If you haven’t read my previous blog post about the background story of the Hunger Games trilogy, please do so here.
“Could you survive on your own, in the wild, with every one out to make sure you don’t live to see the morning?”
This book is the first part of the hunger games trilogy. It is supposedly based on The Most Dangerous Game (which is a great short story) and it contains extreme violence along with deep emotions making it a perfect book for both guys and girls.
Basically, this book starts around the 74th Hunger Games. We follow Katniss Everdeen, a teenage girl/illegal hunter who becomes a tribute (contestant in the hunger games). Katniss considers this as a death sentence since the chances of her winning (surviving) are extremely low. But she’s confronted death face-to-face before and survived. Now she must survive once more, against all odds in an arena with 23 other tributes trying to kill her. With death at every corner, it will take a true miracle for her to live.
Ah, The Hunger Games, perhaps one of the deepest books I’ve ever read; so much symbolism, so much emotion. And enough violence to satisfy all the readers looking for a thrill. I dream of writing an essay on this book for English, with such strong themes the thesis statement would be so easy.
Bottom Line: fantastically written, deep, emotional, yet fast paced and action packed. This is the reason I love reading, this is what a young adult novels should be like. I’ve got nothing bad to say about this book. Oh, by the way, this book is better than The Most Dangerous Game. I give it a 5/5
The Most Dangerous Game? Did you mean the short story by Richard Connell? On what aspects did you judge that the Hunger Games was a better story?
yes, i was refering to that story. the thing is, even though the most dangerous game was a very entertaining read. i felt that it didn't explore the idea of hunting a human as game(probably because it is a short story). for a subject that deep i don't think TMDG went deep enough, it did not discuss the emotional strain of having to kill a human being. and it does not talk about the types of situations that would justify such actions. it also did not explain how (if at all) can a person remain who they are after killing a human being as part of a game. this caused the ending of the most dangerous game to be slightly confusing because it leaves us the question, is our protagonist becoming a human game hunter (since he did display aspects of one, and the author did not discuss if he could possibly manage to stay the same).
on top of that, since the hunger games has the luxury of being full novel instead of a (long) short story – it can discuss certain aspects of a story to a deeper level. being a novel also gives it the ability to discuss multiple themes to a great extent instead of just one. that is why throughout the hunger games trilogy, the theme has managed to deviate from one about violence to one about change or perhaps revolution.
the second paragraph is probably bias because i like novels a lot more than short stories 🙂
I believe that The Most Dangerous Game explore topics more than just the idea of killing humans. The style and psychological components of the short story are quite commendable. I agree that the story did not touch upon the further implications of an after story, but the context of being a short story, it could not. A short story needs a quick pick up and does have the luxury to drawls and badger a build up. I believe if you analyze The Dangerous Game as a short story, and the context of the setting, character, and plot, in relations to how humans act, this story reflects themes similar in the Life of Pi- if you needed novel with a deeper meaning.
I don't think that the most dangerous game isn't deep. I just believe that the hunger games explores the same themes to a deeper extent. that is why i said that i think the hunger games is better.
of course the most dangerous is a short story and therefore, has its limitations. That is one of the main reasons i like the hunger games better.
Comments are closed.