The Conclusion of the Hunger Games
The conclusion of the Hunger Games served to reinforce the novel's dystopian themes. Even after struggling through a rigorous, and emotionally devastating competition and beating all odds, Katniss finds herself tested by the government of Panem. While she was promised rewards for winning the Hunger Games, due to her rebellious act involving threatened suicide with poisonous berries, which made the Capitol seem weak, she is apparently in more danger than ever. Despite her assumption that she would no longer have to act for the camera, she desperately tries to retain the partial illusion of loving Peeta wholeheartedly so as to make her actions seem impulsive, rather than rebellious.
Much like in the Handmaid's Tale, where every public event is given a twist to encourage loyalty to the government, the Hunger Games are recapped on television to avoid each rebellious action Katniss takes, such as the decoration of Rue in flowers. Even though the games are over, Katniss still knows she is under surveillance and that her decisions must reflect loyalty, otherwise, the Capitol will have her killed so as to preserve It's image of absolute control.
A final comparison between the Hunger Games and the other two dystopian novels that we've read, the Handmaid's Tale and The Road, is that they all ended with slight ambiguity. Although Katniss is undoubtedly alive at the end of the novel, and although her story will be continued in a sequel, the conclusion retains the uncertainty of whether our protagonist is safe or not at the end, just as Offred did not know whether she was escaping or being taken away to be punished, deported, or killed, and just as the Boy's safety is also in question. While the Boy seems to have been in relatively safe hands, he was still in the same barbaric world he started in, with little hope of humanity recapturing the dignity it once possessed.
I agree with Zach, the common theme of government reinforcement is very clear in both the conclusion of The Hunger Games and the conclusion of the Handmaid's tale. Both books climax at events of rebellion, while Ofred sees Ofglen forcefully killing one of the rebels who she knows to help alleviate his pain, Katniss outsmarts the game makers, allowing both her and Peta to remain alive, winning the Games. In the Handmaid's Tale the government deals with Ofglen's rebellion by taking her away, wither killing her or sending her to the colonies, we can never be sure. Similarly in The Hunger Games, there is huge governmental backlash to Katniss's actions. She has to work extraordinarily hard to convince the entire society that she is madly in love with Peta because there are clearly people in high positions, namely the prime minister, that are extremely upset with her. Thus, it is clear that the governments in both novels are extremely controlling and try to stop any possible rebellion that may arise.
ReplyDeleteThese novels differ in the government's level of severity, and the way that the author, in the end, chooses to depict the government. In the end of the Handmaid's Tale readers still view the government as a very threatening, extremely evil and ominous force. In the conclusion of the Hunger Games readers understand that the government does not treat its people fairly, but as Katniss has just gotten away with something very large readers are not scared of the government. Although at the close readers are not at peace with the form of government that oversees Panem, they are comfortable knowing that Katniss has escaped any real punishment for her actions.
It's hard to consider the conclusion of this novel as an "ending," just because it's part of a trilogy. However, I found the end to be a bit rushed, although the ambiguity of Katniss's future was certainly present. I definitely felt more fear for Katniss's future at the hands of her government than I did for Offred, perhaps because she was so willing to accept whatever end might befall her.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Mrs. Graham. I think that the ending was a little bit rushed. There was so much build up in the beginning of the novel and so much suspense surrounding all of the events of the actual Hunger Games that when Katniss outsmarts the Gamemakers, I was a little disappointed. Furthermore, I was unhappy with this plot twist. To me, it seemed a little like a copout. Katniss's actions are unheard of and unprecedented, yet it seems that she will not receive any punishment for breaking the game's rules.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I agree that the end of the novel falls into place with the book's dystopian themes. Katniss is different from all of the previous tributes and the end reflects her individuality. Furthermore, the ending of The Hunger Games is ambiguous, like many of the endings of the dystopian literature that we have read so far this semester. I was glad that this ambiguous ending somewhat resembled the cloudy endings to The Road and The Handmaids Tale because it gave me another work for comparison.