be one last piece off for me:The entire argument is based on ..."
I already did in one of my previous comments.
Andrea wrote: "Daniel wrote: "Andrea wrote: "Daniel wrote: "Andrea wrote: "I like and could almost agree with everything you say. But there seems to be one last piece off for me:The entire argument is based on ..."
Here, I copied and pasted it.
Katniss
"Then what's nagging at me? Those double-exploding bombs, for one. It's not that the Capitol couldn't have the same weapon, it's just that I'm sure the rebels did. Gale and Beetee's brainchild. Then there's the fact that Snow made no escape attempt, when I know him to be the consummate survivor. It seems hard to believe he didn't have a retreat somewhere, some bunker stocked with provisions where he could live out the rest of his snaky little life. And finally, there's his assessment of Coin. What's irrefutable is that she's done exactly what he said. Let the Capitol and the districts run one another into the ground and then sauntered in to take power. Even if that was her plan, it doesn't mean she dropped those parachutes. Victory was already in her grasp. Everything was in her grasp.
Except me.
I recall Boggs's response when I admitted I hadn't put much thought into Snow's successor. "If your immediate answer isn't Coin, then you're a threat. You're the face of the rebellion. You may have more influence than any other single person. Outwardly, the most you've ever done is tolerated her."
Suddenly, I'm thinking of Prim, who was not yet fourteen, not yet old enough to be granted the title of soldier, but somehow working on the front lines. How did such a thing happen? That my sister would have wanted to be there, I have no doubt. That she would be more capable than many older than she is a given. But for all that, someone very high up would have had to approve putting a thirteen-year-old in combat. Did Coin do it, hoping that losing Prim would push me completely over the edge? Or, at least, firmly on her side? I wouldn't even have had to witness it in person. Numerous cameras would be covering the City Circle. Capturing the moment forever."
So at this point, she is aware of what Coin is up to.
Katniss
Was it like this then? Seventy-five years or so ago? Did a group of people sit around and cast their votes on initiating the Hunger Games? Was there dissent? Did someone make a case for mercy that was beaten down by the calls for the deaths of the districts' children? The scent of Snow's rose curls up into my nose, down into my throat, squeezing it tight with despair. All those people I loved, dead, and we are discussing the next Hunger Games in an attempt to avoid wasting life. Nothing has changed. Nothing will ever change now.
I weigh my options carefully, think everything through. Keeping my eyes on the rose, I say, "I vote yes...for Prim."
"Haymitch, it's up to you," says Coin.
A furious Peeta hammers Haymitch with the atrocity he could become party to, but I can feel Haymitch watching me. This is the moment, then. When we find out exactly just how alike we are, and how much he truly understands me.
"I'm with the Mockingjay," he says."
Sorry, I just dont see it. Could you be more specific?
Andrea wrote: "Sorry, I just dont see it. Could you be more specific?"If you read that comment and still can't see it, then you never will. Its pretty clear
^The evidence that Katniss voted yes to save her life and ensure her opportunity to kill Coin is that Katniss reminds herself that Coin is out to kill her.It doesn't prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that that is why Katniss voted yes, but it does give a very reasonable explanation as to why she would vote yes when she had every intention of putting a stop to the games.
As far as the issue of whether or not killing Coin would end the games, that may have been one of the things Katniss was thinking about and weighing. But ultimately, it makes perfect sense that she would know that killing Coin would make her yes vote meaningless.
This wasn't a vote of congress or parliament approving a law that survives no matter who is president or prime minister. Remember, Panem is a totalitarian dystopia ruled by a despot. The vote was extremely significant to the story, but in terms of government and practical effects for Panem, it was just a dictator running an idea by people who had no real authority outside of what she was willing to cede to them. It was ultimately up to Coin. It was her idea and she was the one who wanted it. Killing her ends her regime.
Now, that doesn't mean that her replacement might not come up with the same idea. Like in any revolution, there is no guarantee that the replacement will be any better and won't come up with the same idea. But killing Coin would at least provide a chance that whoever replaces her would be better (as was the case ultimately). In any case, it would have made the vote meaningless, since it was an unofficial show of hands in a dark room. The vote only served to make Coin feel comfortable in her decision, a decision which killing her would prevent her from making.
Joseph wrote: "^The evidence that Katniss voted yes to save her life and ensure her opportunity to kill Coin is that Katniss reminds herself that Coin is out to kill her.It doesn't prove beyond any shadow of a ..."
Also, on the topic of the games ending, Katniss says she would never have kids becaise of the games. At the end of the book she has kids, that's how you're suppose to know the games ended
Daniel wrote: "Andrea wrote: "Sorry, I just dont see it. Could you be more specific?"If you read that comment and still can't see it, then you never will. Its pretty clear"
You should not attack your opponent personally unless you have run out of arguments. Maybe we should not be discussing at all.
Andrea wrote: "Daniel wrote: "Andrea wrote: "Sorry, I just dont see it. Could you be more specific?"If you read that comment and still can't see it, then you never will. Its pretty clear"
You should not attack..."
What are you talking about? I wasn't attacking anyone. You're not my opponent, I'm not arguing with you. I'm presenting evidence upon evidence, and you are not.
Joseph wrote: "^The evidence that Katniss voted yes to save her life and ensure her opportunity to kill Coin is that Katniss reminds herself that Coin is out to kill her.It doesn't prove beyond any shadow of a ..."
If she just wanted to survive the voting, there would be no reason for her to be so earger that haymitch's vote would be yes.
I have reformulated my own thinking to accept several of your arguments:
First, she and Haymitch were up to something. And she wanted the aoutcome to be the approval of the proposal.
Second, she was up for killing Coin from the beginning, from before she was in the arena, so to speak.
But my account now differs in two aspects from yours:
The reason she voted yes: it was not to survive, because then there would be no solid or reasonable argument to drag Haymitch into it. She voted yes so Snow would know it. The flower was instrumental to that. By asking Coin to but it in Snow lapel, she would be ensuring Coin would have the opportunity to say it to Snow. And THAT was, ultimately, Katniss revenge.
And the other one, I am clinging to the dark helpeless heroine, the one that does not want to redeem humanity by noble acts. At that point, she really coundnt care less if the games were held again. That is why she does not give us any account if they actually took place or not (killing Coin does not cancel them automaticaly, altough it does make cancelling it possible). She ends up despising humanity and herself, there really is no sense of redemption. The only true piece of evidence of what was on her mind while casting the vote was the idea that things never change. Prim's imminent dearh wasnt avoidable. Any future government could be just as bad. The games could come back. Really, this female heroine is not an archetype of romantic nobility. Her main drive was never out of principles, but just to save the ones she loved.
It is alright to disagree, for allowing personal choices to creep in adds to the story. An ambigous story of an ambivalent heroine.
"Killing Coin does not cancel them automaticaly, altough it does make cancelling it possible)." There would be no need to cancel them - they weren't instituted yet. There was no law or rule saying that there would be a final hunger games (like there was with the original games). Coin was trying to figure out the best course of action (all of which horrible). The final hunger games, using capital children, was her idea to pacify the savage masses. That's why they had the vote, so when she instituted the new games, she could say that the previous victors were for it. But the very next thing to occur after the vote was her being killed and replaced by the non-evil Commander Paylor.
It doesn't say explicitly "the final hunger games match never occurred" because it was implied. Coin died before she could start them. Plutarch talks about how "now we're in that sweet period where everyone agrees that our recent horrors should never be repeated." That sounds like a time of peace and unity to me.
Andrea wrote: "Joseph wrote: "^The evidence that Katniss voted yes to save her life and ensure her opportunity to kill Coin is that Katniss reminds herself that Coin is out to kill her.It doesn't prove beyond a..."
The reason for bringing Haymitch into it is so he would know what she's thinking. So he would know she's voting yes but doesn't actually agree with it.
"The reason she voted yes: it was not to survive, because then there would be no solid or reasonable argument to drag Haymitch into it. She voted yes so Snow would know it. The flower was instrumental to that. By asking Coin to but it in Snow lapel, she would be ensuring Coin would have the opportunity to say it to Snow. And THAT was, ultimately, Katniss revenge."
You're going to have to elaborate on that. Why would she care if snow knew? How would that be revenge?
Joseph,A personal brief account:
No, there was no rule saying that there would be a Hunger Games, but there was no rule saying once Coin was shot they would be suspended either. It was Coin's idea, but there is no indication that others, like Plutarch, could not vouch for it as well.
No, I dont think there was another Hunger Games. I also think this was implied, but not for the reasons you have pointed out. Paylor seemed like a decent person, she would not have carried them out. But, really, could Katniss have predicted this outcome with any amount of certainty? My answer is no.
And lastly, I wouldnt take any words of Plutarch as inspiring. He is a cynical character, a sort of opportunist in the Revolution. His peace and unity could have been paralelled with any peace and unity speech that we find nowadays. Are we thrilled by it in any degree? Does it satisfy our dreams ou rightousness, justice and hapiness? I will leave that for others to answer.
Casey wrote: "I don't think she voted for more Hunger Games with the intent of actually going through with it. She just wanted to get Coin on her side. If she had voted against it, Coin would have ignored her vo..." But she didn't intend on killing her until she was already aiming for snow
Casey wrote: "I don't think she voted for more Hunger Games with the intent of actually going through with it. She just wanted to get Coin on her side. If she had voted against it, Coin would have ignored her vo..."Yes, I thought the same at the beginning but in the book, it looked like Katniss decided to kill her only some moments before she did.
Liz wrote: "I think that they shouldn't have another hunger games, but I understand that since they killed Prim and made Katniss go in 2 hunger games, so if I were Katniss I would have said yes too."But that wasn't the thinking behind Katniss' decision at all.
Brittany wrote: "I was a little annoyed. I think it was a heartless think to do, so vengeful."It was all a ruse. Katniss knew that by siding with Coin, agreeing to another Hunger Game, that she would win her trust for a while. Think how much she had damaged that trust, repeatedly when Coin had told her to do something, Katniss did the complete opposite. This is highlighted more so in the book than the film.
When Coin suggests the Games, if she hadn't thought this before she definitely did now, Coin reveals that she is in fact no better than Snow. Katniss agrees in order to gain Coin's trust and in turn a plan is made. By Katniss agreeing she is also able to bargain that she kills Snow. Once she meets with Snow it only confirms her suspicions about Prim's death and what Coin is really like which all falls in to the bigger plan of being able to execute Coin and Snow in the process.
I hope this helps on your perspective.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Hmmm I see, another person that didn't actually read it