Before I spout my opinions, I will commend the author on some points.
1) The Hunger Games warrants being published and read, unlike some books I've had the misfortune of meeting. I don't think back on the six hours of my life and think "Man, that was a waste of time." It wasn't a crap book.
2) Unrequited love always makes for a good story line. So go Suzanne Collins for creating Peeta's character.
3) The Hunger Games is basically a personal account of a reality TV star's experience in a horrific version of Survivor. Kudos to Collins for thinking this up. America is obsessed with reality TV, and the narrative of a young girl who does not want to be on the show is gripping.
Now on to the problems I had with the book:
Tracker jackers, really? That's the name you are going to give those deadly, determined wasps? When I read tracker jacker, my mind immediately changes it to Cracker Jacker, which leads to Cracker Jacks. So while I am supposed to be really afraid of these terrifying wasps, what I'm really doing is thinking about eating Cracker Jacks and shaking the box upside down looking for the prize. Couldn't they just have been called tracker wasps?
Those character names. Not a single one of them was normal, except for Gale, who at first I thought was a female, because Gail is a girl name. I could actually handle Prim, because Primrose was the name of the main character in a Jerry Spinelli book. But Effie? Couldn't they have just named her Steffie? Because--I'll be honest--when I read Effie, I immediately thought "Oh Eff." As in a shortened, more acceptable use of a curse word. And Haymitch? At least the author was consistent, I'll give her that. She didn't have Linda and Sue running around with Cinna and Octavia (which just makes me think of Greek tragedies).
I understand that the book is supposed to be futuristic, and the many years between 2012 and whenever this takes place could leave a lot of room for popular names to change, but you know what names were used about 2,000 years ago? John. Luke. Jacob. Matthew. And look where we are now, still using them. So I am sorry if I have a really hard time with the masculine name of Gale, but I do.
That whole sponsor thing, with the tiny parachutes. Really? It seems totally unfair that some people can get delivered presents and others can't. But I guess the whole premise of the Hunger Games isn't fair. I have a hard time believing that there are hovercrafts around, just ready to drop down loaves of bread and pots of broth.
How many times have I read a book where there is a sleeping bag scene? You know, there is only ONE sleeping bag and a guy and a girl has to share it in order to survive the cold? It starts out a little awkward at first. "Should I or shouldn't I?" the character thinks. But then the two end up in the same bag keeping each other warm with their body heat, and they kind of like it and feel safe. This concept is way over done. You know how many times I have been out in the elements with just one sleeping bag and needed to share it with an attractive young man? Exactly zero times. And I've been camping a lot.
The whole "here, let me wash your wounds" scene. Happens ALL THE FREAKING TIME. In like, every movie that features a guy and girl in some sort of survival/battle setting. The two instances that come specifically to mind are when Kate had to sew up Jack on the first episode of Lost, and when Isolde had to nurse Tristan back to health in that little underground cave. Taking care of men, of course, requires that they take their shirts off. Usually there is a little blushing in these scenes. If the girl character gets lucky, she gets injured somehow and then the guy has to take care of her, and it's then that she realizes how tender and loving the man is, and how she just can't live without him.
Another part that was rather unbelievable to me was the grand entrance/interviews that the tributes had to do in the beginning. CBS's Survivor never starts off by showing the players enter in really fancy dresses and suits (they leave that up to ABC's The Bachelor, which I guess is just a more glamorous version of Survivor). The players don't go on some stage for a preliminary interview so that people can have more information in order to place bets. In my opinion, if people are going to some televised games to die, getting all dressed up and fancy seems out of place. This isn't a pageant, it's death.
The book started getting good when Katniss set out to find Peeta (because you know, after that is when the sleeping bag scene and the let-me-wash-your-wounds scene happened). But maybe I was just getting bored by lack of dialogue. I feel like dialogue really drives a book, and if there is no one for the main character to talk to, it gets boring. Because then all she's doing is eating groosling legs and hiding in trees. So I was really glad when Katniss teamed up with Peeta, but then some stupid stuff came with it. Like how Katniss "just knew" revving up the romance with Peeta is what Haymitch wanted. That whole angle was dumb. It seemed like a very forced way to foster a romantic relationship between characters, and to cause Katniss to question her feelings for both Gale and Peeta. I think the romantic relationship could have been developed just as well with having Peeta pull all the moves. Then, you know, when Katniss saves his life she realizes how much she cares about him. But of course if there hadn't been "an act" put on by Katniss, the ending wouldn't have been so heart wrenching for Peeta, who really does love her.
And oh my goodness those muttations at the end. First off, dumb name. You can call them mutations, or you can call them mutts, but Suzanne Collins, please don't name them muttations. It's almost as bad as tracker jackers. I wish she would have left those ridiculous creatures out of the ending. Really? It's the dead tributes come back in another bodily form to get revenge? And they have the human's eyes? They can stand up on their hind legs and wave to each other? The author should have just included a pack of rabid wolves. They would have done the job just as well, without me thinking it was moronic.
So yes, I am full of criticisms. Did I spend a considerable amount on my couch yesterday thinking "I must finish this book TONIGHT"? Yes. Am I going to go see the movie? Yes. Was this novel better than Twilight? Yes. Would I give it an award? No.
No comments:
Post a Comment