The Hunger Games
Setting: Post-apocalyptic North America
Government type: Corrupt Roman empire/Isle of Crete (A vast empire with a city as the central command point. To keep the Districts in line the government demands a tribute of youths and maidens every year to die a horrific death.)
Story: Enter Katniss Everdeen, a strong-willed young woman who's only goal in life is to survive. She's basically the head of her household, she looks down on her mother's debilitating bout of depression after her father's death and took over. When Katniss's younger sister, Prim, is chosen to take part in the Hunger Games, Katniss takes her place and is sent off to compete in the Games. Katniss decides on the strategy of feigning love for Peeta Melark, a fellow tribute from her town, and eventually falls for him enough to make sure that they both end up winning the game. During the Game is a bunch of blood and gore that I will not dwell on. After the Games (in the following books) Katniss is slowly taken over by post-traumatic stress disorder as she is used as a pawn in a rebellion against the Capitol. It's a very brief overview, but if you really want to know the entire story line I'm sure that there's a Wiki (or you could read the books).
My thoughts: I enjoyed reading The Hunger Games trilogy, but I do have some criticisms. First, Katniss has only one goal, which is survival. I recognize that she's a strong female lead, but come on. Katniss is essentially willing to let everyone die on her quest to survive. I know, she and Peeta make a scrapbook of everyone that died and "Remember Rue!" all of you fans cry. But Katniss is still pretty heartless in the sense that she operates on the pure animal instinct of survival of the fittest. Secondly, the violence. Yes, situations in which 12-17 year-olds are killing each other can't exactly be Disney material. But at some point I eventually started to say "gruesome death" and scanned to the end of the scene because I got so tired of it. I also wonder how the movie is going to be PG-13 (appropriate for children 13 and over) when the actual book probably would have been rated R (appropriate for adults only). Another problem that I had with the books is the simplistic writing style. I understand that Collins is coming from writing a book series for a 10-12 audience (Gregor the Overlander anyone?), but this is YA. You gotta up your game. I have a similar writing style issue with Twilight. But overall, this is a far better book than The Giver and it is a fairly enjoyable read. I can see why there's so much hype about it.
Setting: Post-global warmed North America
Government type: Socialistic utopia (eg: the government knows exactly what's best for you and makes all of your decisions)
Story: The story starts with a vivid day dream of Cassia Reyes as she is riding the bus to her Matching Banquet. Condie minces no words to really explain what The Society is about, but rather lets the reader understand along the way. The Matching Banquet is where 17-year-olds are shown for the first time whom they will marry. The Society determined that the best way to raise children is in a stable, two-parent environment. So if you choose to be matched the government chooses for you. Cassia gets told that she has been matched to her best friend, Xander. But the problem is that when she goes home to look at his information, another boy that she knows is shown to her on the computer for a brief moment (Ky). When Cassia's grandfather dies soon after (the government only allows you to live until you're eighty, then you just die), Cassia is given a piece of paper with poetry that the government disproves of. The rest of the book is about her journey discovering that she wants to make her own decisions, even if that means that she will be hurt along the way. In the second book, Cassia has fallen in love with Ky and has signed onto a suicide mission to find him. She is sure that he has been assigned to the mission because of a mistake that she made in the earlier book. Ky has discovered that because he's an Aberration (a person or a member of their family that cannot marry or have children because they or their parent broke a law), he is being sent out into the desert to be gunned down. The Society is slowly getting rid of Aberrations and Anomalies (I'm guessing from what I read in Crossed that they are people with genetic/mental diseases) to cleanse the Society of "unwanted" people. When Ky and Cassia finally find each other, they decide to join a rebellion in order to bring free choice back into the Society.
My thoughts: I really like the Matched books because they have an actual moral issue (Is it better to have freedom for all and be unequal, or to be equal and unable to choose your life?). I also like the visual writing. I know that this is a weird thing to say, but Condie really paints pictures in your mind when you read. However, I do have some issues with her books as well. First, the love triangle. I abhor love triangles. They're so annoying. I get that the first book uses the love triangle to represent the fact that Cassia chooses Ky (free agency) over Xander (comfort) as a symbol of her moral dilemma, but still. Secondly, I was totally confused by Anomalies and Aberrations. From what I gathered reading the second book, I think that Aberrations are dissenters and their families, but I would really like to have a clear "this is this, that is that, fish is not pie."
So overall, Hunger Games is good if you like action and Matched is good if you like moral dilemmas. My personal favorite is Matched, but I love both series. As a side note for Matched fans, there has been confirmation of a movie! Yay! If you feel that either series is better, please comment which one and why. Or maybe you disagree with my reviews, tell me why (I promise to read every comment)!
Thanks so much for reading, more to come next week.
No comments:
Post a Comment