The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins

Reviewed by Sarah
Start Date: November 15, 11ish PM
Finish Date: November 16, 5ish AM. Yes, this was a one-sitting reading. Or should I say, a one should-have-been-sleeping reading.
Star Rating (out of 10): 5 stars *****
Movie Rating: PG-13, For violence and adult themes


Ok, EVERYONE. I read it. I both liked it and didn't like it, and I shall attempt to articulate the reasons why, because this is a really popular book and I'd like to be clear about my opinion.

First, I shall summarise: I didn't love it. I didn't hate it. There were things I really liked, things I really didn't like, and things that were really Meh.

Would I recommend it?
Maybe.
Please continue to read to answer this question for yourself.

I am a reader. And I think part of the reason I am a reader is that I can easily get engaged in a plot, and I enjoy being engaged. I have alot of practice in immersing myself in a story. I remember once when mom needed me to drive her somewhere and she dragged me out of a book to do it. And then she was all worried about whether I'd be safe on the road. Her worries weren't unjustified--it was an extreme case but I was TOTALLY in book world right then.

So I wasn't planning on staying up until five in the morning last night. (By the way, right after I finish typing this up it is bed time for me.) But I really wouldn't have slept well (or at all) if I had put it down. I HAD TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENED NEXT. This happened with Twilight and The Da Vinci Code as well. (Well, not so late into the night, but they were both practically one-sitting books.) And those of you who know me and have heard my rambles about books know that I really, really HATE passionately dislike Twilight and The Da Vinci Code. Yes, I was engaged, and I wanted to know what happened next. I was also SO RELIEVED WHEN IT WAS FREAKING OVER AND I COULD THROW THE BOOK AWAY

(Another reason I really wouldn't have slept well aside from MUST KNOW WHAT HAPPENS would be stopping in the middle of all the Violence, which is like all but the first and last section of the book, but I'll talk a bit more about that later. I think. I'm not as awake as I'd like to be for writing a coherent review. But I digress.)

Like I said, I'm good at being absorbed into a story.

Which is a good and a bad thing.

People who don't read as much, I think, often need a bit more in that areay to get them really interested, and they don't really notice or appreciate what may be lacking in other areas. They don't really know or even particularly care that every plot has been done about 643,725,539 BILLION times before. They just care that the plot, whatever it is, engages their interest. For alot of people, I believe their thinking about liking and disliking books goes about like this:

I was engaged
therefore
it was a good book.

Which isn't a wrong way of thinking about it. If thats all you want in your book, then thats what you should go for, and the Hunger Games (Along with Twilight and The Da Vinci Code, *gag*) would be a great book for you. But that isn't exactly what I go for.

An engaging plot is part of what I look for. But there are other things that are, to me, more important that just Wanting To Know WHAT HAPPENS NEXT NOW.

Character is a BIG thing for me. Probably THE biggest thing. If you haven't figured it out by now, I am very entertained by the mischevious/clever/intelligent/secretly-awesome character type. (Eugenides, Sir Percy, Lord Peter, Peaceable Sherwood, Howl, Telemakos, Erast Fandorin, I WILL STOP HERE.) I love fun and quirky and three-dimensional characters, especially when there is More Than One, even when they don't fit the abovementioned type. Here I emphasise fun and quirky. I would call Katniss (main character of Hunger Games) a three-dimensional character. But fun and quirky? There is absolutely NO WAY.


Aha, some of you say. We'll let Telemakos slide by, but Medraut, now... he is NOT fun and quirky. But what makes The Winter Prince so freaking awesome is the character development and the relationships. And the awesome NON cliff-hanger ending.

Oh, so while I'm on the subjct, I am NOT a big fan of cliff-hanger endings. THIS IS WHY MWT IS SO FREAKING AWESOME. (Yes, everything does always come back to Gen. Just in case you hadn't noticed.) But I digress.

Another thing that is important to me as a reader is the writing style and voice. Some people don't, or claim they don't, notice this, but I do. Generally, I especially like it when the narration/narrator really has character of it's own. Which is one thing I'd say that the Hunger Games had going for it. I generally prefer first person to third person narration. Which is another thing The Hunger Games has going for it.

But I hate really don't do well with present-tense narration. I just... don't. In fact, this is the FIRST TIME I've EVER finished a novel written in present tense. (yay.) I have tried other present-tense novels in the past (heh), and failed. Even when the plot was engaging, the characters were interesting, etc., the present tense just grates. so. badly. Here it was, I think, done pretty well. (Not that I'm one to judge, not having read much of it.) But even done well, I just don't like it. It was a sort of constant annoyance the whole time I was reading, like a constant annoying buzz in the background that you're pretending both that you can't hear and that you aren't annoyed by it, but you can, and you are, and the longer it goes on the harder it is to keep on pretending.

Why do I hate present tense in novels so much? Well, because. There's no accounting for taste. But I do think it has some negative associations in my mind, which accounts for some of it. Basically, in my mind, present tense means 'casual' at best and 'unintelligent' and 'sloppy' at worst. I mean, when do you hear present tense? In casual, often mindless conversation ("And I'm like, no way! And he's like, no I'm serious, and I'm like..."). I also associate it with people who obviously don't know how to write. Back when I used to participate in text-RPGs it would become glaringly obvious when some new person didn't really understand writing very well, because most of them didn't understand tense. Most of our threads were third-person past-tense. Not hard to pick up on, right? I mean, most novels (I think) are written that way. But quite often a newbie would show up and create a Mary Sue character and then enter one of our RPGs (which, as I said, were third-person past-tense) and they'd be writing first-person present-tense. And they never seemed to even realize that their prose did not match the rest of the thread AT ALL. We would just continue playing as before, and it would be kindly pointed out to the newbie that they had completely shifted the tense and person of the thread, but sometimes people really had the hardest time with this concept. And once in awhile they were REALLY ANNOYING about it.

So. While I can understand in some ways why it was written the way it was, present tense was one thing that the Hunger Games did NOT have going for it, for me.

And, just one word: VIOLENCE. Bit much of that, don't you think? I did know it would be violent when I went in, but I still didn't like it. Especially just because it was kids. Killing each other. And people watching. And just calling it a GAME.

Ok, now the Romance. I don't mind romance. I rather like it. I'm OK with a romance novel if it's well narrated and totally non-erotic--I HAVE made it through a couple Jane Austens and Jane Eyre. But one thing I really don't find entertaining is the whole Oh NO, who should she CHOOSE, dark and broody Bachelor #1, or fun and kindly Bachelor #2? She must choose before she looses the choice altogether! And all the fans should join teams rooting for one Bachelor or the other!

Aaargh.
SPARE ME.

I prefer it when there is just the ONE love interest, and the question is HOW will they get together? not, WHICH/WHO will she choose? I DON'T CARE JUST PICK ONE ALREADY. (Lord Peter and Harriet.... :-3)

J.K. Rowling did it right. Ever since Chamber of Secrets it was Harry/Ginny, Ron/Hermione. Glad we've got that worked out, now lets move on with the story please. (And I don't care about all the other stupid parings that other people tried to put together. I don't want to hear about it, OK?)

And I've already mentioned this, but I really don't like cliff-hanger endings. This is actually part of the reason that I put off reading this book until now--I was told that it had a REALLY BAD CLIFF HANGER. So I waited until the sequel was out (and I happened to actually own the sequel, though this was unplanned) before I read this book. It ended up actually not being as bad as I was expecting, but generally I prefer to have a bit more closure at the end. I want to read the sequel because the first was so freaking awesome, not because I liked the first but that horrible wide-open ending has been annoying me ever since I finished it. You know?

I could go off here on why this proves that Megan Whalen Turner and Robin McKinley are SO AWESOME, but I would, again, be digressing, and I really do need sleep.