Feministe Book Club: The Hunger Games, Chapters 10-18

23 thoughts on Feministe Book Club: <em>The Hunger Games,</em> Chapters 10-18

1. I was just rereading the start of Chapter 10, and Peeta’s declaration of how he wants to stay true to himself, be more than just the Capitol’s pawn, jumped out at me again:

   “I don’t know how to say it exactly. Only…I want to die as myself. Does that make any sense?” he asks. I shake my head. How could he die as anyone but himself? “I don’t want them to change me in there. Turn me into some kind of monster that I’m not.”

   I bite my lip, feeling inferior. While I’ve been ruminating on the availability of trees, Peeta has been struggling with how to maintain his identity. His purity of self. “Do you mean you won’t kill anyone?” I ask.

   “No, when the time comes, I’m sure I’ll kill just like everybody else. I can’t go down without a fight. Only I keep wishing I could think of a way to…to show the Capitol they don’t own me. That I’m more than just a piece in their Games,” says Peeta.

   There’s a lot to unpack there.

2. There is, isn’t there tigtog? In what you quote Katniss feels inferior because of this, but how much of that is really Peeta’s relative privilege influencing what he focuses on? He hasn’t had to scrabble for survival the way Katniss has, so he’s not really focusing on the practicalities of survival, but taking that as a given, and focusing on higher order questions of identity.

3. My boyfriend is reading HG now (I’m almost done with CF), and I asked him where he was, and he just started the third part. To him, he says, the rule change was way out of left field (which makes me think he’s not exactly comprehending what the Gamemakers are capable of, nor that they simply do whatever the heck they want) – turns out he had forgotten about Cato and Clove, and thought that it seemed wacky because he thought Katniss and Peeta were the only two from the same district. Also, [thing that is going to happen in the future]. I thought it was brilliant, twisted, so characteristic of the Capitol – and I wanted to cry out Peeta’s name with her.

   [Vague spoiler-esque fixed. -C]

4. I think this section is really the heart of the book, crucial to Katniss’ evolution as a character. Up to now, Rue reminded her a bit of Prim, and Katniss was generally sad that this poor little kid was going to die. But Rue saves her, and Katniss is therefore willing to trust her and be trusted by her. This makes Rue the first person Katniss has cared about and felt responsible for other than immediate family (she cares about Gale, but doesn’t really feel responsible–he can take care of himself).

   This trust and friendship makes Katniss’ anger at the system political rather than just personal when Rue does die. We see it in her sudden understanding of what Peeta meant about showing the Capitol they don’t control him, her covering Rue’s body with flowers, the salute, etc. It’s also strengthened when she gets the bread from District 11, and she notes that she doesn’t think a district has ever sent anything to another district’s tribute before.

   I also wonder whether, if Katniss hadn’t allied with Rue, her response to the announcement at the end of the section might have been different. Did caring for and trusting Rue make caring for and trusting Peeta easier at least? Maybe even possible?

5. @oxygengrrl – I completely agree about the importance of realizing that the Games are political. That moment, when District 11 sends Katniss the bread, is the birth of solidarity. That’s what made me cry, more than Rue’s death – that generosity and bravery and hope that solidarity against the Capitol promises.

6. It’s also good to note, that since Rue is a physical reminder of Prim, I think it also acts as a ‘check’ on Katniss. SHes highly aware of performing for the audience and proves to manipulate that well, but Rue/Prim helps her accountable to life outside the arena. Rue forces her to remember why she is there and what she is fighting for.

   On another note, Katniss is obviously upset and touched by Rue’s death, but she hardly dwells on the people that she herself has killed. Except for the one paragraph regarding the boy from district 1, she really doesn’t mention it. At that point, she is responsible for the deaths of 3 people, 2 others indirectly. Considering this book is supposed to make us stop to consider the violence in society, you think there would be more emphasis on her emotions after killing people. Something that I really dwelt on that I dwelt on in chapter , though it is relevant, is the story about the Avox and the hovercraft in the woods. she states:

   I let the Capital kill the boy and mutilate her without lifting a finger. Just like I was watching the Games.

   there’s a big point to be made that if we as a society are so used to watching violence, when we see it in front of us in real life, it might not make an impact.

7. Sorry for typos, I just get so excited and forget to check!!

8. human:

   how much of that is really Peeta’s relative privilege influencing what he focuses on? He hasn’t had to scrabble for survival the way Katniss has, so he’s not really focusing on the practicalities of survival, but taking that as a given, and focusing on higher order questions of identity.

   I didn’t read it that way myself, but it’s possible. He seemed to be doing the absolute reverse of taking his survival for granted to me, he seemed to be preparing for death sooner rather than later, and therefore thinking hard about how he was going to face it.

   Katniss, by contrast, never gave up on her survival prospects in that way. She knew the odds were against her, but she certainly hadn’t resigned herself to death before the games even began.
   oxygengrrl:

   I also wonder whether, if Katniss hadn’t allied with Rue, her response to the announcement at the end of the section might have been different. Did caring for and trusting Rue make caring for and trusting Peeta easier at least? Maybe even possible?

   I like that idea a lot.

9. I didn’t read it that way myself, but it’s possible. He seemed to be doing the absolute reverse of taking his survival for granted to me, he seemed to be preparing for death sooner rather than later, and therefore thinking hard about how he was going to face it.

   Katniss, by contrast, never gave up on her survival prospects in that way. She knew the odds were against her, but she certainly hadn’t resigned herself to death before the games even began.

   That’s what I got from it. He had no illusions about surviving the Games and was figuring out how to die nobly. Katniss had promised Prim that she’d try to survive and was figuring out how to do that.

   When Peeta told Katniss to say hi to his mother when she got back to District 12, it made me think back to chapter 7, when he said his mother had said District 12 might finally have a winner–and she was talking about Katniss. I wonder if there was a sense of having nothing to come home to, since his family didn’t expect to come home anyway.

10. I also wonder whether, if Katniss hadn’t allied with Rue, her response to the announcement at the end of the section might have been different. Did caring for and trusting Rue make caring for and trusting Peeta easier at least? Maybe even possible?

    I hadn’t even thought of this, but I like it.

11. @Beaula,

    I think the absence of any crushing sorrow from Katniss for being responisble for three deaths (an absence noted by Katniss herself) is a crucial part of the book’s core.

    You can survive the Hunger Games, but at the great cost of your own humanity-it’s almost inevitable that you’ll have killed at least one other tribute. This idea comes into play again and again throughout the trilogy, and it plays back into the exchange between Peeta and Katniss that was noted above.

12. Here’s something I don’t quite get about the characterization of Panem government. When Peeta says he’s in love with Katniss, this prompts great sympathy and the rule change – it generally seems to be a good thing from the perspective of the Capitol because it makes things more exciting. But Katniss’ covering Rue with flowers and singing to her (Did they write music for that song for the movie? I hope so!) is seen as an act against the Capitol. Why wouldn’t it just be another thing that would make the Games more exciting/appealing to viewers? Is it because they’re from different districts? It seems like in some cases, the goal is “exciting” and in others it’s just to break the districts. What accounts for the difference?

13. Carolyn, I thought about that too. I think it’s because the Games partially exist to set the districts against each other, so that no district could ever believe that the other districts would back it up against the Capitol. So when Katniss shows solidarity to Rue and her district, and gets bread in return, that’s really sticking it to the Capitol – she’s subverting what the Games are all about.

    Letting Peeta and Katniss survive as “star-crossed lovers” is a way for the Capitol to throw the districts a bone of hope. And it makes for good entertainment. It’s not that they are subverting the Games; they are in love so they can’t help it! I don’t think the Capitol would ever allow a non-romantic pair even from the same district survive; one of their main goals is to discourage cooperation and friendship. I don’t think they would ever see or portray romantic love as cooperative (although of course it is for Peeta, the boy with the bread) so it’s not a threat to them at this point.

14. Remember the scene in the book where katniss refers to their deaths as murders and she chastises herself for thinking that? The deaths of the tributes are entertainment, and it can not be portrayed in any other way. Outside the Capitol, the people are acutely aware of he meaning of the games, and they see it as murder. So katniss’ grief is compassion and acknowledgement.

15. The bodies of the slain tributes are very quickly removed – thus reducing the impact of their deaths and focusing on the survivors.

    By mourning Rue Katniss is suddenly showing that a small child has been brutally killed, and that her passing is a thing to mourn.

    The districts know this, but her actions makes it felt in the capital.

    Furthermore it was a breach of the unwritten rules – corpses are remove with any equipment on the body, as quickly as possible. By delaying the retrieval she is interfering in the way the game is run – any interference, however small, is dangerous as it questions the illusion and ultimately the absolute power of the gamemakers.

16. The Gamemakers support the Katniss-Peeta romance because it makes for exciting television, because the fans like to root for the star-crossed lovers. It’s not a threat to the existing order at all. Katniss’s solidarity with Rue is–the district tributes may form temporary alliances with each other as part of the Games, but it’s not supposed to suggest actual cross-district cooperation. That’s why the bread from Rue’s district is so, well, revolutionary. No district has ever sent a gift to a tribute from another district. Of course, it’s probably also the case that no tribute has ever mourned the death of another tribute so openly.

17. I think the Gamemakers (and the Capitol) see Katniss and Peeta mostly as a product–“Look! It’s the star-crossed lovers! Yay! Root for Katpee!”–whereas Rue was a person. Seeing how tenderly Katniss treated Rue after she was killed might have reminded the people in the Capitol that the tributes were actual people and not just battle-bots. Their favorite game just killed a twelve-year-old girl, and the girl who’d developed a relationship with her and was mourning for her was a person, and the people of DIstrict 11 had just lost a loved one and were grateful to see someone else caring for her. Tributes start showing compassion and humanity, and the viewers at home start getting uncomfortable rooting for their deaths.

18. Has anyone else noticed a parallel between how Capitol relates to the districts and how the USA relates to the rest of the world?

    The USA, on the whole, acts as if people outside the USA (other that US citizens abroad) aren’t really human. I’ve noticed this starting with the Vietnam War (which was the first war which I was all that aware of.)

    For the majority of USA-ans, they are like characters on a TV show, and if they are killed, or starve, well, that’s just a sad story, to be forgotten by the next commercial. Cf. how Kantiss’s beauticians talk about the tributes’ deaths.

    For the policy makers, foreigners are only worth supporting to the extent that they help “US interests.” Anybody else is subject to being eradicated if they happen to be in the way, or if they have a mind of their own. Saddam Hussein, Noriega, and Osama bin Laden are real-life examples, not sure who is an example in HG.

19. Keep in mind, also, that the citizens of the Capitol also likely beiieve what’s in the Treaty of Treason: the Games are more than just entertainment, they’re punishment. They likely believe that the Districts deserve to have their children fight to the death. It might not be their first thought, but it’s an underlying current throughtout the whole spectacle.

    In fact, there’s a dose of fear in there, too: “the games are here so the Districts never rebel! Do you want a rebellion? Well, do you?!”

20. I also think that Katniss’ relationship with Rue made her more open to Peeta. Her general sense of relief and comfort — even a bit of fun, being proactive rather than reactive with the plan to destroy the supply dump — with Rue as an ally changes Katniss. Unlike her relationship with Prim, Katniss takes Rue on as a partner, not a charge or responsibility. It seems more like her relationship with Gale, as she learns as much from Rue as Rue learns from Katniss, except at her death, which could have been Prim’s death had Katniss not taken her place.

    (Somewhat related — in the movie, seeing the Gamemakers’ hand in the Game, with commentating and control room, was an interesting way to show a lot of what we only know from Katniss’ POV from inside the Games. I’d wondered how they would handle that.)

    From what little we know of the media world of Panem, pretty much the only television people in the districts watch is the Hunger Games. Once a year, giant event, everyone watches. Like the Olympics, but subverted — district pride, but instead of not winning medals, your losing team DIES. I think that lack of other media explains the extreme awareness that Katniss has at all times of the cameras, even though she is very literally fighting for her own survival.

    We don’t know if anyone else is playing to the cameras, thinking about whether they are on screen or getting screen time, waiting for a new disaster because the Games have possible gotten “boring” for watchers. Because we only get Katniss’ POV, I think she can seem a bit cold and calculating. Beyond the violence, the play of violence for entertainment is eerily fascinating.

21. Interesting responses, everybody! Thanks. I guess part of my confusion stems from the fact that Katniss/Peeta as a product *depends* on the impending tragedy, but tragedy in Rue’s case seemingly can’t be made into a product. I guess maybe sometimes grief is less legible or commodifiable? or maybe only Capitol citizens are allowed to grieve?

22. AMM, definitely there is an uncomfortable parallel between the US and the Capitol. In fact, reading this book has made me consider the impact of the little things I do that contribute to a global system where people are exploited for my entertainment. Do I really need inexpensive chocolate? For example.
    But Rue…I feel emotionally manipulated by the author. Did she have to be 12 and still scream “a child’s scream”? Why couldn’t she have been older and in my head I could imagine someone less vulnerable? I know that’s the point but when I got to that part in the book I wished I had stopped reading while Rue was still alive.
    As far as the rule change, I totally buy that the entertainment factor of the romance could justify it. when was the last time you saw a mainstream movie without a romance plot? The powers here want to keep the Capitol citizens entertained and happy lest they start asking WHY?

23. AnneT- Rue, in my mind, represents the innocent children killed daily. They’re expendable to the audience- poor, and brown, and foreign.

    As mentioned upthread, the rest of the world is a reality game to the US. America is cheered on with waved flags, foot-stomping, chanting and screaming for the home team even though it means innocents are dying.

    The kids from America’s own districts are the tributes, with mo other option but to join the military. Poor, of colour, failed by their schools, victims of the economy.

    Then there are the children of the Capitol, America’s rich, white, people with connections. They don’t serve in the same army as their peers from the Districts.

    Just like the book, virtually everyone outside the Capitol is a victim. The countries that are occupied, the dead and their relatives. The young people killed while fighting abroad, their families back home

    . Devastated communities laid bare by recession, whole countries decimated by bombs and years of war, but people still fighting to be the last one standing, for the pride and honour of their “district”. If they’re killed, it’s a martyr’s death, they’re the pride of their people either way.

    That’s just what it felt like to me, that it’s heartbreaking when a child dies, that we’re moved to tears by murder of a fictional child, while out in the world it’s happening right now to a real child.

    Perhaps that’s why the author took Rue out with such grim, poignant detail. Maybe it was meant to jar us into pondering actual child soldiers?

    Sorry that got so long, the book really resonated with my own life experience, which ironically was lived (for 26 years) in a place called District 4. Part of an area that was poor, post-industrial, sometimes utterly hopeless. Hunger was part of life.

    Starting on the sequel now, I’m hooked!

Comments are currently closed.