I generally try to avoid posts on hot topics like this, because everyone and their mother’s brother’s cousin’s sister’s aunt has been writing about it… and well, because it seems like a cheap way to boost the number of people clicking on the link. Rest assured, that was not my motivation. But, here you are, reading this anyway!
At the moment, I’m in the middle of a rigorous course of study (directed, taught, and advised by myself) on the art of writing. As a part of this study, I’ve assigned myself just about every decent book I can get my hands on as well as hours upon hours of writing time each week – yes, it’s awesome!
So, after reading the The Hunger Games, I decided to ask my-writing-student-self this question: Why did the Hunger Games make it?
These are my five reasons (in no particular order…)
1) POV and Tense – In case you’re not familiar with writing abbreviations, POV stands for “point of view.” First, hats off to Suzanne Collins. I would never have considered writing in first person present before (and I probably won’t now, because that would just seem like a cheap knock off of the Hunger Games) but it definitely worked for the Hunger Games. I found it a little… strange… at first. But as I got further into the story, and especially once Katniss was in the arena, I realized why Suzanne Collins chose to write it this way.
The point of view allows the reader to experience everything at the same time as Katniss. It allows you to get into Katniss’ head and thoughts in a way you never would be able to otherwise. It is perfect for action and battle scenes where every second counts. It increases the suspense – since you’re reading it as it’s happening, you really don’t know what’s going to happen next. (1st person past POV at least hints that the “narrator” lived long enough to record what happened.)
The Hunger Games would not have been the same story if written in a different POV or tense.
2) The Action and Impossible Odds – Suzanne Collins employs page-turning, paper-cut-causing, gotta-read-the-next-chapter techniques. Relentless action, a plot that just won’t let up, and a cliff hanger at the end of every chapter ensures the reader stays hooked. I finished all three of the books in less than 15 hours reading time.
And, anytime you pit your character against impossible odds, you instantly gain reader sympathy. More so when every attempt to fight the odds just stacks them up even higher. Suspense? Yes.
3) An Intriguing Premise – Admittedly, the premise of The Hunger Games is horrifying (children forced to fight to the death on national TV) but it grabs your attention. And though the books are violent, Collins did not glorify the violence. Instead, it’s seen as something horrible.
Add to the intriguing premise America’s decay into the nation of Panem, the decadence of the Capitol in contrast to the poverty of the Districts, and one girl who is willing to sacrifice her own life for her sister, and you have a very captivating story.
4) Likable and Realistic Human Characters – As frustrating as Katniss could be at times, I found her very likable (another plus of the POV and tense). I always knew where she was coming from, I could sympathize even if I didn’t always understand or share her thought process.
Katniss was nothing if not human. She was not perfect, no cardboard cut out of a hero pasted into a story. She certainly made her fair share of mistakes. She was selfish at times, and at other times utterly selfless (example – volunteering as tribute in Prim’s place). In fact, she felt so real that I was sometimes surprised she didn’t walk off the page. The same goes for the other characters as well – Peeta, Prim, Gale, Cinna, Haymitch, etc.
5) Active Characters rather than Passive Victims – No matter what difficulty faced her, Katniss was always working to surpass it, to overcome, to survive. She was not a passive victim of circumstance, carried this way and that by whatever horrible situation faced her.
Even when unable to change her circumstances, Katniss was an active participant in and driver of the plot. She made decisions, took her chances, and the readers were carried along for the ride. And that, I think, is one of the foundations of good character building. A victim may earn sympathy, but such sympathy will be short lived if the character does nothing to improve his/her circumstances. Complaining does get tiresome after a while. And, although Katniss was not above feeling sorry for herself, she never gave up doing. Tenacity, perseverance, and the will to carry on against impossible odds are all qualities that will endear a character to readers.
What do you think? What are some reasons you think the Hunger Games made it, from a writer’s perspective? Are there any things you learned from the way the Hunger Games was written? Any things to avoid? Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments!
Jake says
I'm still hesitant to read The Hunger Games because of the premise. We'll see if I do or not. :) Great thoughts, though!
Becki Badger says
Another thought about the the tense is that if it's in present, she could get killed anytime. Present means you're uncertain of the future. I tried it, and hated it. I had such a hard time adjusting to it. Well, at least I *HAVE* tried it. :D Now I can say I have. :) Thanks for the post!
Gillian Adams says
Jake – I can understand that. If there's ever something that bothers you about a book, you don't want to read it and mess with your conscience. I think the reason it didn't bother me was that it wasn't presented as something good.
Becki – Very true! Good point. I think that added a ton to the suspense. I tried 1st person present for my entry to the GTW contest, just for fun. It was interesting, but definitely not something I would do for a whole novel. :)
Rachelle Rea says
Such a good post, Gillian! You're so right about all of these great points. :) I also found the tense wierd at first and Katniss nail-bitingly frustrating at times, but, all in all, these were great reads, if only for the writerly research. ;)
Charley Robson says
I LOVED The Hunger Games – Catching FIre was a bit of a let-down after it, and the end of Mockingjay …. graaaaaaah! Gosh that made me angry.
But let's focus on the positives. The Hunger Games is brilliant, and I'd say you and I agree on every level up there. Collins really knows how to break a heart – poor little Rue!!! And even Cato's demise upset me in the end. He was a git, but he didn't deserve to die like THAT. Especially as he'd been trained to be what he was … poor scrap.
Awesome post – as ever ;)
YaashaMoriah says
That was a well-thought post, Gillian! I agree with all your reasons. It's definitely hard to keep the characters developing and the suspense climbing through one book; doing it in three is quite a feat! As Becky noted, I also realized early on that the present tense kept open the possibility that she could die.
The violence was disturbing for me, but I also felt that it was clearly portrayed as evil. The premise made one think: "If we continue to play violent video games and to stay hooked on the reality TV, how long before we just become Romans watching hi-tech gladiator games?"
What killed the series for me was not the violence, but the romance. The author seemed to go to great lengths to justify things that are clearly impure. The kissing was incessant and the romance moved from there to (1) Peeta and Katniss sleeping in the same sleeping bag together to stay warm, (2) tussling in the snow playfully in a way that emphasizes the romance, and (3) sleeping together for comfort (but not for "other reasons"). I'm sure there was more, but I stopped halfway through the second book.
Of course the readers understand that this is only because Katniss and Peeta are forced into maintaining a romantic front, but I was extremely uncomfortable with the author's continual justification of impure actions because they were not "technically" impure. She got about as close to "the line" as she could get and parked there. Certainly, her approach emphasized the desperation of the situation, but I felt that the whole situation could have been handled differently without creating so many gray areas. I've seen the results in our society of justifying "technical purity." It's not pretty, and I fear that Ms. Collins is only leaving the door open for readers to justify their own progress across the line.
Rachel says
I completly agree with all your points. I was alittle worried about the telling instead of showing Suzanne Collins was doing at the beginning but it acctually got you to the action quicker so you didn't mind so much (still don't suggest doing it but somehow she pulled it off). Anyways, I really like this book (only have read one) and can't wait to read the rest.
Gillian Adams says
Charley – Yes! All she had to do to fix Mockingjay was have Peeta come back as himself a little earlier on. The story itself would still have been sad and depressing, but that would have reintroduced some hope into the otherwise hopeless storyline. Still, I enjoyed reading all three.
Yaasha – Thanks for sharing your thoughts! I have to say that I found some of it uncomfortable as well. But I was pleased and surprised that she only took it as far as she did. You'll find the same amount in many Christian novels nowadays – which still doesn't make it right. In fact, I find it rather sad.
Rachel – Another of those instances where you can break the rules as long as you know what you're doing. Honestly, writing rules are "more like guidelines" (to quote Pirates of the Caribbean.) You just have to know them in order to know when it's ok to break them.
Jake says
@Gillian
The manner in which it is portrayed, but that it is portrayed, is what bothers me. I haven't read it — and honestly, I don't think it's WRONG for me to read it. But I don't think it's worth my time to read it, when I know that there is 1) a depressing theme in the last book and 2) has some arguably graphic violence throughout the series. So why read it, when there are other, better, books I could read?
Layla and Josiah says
Yeah, I know, you wrote this a lifetime ago. But I just thought I would put my thoughts in here, seeing as it was either viewed in a mostly negative way, or mostly positive- which I view it neither.
I personally thought that Suzanne Collins writing style was nearly unbearable. There is a good chance I think this since most of my reading is of undeniably amazing literary quality and has been since an early age. (I.e. reading 3 Charles Dickens novels, which were unabridged, when I was 6). Her description was bland and sentences dull, to sum it up hastily. However, I understand why this appealed to more than half of the population, since they are so taken over by television and other media that they do not desire to have to read paragraphs of description; they just want to get to the storyline, they don't want a book that REQUIRES thought or some of their time; they want something easy and generally exciting.
Secondly, I think HOW she did the POV was creative but the execution fell far short.
I could go on & on but I have my WIP to attend to, however, though the idea was intriguing (hence part2) I believe it was of no literary quality. I personally, think there are many more things to learn from The Hunger Games not to do than to do.
Layla.