Dystopia in the Hunger Games and Divergent Series

Home , Battle Royale (novel), Divergent (book series), Divergent (novel), Insurgent (novel), Killing Children, Neil Burger

TOMORROW’S HEROINES FIGHTING TODAY’S DEMONS:

DYSTOPIA IN THE HUNGER GAMES AND DIVERGENT SERIES

Marianna Gleyzer

A Doctoral Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of

Dorothy F. Schmidt College of Arts and Letters

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Florida Atlantic University

Boca Raton, FL

May 2018 Copyright by Marianna Gleyzer 2018

ii TOMORROW'S HEROINES FIGHTING TODA Y'S DEMONS:

DYSTOPIA IN THE HUNGER GAMES AND DIVERGENT SERIES

Marianna Gleyzer

This dissertation was prepared under the direction of the candidate's dissertation advisor, Dr. Susan Love Brown, Department of Anthropology, and has been approved by the members of her supervisory committee. It was submitted to the facultyof the Dorothy F. Schmidt College of Arts and Letters and was accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements forthe degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

Michael J. rswell, Ph.D. Dean, D rothy F. SchmidtCollege of �s�Arts& Letters Khaled Sobhan, Ph.D. Interim Dean, Graduate College

lll ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author wishes to express sincere and utter gratitude to her chair, Dr. Susan

Love Brown, for all her vigilant guidance and encouraging support through the entirety of this dissertation process. Also, a great special thanks to her committee members, Dr.

Steven Blakemore and Dr. Stephen Charbonneau, for their patience, persistence, and encouragement. The author is also grateful to FAU’s English department, for all their brilliant professors and counselors that help spark ideas and carry them through. As well, a thanks to the Graduate College, who helped so kindly and patiently, in figuring out all the formatting secrets there were left to uncover. Lastly, the secret weapon of the

Comparative Studies Program, Ms. Gabrielle Denier, without whom, no forward progress could ever be made in our program.

ABSTRACT

Author: Marianna Gleyzer

Title: Tomorrow’s Heroines Fighting Today’s Demons: Dystopia in The Hunger Games and Divergent Series

Institution: Florida Atlantic University

Dissertation Chair: Dr. Susan Love Brown

Degree: Doctor of Philosophy

Year: 2018

Through a close analysis of Suzanne Collins’ Hunger Games series and Veronica

Roth’s Divergent series, it will be shown that these two-current young adult dystopian

book-film crossovers pose several relevant parallels to contemporary real-world

problems. By deciphering a pattern on what garners their popularity, and most

importantly analyzing the aspect of why they reached such levels of recognition, we can

then begin to close in on just how important these two series are in representing the 21st

century young American mindset. Taking into the equation also, how the overall-arching genre of dystopia has evolved with the times and has now adapted to reflect contemporary anxieties and fears. Looking into several elements such as a newfound desire for strong female roles, persuasive antagonists that are inspired by realistic historical precedents, and an unsettling desensitization towards violence and gore, we can then see that the successful equation of The Hunger Games and Divergent series reflects mainstream interests evocatively and effectively. It is not just an

v intervention into the encompassing utopian/dystopian tradition, but into today’s sociology.

vi DEDICATION

This manuscript is dedicated to my family, they are the stars that guide my night sky, keeping me always on track. No matter what life throws at us, we never give up on each other, making even the most difficult days conquerable. Family is everything, especially

when they define everything for you.

TOMORROW’S HEROINES FIGHTING TODAY’S:

DYSTOPIA IN THE HUNGER GAMES AND DIVERGENT SERIES

INTRODUCTION ...... 1

CHAPTER ONE: FROM UTOPIA TO DYSTOPIA ...... 6

CHAPTER TWO: LET THE HUNGER GAMES BEGIN ...... 18

CHAPTER THREE: DIVERGENT UNLEASHED...... 37

CHAPTER FOUR: HEROINES’ HISTORY IN METAMORPHOSIS,

STARTING WITH KATNISS ...... 53

CHAPTER FIVE: CHANGING PERCEPTIONS OF BEAUTY WITH TRIS ...... 67

CHAPTER SIX: DICTATOR SAYS, DICTATOR DOES WITHIN

THE HUNGER GAMES ...... 85

CHAPTER SEVEN: VICIOUS CYCLES NEVER END IN

THE HUNGER GAMES ...... 103

CHAPTER EIGHT: DIVERGENT DOESN’T DEVIATE ...... 122

CHAPTER NINE: GENETICALLY PURE AND PROUD IN DIVERGENT ...... 142

CHAPTER TEN: HUNGER FOR WAR, HUNGER FOR VIOLENCE IN

THE HUNGER GAMES ...... 166

CHAPTER ELEVEN: DIVERGENT’S NEW GENERATION OF SOLDIERS ...... 189

CHAPTER TWELVE: SURVEILLANCE CULTURE AND TECHNOLOGY

IN BOTH SERIES ...... 210

CHAPTER THIRTEEN: FORGIVING CRUELTY IN BOTH SERIES...... 228

viii

CONCLUSION: CULTURAL DECAY AND ENLIGHTENMENT ...... 253

WORKS CITED...... 275

ix INTRODUCTION

“Since I was young, I have always known this: Life damages us, every one. We can’t escape the damage. But now, I am also learning this: We can be mended. We mend each

other” (Roth, Allegiant 526).

The Hunger Games trilogy (2008, 2009, 2010) by Suzanne Collins and the

Divergent trilogy (2011, 2012, 2013) by Veronica Roth are emblematic of American culture since the rise of worries over terrorism since September 11, 2001, and the most recent financial insecurities due to the stock market crash of 2008. Add to this anxieties over a surveillance-led environment reminiscent of totalitarian governments, and the books of these young adult dystopias create a shared experience between authors, characters, and fans. Eventually, the strong response generated by this shared experience translated into film adaptations, which in turn created a full-blown world revolving around fan communities, the film industry, and interactive venues such a board games, video games, and multiple websites. This phenomenon brought forward record-breaking sales and film receipts, reflecting the prominence of the young female heroes, a shift in gender norms from earlier young adult fiction, and surpassing male-focused young adult dystopias. This dissertation explores The Hunger Games and Divergent as representations of a changing perspective in gender role models in the United States, as well as revealing historical lessons, cultural concerns, and social anxieties about dystopias and the heroes who rescue us from them.

1 To see clearly just how crucial this phenomenon is to an understanding of how

these two trilogies and the films that followed served as a creative outlet, using the

dystopian notions of human suffering, order, and revolution to assist in bearing the real-

world problems in the United States, and the harbingers of potentially new gender role

models, it is necessary to appreciate how unusual they were in surpassing previous young

adult book and film series and creating new female protagonists who are trail-blazers for

their strength and determination.

Suzanne Collins’s first novel of her trilogy was published in 2008 and would go

on to become a ground-breaking set of works. It broke records for Scholastic, its

publisher, and made bestseller lists multiple times and even out-sold Harry Potter on

Amazon (Gaudiosi, “Hunger Games Trilogy Beats Harry Potter...”). The success of

Collins ushered in a renewed fascination for young adult fiction. The Hunger Games

trilogy paralleled the earlier Twilight saga (2005-2008) of Stephanie Meyers, which had also enjoyed a widespread success. Collins, however, would go on to be a strong contrast

to Meyers’s series, which had one particular flaw that many critics zoned in on: “It

perpetuates outdated and troubling gender norms, because its main protagonist, Bella

Swan, is portrayed as a weaker and more fragile feminine character” (Hall 27). Katniss

Everdeen, the protagonist of The Hunger Games, holds more appeal as a trailblazer for

gender roles due to the journey she takes that changes not only her life, but the entirety of

her country as well.

Before the popularity of The Hunger Games trilogy began to fade out with its

finale in 2010, Mockingjay, a new bestseller rose up – Veronica Roth’s novel, Divergent,

was published in 2011. Continuing with the powerful use of dystopia, Roth creates a

different storyline set upon the same problems of totalitarian governments, social control,

and a fiery female protagonist to incite revolution. While Collins depicted a mesmerizing

portrayal of a Girl on Fire in the revolutionary Katniss, Roth answers the same call for a

strong, female protagonist in the form of Beatrice Prior (better known as Tris), the brave

divergent revolutionary. Both of these young women headline two different young adult

dystopias.

Katniss and Tris take on ground-breaking roles that break the mold on gender

constrictions. They do not merely surpass the masculine position of influence and power,

they redefine what it means to be a hero or heroine. Even though strong female characters

already existed, and had for some time, the problem was to challenge and expand this

already defined but limited category: “Violent female protagonists dressed in masculine

qualities and tight clothes like Catwoman and Salt and Aeon Flux” (Balkind 26). What needs to happen now is for the development of trailblazers who can enter into both worlds of masculine and feminine strengths.

Traditional gender role models divide human traits so that masculine traits tend to include self-sufficiency, independence, strength, control, competitiveness, decisiveness, and a capacity for violence. The typical feminine traits revolve around such qualities as vulnerability, cooperation, beauty, compassion, caregiving, intuition, and the ability to compromise (Bewley 372). The Hunger Games and Divergent establish themselves as

good representations of a changing perspective in which gender roles are no longer as

clear-cut, because they bring forth characters who contain the best qualities of both

genders: “[They] carry a burden of multiple symbolic identities that make them desirable,

popular, and successful” (Balkind 27).

Both Katniss and Tris show the world what it is to be a media celebrity, teen idol,

athlete, warrior, rebel, sister, daughter, friend, and lover. One role cannot be enough to

define these young women or to categorize them merely as violent females dressed in

masculine qualities. That is why it needs to be shown the importance and value they bring

not just to their journeys as fictional characters, but to our cultural understanding of this

development in gender roles and other American values. On top of that, even the

antagonists of both series show the fluidity of gender roles as The Hunger Games also

has a female tyrant, President Alma Coin, and so does Divergent with Erudite leader

Jeanine Matthews. Heroes and villains both break the mold on what it is to define gender

within these two series.

By analyzing the storylines from which Katniss and Tris originate, we can

acknowledge similarities between the two heroines and the new gender roles emerging in

the United States, as well as exploring the implications of the hidden gem of their chosen

focus – dystopia. This exploration reveals some important connections to historical

lessons, cultural concerns, and social anxieties arising from the violent disruptions of

American society itself, and the role that popular culture plays in helping people to

navigate and negotiate these unpleasantries.

They also allow us to review the important lessons that history teaches us about

the connections between utopias, dystopias, and the rise of totalitarianism. Seeing family,

friends, and the majority of citizens taken as pawns to be controlled and enslaved is the

largest threat that prevails in both The Hunger Games and Divergent. Yet, placed in a larger historical context of the real world, we can see that this is just one piece of a much larger and older puzzle. Together, these series of books and consequent films, help

contextualize perpetual dark desire for frightening futures, while at the same time illustrating a persistence of strong protagonists who can defeat the totalitarian system and bring back individual power through revolution, although often with extreme punishment and personal loss. As staples of young adult fiction, The Hunger Games and Divergent fit into a clear representation of characteristics that delineate the genre. Thus, it is necessary to understand the nature of utopian thought, the dystopias that arise from it, and how scholars and others dealt with these ideas in the past.

5 CHAPTER ONE: FROM UTOPIA TO DYSTOPIA

“I feel like I am without substance, without weight” (Roth, Divergent 221).

The Hunger Games and Divergent series are examples of dystopian fiction of the

young adult variety. However, this subdivision of an already divided subgenre belongs to

the larger context of utopian literature. In his book, Utopianism: A Very Short

Introduction, Lyman Tower Sargent discusses the meaning of utopia, the verifiable term

that blankets the dystopian subgenre within which these series find themselves: “A utopia

can be simply a fantasy, it can be a description of a desirable or undesirable society, an

extrapolation, a warning, an alternative to the past, or a model to be achieved” (8). The

worlds of Katniss and Tris are not mere fantasies, they are representations of the

undesirable societies that serve as a warning for the future. In the utopian quest for ideal

societies that arise out of social conditions, when they are reactions to extreme

conditions, they result almost always in more restrictive situations.

By tracing the lineage of young adult dystopian fiction back to the original

subcategory of dystopia, which itself drew from the tradition of utopian thought that has

developed within human culture and society throughout history, a larger picture emerges of where and how these modern series connect to their historical precedents. Tom

Moylan discusses the interconnections between utopia and dystopia in his book, Scraps of the Untainted Sky: “Utopia’s promise will rise out of the conditions in which we live

and it may do so in forms and venues not previously recognized” (107). When dystopia emerged almost immediately as a subcategory of utopian tradition and as a subgenre of speculative fiction, it helped bring historical developments into a more modern light that connected past social conditions to future possibilities of totalitarian measures. This tradition shows exactly what Moylan and Sargent noted: a recognition of current tribulations and a promise of overcoming them with something better.

English essayist and humorist Sir Henry Maximilian Beerbohm once said: “So this is utopia, is it? Well—I beg your pardon; I thought it was Hell” (qtd. in Sargent 1).

This memorable phrase that plays with the humorous side of utopia, while underlining the very core of dark dystopia, gives us a unique perspective that blurs the lines between the two realms. It shows that it comes down to how one sees the qualities of that specific realm, for better or worse. The promise for better is what fueled the start of utopian thought, and yet it is the realities of present and future conditions for the worse that much more strongly dominate dystopian literature.

It was Plato who originally described a utopian society in the Republic that represented his version of the ideal society. However, philosopher Karl Popper refutes the merits of Plato’s interpretation of utopia in his work, The Open Society and its Enemies:

“Plato, who in an attempt to interpret the history and social life of the Greek tribes, and especially of the Athenians, painted a grandiose philosophical picture of the world”

(1:11). The reason Popper scorns Plato’s “grandiose” utopia happens to be the very reason Katniss and Tris rebel against their governments—because the ideal society manifests the elements of totalitarian societies in which most people lose their power. In

Plato’s Republic, people are separated into three classes. The philosopher-kings and the

auxiliaries make up the hierarchy known as the guardians, and they happen to hold the

higher hand of influence and authority in their closed city-state (polis). The majority of the population that make up the third class, known as the artisans, are not actually discussed in as much detail, because they are not the focus of power (Sargent 17). In

Plato’s vision, individuals are supposedly happy because they are fitted into the profession that suits them best and best serves the community. That very Platonic inspiration forms the twelve districts of Panem in The Hunger Games and the five

factions of Divergent, where every citizen is placed in a territory and vocation that best

suits the community. This is the vision of utopia that becomes hell, just as Sir Beerbohm

warned.

Acknowledging the recorded birth of an idealized polis with Plato and continuing

to trace how it is adapted by Aristotle (in Book VII of his Politics) is also an important

factor to consider, because it shows that utopian ideals changed even within one society.

Since Aristotle directly rejected Plato’s vision, he came up with his own set of necessary qualities to envision the best lifestyle for a small population. This included a push towards a more intellectual culture for all citizens, forcing non-citizens to fulfill all other aspects of disparaged hard labour (Sargent 19).

These early ideologies help set up the foundation of utopian thought, but there is a strong wind of totalitarianism about them. In understanding the essence of their origins, totalitarianism is understood as something else at that point in time: “Many utopias are like a photograph or a glimpse of a functioning society at a moment in time containing what the author perceives to be better” (Sargent 104). Neglecting to consider the general public’s mindset as Plato does, or simply displacing hard labor onto those not considered

equal as Aristotle does, shows the modern observer a glimpse of what Sargent refers to.

Their utopias are an artifact of what may have worked then and may have been

considered ideal in that moment in time. Those ideals remain projections of philosophers

from ancient times and ancient cultures, though their words still hold sway to this day.

However as shown earlier, Popper points out a taste of totalitarianism that is

present, though not directly acknowledged due to the author’s neglect or ignorance as a

result of his time period. Popper lays the blame at our ancient philosophers’ feet for

presenting a closed society bent on reversing individualism and establishing a

hierarchical system: “The closed society itself does not know this problem. At least to its ruling members, slavery, caste, and class rule are ‘natural’ in the sense of being unquestionable” (1: 176). Thus, the quest for perfection cannot lie in an everlasting

solution, but instead in an evolution of utopian thought adapted with each time period.

Acknowledging the shared goal of achieving the best possible state is the one factor that

remains unchanged.

Another account to substantiate Popper’s certainty that the historic closed-off city-state is not the place to look for anything but this taste of totalitarianism can be shown through the militarized utopia that the Greek writer, Plutarch, depicted in his work, On Sparta. Where Plato and Aristotle were simply laying out possible models for utopian ideologies, Plutarch was actually focusing on one that had existed: Sparta. This

Greek city-state is recalled countless times in literature and popular culture. Spartans are

the warriors who fought to the death for the love of their country, the unequivocal patriots

that are glorified in blockbuster films, such as Troy (2004) and 300 (2007). This ancient

civilization lived by a very particular set of principles brought forth by Sparta’s supposed

founder and reformer, Lycurgus. Gregory Claeys, in his work, Searching for Utopia: The

History of an Idea, tells of how Lycurgus’s early reforms aimed to create a Sparta that

contained citizens who were: “Free-minded, self-dependent, and temperate” (25).

Qualities that Plato might praise and hope for within his guardian class actually became paramount in one of the earliest militarized states, in which such characteristics were meant to further one purpose; as Claeys notes, “In Lycurgus’s Sparta every person was to completely dedicate themselves to the country. They were to lose themselves in the whole; ‘he trained his fellow-citizens to have neither the wish nor the ability to live for themselves’” (17).

Of course there are social classes even within Sparta, where once again non- citizens (slaves and women) are forced to do the hard labor that would otherwise get in the way of the warriors’ main focus: “Description of life in Sparta has become synonymous with bravery and self-sacrifice, but also with the militarized utopia (or dystopia), where individuality is sacrificed to the communal good and no price is deemed too high to secure submission to the demands of the state” (Claeys 25). This form of utopia rose out of the conditions of poverty and social unrest. Their citizens embraced such a radical transformation because it liberated them from their previous desperations.

Lycurgus’s reforms solved many problems by giving a promise of a way out of those undesirable conditions and into a new and more rigorous venue of life, just as Moylan suggested earlier to be a necessary element of utopian tradition.

What happens when one problem is solved in an attempt to recreate a better society by using extreme measures? New problems and weaknesses—unintended consequences—surface. Creating this stronger and better lifestyle as Lycurgus did, did

not mean perfection was attained. There are cracks even in the most perfect of vases after all, they just take time to be revealed. So even though the ideal was seen in terms of the social and economic stability that Sparta was able to achieve due to Lycurgus’s reforms, those cracks—the unintended consequences—still surfaced, slowly but surely: “Slaves were poorly treated, and there were restrictions on travel, with the aim of avoiding the corrupting influence of less virtuous societies” (Claeys 23). Separating themselves from the outside for the better, Sparta fortified its closed borders and limited itself in many other ways, as seen in one of the last remaining closed communist societies of today,

North Korea. For a radical comparison between historical and current times, Sparta was the predecessor of a militarized utopia, whereas North Korea now is the sufferer of

“inheriting aspects of this tradition” (Claeys 25).

With these ancient civilizations that are often glorified in history and philosophy, we are actually presented with some of the earliest utopian/dystopian communities ever recorded in literature and practice. The distinction between whether they are actually utopian or dystopian comes down to the observer’s own interpretation of what is important, “With the breakdown of the closed society, this certainty disappears, and with it all feeling of security” (Popper 1: 176). This is what the case is with North Korea, a closed society hanging onto its facade of security by priding itself on being the purest and most superior race of all. Their current leader, Kim Jong Il, is seen as a godly and protective figure, not as a dictator, as the outside world perceives him. He is the paternal icon that stands up for his people, holding control over them in order to protect them:

“Judging from its propaganda, North Korea's anti-American, isolationist, and pro-military stance is stronger than ever” (Kelly-Sneed, “What North Korea Sees in the Mirror”). This

binary of protection and control, of security and danger, takes on the two sides of what makes utopias transform into dystopias. Seeing current examples, such as North Korea,

only solidifies the core beliefs of utopian thought that fights to come out of the pages of

fiction, philosophy, or even ancient history.

Traveling to history in the middle ages, these similar patterns of transformed

utopias continued. Within the European records of the 5th to the 15th centuries, the

popularized tales of the land of Cockaigne became the larger fascination because once again the general masses were struggling with starvation, disease, and social unrest. In a desire for better lives, peasants as Claeys reminds us, dreamt up such a “Want-

indulgence, or cornucopia” (23). Cockaigne comes from the Middle French term “pais de

cocaigne” meaning “the land of plenty,” and it became popular because of the way in which these tales, poems, and folk songs focused on the topic of overindulgence. In effect, it was the overwhelming desire of the lower classes to be less burdened by their arduous lives and constant hunger, “The renunciation of urban society is often portrayed as a return to rural primitivism, with morals becoming purified proportionately as needs are simplified” (Claeys 23).

In a manner of speaking, this renunciation of urban society and the rise of simplified needs is portrayed in the varying districts of Panem (The Hunger Games) and factions of Chicago (Divergent). The Capitol of Panem prides itself on this cornucopia ideal, where their parties and festivities include so much food and drink, that they need a concoction to throw up the previous course, in order to pursue endless amounts of more delicacies (Collins, Catching Fire 198). In times of trouble and food shortages, such as what the majority of the districts suffer from in Panem, excess is the fantasy.

Claeys analyzes multiple versions of the land of Cockagine in his other book, The

Cambridge Companion to Utopian Literature, and the basic factor that remains the same from tale to poem to song is that there has to be this fantastical destination where food and drink are always in the plenty for one and all (65). The Hunger Games’ heroine initially starts her journey in much the similar way as a medieval peasant. They both want to escape from their impoverished surroundings to a safe destination where their basic needs (not only security but food and drink) are in ample supply. The escape clause that propelled the middle ages into dreams of the land of the Cockaigne continues on, with similar motives and similar hopes.

Following the trajectory of this timeline, Thomas More’s Utopia was first published in 1516 in Latin (eventually translated into English in 1551), heralding in a new phase of unambiguously direct utopian literature. During this stage, the genre of utopia became known as an umbrella genre, with smaller categories quickly forming underneath it. First, there were eutopias, which is basically positive utopian literature that focuses solely on good places such as the land of Cockagine, Arcadia, and even Atlantis.

There were also satirical utopias, the focus of which went beyond pure utopian literature and more into how it could streamline the satire underneath. A prime example was

Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels. According to Claeys, “(‘Gulliver’ being a possible amalgam of ‘gullible’ and ‘traveler’) first published in 1726, remains perhaps the greatest ever satire on the human aspiration to lead a life according to the principles of reason”

(Searching for Utopia 90). Leaving the land of reason, and focusing more on the principles behind it, yet another subgenre surfaced. This was the territory of anti-utopias, with the focus now shifting against ideals of perfection. Furthermore, under the utopian

umbrella, was the critical utopia as well. A critical utopia made us aware of its limitations

within the utopian tradition and rejected utopia as a blueprint, instead focusing on

preserving the dream of it. Somewhere along these lines of division and transformation

arose the most radical of the categories: dystopia.

There are those who consider it to be the oldest binary of utopia, but Claeys

clarifies that it originated alongside utopia, “The three phases of development of utopian

thought might loosely be considered as the mythical, the religious, and the positive or

institutional” (Searching for Utopia 8). Of these three phases, dystopia coexisted with

utopia within both the scopes of myth and religion. In mythology, paradise (meaning

utopia) is always considered a heavenly realm, be it the Elysian Fields from Greek myths or Valhalla from Norse mythology, for example. The underworld that serves as a potent finish for the undeserving, ruled by Hades (for the Greeks) or Hel (for the Norse), was the dystopian counterpart. In religion (be it Ancient Greek, Egyptian, Norse, Christian,

Hebrew, Hindu, or so on), there have always been forewarnings of impending floods, disasters, or apocalypses. These ominous events are by definition dystopian.

In considering the third phase of development with the institutional or scholarly angle, dystopia was not recognized by scholars and authors for quite some time:

“Dystopias (negative or anti-utopias) did not begin to appear as a definitive sub-genre until the late 19th century” (Claeys, Searching for Utopia 175). That is when Wells,

Zamyatin, Huxley, and Orwell entered the picture and pushed the envelope on what defined dystopia. However, it was in fact, the English philosopher John Stuart Mill who first brought forth the new-fangled concept of “cacotopia” and then intermingled this funky term into “dys-topia.” In 1868 during a parliamentary debate, that was when Mill

found the connection and leaped on it (Claeys, Cambridge Companion to Utopian

Literature 107). He declared that dystopian literature is not merely “utopia in reverse”

but it is an argument against something larger and usually more futuristic happening in a

collectivist society.

The institutional/scholarly phase of utopian tradition began to recognize the

importance of dystopia as its own form of speculative fiction with a heavy dose of

cultural criticism giving it fire: “These dystopian visions followed the natural contours of

the literary territory—change is frightening, and the likelier it is, the more frightening it

becomes—and they also extrapolated from the most threatening aspect of contemporary

history, the growing totalitarianism in political systems” (Scholes & Rabkin 27).

Change, history, and totalitarianism became the grounding foundations, and not just for the earliest dystopian literature either. It continues to be the fuel that drives modern dystopias as well, from the series that initiated the young adult dystopian phase (Lois

Lowry’s The Giver dystopian quartet entered circulation in the early 1990s), all the way to The Hunger Games and Divergent series that have shaken up more recent American popular culture. On top of that, their post-apocalyptic undertones emerge to show just as much sway.

Since the development of dystopia and its separate sub-genres of apocalyptic (a world that is in the midst of crumbling) and post-apocalyptic (a world after disaster has struck) narratives, both series have taken cues from these separate developments. It is vital to understand the difference between a post-apocalyptic narrative and a dystopian one however, because the former concentrates solely on how humanity survives after world-changing events. Post-apocalyptic tales focus less on the actual cataclysmic event,

and more on how people survive and evolve in their new circumstances, and they tend to

involve barren landscapes as well as a lack of technology (Paik 122-4). This trend has been on rise for the past few years in television, with powerful dramas such as The

Walking Dead (2010) and The 100 (2014), bringing in more viewers than any previous

post-apocalyptic narrative, and that is just considering one medium.

Fan communities of this genre have been even more vehement about their

dedication and desire to see more and feel more of this uniquely themed genre, thus

springing up wildly successful events such as Halloween Horror Nights. This is a yearly

event that brings in unbeatable records of overwhelming customers to amusement parks

such as Universal Studios because they know how to accurately predict and feed into this

frenzied desire for post-apocalyptic environments full of undead monstrosities, gore, and

horror. However, this post-apocalyptic element must be correctly addressed as not just a

current trend, but as a constantly recurring one. Following severe economic crises,

environmental concerns, fear of technological failures, and even political scandals,

apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic narratives have been turned into popular fiction pieces,

bestselling young adult novels, successful blockbusters, and recurring television series.

This has been a pattern since the introduction of atomic bombs during World War II

(Paik 124).

In contrast to the closely monitored apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic narratives,

the overlying dystopian tradition involves not only elements of technological prowess,

but also radical government control over contained populations. Thus, while The Hunger

Games and Divergent series possess post-apocalyptic elements of previous world-altering

disasters and acclimation to changed environments, they are not just about lone survivors.

Rather they are about the people of the future fighting the totalitarian governments of the future. Therefore, both series have transcended past the environment that tends to be the entire focus of a world coming apart (apocalyptic genre) or specific survivors learning to acclimate to the horrors of an undone world (post-apocalyptic genre). What Collins and

Roth have done well, was pick apart useful elements from traditional utopian works, early dystopian satires, later apocalyptic narratives, and combined them into their own unique interpretation of the modern dystopia for a younger generation dealing with their own set of cultural tribulations.

CHAPTER TWO: LET THE HUNGER GAMES BEGIN

“It isn’t in my nature to go down without a fight, even when things seem

insurmountable” (Collins, The Hunger Games 36).

The success of The Hunger Games trilogy indeed seems to be a continuation of a trend started by Harry Potter or the Twilight saga. However, this is not the case. As a young adult dystopia, The Hunger Games offers a glimpse into an entirely different world

that does not branch out into different genres or themes, it opens the avenue of dystopian

potential instead. Specifically with Collins’s treatment of dystopia, we are given a

focused look into a cultural desensitization towards violence, a revealing commentary on

the real-life problems such as starvation, and an avid criticism of today’s fascination with the media.

Making connections between the novels and films is sometimes too easy, and

critics, readers, and even fans tend to jump at these similarities very quickly. Instead of

focusing on the unique elements of a new success, there is this comfort in drawing

patterns of familiarity with its predecessors. Leah Wilson, the editor of several

anthologies, focuses on analyzing the trendiest bestsellers while they are still in the

spotlight, and has also acknowledged this pattern of behavior amidst popular culture. In

fact, she opens up her latest book, The Girl Who Was on Fire, with this comparison:

“You could call The Hunger Games a series that is--like its heroine--on fire. But its

popularity, in itself, is nothing new. We live in an era of blockbuster young adult book

series: Harry Potter, Twilight, now The Hunger Games. It’s more unusual these days for there not to be a YA series sweeping the nation” (7). While acknowledging the truth of

Collins’s success with her dystopian trilogy, Wilson is also falling back into this comfortable practice of connecting this trilogy to the previous ones that held the same spotlight. Of course, there is no denying similar elements amongst the young adult series that each took the world by storm when they were initially published: “All these series have certain things in common: compelling characters; complex worlds you want to spend time exploring; a focus on family and community” (Wilson 7). In spite of these powerful elements that seem to unite the blockbuster successes, what Collins created within her fictional world of The Hunger Games is still able to hold its own territory.

The elements that bond Collins’s storyline to its predecessors follow a tradition of comparative mythology formally introduced by Joseph Campbell in 1949, within his book The Hero With A Thousand Faces. In his book, Campbell presents a formula to be found in every story involving a protagonist and the path they must take: “Whether the hero be ridiculous or sublime, Greek or barbarian, gentile or Jew, his journey varies little in essential plan” (35). Campbell details twelve steps to be seen in every hero’s journey, and while every story enfolds a different world full of different characters, they are still united by this formula he dubbed the monomyth, or the hero’s journey.

Step one: is the call to adventure, where the hero receives a mysterious message, invitation, or challenge. Step two: assistance, where the hero receives help from someone older or wiser. Step three: departure, the hero leaves his ordinary and safe world for the special and new one. Step four: trials, the hero solves a riddle, faces monsters, or goes through traps. Step five: approach, the hero faces his/her biggest ordeals or worst fears.

Step six: crisis, the darkest hour comes upon the hero, where they face death, possibly even die, and are reborn. Step seven: treasure, hero goes on to claim a prize, receive special recognition or even powers. Step eight: monsters bow down before the hero or chase the hero out of the special world. Step nine: return, hero comes back home. Step ten: new life, the hero has outgrown the old life and is now changed. Step eleven: resolution, hero resolves the rest of tangled plotlines. Final step twelve: status quo, not only is the hero now upgraded, but there are certain changes that the hero has brought forth as well (Winkler, “What makes a hero”). This formula for the hero’s journey is detailed, includes the twists and turns of any major plotline, but also accustoms itself to the lesson curve that comes with every hero who not only learns about themselves along the journey, but also about the changes they set in motion as a result.

From leaving their normal world to struggling with new circumstances and even death itself, and eventually to conquering their obstacles and enemies: this is the outline

Campbell traced in every written story and predicted in every major tale to come. Finding these strong similarities shows us how closely tied we are to making links and basing foundations around them, but at the same time it is hard to deny the legitimacy of these claims. It is not just Katniss and Tris that accomplish unbelievable feats, it is also Harry

Potter before them who that took the hero’s journey as well. J.K. Rowling created her series of seven novels in 1997. Rowling focused on the fantasy of muggles and wizards, she set up this mesmerizing tale of magic, and made it personal for every reader who wished to embrace on the journey with her orphan hero, Harry Potter. Through his years of schooling, and then his epic final battle with the ultimate nemesis, Voldemort, there is great amounts of loss, sadness, and death. The conclusion, however, retains to the

monomyth formula: Harry wins, Voldemort and his darkness is expelled, and a life of contentment is shown for the remaining main characters alongside Harry.

Ten years later in 2007, The Twilight Saga, a quartet series created by Stephanie

Meyer brought an innovative passion back to vampiric life by giving them new attributes and finding an impressionable damsel to fall in love with them all. It also lit the path of heroine enlightenment for The Hunger Games and Divergent series to come, while retaining the monomyth formula just as honorably. Meyer’s heroine, Bella Swan, brings home one message across all four books: the idea that love can win at the end of the day despite impossible challenges. Highlighting the final step in Campbell’s formula, changing the status quo, that is what Meyer accomplished through Bella’s story. Bella and her love defy all odds, even death itself, to remain together: “The hero is the champion of things becoming, not of things become, because he is” (Campbell 225). The hero goes through their trials to become something greater than the obstacles they tried to overcome, and how they achieve victory is one of the most breathtakingly unique capabilities an author has in bringing to life.

This journey seems to leave little room to chance, as every step along the way becomes more of a formula, and less of an adventure. However, even Campbell attests that there is a unique energy about each protagonist that breathes new life into what they are capable of showing: “Always scaled to his stature and to the nature of his dominant desire...a symbol of life energy stepped down to the requirements of a certain specific case” (175). Bella after all starts as a mortal teenager who is both clumsy and quiet, but as soon as she falls in love with the ever-brooding vampire Edward Cullen, it is death- defying battle after battle until she successfully transforms into a vampire as well,

protecting her newfound family (with, now husband, Edward and their child Renesmee).

Thus, there unequivocally is a sense of happy ever after for Bella’s story, and a sense of

peace and content within Harry’s tale. Yet in both tales, their happy ever after is the

victory, the ultimate boon that Campbell continually attests to, scaled down to their

specific story, dependent on their stature and desires. Harry wanted to defeat his nemesis

Voldemort, Bella wanted to be with her beloved forever, and both received what they so much desired to attain.

The way in which Collins sets her heroine apart is not through the prevailing message of love or an ultimate nemesis showdown. While retaining the foundation to all of Campbell’s twelve steps, her heroine Katniss, adapts the monomyth by changing the expected outcome. This is the strongest difference that sets The Hunger Games apart from its predecessors in the Twilight Saga and Harry Potter series. Even if these are the very series that fans and critics alike love to compare to, and even as we trace Campbell’s steps through Katniss’s journey, singularities stand out to make this Girl on Fire transform her series ablaze as well.

Besides the unexpected outcome that concludes her series, Collins prefers a much more mature unfolding of realistically violent and unsettling events for her heroine.

Though Collins bows down to Campbell’s formula and does yield to step seven of granting her hero the final boon of not just national recognition but conclusive victories over two consecutive Hunger Games and her political saboteurs. There is also an ending that shows Katniss as a married mother with her own family, but this “happy” ending simply does not fit into the cookie cutter of a fairy tale conclusion or of a hero that simply changed the status quo.

Katniss, the heroine who fought so hard, cannot find inner peace in the

conclusion, as suggested by her final monologue: “I make a list in my head of every act

of goodness I’ve seen someone do. It’s like a game. Repetitive. Even a little tedious after

more than twenty years. But there are much worse games to play” (Collins, Mockingjay,

Epilogue 7-8). What Collins accomplishes in the final scene of her final novel,

Mockingjay, is a realistic portrait of a young woman who continues to live on with her

scars, with signs of PTSD, but still with that desire to live on. This is keeping in mind,

that on top of everything, Katniss has lost the one individual she cared for the most and

was the actual reason that she volunteered for the 74th Hunger Games in the first place:

her sister, Primrose Everdeen. She loses her closest friend, Gale, to an emotional inner struggle and eventual long distance. The totalitarian government she gave herself up for in order to defeat, almost losing her own life several times in the process, also only brings a temporary victory.

In fact, going back to the conclusion of the third novel, Mockingjay, what Collins reveals is a sense of an unstable peace: “The world is better than it was, but there are hints that this improvement is only temporary--that the kind of inhumanity we saw in the districts under Capitol rule is the true status quo, and that the current peace is ephemeral, precious, something toward which Panem will always have to struggle” (Wilson 7).

Analyzing this shockingly dark and bittersweet ending reveals multiple layers of a

bleaker and colder finale that resembles reality more closely than either Twilight or Harry

Potter. This is due to the parallels Collins made of Katniss’s struggles with actual current

events that shook our world at that same time she was writing. Facing the realistic horrors

and aftermath of 9/11, and dealing directly with the financial crisis of 2008, there was no

sense of stability or peace in the environment that inspired Collins. The pain and fear that

Americans felt took on deeper dimensions; and as a result, reflected in young adult

dystopias, leading to their great popularity. Dystopia is meant to paint a darker side to our

future; well in that moment in time, the present reality was dark enough to instigate the

creation of The Hunger Games all by itself.

In addition to the larger American mindset of the early 2000s, Collins made the

push towards not just a national awareness to current events, but also to an individual

connection to her readers. This push yielded a different coming-of-age story to mold

Campbell’s monomyth formula into something more personal, something more relatable

to younger generations. Though Collins does force her readers to mature quickly in order

to see the actual horrors that surround them outside of their books, in reality. In an

interview with BiblioStar.TV, she talks specifically about these experiences that left an

impact on her childhood as a direct result of her father fighting in the Vietnam War: “I

was horrified because my dad was over there...and to this day, when I see footage, war

footage, be it Iraq or Afghanistan, it still has a very powerful effect on me” (“Suzanne

Collins on the Vietnam War…,”YouTube). That is what drove her to write this series in the first place. Her personal connection to war and its aftermath as a child, the current events that led her adult environment, and the need to bring forth these haunting impacts onto her readers on that closer personal level, through the eyes of a sixteen-year-old girl.

Even if it is a hard pill to swallow in the end, that is exactly what Collins intends:

“The series pushes us to grow up and take responsibility both personally and politically for our choices: those Capitol residents we see milling through the streets in Mockingjay, the same Capitol residents who so raptly watched the Hunger Games on television year

after year without recognizing the suffering that made it possible, are us” (Wilson 8).

There is a warning hidden beneath the journey that so many young readers took with

enjoyment, a caution that is felt towards the end, and is shown even more gruesomely in

the films that barely met PG-13 criteria because of all the cruelty and violence. That

warning is a self-realization of what the world has transformed into: “I wonder for the

people who haven’t had that as a personal experience, how it feels” (“Suzanne Collins on

the Vietnam War…,” YouTube). Feeling strongly enough to want to paint this picture for

them, that is what Collins desired to accomplish and did so. But in a way, that also

defines dystopian ideology de facto: a fearful prediction of the future based on the path of

the present.

This of course, is not the only reason that makes Collins’s series stand out from

the rest of the young adult bestsellers, and even from its more specific genre-generated

young adult dystopian corner. The question that must be asked: how does she singularize

her storyline so effectively for the world to grasp and hook onto it so quickly, especially with other blockbuster sellers that have happier endings vying for the spotlight? Even more important, how does she set Katniss apart when her heroine is performing each of the traditional steps outlined by Joseph Campbell in his formula on the hero’s journey? It

all starts with the preliminary plotline Collins sold to Scholastic, depicting her dystopia to

stand separate from previous literary classics that made the genre popular in the past few

decades, such as Orson Scott Card’s Ender’s Game that came out in 1985 or Lois

Lowry’s The Giver that was published in 1993. With Card, his series was advertised as

military science fiction. Lowry sold her series as a dystopian reimagining geared towards

school-aged children and teenagers, over the span of four books and nineteen years. With

The Hunger Games, there is no science fiction tagline or any long-term goal to reach out

to its readers over the span of a decade.

Part of the allure of The Hunger Games is that it does not try to branch out into other genres or themes. It is a straightforward speculative fiction dystopian narrative,

there is no focus on other worlds, alien species, idealistic communities that slowly come

apart, or gentle rulers that turn evil. Collins does not subvert her storyline with anything

but the cold, harsh truth of the future she sees for American society. There are

propaganda videos and messages created and shared by the Capitol (the government of

Panem, Collins’s future society) that warn of the “Dark Days” where there was civil war

due to political unrest, some 74 years before Katniss’s story even begins: “The result was

Panem, a shining Capitol ringed by thirteen districts, which brought peace and prosperity

to its citizens” (Collins, The Hunger Games 18). Out of civil unrest came a period of

stability, and the yearly Hunger Games is celebrated for all 74 of those peaceful years in

order to ensure this reign of prosperity. These are the very words delivered yearly by their

highest governmental authority, President Snow, in order to serve as a brutal reminder of

why each district must sacrifice its youth. So that those “Dark Days” never return.

This is the strongest point in which Collins allows for a connection to a post-

apocalyptic undertone: that there was a world that came apart, and there were survivors

who dealt with the consequences afterwards. But that is it, no extra focus is given to

figure out how America came apart or how it formed into its current 13 districts of

Panem. Not how President Snow came into power or even why. There is only the reality

of the main narrator, Katniss, as she works to keep her family clothed and fed. Survival is

her short-term and long-term goal. That at least is the main struggle of the first book,

before Katniss becomes a symbol for rebellion and is forced to join said rebellion in order to represent an entire nation oppressed for far too long.

One problem that current critics pose for the young adult dystopian world, is that its authors do not offer any depth to their dystopias outside of the protagonists’ personal struggles. Carter F. Hanson attests to this: “[They offer] no credible extrapolation of contemporary society and hence no credible cautionary warning about where it might be heading...their imagined social and/or governmental structures serve largely as backdrop to romantic concerns” (257). This criticism ignores the reason that The Hunger Games has an edge. Collins may not go into depth on the history of present America’s downfall, but she gives acute details of the suffering of Panem’s people as a result of the collapse.

Those details paint vivid warnings about our contemporary society. Collins gives a frightening commentary on our youth’s fascination with the media, our ignorance towards the starving sector of America’s population, and our desensitized look on violence. There are acutely realistic depictions of Panem’s districts, different social classes, and the overall struggles of an oppressed and suffering nation that opens readers’ eyes to unequivocal problems in our own time. From mass starvation in the higher districts, to fighting for rations and eating scraps out of the garbage, even to making jokes at the state of their environment: “‘District Twelve. Where you can starve to death in safety’” (Collins, The Hunger Games 6), this is the kind of situation that makes a reader think twice about wanting to join in on such a gruesome experience personally.

While it cannot be denied that there is a love story being painted between Katniss and her fellow tribute Peeta, or even a love triangle between Katniss, Peeta, and Gale

(Katniss’s childhood best friend), this romantic concern is subordinated to the main

theme of the books and films. The focus is predominantly on survival and rebellion, seen through Katniss’s perspective. Her priority is always on trying to keep her family alive, first and foremost. While Collins achieves a depth of critical analysis of our contemporary society’s priorities and lifestyle choices, it is the fans who bring an obsessive quality to romanticizing their preferred characters. Team Peeta or Team Gale were formed by the fans after the first film came out in 2012, in a reciprocal fashion made popular with the Twilight films before them. A short time before the release of The

Hunger Games, the craze after all was centered around Team Edward or Team Jacob, to win over Bella’s heart. To color in some reality beyond the fans’ obsessions, the most heated romantic encounters between the main protagonists are only a few kisses shared during their time together hiding in the caves at the end of the 74th Hunger Games, and also while surviving through the start of the 75th Hunger Games. Those were the only times within the novels that Katniss and Peeta shared embraces; and mostly for public attention at that, as they were doing it specifically for the cameras to see.

In fact, the final two films (The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Parts 1 and 2) add in more physical embraces then there were originally in the books, offering its own unique conclusion about what they feel their audience expects and desires. What

Collins’s actual intention was by adding in the romantic element, was not to subvert to the happy-ever-after possibility, but to show another extension of danger: the act of love in times of war becomes a dangerously political act in itself. Katniss began to understand that when in the second novel, Catching Fire, President Snow visits her home establishment in District 12 to remind her of this very fact: “By the way, I know about the

kiss” (Collins 29). The one kiss she stole away with Gale in secret after returning from

the first games, became a secret to be used against her. Nothing is sacred, nothing is safe.

To understand this in terms of dystopian politics, consider the classic Nineteen

Eighty-Four written by George Orwell back in 1949. In his novel, Orwell presented the lovers Winston and Julia, and had them punished for their rebellion by turning them against each other. Winston and Julia were tortured to the point where they were made to hate each other, their wills were broken, and their love was used as a weapon against them. The same ploy is used to turn Peeta against Katniss when he is brainwashed into

hating her at the end of Catching Fire. It takes a great amount of love to be shown in the

first place, for others to take notice and then desire to weaponize it.

President Snow, after all, was the first to pick up on this dangerous potential at the end of The Hunger Games when Katniss and Peeta attempted to eat the deadly nightlock berries together, in a suicide pact: “If Peeta and I were to both die, or they thought we were…” (Collins 344). That thought alone made their love a weapon that helped them both come out victorious in the first game, and it also made President Snow think twice:

“It is seen by President Snow as dangerous because it could be interpreted as an act of rebellion” (Borsellino 34).

In a world where there is not supposed to be any love at all, such as in the case of

Winston and Julia, even giving Winston that note with those words “I LOVE YOU” was

an illegal act initiated by Julia, but also it was a sign of rebellion (Orwell 136). Author

Mary Borsellino makes the point that even such small acts can lead to great

consequences: “Love when there isn’t supposed to be love is a hugely subversive

political act. If it weren’t, there wouldn’t be protest marches in countries all over the

world demanding same-sex marriage” (33). Making real life connections, showing how

far people will go to fight for what they believe in, it shows the impact of something once

thought to be so small and insignificant. In the case of Winston and Julia, it of course did

not bode well for them.

In real life, people are still fighting for equality in love on different platforms

globally, and not all have yet to be victorious. But for Peeta and Katniss, it was never as

simple as being involved in a love triangle with Gale. It was about survival first and

foremost. Then, when Katniss and Peeta go on to show their affections for each other in

front of the cameras and during interviews during The Hunger Games and Catching Fire, that for them was not just an act, it was tactical planning and strategizing. Finding a way back to each other after all the dirty war ploys was their greatest show of true love. In the end, it was indeed their greatest weapon: “When the love you feel is against the laws of those in control, then love is a political act. It’s true in the real world, true in Nineteen

Eighty-Four, and true in The Hunger Games” (Borsellino 34). Things can always be

simplified, but finding the depth to which one small act can become so rebellious and

dangerous—that is when a hero’s journey may become darker but also more livid,

poignant, and everlastingly memorable.

Nevertheless, by neglecting to heed Collins’s subverted themes, fans instead

continue to interpret and re-create for themselves their more favored elements. They dub

themselves “Tributes,” create multitudes more of fan-fiction surrounding the gaps of

passion and romance they felt missing in the series. Albeit, this is the kind of controversy

that gave more public attention to this series and helped catapult it into mainstream focus.

Online sites of fan fiction and artwork would pop up in droves, even within the official

capacities of either the Scholastic books’ websites or the Lionsgate movies’ websites.

Role-playing games, addictive memes, and even forums for parents to help teach and

watch the series became the top fashion trend within the years of 2012 through 2015. The

closest fan reaction of this level can be traced back to Stephanie Meyer’s Twilight series

or J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series, once again on the level of similarity in fan

reactions, more so than actual book series’ similarities. To analyze the start of Collins’s

book series as a worthy contemporary to its classic dystopian counterparts, to interpret its

relationship and translation into a four-part film series, and include the fan obsession that

skyrocketed this series to fame: these angles are vital in breaking down the formula to its

success and influence.

Be that as it may, the start of Collins’s trilogy was actually surrounded by

controversy of a different sort. Just after The Hunger Games was published and started to

hit multiple bestseller lists in late 2008, international critics sounded alarms of

plagiarism. Upon closer inspection by critics such as Sarah Rees Brennan, strong

connections were felt to be had between Collins’s book and the Japanese film called

Battle Royale, released in 2011 and incidentally based on the Japanese novel of the same

name by Koushun Takami. The Japanese version focuses on a group of high school

students who were selected by lotteries to fight to the death on a public arena for the

benefit of an audience, but horrifically backed by their futuristic government which

sanctioned new legislations demanding such atrocious entertainment (Brennan 2).

Brennan goes into detail about how she first refused to read Collins’s novel in an act of loyalty to Takami’s supposed original work. When friends twisted her arm to give

The Hunger Games a try, Brennan came to a keen realization: “My reason for avoiding

The Hunger Games really was ridiculous, as we all know there are no brand-new plots under the sun: what really matters is the way you tell the stories and the passion you have for them” (2). Plagiarism was never the true issue, nor was it ever confirmed or proven that Collins actually stole Takami’s idea from the book that was published back in 1999.

Instead, with further research Brennan was able to discover other books, series, and even comics that touch on similar storylines or plots, such as the ones found in the former

Battle Royale and later The Hunger Games. As for evidence that ever implicated Collins, there was none, and no lawsuit was ever filed either. In an interview with The New York

Times Magazine, Collins admits to having no prior knowledge of that work even: “When

I asked Collins if she had drawn from Battle Royale, she was unperturbed. ‘I had never heard of that book or that author until my book was turned in. At that point, it was mentioned to me’” (Dominus, “Susan Collins’s War Stories...”). To this day, she has yet to read the book or see the Japanese adaptation.

However, each new literary addition has its own timeline and therefore is separated from the mix of what is defined as plagiarism. Plagiarism after all refers to the lifting of words, not only ideas. To that end, this could never be demonstrated in any capacity. Tracing those ideas on the other hand, that can be done. There is a strong link to

Ben Elton’s adult comic book titled Dead Famous from 2001, with another similar plotline that focuses on a reality TV show that becomes more popular once there is a murder planned by its producers. Digging deeper the traces of similarity can continue as well, because it: “Deals with many of the same issues of human fascination with reality television, violence, and the question of how illusion can mingle with reality” (Brennan

3). Once you start looking for similarities, they can be found: that is the point. Making a

case for plagiarism is just not viable when ideas themselves are no longer as “new under

the sun” or all follow the all-encompassing hero’s journey formula laid out by Campbell

back in 1949.

Instead, readers need to be pushed to realize that the packaging is sometimes just

as significant as the message. For that is the very talent on which Collins is able to create

her own blockbuster trilogy: “Hunger Games books [are] ‘sticky,’ meaning that they are compulsive reading. Once you have picked them up, it’s difficult to stop reading: your attention does not wander, and your urge to find out what happens next does not falter”

(Brennan 3). Collins has a way with creating another world and another set of characters that do not bind us to any of their predecessors, as much as it unleashes us to devour what is. This is the morbid allure of a Girl on Fire, of an icon of rebellion, and of a troubled world that must be burned to the ground before it is remade anew. She is selling us the same issues that so many novels before her have dealt with: human obsession with entertainment, violence, and illusion, but her packaging is uniquely alluring all by itself.

The reason for Collins’s allurement is that while her message is not unique, it remains deeply personal. While there are critics who remain steadfast to the plagiarized storyline behind The Hunger Games, the reality stands that Collins’s already has a convincing origin story without the extra controversy. She even published that reason in an autobiographical manner as a children’s picture book after her trilogy was complete in

2013, titled Year of the Jungle. In that child’s book, she speaks of the memorable moments her father gave her that shaped her mind in acknowledging the horrors and violence within the world that cannot be shied away even from innocent eyes. Growing up, Collins did not have the chance to grow up separate from the consequences of war,

death, and violence as her father was a career military man who first taught military

history at West Point before he would go on to fight in the Vietnam War (Weiner 11).

Even though he came back to his family, he came back a changed man suffering from

PTSD, just as Katniss ends up suffering PTSD at the end of Mockingjay. Her family was affected before he even left though, as her grandfather had previously served in WWI and had been gassed. Even Collins’s uncle had gone on to serve in WWII, where he survived shrapnel wounds.

These war stories were a part of Collins’s childhood because they were a part of her family history. Her closest connection was of course to her father, and seeing his transformation made her want to write about these consequences from an early age:

“Collins has stated numerous times that she wants to use her books to educate children about the reality of warfare” (Weiner 12). That is why all her books, not just The Hunger

Games trilogy, deal with different sorts of violence found within war. Her fictional accounts include carnage, biological warfare, genocide, and of course the more well- known teen-on-teen gladiator styled combat. Given these facts, it should not surprise readers to hear of how many schools and libraries have tried to ban her books from their shelves. In 2010 alone, there were 348 cases where the trilogy was attempted to be banned. In reality, The Hunger Games series has even appeared twice on the American

Library Association’s list of ten most challenged books (Weiner 12-3). Accepting all the violence, gore, and seemingly unnecessary death in a narrative meant for school-aged children and pre-teens is understandably difficult.

The exact idea for The Hunger Games is credited to one night of channel surfing, as Collins has referenced to several times in multiple interviews, when she was flipping

from a reality television show to news about the Iraq War back in 2007. The juxtaposition of the two, reality tv and war coverage, struck a chord with Collins that would forever be immortalized as that moment of genesis: “The images began to blur in her mind, and the idea for a televised reality battle show was born in part from her fear that modern audiences, particularly young viewers, could not distinguish what was real on television and what was not” (Weiner 13). Having lived through the experience personally, seen the effects, and observed how others were shielded from reality: all these factors added up to truly bother Collins enough to write about them in a fictional stadium of gigantic proportions.

To truly understand how moments combine to make mental and physical scars that are worth coming back to, remembering, and creating storylines around, consider this unbelievable aspect: the reality versus the illusion of what young people see on television compared with what the outside world is experiencing on a daily basis. December 14,

2012, a lone gunman went into Sandy Hook Elementary School and ended up killing twenty children and six teachers. A scene that would have felt more appropriate on the pages of Collins’s novel, similar to how career tributes heavily arm themselves to obliterate all other tributes in their wake once they enter the arena. Only in this case it was reality, a horrific reality that happened in Suzanne Collins’s very own hometown of

Newtown, Connecticut (Weiner 11). Collins was born and raised in Newtown, and continues to live there despite the horrendous parallels.

The Sandy Hook Shooting that was forever etched as a day of grief and mourning in American history happened to be in the very community of the author who fought so hard to teach her readers to understand the consequences of unnecessary violence. These

horrors cannot be undone. Their bloody legacy should not be forgotten either. That is all

that Collins has ever said about the importance of her books and the reasons for why she

takes them so deep into such dark places. Sophocles once wrote the play, Oedipus Rex, in

which he had his main character blind himself so that he would no longer see the horror

before him. The words of this traumatized protagonist, King Oedipus, ring hauntingly

accurate here in Collins’s case as well: “I can’t look, though there is much to see”

(Sophocles 3). That is the warning before Collins’s book even started and long after her series ended: try to not see once you have already had your eyes opened to the horrors of reality. The reality of Katniss’s world should be avoided at all costs, but the paradox that

Collins presents is that you need to see it and experience it in order to stop it.

CHAPTER THREE: DIVERGENT UNLEASHED

“We believe in ordinary acts of bravery, in the courage that drives one person to stand up

for another” (Roth, Divergent 206).

Facing reality is sometimes the hardest task of all, something that is unbearably painful and therefore reasons are found to keep pushing it back and back. Collins gives her heroine, Katniss, no options but to face the certainty of starvation, survival, and death on a daily basis because Collins herself experienced the power of destruction. Through her father’s military experiences and trauma after the Vietnam War, even through personal community tragedies such as with the Sandy Hook Shooting, Collins has both experienced and seen this destruction up close. Veronica Roth, on the other hand, uses a different set of personal experiences and ideologies to address the same danger of destruction within her Divergent series. Therefore, Tris’s beginnings originate from a similar concern for society, but are shaped and formed from a different foundation.

Hardship and adversity are not thrust upon Tris suddenly, the readers and the

Divergent heroine are given a transitional period that commences with sixteen years of a peaceful and nonviolent upbringing. Roth connected the creation of this amiable childhood for Tris to an inspirational section from a favorite song of hers, Flyleaf’s

“Arise.” Certain lyrics struck a chord with Roth and made her decide to begin her novel in a similar manner: “Hold on to the world we all remember fighting for/ There’s some strength left in us yet/ Hold on to the world we all remember dying for/ There’s some

hope left in it yet/ Arise and be/ All that you dreamed” (Flyleaf, “Arise”). Roth cites this quote as an inspirational beginning because it moved her to start with a character that is not emotionally scarred in the beginning, or one who has to hit the ground running with multiple tribulations (such as the reality Katniss faces in The Hunger Games). Instead

Roth wanted to open her dystopian world with a glimpse of what utopia must have felt

like for those who were deceived into their lifestyle choices.

With such a mentality, Roth wrote Divergent in 2011, shaping a world in which

people live in communities classified by personality types. Based in a futuristic Chicago,

there are a total of five communities. Abnegation is the one in which Katniss was raised

in, and they are the selfless, therefore in charge of leading the entire city, making up most

of the city council as a result. Then there is Dauntless, the community Katniss chooses to

join at sixteen, as they are the brave and fearless, the more exciting community that is

also charged with protecting the city. Thirdly, Candor, those who chose to live solely by

honesty and truth. Fourthly, Amity, peace-makers who mostly focus on farming and producing food for the entire city. Lastly, Erudite, those whose search for wisdom lead them to become Katniss’s greatest enemies, as their search creates civil war. Each community bonds to one personality, but they all live together within the limits of one city as long as they adhere to their community. The only threat therefore becomes those who have multiple personality facets, the divergent. Tris later must learn to live with this overwhelming curse of an identity. For Roth, this was her in. To find a unique facet to a growing character, that quality that will define a protagonist’s mindset, choices, and overall future.

For Tris, who belonged in the Abnegation faction up until the choosing ceremony,

this is a beginning with a naive look upon a world she has not started to fully

comprehend. Those in Abnegation are taught in the ways of pacifism, kindness, and

selflessness. That means that Tris actually has a semblance of a peaceful routine life up

until her 16th birthday. While she chooses afterwards to leave it, those memories forever

stay with her as something dear to hold onto: an innocent childhood. In the final two

books of the series (Insurgent and Allegiant), her memories of her Abnegation lifestyle

with her family give her the inner strength and resolve to keep on fighting: “She is not

big on peace or forgiveness. Honesty isn’t her strongest virtue, either. And while she is

very smart, Tris acknowledges the Abnegation part of herself more” (Clement-Moore

24). So as Tris moves further away from what she grew up with, Tris is still able to look

back on what she had and takes strength from it as being a potent part of her.

Flyleaf’s mantra is something that directly fueled Roth in forming such a

protagonist who first needed to feel a world worth fighting for, before finding the

strength to conquer the untold challenges that are thrust upon Tris as soon as she leaves

the safety bubble that Abnegation offered. Abnegation not only offered that sense of

childhood innocence and protection from the beginning, but it also remained as part of

her identity throughout her journey, until the very end. In fact, at the end of Allegiant, when Tris sacrifices herself for her brother, and gives up her life to save everyone else’s, she shows the imprint of Abnegation. By sacrificing herself for the better good, she reverts back to her Abnegation upbringing. Some of her final words were to show this lesson instilled into Tris from birth: “‘My mother wasn’t a fool,’ I say. ‘She just

understood something you didn’t. That it’s not sacrifice if it’s someone else’s life you’re

giving away, it’s just evil...She taught me about real sacrifice. That it should be done

from love’” (Roth, Allegiant 473). Despite fighting so hard throughout her journey to find

her own identity separate from Abnegation, in the end, the Abnegation values her parents

taught her led to her final decisions as a heroine.

Aside from the thought process that inspired Roth in her time of writing, there are

several other significant characteristics about her as an author that connect back to

Divergent. Those key characteristics that influence her work separate her not only from

her highly successful predecessor, Suzanne Collins, but also from the general gist of

previous dystopian works. In an interview question dealing with the popularity of the

dystopian genre, Roth sets down the common mindset that dystopian writers tend to

concur on: “I think dystopian books are perfect for people who like to ask ‘what if?’ but

want to see their ‘what if?’ questions played out in the world that has the same rules as

our own (as opposed to paranormal or fantasy, in which the rules of the world--in terms

of physics, or biology, or something--are a little different” (Divergent Bonus Materials

5). Just as critics previously have shelved the dystopian definition into fitting a future

based on the present, Roth etches out particular rules she feels dystopian writers tend to

focus on.

What separates them from other genres, such as paranormal or fantasy as Roth

states, are the small restrictions that confine their newly created world to plausible situations based on the “what if?” scenario. A scenario that helps the reader contemplate possibilities of their own future because that link of familiarity has been established:

“There is also something extremely interesting about looking at the world now, reading

about a possible future world, and imagining the steps in between. It’s imaginative, yet

grounded in the real world” (Roth, Divergent Bonus Materials 5). Grounding the story in reality while pushing the idea of “what if?” into those plausible scenarios that could result in horrific futures, that is what separates dystopia from utopian tradition. That is also what separates Tris’s closed off childhood from her forced passage into adulthood, the understanding that one’s utopia is a skewed perception. Understanding that is the halfway point into crossing into the deeper waters of the “other”.

The other half is in taking charge: “My will is mine...I shall not make it soft for you” (Roth, Divergent Bonus Materials 13). This powerful quote from Aeschylus’s

Agamemnon is another reference point for Roth, in finding a source of the inner strength for Tris. The power of determination to defeat obstacles and not bend down to the will of others. These few words were more than enough to create a character’s foundation around, according to Roth: “I’ve said before that I always wanted to write a character who could convincingly deliver these lines from Agamemnon...eventually, I decided I couldn’t tell any other story but hers” (Roth, Divergent Bonus Materials 13). As it turns out, Roth actually started the story by writing a few chapters focusing around Four (the second narrator in the series and Tris’s teacher and eventual love interest) and found that she could not continue past page thirty, hitting a mental roadblock with the aloof protector who eventually does capture Tris’s interest and heart. It took a determined female character with spunk to truly inspire the author to complete the journey.

In retrospect, this becomes another vital aspect to the dystopian narrative in

Roth’s perspective, in having hardcore characters that can stand strong in the face of opposition: “I also love that the majority of the characters in dystopian and post- apocalyptic literature have a lot of agency—they take charge of their lives in

environments that make it hard for them to do so” (Divergent Bonus Materials 5). Having

that agency to prevail is a factor that links back to dystopian tradition as Roth sees it, but

the harsh and grueling environment in which she places her protagonist is one that is

singular to her imagination alone.

Roth came up with the idea for her the Divergent trilogy as an undergraduate student at Northwestern University, and ended up writing the first novel during her winter break in her senior year. At the age of twenty-three, Roth published her novel before she even graduated Northwestern with her bachelor’s degree in creative writing (“Divergent:

Exclusive Interview…,” YouTube). Following up on that, she also sold the film rights to

Summit Entertainment before the first book was even released (Ford, “Divergent

Author…”). Suzanne Collins was already an accomplished screenplay writer and novelist by the time she published her Hunger Games series; whereas Roth was a student who worked up towards a big idea and ran with it, all the way to the top. Her series would reign in the second wave of dystopian young adult literature, as Collins’s had just wrapped up and was starting its transition into film. To reiterate the timeline, Collins wrote The Hunger Games in 2008 and concluded her trilogy with Mockingjay in 2010.

The first film adaptation would come across the big screen in 2012, and end with the second part to the Mockingjay in 2015. Meanwhile, Roth published Divergent in 2011 and ended her trilogy with Allegiant in 2013.

Roth’s film adaptations started in 2014, and went up through the first part of

Allegiant, which aired in the spring of 2016. Similar in the pattern of Collins’s third novel being made into two films, that was the intention the directors had for Roth’s third novel.

That intention however failed to come to light, and the conclusive part of the Divergent

book series was never shown on the big screen. Regardless, the parallel of both series’ timelines shows that within the very next year that Collins finished her series, Roth took over the dystopian young adult spotlight with hers. With the films, it takes longer in development, so both series end up crossing paths at one point on the same timeline, vying for box office records and afterwards DVD sales.

The reality stands that while one author may have inspired the other, both their series add to the dystopian tradition instead of challenging each other for a place within its overall legacy. Roth even expresses gratitude for what Collins’s work achieved in paving the way for her own series: “The Hunger Games is pretty fantastic…[a]nd it’s so good that it’s a little daunting to see those comparisons out there. But at the same time, it’s been pretty incredible what it’s done for the genre and for my book’s visibility. Also, if you’re going to be compared to something, it might as well be The Hunger Games because it’s really awesome” (Ford, “Divergent Author…”). Similar to The Hunger

Games, the Divergent series would also hit the New York Time’s best-seller’s list very quickly after its publication, and remain at the top for many consecutive weeks, and not just for the first book either. The popularity behind the first novel helped its sequel,

Insurgent debut at No.1 a year later in 2012 (Ford, “Divergent Author”). But unlike

Collins, who was writing from her personal family experiences and observations of current media, Roth credited her research for a previous psychology course on how to combat personal fears and phobias, to help her fuel the start of her faction-based dystopia where each faction is divided by virtue (“Veronica Roth Interview,” YouTube).

Furthermore, unlike many memorable genesis stories that renowned authors share, Roth cannot even credit that class alone with the start of her novel.

Writing in her personal blog, Roth reflects back on all the interviews she gave after the debut of her first novel, and there is always that one question that stands out to her as the trickiest: what inspired you to write Divergent? She acknowledges that there are lucky authors who can cite precise moments when the idea came to them: such as with Stephanie Meyer’s renowned dream of Edward and Bella before she had even started writing anything about them, or maybe something more systematic as with

Suzanne Collins’s late night television switching mode. With regard to all those famous methods, then-undergraduate student Roth was actually stuck in continuing Four’s story when specific sources of inspiration pushed her in a surprisingly innovative direction.

Thinking back on the most profound and indispensably vital sources, Roth has finally put her formula for creating her series down to four parts. Firstly, that lesson on exposure therapy in the treatment of phobias in her psychology class gave her the ingenious layout for the Choosing Ceremony, the Dauntless initiation, as well as other vital aspects to separating out the factions in her storyline. One of the techniques in exposure therapy to treat anxiety disorders is to be exposed to the object/context of one’s fear, which is how the entire Dauntless faction works: eliminating fear after fear until they can conquer all their personal anxieties (“Veronica Roth Interview,” YouTube).

Secondly, a popular new song titled “Sweet Sacrifice” by Evanescence struck a different chord with Roth, her mind always revolving back to the lyrics: “Fear is only in our minds/ but it’s taking over all the time.” Just as listening to Flyleaf’s lyrics had inspired her to come up with Tris’s character, listening to this song made Roth imagine a scenario where a person had to jump off a rooftop to prove their bravery (Ford, “Divergent

Author...”). Through this thought process, the faction of Dauntless was born. But before

she could figure out what those factions were, or even how to separate them, she first needed the actual idea of separation into groups.

This came easiest to Roth due to her personal obsession with personality tests, social classes/castes, and anything else that feels closely to sorting and grouping people according to a set criterion. In her reading selections, Roth goes as far as to cite her favorite books in speculative fiction such as J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter because the children there are separated into unique houses at Hogwarts, or Orson Scott Card’s

Ender’s Game where the children are separated into specific armies. Her obsession yielded a given for her dystopian world: “I’ve always been interested in government systems that stick people in classes or castes or high school cliques” (Ford, “Divergent

Author...”). She merely connected the dots on this third inspiration, from personal obsession to government potential in sorting people based on psychological preferences, and thus the five factions: Dauntless (which are the brave), Amity (the peaceful), Erudite

(the intelligent), Abnegation (the selfless), and finally Candor (the ones driven by honesty).

The last and most significant source of inspiration for her series surrounds the birth of her main character, Beatrice Prior, aka Tris, aka the divergent one. Since Four’s perspective was not cutting it for her, Roth searched for life-changing lyrics/stanzas/lines that would help her determine what to focus her new protagonist around. And it always came down to Agamemnon’s curt words of action: “A character who used only as many words as she needed to say what she needed to say. This is pretty much how Tris appeared: a smart, somewhat humorless girl with a voice that wouldn’t leave me alone.

And eventually, I decided I couldn’t tell any other story but hers” (Roth, Divergent Bonus

Materials 13). In channeling this historical link, her psychological schooling, fascination

with lyrics and personality sortings, Roth found her roadmap to success. It may not have

been straightforward or fantastical as compared to other authors; but for this novice

writer, it spelled the origin to a complete storyline for the first time in her long struggle in

finding some solid footing. Some intense researching, soul-searching, and musical inspiration: that is Roth’s conclusive formula.

The interesting part to the Divergent series, is that it is treated as the underdog in comparison with The Hunger Games, due to a supposedly weaker storyline, smaller book sales, and that final box office failure that resulted in the second part of the conclusion to

Allegiant being dropped. Particular critics tear it apart for lack of depth on the literary and cinematic level: “[It] is a limp, aimless story that struggles to establish any meaningful stakes” (Lawson, “From Hunger Games to Ender’s Game…”). Upon further investigation, these criticisms fall short of the truth to what the Divergent series has actually achieved for itself. Roth, is currently ranked #6 on the list of top earning authors as a result of her series selling more than 6.7 million copies (and that is in 2013 alone) and earning around $17 million in books sales between the period of June 2013 and June

2014 (Robehmed, “The World’s Top-Earning Authors…”). Despite negative reviews, its following three films have had considerable success at the box office, especially when compared to the remaining dystopian young adult book-film crossovers. Though The

Hunger Games franchise made over $1.45 billion dollars at the box office altogether,

Divergent still holds its own grounds with the three films it released at a cumulative total

of almost $338 million. The enormous contrast between the success of The Hunger

Games makes Divergent look like a substantial flop, however that is only the result of one skewed angle.

Standing alongside the remaining competitors in this same genre, Divergent

suddenly attains an unbelievable victory. The Giver released its film version in 2014 to a

box office failure, and as a result, the rest of its book adaptations were scratched. Same

for Ender’s Game (which was released in 2013 to another defeat) and The 5th Wave

(released in January 2016 to a very undesirable box office outcome). The only dystopian young adult trilogy that has fleshed out its film adaptations past the first book is The

Maze Runner series, which completed its third film adaptation in January of 2018, leaving the final two book installments in limbo. Nonetheless, to show the stark contrast between the four-competitive dystopian young adult series mentioned above with solely the three Divergent films that have been released, the former capital adds up to

$325,602,842 million at the box office with all different films together, whereas

Divergent holds its ground at $337,549,918 (“Divergent Series,” Box Office Mojo).

Divergent versus four different and also incomplete series, and there is still a margin of

over $11 million by which the success can be seen.

To clarify the mystery behind the second part of the Allegiant film, the official

report that Summit Entertainment released was that due to the third film’s mediocre sales

at the box office (Allegiant debuted on March 18, 2016 to a worldwide total gross of

almost $180 million), a postponement was placed on the overall project. Thereafter,

Summit Entertainment chose to release the film on television later that same year instead

of a final theater release. Then, there was to be a follow-up with an extending television

series to further the storyline of the book series (“Divergent Series,” Box Office Mojo).

2016 came and went, but nothing was ever released on any platform thereafter. With this confounding development, fans, audiences, and critics are left to fill in the gaps and attempt to analyze every possible angle of reasoning for its failures, rather than step back to realize what the series has achieved thus far.

Making comparisons based on book sales and box office records is all good and fair for a quantitative aspect to the successful angle of dystopian young adult fiction; because within that perspective, both The Hunger Games and Divergent stand for something quantifiable over the years of blockbuster flubs and downfalls that have taken mesmerizing books and adapted them into failures. But critics never stop the comparisons, even when stepping outside the scope of film adaptations. In comparing the book reviews based only on these “comparisons,” it turns out there is more to take away from Roth’s novels than what meets the eye on the dystopian front.

One of the most prevalent comparisons within speculative fiction is when critics compare Roth’s five factions to the Harry Potter world that divides its students into four houses (Gryffindor, Slytherin, Ravenclaw, and Hufflepuff). What is not taken into consideration is that Roth took inspiration from Rowling and openly affirms this in multiple interviews. As previously noted, through her own personal obsession of focusing on groupings/sortings/separations, Roth tended to concentrate on novels that also included this element, even if they were outside the spectrum of dystopian or speculative fiction. She confirmed this idea as a starting point for her first novel, and used it as a driving element to help her decide on how to form her own society. Seeing that both the young wizards of Harry Potter and the teenagers of Divergent must test out on their aptitudes and values, to be chosen or placed, that has become an inherent fact. The

difference is the overall genre, setting, age focus, priorities, and consequences that sunder

the two series apart, despite constant comparisons.

When asked, Roth attests to her love for Rowling’s work but nevertheless points

out that to compare Divergent with Harry Potter is not quite congruent: "I love Harry

Potter. I'm a huge nerd…[but] I don't know if she's really an influence because it's not

really the same kind of thing I'm writing. Her attention to detail and world building is

definitely something to aspire to” (Ford, “Divergent Author…”). Acknowledging a renowned author and admiring her writing style, that is feasible. Appreciating Rowling’s approach to detail and especially the idea of sorting children by their personalities, that could be the best link there is between the two. Everything else comes down to the same principle that plagued even Suzanne Collins with those unproven plagiarism accusations:

completely innovative storylines are hard to come by, but intriguing new interpretations

are ones to remember, “Our perspective shifts—the same way reality in the series is

constantly shifting—letting us interpret old events, old ideas, in new ways” (Wilson 9).

So once again, while the critics compare, let the true fans interpret.

In the interest of sorting, choosing, and being selected: Roth was not alone in her

preference for such ideas, that is evident. However, it is not just other authors who set

time-honored standards on how to separate human beings into groups. Divergent

happened to find a strong following of teenagers who wove in their own fan-fiction

narratives based on the faction they felt they belonged in. Roth even released a special

after her first novel, helping fans decide by detailing out the specifics for each preference:

“Each faction chose their own names independently, just as they wrote their own

manifestos independently, and formed their own customs and rules independently”

(Divergent Bonus Materials 27). In all honesty, her meticulous ideas helped create a new

kind of personality test that fans went crazy for: the faction quiz (available in her bonus

materials or on multiple online outlets).

On the other hand, it should not be left unsaid that these factions do not coexist

peacefully for long. The strife between the factions created the ultimate conflict in the

Divergent series. To channel the appropriate animosity, Roth recites Galatians 5:15: “But

if you bite and devour one another, watch out that you are not consumed by one another”

(Divergent Bonus Materials 14). This epic passage helps set up the social unrest between

the factions that leads to Tris’s involvement in their civil war. The similarity to Panem’s

struggling nation in which starving districts start to rebel against their Capitol (Hunger

Games) is paralleled of course with Roth’s struggling Chicago based community, where

the factions begin to clash with one another by the end of the first book.

Civil strife and political intrigue serve as the stronger backgrounds for both

series, but there is a reason Roth chose Chicago as her fictional home base. Firstly, the

city of Chicago happens to be Roth’s very own hometown. Secondly, it is due to

Chicago’s turbulent history, which serves as a parallel to the chaos Divergent is about to unleash on its own version of Chicago: “Government corruption and police brutality plague the city’s history. Communities are, for their own protection, often insular, despite the lack of strict geographic boundaries. In other words, for what Divergent’s world must be, Chicago is the perfect setting” (Arrow 47). The history that defines Chicago’s identity lies in conflict, rivalries, and tribulation, as fiction writer V. Arrow points out. Chicago has indeed been considered one of the worst cities in America due to its bloody history, and that includes a massive corruption putting it on the verge of bankruptcy, endless

killings and higher rates of crime in comparison to other cities around the nation, and one

political party ruling and controlling the city for decades, amongst other continuing issues to this day. These details solidify Roth’s reasoning for picking Chicago as the focal setting in her Divergent series.

Roth goes as far as to name specific streets and city landmarks to help fans orient

themselves, from “We run in a pack down the alley towards Monroe Street” (Roth,

Allegiant 10) to the constant train rides Tris takes, which lets her observe the skyscrapers

in a specific order arranged by today’s city schematics. Also, it helps Chicago visitors to

recognize it to be an elevated train, the el: “A system of eight rapid-transit trains that spider through Chicago like the spokes of a wheel, with The Loop--home to Divergent’s

“Hub,” the massive skyscraper at the center of the city” (Arrow 56). Roth sprinkles many of these geographic based details throughout her three novels, solidifying her dystopia by referencing our current world. Likewise, this reminds us of the claim that utopias, and thereafter dystopias, replicate the times in which they are written and the knowledge of their authors.

In further interviews, Roth has tried to emphasize a more personal angle as well:

“Despite its trendiness, Roth sees Divergent less as a traditional ‘point a finger at society’ dystopia and more of a personal critique. ‘Those virtues are the ones I believe in. And to kind of dismantle my own understanding of those virtues, or what it would be like to live this way, was a little bit delving into my own psyche’” (Dobbins, “Chasing Katniss…”).

Based on this inner reflection of the author, Divergent can be further investigated now not just on the basis of dystopian tradition, but also as a personal psychological practice.

Though particular critics and religiously inclined fan-based communities tend to take this

context in terms of Roth reaching out to express her faith, that is also an interpretation

made by those whose agenda it serves.

Roth has always been open about her Christian beliefs, but never as a tool that she intended or even included in her fictional work. Instead she insists that her characters take on lives of their own, outside of her beliefs and outside of her levels of comfort

even: “Sometimes writing Divergent gave me vertigo...I would never do what Tris does”

(Roth, Divergent Bonus Materials 9). Roth has achieved something remarkable by admitting this. She has separated herself from her protagonist, thus giving Tris not only a journey of her own to take, but a mind of her own to direct it. Roth is merely the creative interpreter, and we the eager listeners.

CHAPTER FOUR: HEROINES’ HISTORY IN METAMORPHOSIS,

STARTING WITH KATNISS

“Ordinary isn’t the norm” (Collins, The Hunger Games 185).

During a transformative period following social upheaval, such as with 9/11 and

then the 2008 financial market crash, cultural representations become more vulnerable to

change, and this includes gender roles. The feminist wave of new heroism is a burning topic that has dug into both Katniss’s and Tris’s storylines in The Hunger Games and

Divergent series, in order to portray their roles as a commentary on gender boundaries,

stereotypes, and the possibility of them breaking through previous prejudices and

limitations. Both Katniss and Tris are the protagonists and narrators of their respective

stories, and yet they struggle to come into their own identities. The traditional coming-of-

age identity crisis is not lost on these heroines, but it becomes an essential part of their

journey to self-discovery. Both series revolve around these adolescent young women

coming to terms with who they really are on the inside, and learning to live with the

knowledge that self-discovery is not always a positive journey.

Psychologist Daniel Kahneman has a theory in which every moment of one’s life

is supposed to be relevant and memorable, but when it comes down to it: not everything

is retained. In one human’s lifetime there is just too much to recollect: “Most of the

moments of our life--and I calculated, you know, the psychological present is said to be

about three seconds longs; that means that in a life there are about 600 million of them; in

a month, there are about 600,000--most of them don’t leave a trace” (Kahneman, “The

Riddle of Experience vs. Memory”). That is the intimidating truth of our reality, that we

live too much in one lifespan to remember it all. To put this into Katniss’s and Tris’s

perspective, the terrifying journeys that they take are not all going to be relevant to their

future selves. What is going to be imperative are the memories that define them, that

make them accept who they are and who they have to become. Campbell calls this first

step the “call to adventure” because it involves the protagonist leaving her ordinary world of normal routine--leaving it because of some mysterious new element at play: “The herald or announcer of the adventure, therefore, is often dark, loathly, or terrifying, judged evil by the world” (Campbell 48). Whoever or whatever calls the hero out of her

ordinary world is that dark herald, be it an actual villain or a situation that instigates a

new terrifying challenge.

Katniss becomes a celebrity almost immediately in Panem, following her

shocking choice to volunteer as “tribute” in The Hunger Games, in place of her younger sister Prim. Since she made this sudden decision in front of the cameras watched by the entire nation of Panem, her status changed within that moment of instinct to protect Prim.

That decision is her invitation to take up the “call to adventure;” a frightening new challenge that pulls her out of her ordinary life and into the “special world” as coined by

Campbell, because that involves an entirely new set of risks and challenges (49). In making this self-sacrificing choice she put her face on the national stage, “She has one of

the most recognizable faces in her entire world, but the vast majority of Panem knows

very little about the real Katniss...Katniss has no desire to be famous. She has no desire to

be known” (Brennan 15). Making her difficult to understand from a reader’s standpoint, and even unapproachable from a viewer's perspective.

The book’s narrative is told through her first-person perspective, making Katniss front and center for most of the trilogy’s storyline and action sequences. In actuality, even the filmmakers of all four Hunger Games films kept to that point of view, initially created by Collins for Katniss: the cameras almost always are focused on her as a result. For the viewing audience, as for the readers, it means that neither the film nor the book will tell us anything that she does not know or want to reveal. We are on the journey with her, and we learn information at her pace. As Katniss discovers facets of herself, so do we. For example, in the first film after having been chosen and gone through the training in preparation for the games, she was being evaluated for a final score before the actual games commenced. Katniss would have no clue that her score would be the shockingly high eleven.

She was actually horrified at the thought that she ruined her evaluation process with her quick temper and snide remark of “thank you for your consideration,” when she aimed an arrow near the judges. Katniss confesses to Haymitch and her team after the evaluation, that she “just got so mad” when the judges ignored her (Ross, The Hunger

Games 0:44:50-0:49:58). She is a creature of reaction, not forethought. That lack of connection between what she is thinking and what she does so quickly is the mysterious element to her personage. In fact, the threat factor that she posed to the judges is what elevated her score so high, but neither she nor the audience could have known or guessed that at that point in time. All we see is shock and disbelief right after she hears her score

on the Capitol television announcement. As the director zooms in to a closeup to catch

that raw emotion of her surprise, the audience is there with her reacting in shock.

Due to this factor where she reveals so little of herself unless something shocking

happens, she is difficult to decipher because Katniss shows very little self-awareness otherwise: “We have to work to figure Katniss out, because as often as not, Katniss doesn’t know who she is, what she feels, or the kind of influence she wields over other people” (Brennan 18). This not only makes her a difficult person to read, but it also makes her mysterious as a female character who just does not fit into the mold of the typical heroine. Katniss does not register the impact she has on people close to her even, which is why Peeta proclaims: “‘She has no idea. The effect she can have’”( Collins, The

Hunger Games 91). Katniss’s demeanor is impactful, she simply does not know the influence she wields. The popularity of Katniss stems from this effect, and is felt not only by Peeta. The Capitol falls in love with her as soon as she volunteers, making her the Panem Darling. Those who read the series and watch the films are left speechless by all that Katniss is and that she becomes. The target aim of young adult women especially identify with Katniss, though these critics fail to recognize how important that is.

Taking into consideration the film’s standpoint here, she is even more unusual as she does not qualify for any of the traditional precedents. Editors Thomas Elsaesser and

Malte Hagener analyze the larger scope of film theory and apply certain principles across the ages, of what is the norm and what is usually expected of the female protagonist or female lead. In a traditional Hollywood sense, there is a rule that Katniss ignores blatantly: “Cinema typically focuses not only on a male protagonist in the filmic narration but also assumes a male spectator...Only few genres such as the melodrama

tend to have a female protagonist” (Elsaesser and Hagener 95). Instead what we have

here is a young woman narrating with minimal self-awareness and outright action reaction sequences that do not fit into the melodrama genre at all. She fills the screen of the typically male narrated action film, and on top of that, assumes a role that is not so

“feminine” at all.

Male spectators may be addressed, but they are not the primary target. Katniss’s reach is ambiguous to gender because of how she does not fulfill typical gender actions or reactions. She is active rather than passive, when considering how she hunts, poaches, and provides for her family as the main breadwinner from the unbelievably young age of eleven. Katniss knowingly starts breaking the law in order to ensure survival for her loved ones, and she faces death with a competence seldom seen in young women. In this way, she does transform into a revolutionary symbol, and she does instigate a national rebellion; but that does not make her any more confident in herself along every step of the way to accomplishing these implausible feats. Neither does it stop her though.

Kahneman has a term for this situation that Katniss presents us with: illusion of validity. It means that confidence is a feeling that is not based on fact or experience, instead it is a judgement based on a compelling impression: “When a compelling impression of a particular event clashes with general knowledge, the impression commonly prevails” (Kahneman 217). Translate this back into Katniss’s situation, and you have a sixteen-year-old girl who impressed a nation and spellbound them to her endearing first public action. And that impression only becomes deeper and stronger with each uniquely powerful deed that she accomplishes. From volunteering for her sister to shocking the judges at the evaluation process, she finds a way to make each step of

Campbell’s monomyth (hero’s journey formula) her own. However on the inside, Katniss is a fearful and cautious fighter who is merely trying to weigh the costs versus the benefits of each small decision that comes down to reacting to her circumstances in an ever-changing environment.

Doing so, Katniss hopes it will get her closer to home (her ordinary world) and the promise she made to her sister. When Prim asked her after the reaping: “‘I just want you to come home. You will try, won’t you? Really, really try?’” Katniss gave her beloved little sister an oath: “‘Really, really try. I swear it,’” I say. And I know, because of Prim, I’ll have to” (Collins, The Hunger Games 36). This one solid relationship that fuels Katniss’s survival instinct in the games also leads to her becoming an intriguing icon; but it is her every action and decision after winning, that shows the readers and viewers she is not just a survivor, she is also a symbol of fortitude. She is frustrated and furious at being manipulated and controlled first by President Snow and then by President

Alma Coin. But she does not begin her hero’s journey as someone in control or even as someone with an ounce of power or authority. She starts as a mere pawn in a much larger game then she ever anticipated, and only slowly does she start to understand her own rank: “ I’m a mere tribute and he’s the Head Gamemaker? So powerful, so removed, so safe” (Collins, Catching Fire 236). From guides to gamemakers all the way to corrupt leaders, it takes her some time to understand where she measures up, and how she wishes to simply be in a position high enough that she can be safe enough. Katniss’s actions go on to shatter the passive feminine and bring forth traits that are totally human and heroic at the same time.

On the outside, she shows an emotionless facade and continues fighting because

she is forced to do so: “Katniss isn’t the kind of hero we’re used to seeing in fiction. She

reacts more than she acts, she doesn’t want to be a leader” (Brennan 16). She does not fit

the mold of the traditional heroine as author Brennan continues to demonstrate, because

of her divided persona: her public mask and her tremulous inner self. Furthermore,

Katniss’s very instinct to fight for survival no matter what defies the fact that she is only

ever reacting. Survival after all, is a cause of action at its core. And with Kahneman's

definition of illusion of validity, Katniss’s compelling impression is more than enough to

win over her audience in the actual Hunger Games, and later to win over the common people for District 13’s rebel cause. For a young woman who is constantly acting in order

to continue breathing and living, her “reactive” acting sells her as a person, celebrity,

icon, and hero all at once. Questioning her own identity she may, but what Katniss does not refute is the experience that molded her strengths: “People help me? When we were dying of starvation, no one helped me! No one... My game is first-class. No one pitied me” (Collins, The Hunger Games 91). This is not a young woman stuck within her

gender boundaries. This is not a child barely surviving. This is a hero who learned her

strengths and therefore knows what she had to do to succeed.

The night before the first games, there is a scene on the roof of their lodgings,

where Peeta and Katniss discuss their doomed fate. They sit looking down at the city

celebrating with anxious and dejected expressions, and Peeta says this: “I just wish I

could think of a way to show them that they don’t own me. If I’m going to die, I still

want to be me” (Ross, The Hunger Games 1:01:57-1:02:38). When Peeta says this, the

cameras switch back to a closeup shot of Katniss’s expressionless face. She does not

to the city’s horizon and cautiously back to him: “I just can’t afford to think like that”

(Ross, The Hunger Games 1:03:15-1:04:29). While the camera remains focused on her

face as she says those very words, her eyes quickly look downwards. In that rare kind of

moment, by not showing on her face what she is actually feeling, by not saying what she

actually fears or desires: the viewers still get that rare but raw glimpse of someone real.

Because when she looked downwards, her small physical movement spoke volumes at

how cautious she really is to conceal her true self. All she knows now is that she

promised to survive, and now she has to try. Her place in the world, she will figure that

out later.

Due to Katniss’s supposed minimal self-awareness, over-induced caution, and constant fear: critics continue to depict the fragility of Katniss. After all, she is a character that does not project the strongest confidence within her inner thoughts and monologues. There is never an expression of happiness or content with any of her circumstances. But why should there be, “I mourn my old life here... I wish I could go back to it because, in retrospect, it seems so secure compared with now, when I am so rich and so famous and so hated by the authorities in the Capitol” (Collins, Catching Fire

7). Given that she is facing imminent death with first the 74th Hunger Games and then

with the 75th Hunger Games, constant threats and surveillance by the highest of

authorities, her home district completely destroyed, and the loss of loved ones the further

she fights to stand her own ground: what reason is there to show her true self and

genuinely act happy and content with her lot in life?

Instead of accepting her lot in life, Katniss shows that there is an exceptional

amount of space for personal discovery and growth throughout the span of the three

books and four films. This is what makes Katniss a genuine trailblazer: “She is

interesting and flawed and completely three-dimensional all on her own. She’s a sister, a daughter, a friend, a hero, and—above all—a survivor” (Brennan 15). Katniss shows what it takes to be honest, genuine, and realistic above all else, no matter what role she takes on or is forced into. And instead of ending on a happy ever after that is expected from a heroine’s completed journey, Collins gives her creation a wistful conclusion.

Readers do not have the opportunity to observe Katniss in a utopian state of mind, because that would go against the dystopian genre that fueled her birth in the first place.

Rather, the Mockingjay book and film present a realistic image of a scarred survivor who does not get the heroic death but quite contrary, the bitter pill of continuing to live in a world where her loved ones are gone.

Redefining herself as a wife and mother in the final epilogue, we are finally granted the chance to see Katniss’s internal growth from an insecure young woman into a more self-aware woman who knows suffering but refuses to let it control her anymore.

Another reason behind the popularity of this series lies in this young woman who has grown into her own strength. Katniss is a hero and uses her human, rather than feminine, abilities to survive, protect the ones she cares about, and even save the boy she came to appreciate and love greatly for the peace he offers to her unsettled soul, “The promise that life can go on, no matter how bad our losses. That it can be good again. And only

Peeta can give me that” (Collins, Mockingjay 388). It is an emotionally draining and

physically scarring journey Katniss took; but in the end, she shows great strength in understanding that she needs help to recover.

In the epilogue of Mockingjay, Katniss narrates her thoughts as she watches her children play in an idyllic meadow, reiterating the lyrics of the song her children love but take for granted: “Deep in the meadow, under the willow/ A bed of grass, a soft green pillow/ Lay down your head, and close your sleepy eyes/ And when again they open, the sun will rise” (Collins 389). These beautifully peaceful lyrics bring happiness to her children’s ears, but to her they serve as a terrifying reminder. That where they play now is not just an ideal little meadow, it is a graveyard where many eyes will never again open. Collins serves up this frightful binary of happy ever after with realistic horrors carved into memories that will not yield: “One day I’ll have to explain about my nightmares. Why they came. Why they won’t ever really go away” (Mockingjay 390).

These final words are some of the most powerful lines ever delivered because they show one of the deepest facets to a truly developed protagonist who is no longer cautious and hiding and lacking awareness. Katniss shows true heroism that tests boundaries and stereotypes because she ends her story the only way she can, with the one attribute that defined her through her entire journey: “I’ll tell them how I survive”

(Collins, Mockingjay 390). This story after all was not a traditional hero’s journey for fame and glory, it was about a young woman who never stopped fighting to survive.

Campbell established that adventure is a time for searching for one’s identity. With

Katniss, we see how she achieved that discovery because her biggest trailblazing quality is that in fighting to survive, she did indeed find herself.

Nevertheless, the reality is that in the young adult market, the overall consuming

theme centralizes around finding oneself. The bestselling storylines are not the most

original, as pointed out earlier by Brennan and beat down to a formula as established by

Campbell, but they are to a greater extent more effective because they target concerns of

inner conflict that are commonly relatable to young adult readers: “Teen literature like

teen lives, is a matter of firsts--‘first love, first rebellion, first everything’” (Bethune 68).

The complexity of these first experiences yields tremendously powerful emotions, and

results in millions of young readers crossing the threshold into passionate fans just as quickly as they start turning the pages.

Relatability is a huge factor in making these dystopian series bestsellers: “YA dystopias work not because teens think those actual events are going to happen— however plausible they may be—but because the real emotions they would evoke are caught... People who dismiss YA books have simply forgotten how complex they themselves were at that age” (Bethune 69). In agreement with literary critic Brian

Bethune, author Elizabeth Norris concurs on the significance behind grasping and understanding this age group. She emphasizes the importance of a youth mentality, even as she includes into the equation the social regard for their maturity level: “Teenagers in our society sometimes end up with a bad rap. Adults think they’re selfish and entitled or rude or even silly. I hear all the time from adults that young adult novels aren’t realistic, not because of the paranormal or fantasy elements, but because a teenage girl wouldn’t be able to save the world” (Norris 110). That kind of prejudice helps Collins and Roth in redefining those biased standards by creating powerful young heroines who have

effective and compelling storylines supporting them. They break tradition and even defy

social conformity, by showing the possibilities of stepping beyond one’s limits.

Behavioral economics expert Cass R. Sunstein, uses this very angle to attribute

the importance of popular culture norms as undeniable tracking points in humanity’s

progress overall. He attests that social influence is one of the largest attributes to change

and accepting change: “If people are listening, they will have a stronger conviction...The

central idea here is that most people care about what others think of them, and once they

hear what others believe, they have a tendency to shift their positions accordingly”

(Sunstein 134). This social influence implements change on many platforms, but

specifically lets us focus back to Katniss and Tris. Young heroines were once thought of

as ineffective and powerless to carry their own stories as Bethune and Norris state. Yet,

these two young women caught the eyes and ears of enough people to make their stories

not only believable but effective enough to stand on their own.

The factors that gave rise to their popularity supports Sunstein’s theory of chain

reaction between being heard and putting conviction behind what you hear if enough

people say it and believe it: “Social influences can help foment a rebellion...reputational

cascades play a large role in rebellions” (134-5). Just as Katniss’s reputation as the

Mockingbird gave fire to a national rebellion, so too did her reputation as a young adult

character influence enough fans in her targeted age group, that others started to pick up

on the how and why behind such a character. Katniss is a Girl on Fire, not just within her

story, but outside as a social influence marking progress in the chain of our culture’s

interests changing and developing with the times: “Once the number of rebels increases,

participation can become far more energizing; it can seem like the best club in the history

of the world” (Sunstein 135). Each reader becomes Katniss’s rebel, each viewer becomes her follower, and joining her club is exactly as Sunstein puts it, one of the most energizing participatory experiences of all time.

In addition to the criticism on teenage maturity and their fictional scope, there is another profitable angle to consider: “YA dystopian novels are as much alike in their deep structure as they are varied on their surfaces. Their characters live, for the most part, in post-sexist societies; the protagonists are far more often female than in past adventure stories, and the girls all have kick-ass potential. Like Katniss, they rescue more than they are rescued” (Bethune 69-70). The Hunger Games is not another damsel in distress story, nor is it a femme fatale scenario either. The patterns of storytelling may remain similar as

Bethune agrees with Brennan’s assessment on the subject. But the characters themselves are coming to life in unexpected new ways that would not have been acceptable in previous generations. Bethune puts her finger on these very changes that are trailblazing through previous social expectations and norms: such as the specific gender roles and what they once entailed, but no longer.

Kahneman’s often quoted motto has a staggering correlation to this pattern of change: “I do not trust words. I even question actions. But I never doubt patterns” (Lam,

“The Friendship that Created Behavioral Economics”). The impact of his motto shows that the currently rising convention for “girls [who] have kick-ass potential” (Bethune 70) is not some random trend. Staggering events that change history, such as 9/11 and the

2008 financial stock market crash, are ripples that initiate transformation within society, in many unexpected areas of culture at that. This is simply our cultural development colliding with human behavior: “Many of the things around us have a random

component; a lot of luck involved. The human mind doesn’t see the luck, it sees the pattern and this is one of their first great insights: (Lam, “The Friendship that…”).

Something horrific happens, and people react. How we decide to look back on the consequences of those reactions depends on the preference for luck or for patterns. This leads to the parallel into what makes the series so popular; and also, into what makes

Katniss tick in such an original way.

The status of Katniss as a unique female protagonist outside the margins of conventionality arises because luck is never a part of Collins’s vocabulary. Instead it is about meticulous patterns of behavior in the characters that make up The Hunger Games universe. Not just in the way Katniss reacts to the chain of events that push her life into chaos, but also in the people around her who follow similar patterns of behavior and who make the rebellion possible in the first place, just as Sunstein describes. Without behavioral patterns behind Katniss, her friends, and even the corrupt politicians who control her, there would be no such storyline in the first place. It all comes down to the one factor characteristic of all humans—the universal patterns generated by their human natures. These patterns are equally present in Divergent and in its protagonist, Tris.

CHAPTER FIVE: CHANGING PERCEPTIONS OF BEAUTY WITH TRIS

“‘Who cares about pretty? I’m going for noticeable’” (Roth, Divergent 87).

Shifting our gears into Tris’s world of factions, the same question of behavioral

patterns can just as easily relate to Roth’s Divergent storyline. When asked the question

of why dystopian futures are so popular in the present world of fiction, Roth gives an

intriguing answer that connects the genre to both young adult prejudices as well as gender

biases: “A dystopian setting dramatizes in a really interesting way the struggles of the

average adolescent...They create this world where the struggle that a teenager is having

feels like the end of the world, and are actually like the end of the world” (“Veronica

Roth Interview,” YouTube). Roth is alluding to the common prejudices of adolescent mindsets by showing that an extreme environment that is ideal in a dystopian setting, is also ideal in forecasting those extreme feelings known to the adolescent age group.

Instead of denying those feelings, Roth empowers them: “It honors what teenagers are experiencing because your emotions are so powerful at that age and everybody's telling you to kind of chill out. But the dystopian books are saying, ‘No! It's important! It's a big deal!’ And I like that” (“Veronica Roth Interview,” YouTube).

Instead of ignoring and neglecting this aspect, or simply type-casting it under one stereotype of teenage immaturity, Roth embraces this as a unique twist of narrative.

Specific to the dystopian genre because it creates extreme environments that allow extreme emotions to rule. Therefore, where most young adult narratives are consumed by

the theme of finding one’s self, it can be argued that in both The Hunger Games and

Divergent series, this pursuit is only one initial layer to the protagonists’ struggle for overall survival.

Modern feminist criticism is at times in favor of pointing out a new flaw with this struggle for survival, stating that just because these heroines can fight for themselves, that does not make them trailblazers in redefining gender roles, “The fallacy in Hollywood is that if you’re making a ‘feminist’ story, the woman kicks ass and wins. That’s not feminist, that’s macho” (“Is Katniss Everdeen…,” HuffPost Books). To prove that both

Katniss and Tris have more depth to them than just misplaced superficial hype, I argue that all the different roles they are either forced to take on or willingly take on (such as being media celebrities, teen idols, athletes, warriors, rebels, sisters, daughters, friends, and lovers) show that they can dominate both the falsely symmetrical male and female boundaries of society.

In the books, their inner-dialogues and personal choices define their strength to handle both the masculine and feminine roles. This entails human traits that are culturally divided between men and women and stereotyped into gender role models. For example, when Tris comes up against Dauntless leader Eric in the second book, Insurgent, she acknowledges that he can overpower her. She has no fantasies that she is stronger or faster: “But I know, even as the idea occurs to me, that I won’t be able to outrun him.

And I won’t be able to shoot him” (Roth 186). She acknowledges the reality of facing a stronger and faster male opponent, but the difference is that she does not let it stop her from outwitting him: “‘Well, I’m smart enough to do this,’ I say. I stomp hard on his foot, which I fired a bullet into less than a month ago. He screams” (Roth, Insurgent 186).

Masculine strength succumbing to feminine cunning would be too easy of a category for

this situation because what we have here is simply Tris. Thinking fast on her feet and

logically working out a scenario where she comes out on top, regardless of her own

weaknesses or Eric’s strengths. And that cannot be pigeonholed into any cultural

boundary based on gender alone.

In the films, choices such as not oversexualizing the heroines through their wardrobes and makeup selections, is another step in the right direction. Case in point,

during the 74th Hunger Games, Katniss was dressed in comfortable hunting clothes that

were designed for warmth and not visual appeal. In the 75th Hunger Games, every tribute

was dressed in the same waterproof bodysuits that again were designed for practical

reasons due to the climate and environment of the games, not due to any fashion trends or

preferences. With Tris, clothing was not even allowed to be considered as a fashionable

statement. Since she was raised in the Abnegation community that focuses solely on

selfless behavior, anything that would call attention to oneself was avoided at all costs.

For this reason, director Neil Burger of the first film, Divergent, made sure to

request of the costume and design teams to create clothing that drew no attention to color,

body shapes, or any formal kind of fashion trends, so that Abnegation values

overpowered the visual. Therefore, up until Tris joins Dauntless, the actress Shailene

Woodley (who portrays Tris’s character) is seen in a loose worn-out full-length dress

shaded in two different tones of gray (Burger, Divergent 0:04:25-0:22:15). There is no

emphasis on her lean body type, no hints of a fashion trend, futuristic or even present time, her Abnegation style is simplistic in all possible ways. Even Woodley’s face shows not an ounce of makeup, as the makeup crew was specifically instructed to keep her

complexion and highlights as natural as possible. In that simplicity, the message of

Abnegation becomes clearer than any intent to position gender stereotypes on costume and design.

Nevertheless, there remains room to critique the moments that some sort of fashion does emerge in either series. Due to such moments that are present, literary critic

Bewley discredits earlier attempts to neutralize wardrobes and makeup selections as insignificant changes: “Superficial alterations to character traits are not enough to redefine narrative roles” (372). Using Laura Mulvey’s iconic male and female gaze ideologies, that have become a traditional go-to in film theory, I could further this idea even more; to show that yes, there are certain roles and scenes that could be felt as if these young women are being objectified. When Katniss is interviewed in front of audiences and asked to twirl around, that is clearly to highlight her fashionable outfit and glamorized body. When Tris goes to get three ravens tattooed on her collarbone after being initiated into Dauntless, that is also a radical fashion statement that highlights her feminine lines as she is being permanently marked.

That the camera allows us to see these moments however should not be a clear-cut case of objectification. The gaze of the camera is guided by the hopes of directors Neil

Burger of Divergent, Robert Schwentke of Insurgent and Allegiant, as well as Gary Ross of The Hunger Games and Francis Lawrence of Catching Fire and both parts of The

Mockingjay. As a group, the intention and hopes of these directors was to make a statement in honor of the dystopian worlds they were helping to create, not as a stereotyped objectification case that remains present in today’s world. These filmmakers

aimed to create a spectacle that has less to do with gender, and more to do with

heightening the spectacle of Panem and futurized Chicago.

For example, Katniss is taken for a makeover before every parade, showcase, and interview, to be made appealing and presentable on screen. She has an entire team to beautify her. From waxing to hair styling to makeup, they highlight every part of her body thought to be worth paying attention to. But behind all the makeup and fashion, there is a vital distinction her main stylist Cinna makes. When first meeting him, Katniss asks, “So you are here to make me look pretty?” His response is the defining quality that separates objectification from actual purpose: “I’m here to help you make an impression...I want to do something they are going to remember” (Ross, The Hunger

Games 0:30:44-0:30:55). This is not necessarily gender objectification, so much as an

extension of the glorification of the body and appearance typical in Panem.

Cinna’s point is this, if they want to objectify you, let us do it to the point where

you become an icon for it. The way he dressed her would not be for sexual appeal, it

would be to make an impression that took on a nation. Her clothing becomes another

symbol of rebellion. Cinna’s last gift to Katniss was a gorgeous wedding dress with a

very specific message: “I’m in a dress of the exact design of my wedding dress, only it’s

the color of coal and made of tiny feathers. Wonderingly, I lift my long, flowing sleeves

into the air, and that’s when I see myself on the television screen. Clothed in black except

for the white patches on my sleeves. Or should I say my wings. Because Cinna has turned

me into a Mockingjay” (Collins, Mockingjay 252). The details to her transformation,

even when it comes to Katniss’s fashion statement, are bold and brazen.

Katniss herself is meant to be bold and brazen because she is not only wearing the

outfit of a Mockingjay, she is the Mockingjay, a sign of rebellion. Cinna, her own fashion stylist, shows her that even something so superficial as your latest dress, can be used to not only make an impression, but to ignite change. In this exact manner, literary critic

Yvonne Tasker shows the power one can put behind something that was only used as a tool to be further objectified beforehand: “Her appearance can be seen as a signal, amongst other factors, a response to feminism and the exhaustion of previous formulae”

(152). Small details can now be seen as traces of change and signals of empowerment.

This applies to Tris as well, who was only allowed to look at her appearance in the mirror for a few seconds every three months, during her haircuts: “I sneak a look at my reflection when she isn’t paying attention—not for the sake of vanity, but out of curiosity” (Roth, Divergent 1). Abnegation, her faction, warns against self-indulgence and desire for superficial vanity. In retrospect, you can consider this as the exact opposite to Panem’s Capitol and their obsessive trends with over-the-top fashion. One world is defined by emphasizing the physical body and the styles that can adorn it, while the other warns against such vices. In both worlds and series, the message remains on the young women who weave in and out of these fashions in order to find themselves.

Divergent’s world nevertheless starts with a stricter view on such matters because the narrative starts in the community of the selfless. Even Tris’s mother had to learn to adapt to these principles because though she is a natural beauty as Tris describes her,

“She must hide that beauty in Abnegation” (Roth, Divergent 2-3). They are cautioned against the very things Katniss is made to show off on the public stage. Perception of beauty and its necessity is put under a different scope in this faction, and used as a

warning and precaution instead. Yet, by twisting around something supposedly

insignificant they give it another purpose through how Abnegation conforms around their

principles: “In a novel that takes on the problem of conformity and questions the certainty

of narrow-minded ideologies, such circuit-breaking is nonetheless useful, forcing the reader to pause and think” (Dominus, “In This Dystopia…”). Abnegation ideologies that are thought to be so high and pure to those who belong within its faction, can now be questioned by us, the readers, who are used to different lifestyles and ideologies.

Even Tris, born and raised within this faction, questions Abnegation reasoning not

because she is seeking a path towards vanity, but towards curiosity. Once she joins

Dauntless, she learns just how narrow-minded closed ideologies can be. Tris finds that

her body is not something to be ashamed of nor objectified, it is a canvas to make a

statement with proudly: “‘Who cares about pretty? I’m going for noticeable’... I will find

new habits, new thoughts, new rules. I will become something else” (Roth, Divergent

87). Cinna teaches Katniss what Tris learns herself, that to be noticeable means to change

oneself for a new purpose. Tris does that by getting a tattoo, a physical marker that

Abnegation always warned against, but to her now, there is a purpose to it.

Understanding the boundary between letting go completely or moving on with a

reminder is what Tris comes to learn instead, “I understand now what Tori said about her

tattoo representing a fear she overcame—a reminder of where she was, as well as a

reminder of where she is now. Maybe there is a way to honor my old life as I embrace my

new one” (Roth, Divergent 90). Tris ends up getting three flying birds tattooed below her

collarbone, to signify one for each member of her family. In this way, Tris also learns to

use tools of beauty for other purposes, such as reminders and representations of what she

is leaving behind, and what she is moving towards. Tris is holding onto the family she

grew up with in a concrete form, though it is in defiance to the allegiance she is supposed

to reserve for her new faction and family within Dauntless.

Tris’s tattoos become a symbol that achieves two purposes outside the narrative.

Tasker discusses these different forms of representation as they allow for this binary to take shape from one form of action. The meaning of the binary behind the action of getting this tattoo is that it, “Both strengthens and weakens the heroine in ways that draw on the complex history of ‘woman’ as a term within representation” (Tasker 152).

Something that was once thought of as a weakness because the sole purpose of this beautification was thought to only grab attention. Now, it can be considered a strength because of this new purpose Tris binds to the meaning of the three ravens. It is not an attempt at grabbing attention as much as it is now a physical reminder of the family she left behind.

However, the books and films do not contain just these supposedly “stereotypical” moments of makeovers for Katniss and Tris. Superficial beautifications are only one facet after all, “Seen against such a history, for the action heroine as much as the action hero, the development of muscles as a sort of body armor signifies physical vulnerability as well as strength” (Tasker 152). Tasker brings to light another term that can serve as a binary, and that adds to the “complex history of ‘woman’” once again. Emphasized in multiple scenes to a great extent of detail, the lean and muscular builds of Katniss and

Tris point to this very statement of a gender-bending cultural development. These moments of weakness that make these young women question themselves and second-

guess their own actions helps portray them as more fully formed dynamic characters, fine-tuned for a new age of gender reconstructing heroism.

It is not the sexual appeal that wins you favors, as much as it is the muscular body armor that helps ensure survival: “I see muscles that I couldn’t see before in my arms, legs, and stomach. I pinch my side, where a layer of fat used to hint at curves to come.

Nothing. Dauntless has stolen whatever softness my body had. Is that good, or bad”

(Roth, Divergent 167-8). As she is training more, Tris starts to see the differences in her body and starts to question the purpose behind this physical change. She comes to the same conclusion Tasker was hinting at earlier: “I am stronger than I was” (Roth,

Divergent 168). Everything has a reason, and her transformation is not a weakness that can be objectified. It has become her strength instead.

While there are great similarities in how Katniss and Tris become symbols of revolution and change, these heroines do not have similar journeys, in terms of personal growth. Tris’s initial struggle is to accept her “divergent” identity, and then to survive the consequences of others finding that out. Going back to Kahneman, one discovers there is a vital tie to how Tris chooses her path and how it defines her: “If the mistakes aren't systematic, then economics can ignore them. They're showing that we're hardwired for certain types of mistakes, so people are mostly going to make these mistakes” (Lam,

“The Friendship That…”). This shows that when a person falls into a pattern of errors, there is a reason behind that individual’s flawed decision-making skills. For Tris, her mistake comes down to trying to blend in with her society while also trying to discover what exactly is wrong with her.

In the first chapters of Divergent, after her 16th birthday, she is taken to the

Choosing Ceremony, where she has the choice to pick a different faction to live in. That is the coming of age rite of passage for her world: everyone before her has followed in the path of deciding to stay with the faction they were raised in, or the faction that relates more closely to their primary personality. Knowing this is a ceremony of personal choice over family custom, Tris finds herself in doubt of what to do and whom to choose: “I turn toward the bowls. Dauntless fire and Abnegation stones are both on my left, one in front of my shoulder and one behind. I hold the knife in my right hand and touch the blade to my palm. Gritting my teeth, I drag the blade down. It stings, but I barely notice” (Roth,

Divergent 47). Tris takes as much time as possible to delay by paying attention to every possible detail until she finally allows her body to betray her, “With a gasp I can’t contain, I shift my hand forward, and my blood sizzles on the coals. I am selfish. I am brave” (Roth 47). Tris moved her hand almost as if without thinking, she let her body decide for her that in order to leave Abnegation she must be selfish.

The reason for Tris’s inner doubt comes down to the results of her aptitude test, a drug-induced virtual reality session that helps the test administrator conclude which of the five factions is better suited for the test taker. After taking this aptitude test, Tris finds herself to be “divergent.” This mysterious word is the scarlet letter A stamped over her profile, showing that she has an aptitude for multiple factions, “You should never share them [the aptitude scores] with anyone, ever, no matter what happens. Divergence is extremely dangerous” (Roth, Divergent 23). Tori, Tris’s test administrator gives her this valuable warning from the beginning: that her ability to connect to multiple factions is

not a desirable trait for the reality they live in, one in which everyone is closely monitored so that those in charge can weed out such singularities.

“Divergent” singularities supposedly go against nature in their society. To be divergent means to have a death sentence. Roth creates for her protagonist this undesirable outcome from the onset, “I can’t bear to think about the Choosing Ceremony tomorrow. It’s my choice now, no matter what the test says. Abnegation. Dauntless.

Erudite. Divergent” (Roth, Divergent 23). This identity crisis Tris must deal with makes up the plotline of the majority of the first novel, because having multiple options is a dangerous advantage to have in a world where choices are supposed to be preselected in your DNA. In the shadows of the great dystopian predecessors such as George Orwell’s

1984 and Yevgeny Zamyatin’s We, which Roth cited as direct inspirations to parallel her dystopian universe around, the worlds of the protagonists are closely monitored and controlled to eliminate free will as much as possible. It is about scientific advancements and accuracy over free will and personal choice. And therein lies Tris’s entire dilemma.

A dilemma more common to an ordinary teenager who finds that they too do not fit in with the crowd, and thus the parallel to Tris’s plight becomes that much more comforting.

Family and identity overlap so potently in this narrative, just as they do in The

Hunger Games. Tris knows she will miss her family, who all originate in the Abnegation faction, but she feels she does not belong in the selfless lifestyle that they must abide by.

Tris sees it as a problem, “I will miss my mother and father and Caleb and evening firelight and the clack of my mother's knitting needles, but that is not the only reason for this hollow feeling in my stomach. My problem might be that even if I did go home, I wouldn't belong there, among people who give without thinking and care without trying”

(Roth, Divergent 75). Having lived in Abnegation for sixteen years, she never felt that

she truly belonged there as a result of her preference towards slightly selfish actions (such

as not giving her bus seat to the elderly or helping carry groceries for strangers). She

loves her family and knows she will miss them, but her divided personality leads her

elsewhere, especially after her aptitude scores confirm her doubts, “This is a huge part of her struggle throughout the series—coming to terms with her own identity” (Norris 109).

She never felt as if she belonged in Abnegation, and finding out she is divergent defines her as a dangerous anomaly that does not conform to any one faction. This explains Tris’s internal turmoil, and where her feelings of not being able to belong originate from.

Conformity is key in dystopian tradition, even if the majority of the population is forced into narrow-minded ideologies and controlled lifestyles. Outside of literature, human behavior still follows in this same pattern, “Social life begins with face-to-face interaction. Guided by cultural norms and expectations, we negotiate these micro-level encounters with family members, friends, coworkers, and strangers that are the building blocks of social life” (Croteau & Hoynes 163). What sociologists David R. Croteau and

William Hoynes are expressing here is similar to what Kahneman and even Sunstein stated, that people act a certain way because that is how we were raised and that is how we function in a society.

Those individuals who surround us as we grow up are not only the building blocks of our developing social life though, they are also factors in what shapes our inner self. Extensions of who we become basically, “Social interactions [are] crucial in the development of our sense of self. Through socialization, we become adept at taking the perspectives of others and determining the intent and meaning of their actions” (Croteau

& Hoynes 163). Take these sociological theories and plug them into Tris’s dilemma, and

what we have is a young woman who grew up one way, shaped by Abnegation

individuals who tried to embed into her a selfless and caring lifestyle. However, instead

of totally accepting this lifestyle, she merely interacted on one level with everyone else without truly clicking into place.

Instead of using the building blocks around her to help develop her sense of self,

Tris uses them as stepping stones to contrast herself from them. She is able to look at her

community as a stranger might: “When I look at the Abnegation lifestyle as an outsider, I

think it's beautiful. When I watch my family move in harmony; when we go to dinner

parties and everyone cleans together afterward without having to be asked; when I see

Caleb help strangers carry their groceries, I fall in love with this life all over again”

(Roth, Divergent 24). The first book in the series does not waste time on figuring out

what Tris’s inner struggle truly is. It is about her family versus her identity versus the overall faction conflict.

In chapter three of Divergent, after Tris receives her aptitude score, this is where she takes a philosophical step back in order to consider all three issues (of her family, identity, and overall faction). For her, they blur together into one big obstacle: “It's only when I try to live it myself that I have trouble. It never feels genuine. But choosing a different faction means I forsake my family. Permanently” (Roth 24). She lays out her dilemma definitively before the Choosing Ceremony. While her family is very important to her and the life they live within Abnegation is quite beautiful, she simply does not belong there with them. Not with her hard-working parents or her trustworthy noble

brother Caleb because her heart sets her apart, and thus her disappointment kicks in for

not truly belonging.

This is also the reasoning behind Tris’s drastic choice at the actual ceremony:

“She finds selflessness stifling. Those feelings of rebellion are made tangible, and as a

result more permanent, when she chooses to leave Abnegation and become

Dauntless...she feels selfish and brave” (Norris 107). For Tris, the Dauntless faction

symbolizes freedom from the stifling rules of Abnegation, and gives her room for self- discovery away from all the social confines she grew up with. Instead of taking the building blocks that she grew up with, she decides to take socialization into an innovative territory. Tris explores the concerns that are again, typical to common teenagers:

“Divergent clearly has thrills, but it also movingly explores a more common adolescent anxiety—the painful realization that coming into one’s own sometimes means leaving family behind, both ideologically and physically” (Dominus, “In This Dystopia…”).

Taking such a common anxiety and plugging it into step three of Campbell’s hero’s journey (the departure), Roth uses psychology and tradition to show how leaving one’s ordinary world of safety helps not only to start the journey of the hero, but the journey to discovering one’s true self.

Leaving her ordinary world of Abnegation leads Tris to the faction of the brave, in the hopes that they can help her discover her own potential while hiding her divergent abilities. After all, their manifesto complies with what Tris’s heart now desires to find:

“We believe in freedom from fear, in denying fear the power to influence our decisions.

We believe in ordinary acts of bravery, in the courage that drives one person to stand up for another. We believe in acknowledging fear and the extent to which it rules us” (Roth,

Divergent Bonus Materials 47). The Dauntless challenge the very core of what makes a person quiver in doubt, worry, or fear. They are the law enforcement of this world, and by choosing them, Tris takes a step forward in acknowledging the need to face her own fears head on.

After that huge step forward into the unknown of the Dauntless faction, Tris finds herself having a lot of “I am” self-discovery moments. For example, to enter the

Dauntless home base, there is a challenge that must be faced almost immediately. It involves jumping off a roof to prove your worth to Dauntless, and of course not one single initiate is willing to take this kind of trust exercise. Until we have our protagonist,

Tris, step up with this first “I am” moment: “I am proud. It will get me into trouble someday, but today it makes me brave. I walk toward the ledge” (Roth, Divergent 57).

Her future “I am” moments tend to position her as neither belonging in Abnegation nor succumbing to fear as a member of Dauntless. But in this instance, she identifies herself as being proud.

This is a momentous occasion for Tris because it shows her progressing at a much quicker rate than even Katniss did in her own storyline, for the very reason that she is accepting the differences within herself and acknowledging the qualities she finds meaningful. Political author Barbara Ehrenreich correlates to this message of self- empowerment when it comes to female dystopian narratives by acknowledging Tris’s step as an act of heroism: “In the long story of human cruelty and pillage, women are actors as well as victims, even when we choose to turn our backs and burrow into the narrow world of daily life. We can do better—we have to do better” (86). Instead of turning away her back and hiding into the daily routines of a safe Abnegation life, as

Ehrenreich alludes to, Tris is refusing to be a victim of her fate by diving headfirst into

the extremes of the Dauntless lifestyle.

Tris does not want to act anymore just to give off the semblance of belonging, so she begins to actively pursue her own answers. This is one of the target differences

between her and Katniss. Though both are tremendously positive representations of the

modern heroine, their journeys show them at two different points along the spectrum.

Katniss continuously fights herself in acknowledging her own strengths, that is one of the reasons that her narrative is lacking in a more developed awareness up until the last book.

She is a cautionary creature who reacts to all the violence and chaos that is unleashed on her. Of course, Katniss’s cautionary trait is also her greatest survival mechanism in the chaotic world in which she resides in. Tris, on the other hand, actively seeks danger and uncertainty, in order to prove herself at all costs.

Though both young women deal with identity crises, for Katniss that is not a priority that she needs or wants resolved early on. For Tris, that is always the number one priority: to answer who am I? This is exactly why in chapter six of the first book, she renames herself. Given a choice to retain her birthright name or change it, she chooses the second option: “I don’t know why I hesitate. But ‘Beatrice’ just doesn’t sound right anymore...A new place, a new name. I can be remade here. ‘Tris,’ I say firmly” (Roth,

Divergent 60). This is one of the big moments in which Tris helps the readers recognize that she has not just chosen herself a new nickname, she has remade herself anew.

Coming to terms with herself takes three books and three films; but from the foundation, you can tell she is proactively trying.

In the other world, Katniss does not seek out new nicknames or identities, they are placed onto her by the public that has put her up on a pedestal the moment she volunteered in her younger sister’s place. However, the name given to her at birth by her father, is something Katniss brings deep meaning to throughout her journey: “I knelt down in the water, my fingers digging into the roots. Small, bluish tubers that don’t look like much but boiled or baked are as good as any potato. ‘Katniss,’ I said aloud. It’s the plant I was named for. And I heard my father’s voice joking, ‘As long as you can find yourself, you’ll never starve’” (Collins, The Hunger Games 52). In this one revelation,

Katniss gives a different meaning to names. She accepts who her parents saw her as and tries to stay true to that image. She was not named after a beautiful flower like her beloved sister Primrose, but after a plant that can survive almost anywhere and gives sustenance when found. Katniss may be a heroine who reacts instead of acts, but she is also a young woman who is forced into a game of life or death, only to find out that she has the key to survival within herself, just as her namesake does. That too, is a substantial breakthrough.

What Katniss achieves with the limited amount of skills she has is an act of power all by itself. Bringing back the aspect of gender stereotypes, “The ability of humans to alter the social environment has accelerated exponentially in just a couple of centuries, undermining the significance of sex differences” (Croteau & Hoynes 302). Therefore, when it comes down to gender roles and restrictions, let the naysayers hear of Katniss’s achievements. Let them see Tris’s fearless triumphs. And let them know what true empowerment really means. Croteau and Hoynes state, “Women have become empowered, they have accomplished these gains without dominating men, making their

achievements examples of the ‘power to’ act rather than ‘power over’ others” (111). Tris

never fails to prove her status of worth in the Dauntless training; though she is bullied

and tortured, she never resorts to flaunting her power over those weaker than her. As for

Katniss, others pushed and manipulated her into the Hunger Games twice and then into

leading a rebellion. But they could never have predicted that Katniss would take fate into

her own hands, and make her own drastic decisions that would indeed shape the future of

all Panem.

In every single one of those death-defying adventures, Katniss showed the

incredible power to react when needed, instead of blatantly dominating and manipulating

others to get ahead. These are two young women worth memorializing, not just for the

sake of the young adult dystopian corner, or for the new wave of feminist heroism. As a

commentary on gender boundaries, stereotypes, and prejudices, Katniss and Tris display

the magnitude of human possibility to imagine the extraordinary in human beings. When

one young woman does the impossible, that is an exception. However, when a second one steps forward, well then, you have a pattern worth noting.

CHAPTER SIX: DICTATOR SAYS, DICTATOR DOES

WITHIN THE HUNGER GAMES

“You don’t forget the face of the person who was your last hope”

(Collins, The Hunger Games 253).

Social and cultural reflections, role models, gender-bending teenagers—that is a

lot to undertake for just one underage narrator, but that is nevertheless what Katniss and

Tris start fighting to achieve from the age of sixteen. Sixteen is the age of change,

transformation, and the typical turning point for many coming of age adolescent novels.

Unlike ordinary teenagers though, these young women are also tasked with the role of

being a protagonist, which weighs them down with even larger responsibility:

“Protagonists in novels serve both as reflections of the current social and cultural climate

and as role models for readers” (Bewley 373). Surviving within the realm of dystopian

tradition means fighting to find one’s unique identity in a society based on conformity. It

means fighting the demons of their reality that are founded upon the darkest fears of their

creators. Suzanne Collins and Veronica Roth generated projections of the future based on

patterns founded in historical nightmares and current cultural anxieties. Part of the world

they create for their heroines includes facing these kind of demons, such as conformist

societies and tyrannical leaders.

Conformist societies are founded upon behavioral patterns that seem inherent, such as wanting to blend in and to do as others do. Author Bill Wasik attests this to the

age-old principle of the “bandwagon effect.” Wasik applies this principle to how we as

human beings think and act, basically as social creatures. He states that similar to herd

behavior, the “bandwagon effect” is: “The instinctive tendency of the human animal to

rely on the actions of others in choosing its own course of action. We get interested in the

things we see others getting interested in” (Wasik 482). Dystopian narratives attempt to

provide an outlet for creative difference by allowing their protagonists to separate from

the pack. Since human behavior is argued to be inherent and shown through centuries of

practice to be unavoidable, what these protagonists accomplish does not go against nature

as much as it goes against cultural practices.

Katniss and Tris do not defy human nature, they defy cultural norms that are shared in their worlds though they are not necessarily right or necessary. In going against the norm, these young women go against the “herd instinct” of their communities to stand out as their own true self. Campbell emphasizes this as a necessary part of the hero’s journey because it allows the heroines to break away from immoral practices and define their own paths. Katniss goes against the games, Tris goes against the annihilation of divergents. Their journey allows readers to gain insight into the experiences of these heroines who can do what others could not. Stanley Milgram established in his book,

Obedience to Authority, that one of the most essential qualities that allows the majority of the population to conform to immoral practices is basic obedience.

Following authority without question becomes a requirement for successful communal living. Milgram states that, “Obedience is as basic an element in the structure of social life as one can point to” (1). Furthermore, it is this quality that separates the outcasted troublemakers turned into rebellion leaders, from the rest of the pack of

numbed followers. Katniss and Tris defy the odds played into by the rest of the majority,

“Obedience is the psychological mechanism that links individual action to political

purpose. It is the dispositional cement that binds men to systems of authority. Facts of

recent history and observation in daily life suggest that for many people obedience may

be a deeply ingrained behavior tendency” (Milgram 1). Returning to this pattern of

human behavior, where the “bandwagon effect” now entails an overwhelming need for

obedience in order to ensure order, there is another characteristic that pushes Katniss and

Tris even further outside the realm of what is normal and what is accepted.

Then again, their journeys provide the evidence that it is not their human behavior in question, it their ability to not accept commonly accepted wrongdoings. Katniss refuses to see other tributes as simple pawns, and not as human beings. Later, Katniss refuses to allow human sacrifice for some semblance of peace when innocent lives will continue to be taken as one totalitarian era transitions into another totalitarian era, simply led by a different dictator. She cannot close her eyes to the cultural norm of allowing murder without due cause. Similarly, Tris refuses to see divergents as a problem, she cannot accept the easy murder of innocents simply because their personality type divides into multiple facets. She also does not allow the Erudite leadership to commit genocide based on their culturally incorrect presumptions of who deserves to rule. These two young women become outcasts due to how they think, act, and defy. And because they do, they become the conscience of their worlds.

Cultural norms based on practices set by historical precedent are not always right, but they can be adjusted and decreased, through the acts of our protagonists who correct the trajectories of their worlds. Steven Pinker in his book, The Better Angels of Our

Nature, wishes to see this side of righteousness as a possibility within human practice as

well. In acknowledging the errors of the past, Pinker highlight the parts of human

behavior that allows us to act not with the majority but with our conscience: “Human

nature also contains motives to climb into the peaceful cell, such as sympathy and self-

control. It includes channels of communication such as language. And it is equipped with

an open-ended system of combinatorial reasoning” (695). We are equipped with possibilities, we contain within ourselves all that is needed to reduce if not eliminate cultural malpractices. But on the global stage, it has not been done in history, present, or following the projections of our future. It is merely a hope within the darkness.

It is a light stirred by Katniss and Tris in their dystopian worlds. Pinker ends his

optimistic theory of globally diminished violence by stating, “For all the tribulations in

our lives, for all the troubles that remain in the world, the decline of violence is an

accomplishment we can savor, and an impetus to cherish the forces of civilization and

enlightenment that made it possible” (696). World peace is still not possible, and as

Pinker acknowledges, there are still many more troubles to fight in this world and the

next. Less wars and reduced murder statistics cannot change the fact that innocents still

die, and countries still fight. But their plight gives more power to our heroines who do

accomplish what Pinker believes in so wholeheartedly, though it is in their worlds that we

see their accomplishments come to fruition.

Not before Katniss and Tris go up against their greatest antagonists though, the

authoritarian leaders that hold iron grips upon the principles that challenge our better

nature. Ruthless governments that push conformity need to be controlled; thus authority

and obedience needs to be instilled by someone on top. This is the characteristic Sigmund

Freud picked up on just as the classic dystopian novels were emerging in the early 1900s.

Freud warned against the power of suggestion as exemplified in 20th century totalitarianism (Booker 10). This plausible concern showed that the reality of history could pervade into the imagination of future readers all too easily. With an extensive study published by T.W. Adorno, Else Frenkel-Brunswick, Daniel J. Levinson, and R.

Nevitt Sanford in their book, The Authoritarian Personality, Freud’s suggestion becomes a trait studied and proven. The qualities that show the power of suggestion in practice are:

“Submission to authority, desire for a strong leader, subservience of the individual to the state” (Adorno et al. 231). These three qualities allow for totalitarianism to emerge.

In submitting to authority due to the desire for strong leadership, that is how dystopia takes shape. Not as a fictional landscape, but as a realistic projection. As further evidenced by Hannah Arendt in her book, The Origins of Totalitarianism, it not only emerges but thrives where there is this desire for the most powerful to rule. Influence is not only the moving factor of the “bandwagon effect,” it is also the core foundation to reigns of terror: “What makes men obey or tolerate real power...is the rational instinct that power has a certain function and is of some general use. Even exploitation and oppression still make society work and establish some kind of order” (Arendt 5).

Therefore, these small fragments of our contemporary society’s present fears and past horrors find their way into shaping the minds and decisions of Katniss and Tris. Just as

Freud warned against the power of suggestion, so to do these young women become warriors in fighting against the commonly laid suggestion that power is good, and that power is right.

We need protagonists such as Katniss and Tris, to point out that exploitation and

oppression may instill order, but not for long. Arendt points to the shadow behind the

leader who rules with an iron-clasped hand, “Persecution of powerless or power-losing groups may not be a very pleasant spectacle, but it does not spring from human meanness alone” (5). The powerless and power-losing groups are the victims or future victims, and in the fight to rule, they lost to the ones who now dictate their fates. Destroyed districts within Panem and innocent divergents killed within futurized Chicago, that is just the beginning for those who lost out. Civil war dictated Panem’s current state, and brainwashing propaganda ruled all five communities within Chicago. To instill reigns of terror commercialized as eras of peace, it is not just Milgram’s social factor of acknowledging obedience that grants tyrants longer periods of success. There are other factors afoot.

The three factors of distinction found within dystopian tradition, that Keith M.

Booker distinguishes are, “Producing obedience, manipulating specific behaviors, and engineering individuals” (74). The implication here is that dystopian writers adapt the mistakes of relevant historical events to their own storylines. They acknowledge ongoing political extremism such as with Nazi eugenics, Soviet Union communism, and North

Korean radical totalitarianism. Communist societies are known to be “Highly militarized and increasingly paranoid” because of their strict doctrines that they try to implement:

“Denunciations for treachery, thinking unacceptable thoughts, or simply for being different from the majority, characterized many 20th century communist regimes”

(Claeys, Searching for Utopia 184-5). Thus, these top three historical and even current

political disasters are the best sample of all those mistakes to be conquered in both narratives of The Hunger Games and Divergent series.

For example, the ongoing political disaster that is otherwise known as North

Korea, gives great suggestions of what to put into practice for the fictionalized versions of totalitarian governments: “The last remaining vestige of this extreme militarization to survive into the 21st century is the regime in North Korea. It transpires, we now know, that life excels art in the totalitarian experience” (Claeys, Searching for Utopia 185). The connection of Katniss and Tris to North Korea is surprisingly to the point, because

Collins and Roth both take cues from such radical extremes in reality and make them the obstacles to conquer in their own worlds.

For Katniss, her ongoing battle with the despotic Panem leader, President Snow, continues for the majority of three books, costs countless lives, and is the very reason that the people of Panem start seeing her as their savior. Katniss takes on that position of power that is always desired, but towards a different capacity in terms of how she would wield that power, “People are starting to realize that Katniss is a leader and, therefore, she presents an alternative to the image President Snow wants to cultivate...fear is the core thing President Snow relies on when using his power” (Heit 56). Fear as the mechanism to govern is something that can be taken out of historical textbooks, be it from Kim Jong-

Il’s rule or to more traditional supreme reigns such as with Stalin, Lenin, and Hitler. Even

President Putin’s continuing domination and control over the Russian Federation has hints of what Claeys discussed in his views on dystopian totalitarianism, what Freud once warned about at the onslaught of World War I, and even what active researcher and writer Jamey Heit is now referencing when constructing a character analysis of the

notorious President Snow figure that Collins created herself. Inspiration comes from unexpected corners, there is no denying that. So, the question that begs to be answered: which tyrant directly influenced Collins? Or is it the common denominator that is found in every single one of these real-life dictators?

Though Collins herself never says outright that one particular dictator was the complete motivation behind her novels’ antagonists, she does admit to being influenced from the way humanity has been scarred by the historical tragedies many of these dictators instigated: “‘If we introduce kids to these ideas earlier, we could get a dialogue about war going earlier and possibly it would lead to more solutions’”(“Suzanne Collins

Biography,” Biography.com). Her father taught her about the reasons behind wars, the appeal of dictators at their pinnacle periods of influence, the millions affected afterwards, and he taught it to her at a very young age. Learning the darkest lessons in history from her father influenced her young imagination, and thus helped shape her future characters as a result. What is painful and wrong needs to have a platform for analysis in order for it to be fixed, this goes back to Pinker’s own hopes for reducing world violence. Seeing the problem, talking about it, and fixing it once it is truly understood, that is Collins’s approach as well: “‘I just feel it isn't discussed, not the way it should be. I think that's because it's uncomfortable for people. It's not pleasant to talk about. I know from my experience that we are quite capable of understanding things and processing them at an early age’” (“Suzanne Collins Biography,” Biography.com). It is the fueling reason that

Collins is not afraid to create such darkly realistic antagonists, because she hopes it will inspire her young readers to ask questions and to start necessary dialogues about possible solutions in avoiding the mistakes of the past.

The dark tones of historical realism behind President Snow for example overshadow the plight of his nation, because he holds the reins of control over everything that comes in and out of the twelve districts. Food sources are rationed, other necessary imports are monitored and brought in as needed on closely monitored trains, even news is incorporated the way he sees fit into his propaganda messages that are delivered and forced to be watched in all districts. One of the surest ways to maintain control over so many people is by employing a tested tactic as evidenced by our own history: “One of the most effective tools of the fascist and communist regimes was the mass rally, which functioned as a celebration and demonstration of power” (Claeys, Searching for Utopia

183). One of the first major rallies of note was attempted by the Nazis at Nuremberg, and even the Soviet Union routinely employed rallies scaled to gigantic masses for major political events and celebrations such as “The Great October Revolution” (Claeys,

Searching for Utopia 183). Gathering the masses to celebrate a propaganda message, forcing a hyped-up attitude to support a new cause, ensuring that the public would come out in droves and follow one mainstream ideology, this is a recorded practice that many dictators have found to be a great success for their campaigns and regimes.

It is also one that President Snow enforces wholeheartedly every year in forced rallies throughout the nation, to serve the purpose of reminding the people why they must obey his doctrine:

It’s the same story every year. He tells of the history of Panem, the country that

rose up out of the ashes of a place that was once called North America. He lists

the disasters, the droughts, the storms, the fires, the encroaching seas that

swallowed up so much of the land, the brutal war for what little sustenance

remained. The result was Panem, a shining Capitol ringed by thirteen districts,

which brought peace and prosperity to its citizens. Then came the Dark Days, the

uprising of the districts against the Capitol. Twelve were defeated, the thirteenth

obliterated. The Treaty of Treason gave us the new laws to guarantee peace and,

as our yearly reminder that the Dark Days must never be repeated, it gave us the

Hunger Games. (Collins, The Hunger Games 18)

This description Katniss is giving includes the force-fed history of why their country is in the state that it is, why they follow the practice of the Hunger Games, and why they must obey to avoid a repeat of those Dark Days. All the disasters imaginable, all the chaos possible, and civil war to boot: this nation has been through too much President Snow attests. To learn from the mistakes of their past he creates this rally for all to hear this message enough times to have it memorized and inherently hated: “To make it humiliating as well as torturous, the Capitol requires us to treat the Hunger Games as a festivity, a sporting event pitting every district against the others” (Collins, The Hunger

Games 19). A festivity that quite frankly uses the tried-and-true method of “divide and conquer” to keep the districts apart, to keep the people from joining together under one cause. Because if the districts are fighting one another, even if it is tribute against tribute within the games, the concern remains on who survives instead of worrying about who pushed them into the fight in the first place.

As Katniss explains what this gladiator tournament really means for the tributes who are forced to participate in it, she is actually also standing in the yearly rally that welcomes the start of the games. Only here in the districts they call it the reaping, “The reaping is a good opportunity for the Capitol to keep tabs on the population” Katniss

continues to detail out, saying that attendance is mandatory for the entire district, “unless you are on death’s door” (Collins, The Hunger Games 16). Every year, every district is forced to attend this reaping/rally to hear the propaganda as to why they hold this tournament, the entire population comes out into this forced celebration. This mandatory gathering is reminiscent of Shirley Jackson’s 1948 classic, The Lottery, which also introduced a similar setup where everyone in the community was forced to attend the annual lottery event, in order to decide who was next to die. Radical and extreme measures are taken to ensure community unity and order, from The Lottery to The

Hunger Games. The reasoning is clear behind the motives in Collins’s story as well, it is not only to keep account of each district’s population, but also to maintain their obedience. In order to ensure they believe the propaganda that President Snow has laid out so meticulously.

Of course, there are more examples of his dictator habits. In a pivotal scene at the beginning of the film Catching Fire, there is such an example of horrifying despotism that is shown ever so acutely. The scene opens up on President Snow discussing strategy with his new gamemaker (Plutarch), after dooming the previous gamemaker (Seneca

Crane) into a forced suicide. Gamemakers are in charge of creating and operating the

Hunger Games, but even though they are “in charge,” it is President Snow’s opinion that matters most as he has the final say in every major decision. Thus, when Seneca Crane allowed for both Katniss and Peeta Mellark to survive at the end of the 74th Hunger

Games, President Snow showed his horrifying authority by ending Crane’s career and life in one fell swoop.

President Snow’s choice of punishment: eat the nightlock (poisonous berries) that the heroes should have been forced to eat in the games. Short, swift, and deadly are the

focal points in describing President Snow’s decision-making skills. Using his newest

gamemaker, he wants to come up with a tactical plan on how to annihilate Katniss, the

rising beacon of hope for the starved and struggling districts in his great nation of Panem.

In President Snow’s opinion, hope is too dangerous of an element to control:

PRESIDENT SNOW: She’s not who they think she is. She’s not a leader. She just

want to save her own skin. It’s as simple as that.

PLUTARCH: I think that’s true.

PRESIDENT SNOW: She’s become a beacon of hope for rebellion, and she has

to be eliminated.

PLUTARCH: I agree she should die, but in the right way, at the right time.

(Lawrence, Catching Fire 0:32:09-0:32:29).

Plutarch has to maintain a sense of calm and cooperation, in order to keep President

Snow from assassinating Katniss outright. There is this overwhelming sense of political plotting and tactical maneuvering in order to make the nation’s beacon of hope a more useful pawn on President Snow’s chessboard.

Sociologist Dominic Strinati provides an extension to this logic as seen in totalitarian governments and enforced traditionally by dictators, “The existence of highly efficient means of reaching large numbers of people within societies with centralized, totalitarian political systems was seen by many as another way, along with coercion, of further entrenching such systems and suppressing democratic alternatives” (5). Katniss is the democratic alternative of something other, a touch of hope with a possibility of

rebellion, that needs to be quickly coerced into silence in order to ensure the continuing

efficiency of Panem’s own centralized totalitarian political system. That is what Plutarch

is trying to achieve as the newest gamemaker, appease the dictator while coercing the

beacon of hope into a form of obedience that does not necessarily spell out her immediate

death. Plutarch needs to keep Katniss alive longer in order to gain more followers and

public attention, and this is not even including his double-dealing plans for using her on the rebellion’s side as well.

As the leader of Panem, President Snow wants and needs to annihilate any true threats to his regime. He instilled control through fear, but now: “Fear does not work as long as they have hope, and Katniss Everdeen is giving them hope” (Lawrence, Catching

Fire 0:32:57-0:33:04). The binary of hope and fear are the two extremes he operates by.

Since one is too dangerous for the public in his mindset, the other is his go-to move in order to bring about order and control. After all, just think about the name Collins gave her fictionalized dystopian nation: Panem. That is the author’s personal critique of imperialism because Panem originates from the Latin phrase “Panem et Circenses.” This translates into “bread and circuses” coined by the famous Roman playwright Juvenal, who once lamented that, “In return for full bellies and entertainment, his people had given up their political responsibilities and therefore their power” (qtd. in Saunders, “The

Hunger Games’ Bread and Circuses”). Juvenal must have been predicting what would happen to the American people as well, because this age-old fear holds just as accurately here and now. Since in a similar situation that Collins created under President Snow’s regime, the majority of Panem citizens are starving and barely surviving. Nevertheless, he provides his people the bare minimum of rations and entertains annually with the

menacing Hunger Games. So, both the “bread” and “circuses” parts of the equation have been fulfilled: “Fear gives those who live within a strongman’s shadow reason not to challenge the rules that can make life miserable” (Heit 57). Simply put, fear has worked for too long.

Consider the grim reality of Katniss’s District 12 citizens, where old age is rare, hunger is the daily plague, and even the motto Katniss creates for her people is despairing to hear: “‘District 12. Where you can starve to death in safety’” (Collins, The Hunger

Games 6). This is District 12’s reality. This is President Snow’s cruelty unleashed on a national level. But it is also Collins’s very accurate interpretation of a dystopian setting.

After all, the earliest dystopian narratives originate within evil places such as the

Underworld or within desperate and difficult times, such as with the Flood and the

Apocalypse. These disasters have been mentioned earliest in biblical mythology, but continue to be referenced, even in President Snow’s own propaganda.

In point of fact, Gregory Claeys reiterates multiple times throughout his literary canon that the shortest path to a dystopian world is through: “Governance or behavioral regulation through fear, rather than [through the] utopian core theme of friendship”

(“News from Somewhere…,” 156). Check and check on both accounts as fear is

President Snow’s favorite tactic, and friendship is a great liability that he destroys as soon as there is a whiff of it. Too dangerous to let live is his go-to leaderly advice whether it comes down to Katniss, her growing friendships with other tributes, or even as whispers of district 13 resurface: everything needs to be eliminated as quickly as possible.

Even more horrifying than reading of President Snow’s ulterior motives that pushes Katniss into heading a revolution, is in seeing it on the big screen. Heit touches on

the most mesmerizing and bloodcurdling moments in which this tyrant is recreated

onscreen: “Donald Sutherland’s portrayal of President Snow in each of The Hunger

Games films thus far captures his unsettling and mechanical nature. He does not show

any overt satisfaction in the violence he perpetuates and he certainly does not appear to

regret it. Violence is just part of the world he runs” (57). Take that image and think of

Hitler: did he ever display his satisfaction when he committed genocide? Did Mao

Zedong, or Kim Il-Sung, or even the late Fidel Castro? No, they stuck to their hardcore

beliefs and made sure their sadistic policies were carried out regardless of any display of

emotion.

Show no emotion, continue pushing authority through fear, this is the image of

tyranny. This image is one that Claeys attests too as well, “Much of the imagery of

modern totalitarianism and modern dystopia is dominated by the omnipresent figures of

its greatest dictators” (Searching for Utopia 184). Greatest, of course, holds a different

connotation for the type of character President Snow represents. The greater the fear, the

greater the amount of power a leader supposedly can hold over his subjects. To dominate

completely, to stand true to totalitarian values, and to prove how plausible a modern

dystopia is to show, “Fear [as] the core thing President Snow relies on when using his

power. This is the primary way that President Snow is able to build and maintain a

culture where the Hunger Games can exist. It also creates the weakness that ultimately

creates space for Katniss and the other rebels to bring down President Snow’s

dictatorship” (Heit 56-7). Just as every historical dictator saw the sun set on his regime

(be it by failure of policy implementation, assassination, or eventual death), so too does

President Snow feel the taste of his own demise.

Right before his execution scene in the second part of the Mockingjay film,

Katniss finds him imprisoned in his very own gardens. Though these are his final

moments and death is imminent, President Snow retains his usual calm and aloof manner,

ever the great leader who bows down to nothing, even as he is coughing up his own

blood, he approaches the withdrawn Katniss and addresses her. His words are softly

spoken but no less calculating, “I was hoping you would find your way here, so many

things that we should discuss” he says to her as he sits down amongst the white roses he

loves so much (Lawrence, Mockingjay Part Two 1:41:10-1:41:20). Sitting down in his

royal red robe, he is the greatest contrast of color in this scene where everything else is

white, green, or gray. Even Katniss, the beacon of hope he so feared, approaches him

cautiously in a military dark gray-black uniform. In the world of visuals, color takes on symbolic meanings all by itself.

The fallen leader represented by the color of blood he drenched his reign in smiles to her as he continues to cough: “I wanted to tell you how sorry I am about your sister, so wasteful, so unnecessary. Anyone could see the game was over by that point...We both know I’m not above killing children, but I’m not wasteful. I take life for specific reason”

(Lawrence, Mockingjay Part Two 1:41:33-1:41:50). His final dialogue is a wisely crafted speech not to ask Katniss for true forgiveness or beg her to save him, instead his last words are a ploy to get even with those who usurped him. True to his core, President

Snow thinks a few steps ahead and is not willing to give up his chessboard of a ruling game without one last shot: “I was watching you and you were watching me, and I’m afraid, we’ve both been played for fools” is his last hint that finally makes Katniss suspect their newest leader (Lawrence, Mockingjay Part Two 1:43:22- 1:43:33). With

100

those words he does what he did best all along, sew doubt and fear into her mind, enough that when Katniss was tasked with executing him, she executed Panem’s new leader instead.

The relationship between Katniss and President Snow is one of the most difficult ones in the trilogy because it highlights the tensions of power and influence, and who controls the other until the very end. Strinati references the semiologist Eco’s theory of oppositional couples to highlight this kind of relationship in which a protagonist and antagonist must carry through convincingly: “They form an invariant structure of oppositions which defines the narratives and ensures the popularity of the novels. These oppositions involve the relations between the characters in the novels, the relations between ideologies, and a larger number of relations between distinct types of values”

(Strinati 103). Katniss and President Snow stand for different ideologies, different values, and find themselves on two drastically different sides of the spectrum in terms of powerful characters within the trilogy. Katniss never yielded any political influence directly by herself, she always feared his totalitarian ideology, and fought against his dictator values; and yet in the end, she still allows herself to be used by him in order to right the world once more.

In that final scene of his, Donald Sutherland portrays President Snow to a perfection, because as he is tied to a post and waiting his demise, he shows not one inch of fear. The camera does a closeup of Katniss’s determined face and then his questioning expression, without one word, his raised eyebrows and glaring eyes stare back at her, pushing her into action based on his final hint. Katniss makes a decision based on his last warning to her. A chorus begins to sing, her arrow raises towards him, but he continues to

101

stand without a trace of fear or doubt in what Katniss will do next. Seeing Katniss shoot down President Coin instead of him, he knows he has won one last time. He bends over laughing, blood coming out of his mouth, his disease finally having caught up with him, and as the crowds rush to finish him off, the focus remains on his eyes full of contentment.

This was a leader that never backed down and never bowed down. Director

Francis Lawrence was able to shoot this scene with such a loyal credence to the character that Collins created because there is a realistic, cold-hearted, calculating attribute to him that vibrates off the pages and into the Sutherland’s portrayal. Collins left no room for doubt as to what kind of man President Snow was meant to be, or what his intentions were all along: “I search his eyes for the slightest sign of anything, fear, remorse, anger.

But there’s only the same look of amusement that ended our last conversation. It’s as if he’s speaking the words again. ‘Oh, my dear Miss Everdeen. I thought we had agreed not to lie to each other’” (Mockingjay 372). His final look, his last message, even his entire rule: President Snow was a man of calculation and decision. To the point that his last words to Katniss changed the face of Panem’s future twice over. Twice over though includes someone else’s reign as well. In the fall of President Snow, the face of the transitory period is with a female dictator who nevertheless shows as much potential for horror, if not more so. This is the short and impactful period of transition that is led by

President Coin. Short her reign may have been, but the consequences President Coin initiated continue long thereafter.

102

CHAPTER SEVEN: VICIOUS CYCLES NEVER END IN THE HUNGER GAMES

“Nothing has changed. Nothing will ever change now” (Collins, Mockingjay 378).

The uphill struggle against President Snow is undeniable; however, he was not the

final threat against Katniss’s entire existence. The hidden but quite frankly much more

potent opponent remains in the shadows for the majority of the series. Alma Coin, who

started as the President of underground District 13, then quickly took on the role as leader

of the Second Rebellion against the Capitol, and ended up replacing the paramount place

of power previously held by President Snow. These intertwining eras of totalitarian

regime under despotic leadership, show that for Collins, it was not enough of a struggle

for her protagonist to overcome the obstacle of one major antagonist.

Since there cannot be just one villain to conquer, there is a vacated need for Alma

Coin. Had President Snow fell and his wicked ways with him, that would have given

Katniss’s story a fairytale of a happy conclusion. And that would also make the story less dystopian, due to the fact that dystopian narratives by tradition do not allow for a happy ever after. Or if it does, it must be ephemeral. Culturally, Americans like that happy ever

after, especially in the midst of tragedy. While it is the American culture that has

produced The Hunger Games, there is a divergence from these mainstream preferences in

order to retain the influence of its dystopian predecessors.

President Snow initiated the circle of destruction that yields to the power of

dystopia, and with President Alma Coin we see a continuation. Yes, originally, she was

103

the underground leader of District 13 and the rising rebellion. She appeared for Katniss, the remaining survivors of District 12, and anyone else who wished to flee from President

Snow’s reign, as a savior. Then when it was time to battle the Capitol dictator head on, she was the one that initiated the civil war against President Snow’s regime. In all these facets, President Alma Coin fights for justice, she is the liberator. But as Katniss learned from President Snow’s final conversation with her, that is all a façade that tricked even him. The opponent that he underestimated: Alma Coin. She is cunning, ruthless, and very goal-oriented. Where President Snow clarified that he would never take life without reason, President Coin would stoop even to that in order to fulfill her goals of taking over

Panem. Not liberating it, no, but taking over it by ushering in her era of dictatorship. The terrible beauty behind Alma Coin is that while her tactics are even worse than her predecessor’s, so is her character’s potential. Possibly playing on both first and last name,

Collins created her with an idea in mind, as “Alma” translates directly into “soul” from the Spanish language, while the materialistic “Coin” contradicts such a prospect. Leading

Collins to create a paradox of a name out of this next antagonist.

Alma Coin not only continues to manipulate Katniss where President Snow left off, but she does it in a way that opens a completely different facet to the potential of eroding gender roles and stereotypes. President Coin is after all before anything else, a woman. What does her role indicate about the nature of gender? That it can no longer be pigeonholed. With Alma Coin, Collins makes the same point she proved with her protagonist, Katniss. That human traits, no matter how strong and beautiful or dark and frightening they are, exist in all of humanity, whether male or female. With Alma Coin, it

104

is not her femininity that takes center stage. It is with her authoritarian potential which

she shows that a dictator is a dictator, regardless to gender.

Showing this potential in continuously breaking gender stereotypes on both fronts of heroism and villainy is only the beginning with Alma Coin though. Her mindset connects to not only classical dystopian literature of old, but also the same philosophy and psychology that stirred those works into being. Her actions link to historical figures in our timeline just as strongly as President Snow’s. Alma Coin’s complicated decision-

making skills that are based on immoral justifications parallel to the horrors we continue

to see in our world today. Basically, this second antagonist is second to no one when it

comes to trumping up dystopian themes while messing with happy endings.

Starting with President Coin’s correlation to the classical literature that not only

brought forth the early dystopian works, it also set a precedent to connecting storylines to

the circles of philosophy and psychology that were taking place during those periods. For

example, George Orwell’s 1984 or Yevgeny Zamyatin’s We were both at the epitome of what defines classical dystopian fiction. Orwell set the pace on how far dystopian societies are meant to push their protagonists, his preference was of course to a point of no return. Just as President Coin is willing to sacrifice Katniss in order to create a strong martyr for her cause, and then when we find out that President Coin was even behind the tactic of killing innocent children to further her war effort, readers are horrified and unbelieving of how far this leader was willing to go. But she was not the first of her kind.

Orwell set the precedent for this kind of tyrannical logic, of taking antagonistic mindsets to the point of no return. Of mentally destroying if not completely ruining the heroes in the process of their heroic journey, if only to weaken the fallout of their mission.

105

Orwell’s main character in 1984, Winston Smith, was one of the first dystopian protagonists to fight against a totalitarian government and lose. Winston was torn away from his beloved, tortured and brainwashed for months, and finally released back into society when he was no longer considered a threat. That is the darkness of complete and utter control by a government that grants no personal liberties or freedoms: “Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing” (Orwell 336). That logic resulted in a protagonist losing his complete sense of self and succumbing to the demands of the higher authority: Winston accepted the Party (the novel’s government) completely and learned to love Big Brother by the end of his lamentably unsuccessful journey. Just as Katniss is scarred and unwilling to fight after the 74th Hunger Games, and even more so after the 75th Hunger Games that has left her not only broken but completely in despair because of how she lost Peeta in the games.

Worse so, the experiments run on Peeta while he was held captive by the Capitol are almost the mirror image of what this Big Brother government did to Winston when he was being held captive. They ruined these young men completely, inside-out, to the point that they could no longer distinguish friends from enemies. The unnerving truth of this classical failure is that even Winston was not the first to fail in his fight against tyranny, at least where dystopian literature is concerned.

More than twenty years before the world was horrified by Orwell’s epic representation of heroic failure, a struggling Russian author was on the brink of political damnation because of what he predicted in his own interpretation of a dystopian future based on the path he felt his homeland was taking. Zamyatin’s personal philosophy was stuck with the idea that his homeland was on the path to no return, “He [Zamyatin]

106

remained gripped by the idea that the revolution [brought on by Bolshevism], having negated yesterday, seemed fixated upon the sacrifice of today for tomorrow” (Claeys,

Dystopia: A Natural History 339). The fixation that our past is ruined by the struggles of today, which in turn destroys tomorrow, well, Zamyatin was the ominous prophet of this apocalyptic perspective in terms of his philosophical approach on the matter. He actually had to publish We initially in England in 1924, because he was already blacklisted in his homeland. Even then, there was no going back home for this exiled author: “An abridged

Russian translation of We appeared in 1927 in Czechoslovakia, making Zamyatin’s political position in Russia untenable” (Claeys, Dystopia: A Natural History 340). On the onset of the 1920s, just as the Soviet Union was rising into power, Zamyatin predicted a horrendous future for his country, and published it under the fictionalized scope of dystopian satire. For authors to feel the utter depth of darkness, some must go through the path of despair themselves. Others, such as Orwell and much later Collins and Roth, take aspiration from such poor souls as Zamyatin.

Within We, Zamyatin’s protagonist, D-503, learns of an underground revolution, falls in love with one of their top rebellion fighters, and does not even have the opportunity of assisting in their groundbreaking fight for freedom against the One State

(this novel’s totalitarian government leadership) before they snatch him up for going against the norm of their society. D-503 is lobotomized and in turn gives up his beloved and her crew, where they are subsequently sentenced to death. This bloodcurdling psychological warfare that Zamyatin invented for his protagonist, D-503, goes on to inspire Orwell and then Collins in breaking their protagonists with similarly cruel methods. With Collins, Peeta is tortured and broken down in the same exact manner.

107

President Snow orders for a psychological torture-focused brainwashing, in order

for Peeta to give up his beloved, Katniss. For the welfare of the people’s government as

represented by President Snow, and in order to become a more useful weapon for

President Snow to manipulate in his larger game against Katniss and her revolution, Peeta

becomes a mere pawn and parallel to D-503’s failed struggle. When District 13 captures

Peeta, his warped mind is then used by President Coin in order to elicit from Katniss the

actions and behaviors President Coin needs from the image of the icon she wants to shape

for her rebellion. Cruel leaders and victimized heroes spell for a bad ending but for a

strong dystopian formula.

The time period in which the forefathers of dystopian literature were pushed to

the brink determined the outcome and natural course of dystopias, then and now. For

these individual precursors (Orwell and Zamyatin), there was no ounce of light to express

within their protagonists’ journeys because they themselves were living in overwhelming

times of subjugation. The one unique caveat that could be offered was this: “How can

there be a final revolution? There is no final one [number, so] revolutions are infinite”

(Zamyatin 168). This was the mantra of I-330, the rebel fighter that D-503 fell in love

with and as a result ended up sentencing to death. She believed wholeheartedly that just

as there is no highest number, there can be no final revolution. Humanity is built on the chance of possibility: the possibility to rise up again, fight again, and maybe one day win as well. She tried to teach that to D-503 and was forced to die for that veritable principle.

However, where these early dystopian heroes were annihilated and their fight towards freedom crushed, what they instigated was not lost upon future generations.

Particularly with Suzanne Collins who took direct inspiration and influence from both

108

works, and infused their failed lessons into her Hunger Games storyline. The regimes of

Big Brother and One State however presented an antagonist that was faceless and omnipotently ambiguous, it was the entire government in control and at fault for their dystopian societies. This presents an enemy that is hard to know, face, and fight one-on- one. Claeys makes this same point, that an enemy with a face gives the leadership a focus as well: “There is one road to the collectivist society. One leader prevails. Dissent becomes unthinkable. Yet this dictatorship has a purpose, or at any rate a rationale, which goes beyond personal power and beyond politics” (Dystopia: A Natural History 342).

Claeys took these classic novels and broke their storylines down into a few sentences.

Claeys’s interpretation of dictatorship, authoritarian rule, and totalitarian government all comes down to a fight between the collectivist society versus the personal growth of an individual, at least where early dystopian literature is concerned. Claeys only tweaks it to make the open-ended threat of a totalitarian government come into a more feasible shape of a specific dictator behind all the instilled practices and politics. A correction that

Collins applies enthusiastically as well, with the well-known faces of Snow and Coin, rather than a larger and ambiguous government force behind the villainy.

An individual hero is one who can step outside the fight for power and political gain, and truly evaluate what are the risks and what is the ultimate win. Katniss is the representation of that individual in this storyline. However, Collins put everything that

Orwell and Zamyatin instituted, everything that Claeys is alluding to here, and incorporated it into her own recreation for authoritarian antagonism. First, with the tyranny evoked upon Panem by Snow. Then, following his defeat, she felt it necessary to introduce into her storyline a secondary evil. To put order back into the balance, as

109

Orwell and Zamyatin have shown so scrupulously, there can be no final victory between good and evil: “If you want to imagine a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—forever” (Orwell 337). The future is locked in a perpetual battle as

Orwell puts it so artistically in his novel. Good will never last interminably, and evil will never have its permanent day of triumph, though in Winston’s case within 1984, it definitely feels that way as his sense of self is completely destroyed by Big Brother.

However, as one protagonist fell in Orwell’s dystopia, another rose here in Collin’s.

Worlds change, but the good fight continues on because that is reality. The only difference here is that the worlds continue to change under a dystopian flag, which pushes for that darker resemblance to our hopefully lighter reality.

Dystopia takes our history, the experience of world leaders, and paints their colors truthfully but in the most horrifying undertones. Their reigns have purpose and serve the greater good, “Powerful leaders of all kinds insist that that is what they are doing;

Vladimir Putin is just one example, and in 2015 and 2016, Donald Trump’s surprising run for the presidency reflected something similar. (Hitler, you might respond. George

Washington, they might reply” (Sunstein 72). What Sunstein does is make a loud statement about the world leaders of yesterday, today, and tomorrow and attests that each one ran and won with a purpose. History is what shows which sides of the spectrum their reign and purpose lands on: from Putin to Trump to Hitler to Washington, each represented and will represent their own scope of good and evil in real life. In the record book, there is a clear difference between the horrors that Hitler allowed and the mere chaos that riddles Trump’s presidency, because while one dictator initiated genocide, the

110

other has not. These extremes should not be overlooked going forward, even as we

examine what similarities pop up in the reigns of leadership within Panem.

That greater evil that started with President Snow merely changes faces and

continues on with District 13’s President Alma Coin. Ironically enough President Coin’s

last words turned out to be her truest: “Mockingjay, may your aim be as true as your heart

is pure” (Lawrence, Mockingjay Part Two). These final words were part of her speech

addressing Katniss, in front of the entire Panem, at deposed President Snow’s execution.

President Coin meant to inspire Katniss in aiming for the kill shot towards the despot

who was no longer in control; but in actuality, it pushes Katniss towards executing the

newly minted leader instead. The outcome of Katniss’s extreme decision lies in the same

territory as does Winston’s and D-503’s failures. Winston and D-503 failed at

overthrowing their totalitarian governments because they could not eliminate the true

power behind the regime in one fell swoop.

Katniss on the other hand, was able to assess the true danger of where this

consuming power would continue if left unchecked due to President Snow’s warning and

based on his forecast, she made the necessary choice of political annihilation in order to

ensure a longer period of peace for her people. Her thoughts going into this radical decision were exactly this, how to break the chain of violence: “All those people I loved, dead, and [here] we are discussing the next Hunger Games in an attempt to avoid wasting life. Nothing has changed. Nothing will ever change now” (Collins, Mockingjay 370).

That is the epiphany Katniss comes to in the defining moment where she deceives

President Coin in order to keep the scheme going just long enough for her to assassinate

this ruthless new leader. She realizes that there is no precedent for flawless victory over

111

death, loss, and a constant thirst for vengeance. Even when regimes are overturned, and

new rulers take over, the same destructive pattern of behavior within humanity follows.

Literature, philosophy, psychology: they all point us towards this one direction. Zamyatin

showed it, Orwell confirmed it, and now Collins attests to this as well.

Acknowledging this persistent mortal curse does not mean Katniss accepts it

willingly. Katniss reacts as an experienced chess player used to being manipulated. As a

result, she is pushed into thinking three steps ahead since the first Hunger Games: “I

weigh my options carefully, think everything through” (Collins, Mockingjay 370). Like it

or not, her subjugating antagonists have stamped something of themselves onto her. She

grew up in the face of their cold-calculated manipulation tactics, and learned to make

decisions accordingly. Katniss may have started as a pawn in a game controlled by ironfisted leaders (first she was manipulated by President Snow and then by President

Coin); but in the conclusion of her journey, she is able to learn the lessons previous dystopian protagonists could not. That it takes the same amount of ferocity to challenge as it does to annihilate: “I may have been a catalyst for rebellion, but a leader should be someone with conviction, and I’m barely a convert myself” (Collins, Catching Fire 140).

It takes tremendous personal loss for Katniss to gain this introspective transformation to change from a convert to a leader who can fulfill her destiny with conviction.

Through Katniss’s actions, imagine how the exiled author Zamyatin would sigh in an appeased relief for what he himself wished to achieve in real-life for his native

Russia. Heit concurs on this point as well, “From the moment Katniss volunteers to go into the Arena in Prim’s place, a political shift occurs...Though everyone faces an uphill struggle against President Snow, this initial awareness of what the Hunger Games

112

symbolizes surfaces again and again until the rebels’ momentum cannot be stopped”

(169). This awareness of a young woman’s importance that goes beyond fronting an icon of resistance shows that just as there are hidden antagonists within the series, so too are there hidden powers that our heroine must uncover for the rebellion to catch fire. After all, that is the catchphrase that immortalized her in the first place: “Katniss, the girl who was on fire” (Collins, The Hunger Games 67). Yet the ones who came closest to extinguishing her fire remained hidden for far too long.

Alma Coin represents the ultimate threat no one saw coming for one overwhelming reason. She started by fighting for the right side. Alma Coin is the ally, the savior, the one who helped her people survive and gave home to those who had none.

Notwithstanding all these pros, she remains cold, distant, and unapproachable. Heit seconds this quality behind all her pros, “Despite the benefits she brings to the rebel cause, there is an unmistakable quality about President Coin that makes her almost impossible to root for” (117). She has so much to offer the rebellion, Katniss, and her friends. In fact, it is her rescue team that retrieves Katniss and Finnick from the 75th

Hunger Games. Is that enough though? No.

President Coin goes as far as to offer aid and shelter to those who were threatened by President Snow. These positive attributes and heroic actions indicate that she is a tremendous ally. President Coin does, however, retain a great likeness to her predecessor,

President Snow. Even though these two leaders find themselves on different sides of the war, the way they genuinely think and act shows them to be simply too similar:

“Although President Coin leads the resistance, she uses the same problematic strategies that define President Snow’s politics. She jails and tortures innocent people (Katniss’s

113

prep team), she drops bombs on her own people (and Prim and other rebel medics), and

she’s prepared to sacrifice more innocent children” (Averill 179-80). Therefore, while

President Coin starts in a position of power and influence, she uses it in a dangerously similar manner to President Snow, which leaves the nation almost in the same mindset as

before the war. She is an authoritarian, and Panem would remain a conformist society shackled to her reign.

Even when she comes out victorious in the revolution against Panem’s previous leadership, President Coin is not content to start a reign of peace. Instead she comes up with the idea that acts as a catalyst for Katniss: “‘What has been proposed is that in lieu of eliminating the entire Capitol population, we have a final, symbolic Hunger Games, using the children directly related to those who held the most power’”(Collins,

Mockingjay 369). This would be the defining first action of her reign as a Panem leader, and not just as a representative of the hidden District 13. Now, on the surface, President

Coin is asking all the previous seven victors for their consensus. Underneath though, she is actually pressuring them into a choice of her own design and preference: “‘Was this

Plutarch’s idea?’ asks Haymitch. ‘It was mine,’ says Coin. ‘It seemed to balance the need for vengeance with the least loss of life. You may cast your votes’” (Collins, Mockingjay

369). This is the most frightening aspect to President Coin, the way she speaks to show her sleight of hand. She makes it sound as if she is giving freedom of choice, when she is actually twisting their hands into complying with her previously set-up agenda.

That quality that makes President Coin so cold and distant is her preference for political manipulation over personal connection. Katniss senses the forewarnings of this new leader’s mentality based on what President Coin is laying out on the table as her

114

choice of political development for a new nation coming out of a brutal rebellion. Seeing that means understanding the correlation of authoritarianism that remains from one deposed leader to the next self-elected one, “When President Coin asks the surviving tributes whether another Hunger Games should be held, Katniss understands that Coin is no different, in the end, than Snow. In order to ensure herself an opportunity to assassinate Coin, Katniss gives a vote of yes to the new round of games” (Keegan 82).

President Coin affirms that it will be the victors’ majority vote that will decide the fate of the Capitol’s children, while emphasizing that this idea she came up with herself, is actually the best route in ensuring the least amount of death. The question that should have been asked: what other routes could be taken to avoid any death at all? A peaceful transition to unite the divided sides of one nation would be the strategic maneuvering of a leader seeking true reconciliation. Not everyone catches on so quickly as Katniss does, to the warning signs of a returning cycle of despotism. Signing away one act of violence for another is not the way towards a peaceful democracy.

Katniss realizes this much more expeditiously than anyone else thanks to

President Snow, and our protagonist concludes to take the martyr’s way out. Katniss’s

decision to lead President Coin on in order to ensure a public double execution feels like

a death sentence to herself, “In reality her motivation is self-sacrifice: Katniss began her

journey when she put her own life in danger for Prim, for a child who would otherwise

have died in the arena. Expecting to die after the assassination, Katniss once again places

the life of children bound for the arena before her own by killing the woman who would

have reinstated the games” (Keegan 82-3). Katniss’s rationale is gallant but one of a clear

martyr, who would rather die for her cause than go on living in an unjust world that she

115

directly helped to create. On top of that, Katniss has lost the one person she fought and lived for: her beloved sister, Prim.

Prim’s death is a direct result of another calculating move made by President

Coin. This is revealed when Gale confirms Katniss’s suspicions that President Snow implemented in her mind, in that it was President Coin who orchestrated a bomb drop over innocent children and medical workers at the gates of President Snow’s mansion during the final siege (Collins, Mockingjay 366-67). In giving that order, Collins gives her readers an acute look behind the facade of Panem’s newest leader. Literary scholar

Heit offers a penetrating analysis into those inner workings, basically what makes the gears turn inside Alma Coin’s mind:

President Coin ordered the bombing that killed so many children. In its outcome,

President Coin’s decision is no different than the [actual] Hunger Games. The

motivation is the same as well. President Coin saw in the bombings the chance to

advance her own political ambition. The difference that Katniss must come to

terms with is that President Snow accepts responsibility for his actions while

President Coin attempts to blame someone else for all those deaths. The

difference is subtle, but important (and it does not excuse the outcome; obviously

bombing children is wrong). President Coin’s willingness to kill children will be

an even worse scenario for the political reality in Panem after the war. The same

tactics will be on the table, she just will not be honest about her willingness to use

them. (Heit 124)

Fear served President Snow so well after all, up until Katniss became a pawn he could no longer control. This same logic seems to apply for President Coin now as well. She sees

116

those innocent lives as pawns in her own twisted game of political gain. To quench her

thirst, to fulfill her ambitions, nothing is immoral.

The difference between these two leaders does not come down to which side they

are on, but the way in which they use cold-hearted and calculating moves to instill fear into the public, and as result, their version of order. One takes responsibility, no matter how deplorable his decisions were: “‘I take life for very specific reasons. And there was no reason for me to destroy a pen full of Capitol children. None at all’” (Collins,

Mockingjay 356). This confession President Snow gives to Katniss before his execution is brutal but honest, and it shows that while he deeply believed in instilling fear, and was not above murder to do so, each murder had to account for something in order for there to be a political gain in his favor.

What is the preferred tool in order to ensure political power? Going back towards the villainous connections instigated in classical literature and philosophy, there is another work that stands out as an exemplar from which Collins’s tyrants shape their foundations. Machiavelli’s The Prince is not your typical source of dystopian origin, but it is however a solid foundation for leadership guidelines, towards the wrong direction of course. Heit notes this correlation between Machiavelli as well,“‘It is better to be feared than loved’ convey[ing] the essence of President Snow’s political mindset” (120).

Machiavelli’s The Prince shows the frightening line that one crosses from democratic leadership into authoritarian tyranny.

After all, within this classical masterpiece, Machiavelli displayed what it means to shape a government based on the “politics of fear,” going as far as to recommend for rulers to assume that their people are inherently tuned towards bad actions. Only under a

117

more steadfast regime that pushes for an authoritative influence, can citizens then act according to the principles instilled into them: “When faced with wicked people, rulers should emphasize security to minimize the risk that our supposedly negative dispositions pose to the political elite” (Heit 120). Take into consideration this historic dictum

Machiavelli instilled, and then how President Snow ran his regime following this exact order, for as long as there was control over all his citizens. It worked for an unbearably long amount of time, the Hunger Games was held annually for 75 years after all.

It also worked favorably for President Coin, as she silently but even more effectively ruled over District 13 where there was no dissidence at all. She ran her underground community as a Spartan would, every one of her citizens accounted for by the hour. Between these two leaders, one ruled supreme in the end: “‘My failure,’ says

Snow, ‘was being so slow to grasp Coin’s plan. To let the Capitol and districts destroy one another, and then step in to take power with Thirteen barely scratched. Make no mistake, she was intending to take my place right from the beginning’” (Collins,

Mockingjay 357). In his final confession to Katniss, President Snow accounts for his mistake that cost him the war. By doing so, he is not only acknowledging his weakness but also his failure. He was too short-sighted, too focused on his pawns on the gameboard to actually spot what was lurking just beyond: “‘I wasn’t watching Coin. I was watching you, Mockingjay’” (Collins, Mockingjay 357). These words are his most clever gift to the

Mockingjay because they allow for her to see the truth before it is too late, as it was already for President Snow.

By the same standards that lost President Snow his reign and his life, President

Coin outshined him and every other unsuspecting soul in Panem. Even when she was

118

leading only District 13, her efforts to control every possible scenario in order to

determine the best outcome in her favor showed her most frightening capabilities.

Silencing every internal conflict before it ever began showed us the early signs of how

she implemented extremism successfully: from imprisoning Katniss’s makeup crew, to

controlling Peeta’s recovery, even to something so small as formally allowing for

Primrose’s cat inside her district. Every move planned and calculated to give her the edge somewhere later in the game. The only encounter she could not account for and therefore could not avoid was Katniss, the protagonist who simply could not and would not fit into

President Coin’s or President Snow’s political frame. Katniss, the Mockingjay symbol, that both assumed to be a useful pawn and an empty icon, ended up being their undoing.

Taken back into the larger context of how these authoritarians relate to our historical precedents and current horrors, it all comes down to the concept of pervading villainy. Accurately enough, author Chuck Klosterman, pinpoints a specific characteristic as the defining quality of modern villainy: “[Villains come] at the media from a bottom- line, non-theoretical, the ends-justify-the-means perspective that was (perhaps not so coincidentally) first described in Machiavelli’s The Prince” (232). Here we have a mainstream modern popular culture analyst who correlates back to Machiavelli’s masterpiece and then to the stoic mantra that influences antagonists, fictional and real.

The central argument in Klosterman’s chapter “Electric Funeral,” is that modern men of note who headline current news (Klosterman’s focus spotlights Perez Hilton, Kim

Dotcom, and Julian Assange) all follow this mantra of the ends justifying the means, which tends to lend them an antagonistic view. Since it allows for them, antagonistic

119

figures of any and all platforms, to do illegal or morally questionable things for the sake of a successful endgame.

The pattern of human behavior that allows for this kind of driven attribute to continuously surface is this ability to departmentalize who gets hurt and who dies as a lesser issue. Singular lives do not outweigh the greater agenda set forth by authoritarian agendas, which is exactly what President Snow and President Coin proved. Klosterman confirms that innocent lives are mere casualties when you have such a mentality in place,

“Willing to accept that an action that hurts one person is justified if it helps a hundred or a thousand or ten thousand others” (232). Outweighing costs versus benefits is what the simple equation comes down to, when valuing lives or discarding of them.

That is also, how we determine the accuracy of how far an individual is willing to go to accomplish the goal set forth by their own ambition. Direct this mindset towards the transcendent yet antagonistic characters that Collins brought to life in her series, and the confirmation of their modern villainy becomes inherent within their practices, tactics, and choices in order to ensure their political goals. Both President Snow and President Coin proved the age-old theories of philosophy and psychology, connected their actions to historical figures in our own timeline, and complicated their decision-making skills based on immoral justifications that we are still seeing in today’s headlines. And they did it all without regard to restrictions of gender roles and stereotypes. That is the most intimidating part to the dystopian world Collins unleashed upon her unsuspecting readers and viewers. You may have only wanted an engaging adventure, but you also received an entire social critique and cultural forewarning all wrapped into one charming young adult dystopian fiction wrapper. This we can also see replicated in Veronica Roth’s Divergent

120

series, as her antagonists parallel the possibilities seen here with Collins’s villainous creations.

121

CHAPTER EIGHT: DIVERGENT DOESN’T DEVIATE

“Dead people can be our heroes because they can’t disappoint us later; they only improve

over time, as we forget more and more about them” (Roth, Four: A Divergent Story

Collection 11).

Just as there are two authoritarian antagonists in The Hunger Games, so too are there two key power players that Roth’s protagonist, Tris, must face. With the same disregard to gender restrictions, Roth evens the playing field by first giving her storyline a stoic female leader who confronts Tris in Divergent. Then by the end of the second novel, Insurgent, and more central in the closing of the series, Allegiant, comes forward a master manipulator from behind the curtains. Jeanine Matthews and David of the Bureau, two leaders who present Tris with her biggest fears and trials as they force their versions of rightly rule upon everyone: totalitarian style. Using political influence, tactical intelligence, and different forms of manipulation and brainwashing, Jeanine and David present different agendas but carry out their goals with the same vicious focus hidden behind a diplomatic facade. Starting with Tris’s first foe, Jeanine, whose biggest advantage becomes her eventual undoing, her own intelligence, and the obsession to continually place her intellect above everyone and everything else.

Emphasizing Jeanine’s obsession with the mind stresses the personality quality that she and her community prize above all else, intellect by way of knowledge.

Knowledge becomes the key tactic within the Erudite community, structured around and

122

organized by the woman who leads the Erudite people and teaches them that this quality

is the most necessary and important resource. Jeanine’s central idea however should not

be alien to its readers of this modern age, “Today the main source of wealth is

knowledge. And whereas you can conquer oil fields through war, you cannot acquire

knowledge that way. Hence... knowledge [has become] the most important economic

resource” (Harari 15). This forward-thinking mentality is discussed by historian Yuval

Noah Harari, in his latest bestseller, Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow. Harari’s

argument states that the mantra of the present age and future eras lies in the fact that

knowledge has become and will remain the real power. Knowledge is power, these are

the words that define Jeanine entirely.

In the future painted within Divergent, Chicago’s society is broken down into five different personality driven factions. The most impactful villain shapes up to be an unapologetic female leader who originates from the very faction that prizes intellect above all else: “Jeanine Matthews is Erudite’s sole representative, selected based on her

IQ score” (Roth, Divergent 33). American culture has a penchant for revering intelligence, there is even a phrase for it: modus vivendi. This Latin phrase for “mode of living” is commonly used to address how one culture approaches customs and lifestyle choices with a particular focus towards one attribute (“United Nations Treaty Series,”

United Nations Treaty Collection). Through Roth’s introspective view on America’s modus vivendi, it is about mind over heart, and logic over emotion. Therefore, it is not coincidental that Roth focuses on intelligence with her principal antagonist. Jeanine uses her daunting IQ to deploy every tactic possible by way of technology, brainwashing, and outright violence and war in order to ensure obedience and conformity to her rule.

123

When Jeanine faces Tris, she finds the sixteen-year-old not only her match but also her eventual subduer. Reminding us of Eco’s theory of oppositional couples, Strinati makes the more modern correlation between the pairing that potently contrast each other:

“‘Chance-planning, perversion-innocence, loyalty-disloyalty’...These relationships are worked out by particular characters, the relations between characters and the unravelling of the story as a whole” (Strinati 103). The binaries that Strinati highlights as vital relations that an oppositional couple must have to unravel a storyline are all found within

Tris and Jeanine. Jeanine is calculating and all about masterful planning, willing to sacrifice anyone underneath her in order to accomplish her goals. Tris on the other hand, is impulsive, innocent, and utterly loyal to the friends she believes in. Jeanine does not

believe in this kind of idealistic leadership that Tris comes to represent. Instead, Jeanine

perverts authority into dictatorship and punishes loyalty with her own constant

manipulation and treachery. The secret weapon that Tris uses to ultimately defeat Jeanine

is the one thing that interested Jeanine the most about our adolescent heroine in the first

place: divergence. The genetic enigma that initially stapled Tris as a divergent.

The “divergent” DNA that makes Tris different and unsortable into the traditional

five factions that their Chicago social experiment was founded upon, makes Tris a threat

to the monolithic regime Jeanine clandestinely initiates during the second half of

Divergent. These are Jeanine’s first steps to satisfying her curiosity while spelling out her

own doom as a leader. Initially, Jeanine’s reaction was to eliminate the threat of those

who are divergent, people like Tris. The first novel’s entire plotline is set up around how

Tris survives and escapes the death sentence Jeanine has made public, in order to

exterminate the threat of change that the divergents symbolize.

124

In the first film, director Neil Burger had his screenplay writers revise the scene in

which Jeanine discusses the beauty behind the faction system, in order to emphasize the

dangerous aspect of being divergent: “The brilliance of the faction system is that conformity to a faction removes the threat of anyone exercising their independent will.

Divergents threaten that system” (Burger, Divergent 2:02:55-2:03:05). This speech is delivered by Kate Winslet as she adroitly plays her character of Jeanine towards the end of the Divergent film, bringing to life the role of a cold and calculating Erudite leader.

Even as she delivered these words to a frightened Tris, there was no sign of emotion on

Jeanine’s face or in her voice. Winslet described in an interview, that to get into the mindset of her character, she imagined herself to be an extreme radical: “Essentially my character is a female Hitler, because all the divergents have to be removed” (“Kate

Winslet on Divergent,” YouTube). Jeanine’s goals and plans all centralize on this one- track mentality, and channeling such a radical leader from our history as Hitler, is a prime parallel in how far leadership is taken with that specific mentality. Of course, for Winslet, it is all the more prevailing to have this horrifying link in order to make Jeanine that much more authentic.

On top of that, Jeanine considered all the people she had to eliminate as mere casualties, numbers that ended up on the wrong side of her equation. That is why Winslet compared Jeanine to Hitler, who also profoundly believed in a similar form of eugenics in order to ensure his Aryan race: “Eugenic engineering designed to hinder miscegenation and prevent the procreation of individuals with grave ailments echoed the literary projection of such experiments a generation later” (Claeys, Searching for Utopia 183).

For Jeanine, the grave ailment threatening her version of the Aryan race are these

125

divergents. In order to purify the faction system, they must be eliminated as the Jews, gypsies, homosexuals and other groups were eliminated by the Nazis. The parallel to these leaders, their beliefs, and how they went about implementing them is unfathomable.

By the second book, Insurgent, Jeanine realizes that the divergents have a purpose and, therefore, need to be studied and utilized before complete annihilation.

Similarly, to how Hitler decided upon his Aryan race and then relegated all other groups to an inferior status that could be experimented on, tortured, and killed at will: “Hitler didn’t create the world. He just managed to decipher the laws of nature, and then instructed us how to live in line with them. If we disobey these laws, we will come to a bad end. Ist das klar” (Harari 183). In Jeanine’s mind, the same logic applies,

“‘Improved, and working toward a world in which people will live in wealth, comfort, and prosperity’” (Roth, Divergent 176). For her, the faction system is the law of nature and her instructions are only to better that modus vivendi.

Being the Erudite leader, Jeanine changes gears based on her rationale and mental trajectory in order to successfully carry out these political goals that ensure the survival of the faction system: “‘I am not a fool,’ says Jeanine. ‘A faction of intellectuals is no army. We are tired of being dominated by a bunch of self-righteous idiots who reject wealth and advancement, but we couldn’t do this on our own. And your Dauntless leaders were all too happy to oblige me if I guaranteed them a place in our new, improved government’” (Roth, Divergent 176). Her reasoning for including the Dauntless faction leadership into her new plan while annihilating the Abnegation faction comes down to purpose, who can further her goals and who will derail them? Eliminating the

126

Abnegation faction that she calls “a bunch of self-righteous idiots” is the next step in securing control.

Hunting down Tris is Jeanine’s third step, because there is now a reason to experiment on her. Consequently, Jeanine blackmails Tris into surrendering, then manipulates Tris’s own brother (Caleb) into studying and torturing her, all in order to find a method of using Tris’s divergent DNA. She understands that the anomaly of the divergent DNA can be used as an anchor: “‘Jeanine doesn’t want to kill everyone,’ I say slowly. ‘She knows that would be illogical. Without each faction, society doesn’t function, because each faction trains its members for particular jobs. What she wants is control’” (Roth, Insurgent 69). The key to controlling all factions lies within Tris’s DNA, therefore, Tris becomes a case worth finding, catching, and studying before annihilating.

Emphasis on case, because Tris is not seen as a human being at this point, just as a subject.

Before catching her prized divergent subject though, Jeanine unfolds a terrifying extirpation movement upon the Abnegation faction, and many innocent citizens fall victim to her despotic tactics. She starts firstly, by integrating into all factions’ propaganda about the vices of the Abnegation: “Saying that they are hoarding food and supplies, and slandering Tris’s father and other Abnegation leaders with the goal of turning the other factions against them” (Karr 199). Her initial tactic is to weave distrust and miscommunication, make the mass population doubt the current leaders in charge to the point that when she starts attacking them outright, no one will come to their defense.

Author Julia Karr also found this parallel hauntingly similar to the historical precedent Winslet made a comparison to: “This was the same tactic used by Hitler

127

against the Jews prior to, and throughout World War II. Unlike Jeanine’s devious

undermining of Abnegation through rumors and innuendos, Hitler was never subtle about

his anti-Semitic rhetoric” (199-200). Her attempted annihilation of Abnegation started

slowly and built up with the help of the Dauntless, but it all came down to how Jeanine

mirrored Hitler’s moves into her own devious fight for control over those who would not

agree with her. Even the Dauntless soldiers that ended up carrying out Jeanine’s early

stages of genocide against the divergent and Abnegation members did not know what

they were participating in. Using Erudite laboratory technology to weaponize her

brainwashing serum, Jeanine had every member of Dauntless inoculated with her

creation. So that for all intents and purposes, they became her zombie army, hypnotized and unaware of the murders they were committing by her command. Symbolic is it not, to the “hypnosis” of the German people under Hitler’s reign?

In his autobiography Mein Kampf, Hitler blamed the Jews for everything that

could have gone wrong in Germany from losing WWI to their Depression of 1929: “He

tapped into Germans’ dissatisfaction and their established prejudices against the Jews,

and used it to build, then solidify, his own power” (Karr 200). Every weakness, every

fault within his society became a potential reason to build mistrust and prejudice against

his targeted scapegoat. Hitler claimed that Jews became wealthy on the backs of

struggling and starving German people. Abnegation hoarded resources from the starving

factionless and hardworking Amity, according to Jeanine’s propaganda. Furthermore,

Abnegation supposedly lied to Candor and withheld political freedoms from Dauntless.

Suddenly, every faction seemed to have been abused by Abnegation as the entire German

nation seemed to have been cheated by the Jewish, according to Hitler’s propaganda.

128

For this reason, Jeanine’s propaganda works its magic and keeps the other

factions from helping Abnegation once Dauntless starts hunting them down, at Jeanine’s

command. Candor turns the Abnegation survivors away outright, while Amity refuses to

help directly though they do offer shelter: “‘We have arrived at the conclusion that we

will establish our faction headquarters as a safe house for members of all factions...under

a set of conditions’” (Roth, Insurgent 14). Johanna, the leader of Amity, declares that should the Abnegation refugees cause conflict or initiate trouble of any kind, they will be reported to Erudite and Dauntless. No other assistance will be provided either, in the fight against those attacking them. Jeanine’s propaganda campaign is powerful enough to instill a cloud of ignorance and refusal to assist.

Yet, in paying heed to her slander the other factions lack the foresight to see that while Jeanine was solely targeting Abnegation at that point in time, soon enough it could and would be their factions as well: “What happened to Abnegation could just as easily happen to them. And I can’t help but compare this to the rest of the free world, which initially refused to censure or condemn Hitler’s actions. World leaders stuck their collective heads in the sand until Hitler’s atrocities could no longer be ignored” (Karr

201). Collective human behavior follows these patterns laid out by Milgram, Pinker,

Adorno, Arendt and others. The reasoning behind the lack of action on the part of the world leaders during WWII or the other three factions during the Abnegation genocide is horrifyingly simple: “What explains people’s movements toward extremism? There are two major answers. The first is based on the exchange of information. People respond to the information held by others” (Sunstein 133). A lack of action is an extreme on the

129

furthest side of one spectrum, and it is a result of reaction to the information released into

circulation. Simply put, the general public was conditioned by misinformation.

Sunstein’s second reason has to do with social influence—who is growing in

power and yielding more control? Authoritarian leaders hold the stronger conviction to sway others in following them by convincing the masses of information that is incorrect but still believable: “They might think that the current regime is all right, or pretty good, but if they get some facts, or a few stories, they can be persuaded that it is really bad”

(Sunstein 136). Not one faction complained about the balanced policies and regulations of the Abnegation leaders until the misinformation (propaganda) started circulating; and then all of a sudden, the remaining factions were convinced at the lack of righteousness behind the Abnegation rulings.

Leaving the doors open to the annihilation of a defenseless faction, and the lack of support from the unavailing remaining factions who desired to keep their heads in the sand during the initiating genocide. Even more disturbing is that Jeanine started not only as Erudite’s leader, but also as a representative on that same Abnegation council she later targeted: “The city is ruled by a council of fifty people, composed entirely of representatives from Abnegation, because our faction is regarded as incorruptible, due to our commitment to selflessness...Representatives from each of the other factions can speak in the meetings on behalf of a particular issue, but ultimately, the decision is the council’s” (Roth, Divergent 18). Jeanine served as the sole Erudite representative on the

Abnegation council that held the upper hand in all final decisions; and yet, she successfully machinated her way into discrediting all fifty members and then dismembering their incorruptible council. Proficient in dealing with that supposedly

130

delicate balance between truth and fiction, Jeanine deployed half-truths and rumors, making them stronger in the process of spreading them. She took doubts and made them her weapons. Finally, she uses indecision as her victims’ downfall, just as she took apart the network of the Abnegation council, so too does she take apart the five factions and reorganizes them into her regime.

What kept Jeanine’s methods from fully taking over Chicago was Tris, Tobias

(her lover), and the few allies they made along the way to stopping Jeanine’s larger plans.

The few who could stand strong in face of such overwhelming opposition. Harari actually brought up President Lincoln’s historic principles of truth in order to draw the parallel between truth and lies and those who can separate the two clearly: “Abraham Lincoln said you cannot deceive everybody all the time. Well, that’s wishful thinking. In practice, the power of human cooperation networks depends on a delicate balance between the truth and fiction” (Harari 170). Though Harari clashes with the prevailing words of

Lincoln, he draws on a key point, human cooperation determines the legitimacy behind any truth. Even if the mainstream follows one path, there can and usually are individuals who are not buying what everyone else is sold on. That is why some of Hitler’s top military leaders within his own inner circle, tried to assassinate him. Lincoln, it seems, was right. In reality and in fictional accounts, it only takes a few who refuse to be deceived to stop a larger evil from fully taking shape. Tris and her few are in that same boat, of fighting a larger evil because they could not look the other way, as everyone else did. Furthermore, Jeanine is not a reflection of Lincoln’s ideals either, she is a fictional symbol of “what if” carried through to the extreme.

131

But let us take a step back for one second to reconsider the motivation behind this particular despot of Roth’s creation. There is a coercive mantra that Jeanine enjoys sharing publicly, which portrays her unfaltering mentality. You can see her repeating different versions of this one mantra throughout the first film: “The faction system is a living being composed of cells: all of you. And the only way it can survive and thrive is for each of you to claim your rightful place. The future belongs to those who know where they belong” (Burger, Divergent 0:17:30-0:17:51). Powerfully impactful words spoken by the self-elected leader supreme who displays the totalitarian personal belief system she holds others accountable to. If you know your place in my world, only then can you be guaranteed a future. A straightforward mindset to force-feed the public and force their obedience. And just as Collins’ President Snow and President Coin fought to maintain control by projecting their idea of an organized and beneficial society founded on this principle of conformity, so too does Jeanine fight to maintain this version of authority as well.

This common denominator is the shared quality of all of our dystopian despots and our historical ones as well, because those who control the mass control the history by which the people live and remember who they were and what they did. Harari states,

“The cold hand of the past emerges from the grave of our ancestors, grips us by the neck and directs our gaze towards a single future” (60). What Harari means by this is that leadership is defined by how they approach history. Those who want to rewrite it, aim to control the vision of the future as well. Their goals need to become the public’s goals, in order for there to be a realistic projection of when and how they can achieve that vision.

From the public’s point of view, then, when they are under this influence, there is a

132

steady path to follow and no reason to deviate. This is an ironclad grip once put into

position, “We have felt that grip from the moment we were born, so we assume that it is a

natural and inescapable part of who we are. Therefore we seldom try to shake ourselves

free, and envision alternative futures” (Harari 60). That inherent “sheep mentality” is

something history has shown leaders to bank on, hoping that the masses would carry over

their ideals into action.

It is this exact quality that proves to be the most powerful motivator in manipulating large masses of people to live one way, think one way, and die for one cause. Claeys associates this back to collectivism: “Collectivism does not seek only to promote a uniform devotion to the common good. Mechanical uniformity and precision have become the paradigm of human rationality. Society aims to create people as efficient as machines by making society machine-like” (Dystopia: A Natural History

342). These very words speak to Jeanine’s heart: “making society machine-like,” because

that is also how she prefers for people to see her as. To compare her to something else, it

must not be human to start with, “‘Jeanine’s so smart you can see it even before she says

anything. Like…a walking, talking computer’” (Roth, Divergent 131). Computers follow

formulas and algorithms uniformly. Their mechanical precision is cohesive and

dependable.

In a leader’s mind where knowledge is the prized possession, instilling such a

collectivist form of societal obedience is basically achieving that utopian state. Her every

speech to the public continually reiterates Claeys’s earlier message. Right before the

choosing ceremony, Jeanine attempts to stamp this mentality onto then naïve Tris. In the

film, Shailene Woodley who plays Tris, looks upon the power of Jeanine’s façade and the

133

strength behind Jeanine’s words, and Tris’s eyes open in doubt and fear as she takes them

in. The camera even allows us to see Tris’s physical reaction, as her shoulders come up in

defense and her eyes quickly look back to her parents for support. Not that it stops

Jeanine from stepping closer and speaking slowly and clearly, making sure everyone

around them hears her words of wisdom as well as the one graced with her direct

presence, “‘I want you to choose who you truly are and where you truly belong. Not on a

whim, not because you wish for someone you’re not, but because you honestly know yourself. I want you to choose wisely. And I know you will’” (Burger, Divergent

0:17:09- 0:17:26). Jeanine promotes a devotion to the true self, however one that is

devoid of freewill and based not on liberating personal choices, but on this inherent belief

in the system that has guided you all along towards the right and wise choice.

The inevitability of falling into a mechanical uniformity that will serve the greater

good of Chicago is deeply felt in Jeanine’s speeches and campaigns. Returning to

Klosterman’s larger argument on the difficulties of fighting modern villainy, he makes a unique point in the struggle to fight it: “‘You might not like where we’re going, and tomorrow might be worse than yesterday. But it’s still going to happen, whether you like it or not. It’s inevitable’” (Klosterman 225). Embracing Jeanine’s inevitable tomorrow is the hardest pill to take, and also one that Tris and her allies refuse to take without a fight.

No matter how likely the progress of tomorrow may be, its history will not be written until it passes. And until then, there is a fighting chance for the outcasts that have not embraced Jeanine’s brainwashing propaganda to alter its course.

In a pivotal scene within the first film, Jeanine’s first one-on-one with Tris illustrates the selling point of her hardcore ideology that she continues to try and force-

134

feed: “It’s hard to let go. Faction before blood, it’s an important ideal but sometimes

difficult to fulfill. It goes against human nature, but that is a weakness we need to

overcome” (Burger, Divergent 1:20:49-1:21:07). Jeanine is saying that human nature can

be overcome, when by definition it cannot, and that is her fatal flaw. Her goals are in contradiction to human nature. After all, attempts to correct human weaknesses are

shown in practice throughout utopian tradition, and the results are always the same:

unattainable perfection remaining ever the more distant.

Kate Winslet delivers these words emphasizing “faction before blood” matter-of-

factly, and the camera highlights her machine-like dialogue by mirroring it in her

appearance and movements just as precisely. She sits as straight as possible, with a dark

blue business suit and a perfect blond haircut that leaves not one hair out of place. The

camera angle is at her eye level, yet the medium closeup shot displays her dominant stare

and posture acutely at the same time to emphasize that she is the entire package. She

adjusts her top coat swiftly with one move as they sit down with Tris, and the camera

turns around to show the Erudite headquarters quickly enough to make another parallel to

Jeanine’s character: they are all grandiose and white-washed, the only elements that stick

out are the various glass tops to desks, windows, and ceilings. The overabundance of

glass decor helps to emphasize the pure advantage to knowledge and the see-through

benefits of accepting this ideology as represented by Erudite’s leader here. But then

again, glass is also symbolic of looking strong but being breakable, just as Jeanine’s

truths come off as overpowering but in actuality, are not without points of weakness.

With director Neil Burger’s preference for the rack-focusing technique, the

viewers’ attention is forcibly drawn from Jeanine to her backgrounds to the horrified

135

expression on Tris’s face, as she sits across from Jeanine. This pulled focus is changed

several times in this one scene, to emphasize the level of power and dominance Jeanine is

trying to exude over Tris, from their first meeting. As Tris cautiously says, “You think

that human nature is weakness,” the focus is pulled again to Jeanine as she smiles self-

assuredly and replies, “Human nature is the enemy. Human nature is to keep secrets, lie,

steal, and I want to eradicate that. That’s how we will maintain a stable peaceful society”

(Burger, Divergent 1:21:11-1:21:25). Jeanine is basically proclaiming the manifesto that

allows for her to eradicate the Abnegation faction, including most of Tris’s family and

friends within it. Knowing that, Jeanine still smiles and says it as a veritable fact to the

one young woman who has the potential to stop her.

While explaining her radical belief to a frightened and cajoled Tris, Jeanine

continues to display the marks of her machine-like personality even further. From the

smoothing of her suit to the elegant holding of her teacup, and even to the composed and

calculated placement of the chinaware back onto her glass side table without one

unnecessary movement, this is a woman shown inside-out to be the very threat worth

fearing the most. Tris thinks back to all the warnings of danger she received, and now they all point to Jeanine being at the center of them, “She is the danger Tori and my mother warned me about, the danger of being Divergent. Sitting right in front of me”

(Roth, Divergent 147). Tris may be the heroine of the story, but at this first meeting, she only begins to sense the danger ahead. Tris only begins to link the dots as to who is the true threat. It is this cold, composed, and collected Erudite leader who sits across smiling

the smile meant to indoctrinate fear.

136

Most overwhelming of all is that fear is not one finite emotion that shows itself

and dissipates forever more. Tris does not encounter and defeat her fear at that one

meeting, nor even by overthrowing Jeanine’s doomed reign. It comes back to hit Tris again and again, because she is part of that postmodern cycle of crisis mode that

Christopher Sharrett writes about in his book, Crisis Cinema: The Apocalyptic Idea in

Postmodern Narrative Film. Sharrett establishes that even the word “crisis” holds many layers and answers that we can connect our character’s plights to going forward, “The term ‘crisis’ often seems comfortable both to radical and conservatives critics of postmodernity since it contains a sense of renewal… ‘Crisis’ has always suggested a cyclical occurrence” (2). Sharrett argues that most modern works, especially those dealing with darker genres such as dystopias, soak in the postmodern era’s necessity for a crisis mode that never folds up; and in this sense, the treacherous feelings of fear and danger always make a promised return.

That is the appeal of catastrophe: burning old worlds to the ground, finding a possible moment of peace, and then having the embers of dissatisfaction and rebellion burn once again. Tris left her old world of Abnegation, she found a moment of peace with her new identity at Dauntless, then chaos burned through her new world again. In this order, meeting and understanding what kind of threat Jeanine symbolizes is just one more obstacle Tris must face in that chaos that takes away her momentary peace. Stopping

Jeanine’s genocide is one of Tris’s greatest hurdles however. Campbell elucidates that breaking down these barriers are part of step four, the trials of the protagonist, “The whole sense of the difficult world of trials...one by one the resistances are broken” (86).

137

Monsters being plural, trials being plural, and breaking resistance implying that familiar

cyclical occurrence that one is never enough.

In Insurgent, after Tris has stopped Jeanine from fulfilling her plan of complete

annihilation of Abnegation and divergents, she is not rid of the villainous woman herself.

Unexpectedly, another trial for Tris, is to represent the side of justice, in determining

what kind of punishment Jeanine deserves, instead of immediate death. This is a hurdle

that sets up what kind of heroine Tris truly is. Katniss never asked for President Snow’s

execution, though she was given the key role in it. When determining what sentence

Jeanine deserves, Tris and her comrades consider a death penalty befitting the many she

killed to achieve her goals. Yet, staying true to herself and believing in justice over

vengeance, Tris considers other options. Meanwhile as she is being threatened and

interrogated, Jeanine is not one to back down nor give in to the crisis mode of fear: “‘The

reasons for my actions are beyond your understanding,’ Jeanine says. ‘I was willing to

make a sacrifice for the greater good, something you have never understood’ (Roth,

Insurgent 162). Just as President Snow faced his execution head on by defending his decisions and sewing doubt in his executioners, so too does Jeanine face hers head on by refusing to succumb to the threatening tactics of Tris’s comrades.

Instead, Jeanine defends her decisions and attempts to persuade her informal jury

of her usefulness. The most terrifying part is that the damage of Jeanine’s reign is already

done, and it has had a disturbing effect on everyone who survived her genocide. George

Orwell once wrote, “We do not merely destroy our enemies; we change them” (319). In

saying that, Orwell meant that reworking or brainwashing the minds of the enemies

meant that death was not the ultimate goal. Unfortunately, while Jeanine did not kill

138

everyone, she killed enough to change the values and decision-making skills of the remaining survivors. Jeanine did not destroy the survivors outright, but she changed them viciously to mirror her own homicidal tendencies.

In the ensuing scene that spells Jeanine’s ultimate demise, its shows just how much her tactics ruined her chances at surviving. The only one who is able to remain true to her core and steadfast in her beliefs is our protagonist, Tris:

‘I hate her as much as you do. I have no reason to defend her. I’m telling you the

truth. This is important.’ Tori is silent. I think, for a moment, that I’ve won, that

I’ve persuaded her. But then she says, ‘Nothing is more important than her death.’

‘If that’s what you insist upon believing,’ I say, ‘I can’t help you. But I’m also not

going to let you kill her.’ Tori pushes herself to her knees, and wipes my blood

from her chin. She looks up into my eyes. ‘I am a Dauntless leader,’ she says.

‘You don’t get to decide what I do.’ And before I can think— Before I can even

think about firing the gun I’m holding— She draws a long knife from the side of

her boot, lunges, and stabs Jeanine in the stomach. I yell. Jeanine releases a

horrible sound—a gurgling, screaming, dying sound. (Roth, Insurgent 499-500)

Tori, a survivor and newly minted Divergent leader had a personal vendetta against

Jeanine, just as Tris did. They both lost family members as a direct result of Jeanine’s bloodthirsty orders. The only difference here is that Tris is still able to keep a cool head and see that there is value in keeping Jeanine alive, that vengeance does not equal justice.

Tori did not or could not see that line anymore, her judgement was clouded to the point that she acted rashly and dealt Jeanine a death blow without an actual sentencing. Jeanine

139

died in an excruciatingly painful way as a result, bleeding out from the stomach, a

torturous method familiar to many infantry soldiers.

In doing so, there is an immense contrast shown between those who remain

narrow-minded or confined within the barriers of their personal pain, and those who

answer to a higher calling without regard to personal vendetta. To answer the call of true heroism, it means to step outside the walls of personal limitations, “This reveals her true

character...every hero must encounter who steps an inch outside the walls of [her]

tradition” (Campbell 77). Tris reveals her true character by speaking up for her moral

code, in trying to keep alive the person responsible for the death of her parents and

manipulation of her brother. The problem is that Tris must encounter those who do not

listen or accept her ideas, just as Campbell attests, the hero must deal with those who

walk around her choices and thoughts. This is a necessary learning curb where she is

forced to step outside her ideologies as a result of not being heeded.

In spite of Tris’s pleas for mercy, Jeanine dies a sad and pitiable death. Not an

inordinate execution where you can go down with a conspicuous smile, as President

Snow did, nor an unexpected execution from the arrow of a hero, as President Coin did.

Jeanine dies being stabbed in the stomach by someone pushed too far by her reign of

terror: “Human reason can excuse any evil; that is why it's so important that we don't rely

on it” (Roth, Divergent 45). These were the words of Tris’s father that she took to heart,

but regrettably, not everyone learned them to heart as Tris did. Jeanine relied on evil and

died at the hands of Tori, who resorted to evil as a result of her personal vendetta that

became her reason to justify a murder for a murderer. For Tori, it was justice. For Tris, it

was immoral. For Roth, it is the consequence of an atrocious cycle with no end.

140

Jeanine’s most powerful tool was manipulating the behavior of others, to the point

where it finally cost her her life. She used political influence, tactical intelligence, and

different forms of brainwashing propaganda to elicit a reign of conformity to “faction

before blood.” Jeanine’s strength became her ultimate weakness: her intelligence. That

obsession to continually place her IQ above others’ potential led to Jeanine being

blindsided by Tris, a young woman who resorted more to survival instinct and well-bred morals than cold-hearted calculations. Considering the miserable demise to such a powerful Erudite leader, the rule of tyranny is once again thwarted. Jeanine may have changed the landscape of gender role models, even when it comes to villains, but the contemporary experience of dystopian tradition remains.

In consideration of Snow, Coin, and now Jeanine, Booker’s three tactics of tyrants stands almost completely confirmed with the obsessive need to produce obedience, manipulate specific behaviors out of the public, and engineer individuals who lack the necessary qualities (74). Collins showed the horrors that come with dictators who focus on producing obedience. Both Snow and Coin led frightening reigns full of potential in using conformity to instill obedience. Roth displayed how catastrophic it is for leaders who fixate on manipulating behavior, as Jeanine did not even receive an honorable death after being thwarted out of ensuring faction-focused behavior from everyone within Chicago. Still, one more tactic remains, a tyrant who rules by engineering individuals. Thus, the master manipulator behind the curtains finally emerges.

141

CHAPTER NINE: GENETICALLY PURE AND PROUD IN DIVERGENT

“I will find new habits, new thoughts, new rules. I will become something else”

(Roth, Divergent 39).

To usher in this third phase of tyranny is someone unexpected, someone who does not show himself until the third novel and film, Allegiant. This is an individual who leads not by example, but by engineering the right example in the first place. The man behind the curtains, who operated outsides the limits of Chicago but controlled everything that was set up within it: David, the leader of the Bureau. Through the character of David,

Roth depicts the deadliest antagonist of the entire series. Yes, Jeanine represented her role wickedly well, but she worked within the confines of Chicago alone, and within the constrictions set up by David in the first place. Dramatic irony allowed for readers to eventually catch on that even the cunning Jeanine was being manipulated by David.

While Tris and her allies discover this at the onset of Allegiant, Jeanine dies at the denouement of Insurgent, without ever having found out that she was actually a pawn in a much bigger game.

Jeanine was not only being manipulated by this elusive David however, as

Tobias’s mother (Evelyn Johnson-Eaton), makes an entrance in Insurgent to represent another minor antagonist. Evelyn, the leader of the Factionless, was responsible for destabilizing Jeanine’s political influence over other factions and military control over

Dauntless. Working from the shadows with the other factionless, Evelyn assisted Tris’s

142

mission to supposedly take out a tyrant in order to bring about peace. Her real motive wasto usurp Jeanine’s newfound position in order to abolish all factions. Evelyn’s character represents less antagonism towards Tris, and more towards the tricking and double-crossing between antagonists themselves. Evelyn is the chaos agent of the series, trying to disrupt an already unsteady period within Chicago and always fighting for a further fight. Her motto represents everything that she stands for, “Sometimes drastic change requires drastic measures’” (Roth, Insurgent 110). Though Evelyn’s coup of

Jeanine’s coup was also temporary, it allowed for us to see that female villains continue to widen the gap on gender restrictions with their villainous potential.

Notwithstanding Jeanine’s rule of tyranny and the chaos that Evelyn brought, these powerful women are still only playing within the restrictions of the sole reality they know: the boundaries of Chicago. Outside those boundaries is the man who sets up their environment, plants their radical ideas, and manipulates them towards actions that would better carry out his long-term goals. Consider this: David was the man who manipulated

Jeanine’s ideas on genetic divergence and therefore the need to separate them out, because he had need of the divergent DNA for his own research. Of course, it was

Jeanine’s initiative and plan to then annihilate the divergents after weeding them out of the factions. It was also David who guided Evelyn towards a factionless fantasy and weaponized her initiative to wipe out everyone’s memories of a faction-led lifestyle within the boundaries of Chicago. And, he did all this without either women ever knowing of his existence or influence on them. Therefore the question that begs to be answered: who is David?

143

David is the man in charge of all experimental cities, such as we find out Chicago

to be. He is the leader of The Bureau of Genetic Welfare, an organization that controls

the world outside of the safe bubble of Chicago. When Tris is first introduced to him, he

is welcoming and kind: “An older man wearing a smile and a dark blue uniform, just like

all the others. When he sees us approaching, he spreads his hands as if to welcome us.

David, I assume. ‘This,’ the man says, ‘is what we’ve waited for since the very

beginning’” (Roth, Allegiant 118). He does not set himself apart in dress code, demeanor,

or even in his expressions, as Jeanine did. He blends in with his people and appears to

come off as a kind teacher, instead of a cruel dictator. At their first meeting, he opened his arms to Tris and treated her as if his prodigal daughter had finally returned home.

Who would guess that he would also be Tris’s undoing, the reason behind her death.

At the start of Allegiant, David is so delighted to have Tris come into his world.

His delight stems from the same exact reason Jeanine feared Tris in the first place: her divergent DNA. Within Chicago, Tris’s divergent DNA created a huge element of danger for her because Tris did not belong to any one faction completely, “I know what’s true and what’s not. I am Divergent, so I am not nobody, there’s no such thing as ‘safe,’”

(Roth, Insurgent 120). Outside the limits of the experimental city Tris grew up in, her

DNA is actually a miracle that is sought for study. Genetic studies that are meant to stabilize the world at large, and not just Chicago. David maintains the outside world based on different criteria—two factions instead of five, genetically pure (GPs) or genetically damaged (GDs).

David leads the outside world based on every person’s individual genetics. He created entire social experiment cities to produce the highest GPs possible, which is why

144

he treated Tris as his prodigal daughter, as she is his most successful result thus far. The

problem with his classification is that there is still a separation, “Segregation, by its very

nature, focuses on exclusion rather than inclusion, and that comes with the very real risk

of not only setting person against person, but group against group” (Karr 193). The

factions broke out in civil war because of the qualities they valued and saw as more

important in relation to the other four factions, egged on by Jeanine and her preference

for cold calculating knowledge above all else. Take a step outside of the experiment of

Chicago, and it is even crueler to be segregated based on one’s genetic makeup. The

Bureau that is led by David, did not create a better or more different world, because they

continued to set people apart from each other: “The Bureau is all about reinforcing ideas

that lead to societal oppression. They oppress in subtle ways than turning fire hoses on

people” (Krokos 178). Historical precedents are not even needed to see that their subtle

oppression is still a suppression of the people deemed inferior. Of course, just as the

Panem had a reason for its annual ritual of the Hunger Games due to historical

devastation, so too is Roth’s creation of GPs and GDs based on a version of historical

catastrophe.

In the Divergent storyline, the horrors of the nation’s past lie with the initial

desire for genetic enhancement. Roth’s idea for such a biogenetic foundation is simple,

“‘It seemed advantageous to our ancestors to reduce the risk of these undesirable qualities showing up in our population by correcting them. In other words, by editing humanity’”

(Allegiant 121-2). This is how David starts to explain the origins of the Purity War that

destroyed the United States of America. The constant theme of human enhancement that

always leads to disaster, it is not a newly discovered theme nor is it a rare one. Joss

145

Whedon’s 2002 television series, Firefly, and his 2005 film, Serenity, touched on this

theme multiple times and implemented it into popular culture’s modern construct of what

truly defines humanity. Though Whedon’s representation was by far not the first, his

radical example within Serenity showed the extreme to which a government is willing to

go in order to achieve an edited humanity, as David alluded to. In Serenity, Whedon used

spellbinding cinematography to present the viewers with the futuristic planet of Miranda,

only to uncover that this beautiful world designed a drug to eradicate aggression and

doused their people with it. Without studying all the short-term and long-term consequences, Miranda’s government created the worst-case scenario instead: monstrous creatures who symbolized the cruel twist in biogenetic plans. And Whedon’s message became solidified into not only American cinematic history, but American popular culture at large, to which Roth now joins her trilogy. People that do not fit into the established ideal of what defines proper humanity end up being the ones who save it, because they rebel against the norms that yield horrendous atrocities.

From even earlier dystopian film classics such as Gattaca (1997), that built an entire storyline around global genetic human classification and subjugation, to later dystopian literature reiterating these same dangers, such as with Allyson B. Condie’s

Matched trilogy (2010-12) and Lauren Oliver’s Delirium trilogy (2011-13). Condie’s and

Oliver’s dystopian worlds are created around governments that enforce biogenetic

breeding and maintain it through biogenetic drugs. The horrifying consequences and

resulting rebellions join all these great futuristic films and novels to the one caution that

Roth’s focal antagonist has still not understood. Pure genes, or GPs as David has taken to

calling them, will never end with a pure utopian society. Not while there are still

146

individuals who can think and act for themselves, and therefore fight the “bandwagon effect” that yields civil wars, monstrous creatures, and all around negative outcomes.

Case in point, David’s government had a direct intervention into the welfare of the general public by enforcing genetic alterations in order to make future descendants superior. By manipulating genes more and more, instead of a superior race, there were disastrous consequences to the point that a clear division was now felt: “Humanity has never been perfect, but the genetic alterations made it worse than it had ever been before.

This manifested itself in what we call the Purity War. A civil war, waged by those with damaged genes, against the government and everyone with pure genes” (Roth, Allegiant

123). So, instead of Collins’s natural disasters that shook up the land before actual civil war erupted for control of the remaining land, Roth dives into a different dystopian fear of technological catastrophe. One that is even more realistic and relevant in today’s time than ever before.

As many current world leaders write about their concerns of genetic technology taking it a step too far, Roth researched these concerns before addressing them in her third book: “I wanted a very scientific explanation for what divergence was...so for the third book, there was a crazy amount of research, a lot about genetic engineering, and a little about the history of eugenics movement in the US” (“Veronica Roth Interview,”

YouTube). In admitting to the relevance of her studies to today’s concerns, Roth shapes her ultimate antagonist and his reign around the fears that circumvent our present society.

There are emerging companies today that help select particular traits for your unborn children, just as there is rising medical research to cure certain genetic deficiencies in the womb. And this is only one side to the realistic track of genetic technology today.

147

Based on today’s track, tomorrow becomes more precarious and therefore the perfect breeding ground for dystopian narratives. Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama, is one world leader who reflects upon the exact issue that Roth draws her inspiration from when creating David and his mentality for valuing genetically perfected individuals. In many conferences, interviews, and even in his book, The Universe in a Single Atom,

Gyatso predicts and warns against this kind of eugenic-twisted mentality: “We have to bear in mind the long-term impact of this kind of manipulation on the species as a whole, given that its effects of limiting the diversity of humanity and the tolerance that goes with it, which is one of the marvels of life” (136). Gyatso outlines the reasoning used for

Roth’s Purity War in this passage right here by stating that in perfecting certain traits, tolerance for others is decreased. Genetic purity by itself is not a realistic possibility, as there is no such thing as an ideal human being to start with. Purity in this sense, is a fiction-based objective and nightmare all in one. Discrimination and subjugation on the other hand, is one of the most commonly repeated cultural vices that continues on strongly in our history, present, and works of futurized futures.

Diversity is limited as one group perfects itself, while the other is left to be subjugated. Genetically pure versus genetically damaged is what Roth depicts as a feasible consequence due to our course of action in scientific advancement and cultural practice. While technology is meant to better life, in this situation it feeds separation:

“Society will find itself translating an inequality of circumstance into an inequality of nature...At the social level, it will reinforce--even perpetuate--our disparities, and it will make their reversal much more difficult. In political matters, it will breed a ruling elite, whose claims to power will be invocations of an intrinsic natural superiority” (Gyatso

148

136). Check and check on both accounts, not only within Chicago’s experiment of five

factions, but outside with David’s Bureau of Genetic Welfare as well.

The Bureau places the elite with their intrinsic natural superiority higher in the

social order, simply because their genes are “pure”. The disparity of the genetically damaged is not reversible either, as their descendants continue to be declassified and live

on the fringe of society. Gyatso makes the forecast and Roth paints the picture, losing one

essential message in the mix of all this biotechnology aftermath: “All human beings have

an equal value and an equal potential for goodness” (137). The belief in equality and

potential for goodness is the very ideal that many forget living in a faction-based society

of categorization, and it takes the purest one of all to remind everyone else of this lesson.

Tris initially refused to be categorized into one faction as her mind allowed her to

engage in multiple personality traits simultaneously, and it was Jeanine who put the fear

into her to hide this ability of divergence. David welcomes and prides himself on just

how divergent Tris is, as if her genetically pure DNA is his personal success. Yet, when

her beloved Tobias is shown to be genetically damaged and not as divergent as everyone

thought he was, it changes nothing in her perspective: “‘You’re the same person you

were five minutes ago and four months ago and eighteen years ago. This doesn’t change

anything about you’” (Roth, Allegiant 177). In Tris’s point of view, genes do not define

what kind of person Tobias is. His actions and decisions are more important, and that is

what she was trying to convince him of. The very words that Gyatso emphasizes above

all genetic enhancements: “A basic equality of our human nature” (136). Human nature

should not be altered or corrected, not if not deep down, it is already so pure and good.

149

It is a losing battle when David continues to subvert Tris’s message of equality by

emphasizing the importance of her DNA above everyone else’s. He makes her his

personal assistant, separates Tris from Tobias and her other genetically damaged friends,

and attempts to convince her that the Bureau headquarters is her home where she truly

belongs. This authoritarian quality shows no gender limits either, as Jeanine too fought

for “faction before blood” in order to prove that one’s new community is their true home.

Be it the faction you chose or the Bureau that accepted you, the new home is meant to

cute ties away from the old. As Campbell would put it, the new world is more desirable

now than the ordinary world is behind the protagonist (75). That feeling of belonging is

manipulative on David’s part because it is something Tris could never truly acquire in

Chicago. For someone who held steadfast to her beliefs even in the face of death, now

Tris is put into a confused state of mind: “I don’t know what’s right or wrong. I don’t

know anything about this country or the way it works or what it needs to change” (Roth,

Allegiant 282). While Tris begins to doubt herself and on what side she is on, she never

forgets that classifying and sentencing others is not the way.

In this new world that David has welcomed Tris into, he has placed her into a

precarious situation where someone of lesser capability would have already succumbed to the feeling of belonging and closed their eyes to the remaining subjugation around.

Tris does not succumb as easily; her inner worth shines through as an admirable standard for heroism. Tris presents to us a moral code worth acknowledging and defending,

especially going into a future outlined by our own avaricious initiatives. Francis

Fukuyama writes about such a need for a higher moral code in the age of

biotechnological prowess in his book, Our Posthuman Future. There, Fukuyama urges

150

heroes of the future to “find a source of that superior human moral status” to stick to in

times of confusion and doubt placed upon us, by others in power (77). That source of

inner strength is fueled from a superior moral code.

Referencing the same concerns Gyatso does about biotechnology consequences,

Fukuyama states: “We do not have to posit a return of state-sponsored eugenics or widespread genetic engineering to see how this could happen” (16). The scenario

Fukuyama forecasts in his prediction upon our scientific future aligns with Roth’s dystopian projection just as neatly. Dubbing the future classification into two groups,

GenRich and GenPoor, Fukuyama’s concern relies on what could genetically happen to us as a species tomorrow, based on what is produced today. For him, GenRich is Roth’s version of genetically pure (GP), and GenPoor is genetically damaged (GD). If the biotechnology of today proceeds towards the potential of not only genetically enhancing certain traits, but also personality qualities as Roth describes in her premise about the

Purity War, state-sponsored eugenics or widespread genetic engineering becomes the feasible forecast so many now fear.

Whatever name you dub the enhanced beings (be it GenRich or GP), their status to superiority does not become a question of opinion but instead it is a matter of fact.

Fukuyama warns of this possibility with the creation of such a class, “GenRich...might assign themselves rights superior to those of the GenPoor. Since there is no stable essence common to all human beings, or rather because that essence is variable and subject to human manipulation, why not create a race born with metaphorical saddles on their backs, and another with boots and spurs to ride them? Why not seize that power”

(154)? Seizing the power and control over human life that was once left to the lottery of

151

chance does create this drastic binary where the gray line fades altogether. Taking out

that variable of higher moral power that could unite humanity, instead it is as Fukuyama

metaphorically puts it, a social hierarchy installed from the get-go. Jeanine may have

thought she was wearing the boots and spurs; but that was in her experimental Chicago

bubble. In the outside world, it is David at the helm. Everyone who fit so well into their

factions and never questioned the reasons, they automatically wear those “metaphorical

saddles on their backs”.

Even those who were hunted on suspicion of being divergent within Chicago,

upon entering the outside world, are not automatically given a free pass to the higher

ranks of the Bureau’s social hierarchy. It is not a guarantee that they are genetically pure

once they enter the outside world just because they fought to break free from their five- faction system. One of David’s specialties is using science to take away people’s hopes and crush them before they even have a chance to feel truly liberated: “‘You are not

Divergent. Your genes are still damaged, but you have a genetic anomaly that allows you to be aware during simulations anyway. You have, in other words, the appearance of a

Divergent without actually being one’” (Roth, Allegiant 176). This is David’s personal scientist breaking down the scientific reality of Tobias’s genes, showing him that the one thing Tobias thought was special about himself, and what helped him connect on a personal level with Tris, is actually an anomaly and, therefore, an illusion. With one lab result, Tobias and Tris are no longer on the same playing field. Though Tris refuses to see the dissolution of equality based on genetics, Tobias is shattered by this news. To him, it means to either accept the new reality of his inferior status or to join the new

152

underground rebellion that wishes to break David’s rule, just as they had broken

Jeanine’s.

In the Insurgent film, director Robert Schwentke includes the scene that solidifies

Tobias’s certainty. Tobias was asked to assist in a raid on the outskirts of the Bureau.

There he sees in person, the Bureau soldiers not just saving the orphaned children, but actually removing their memories before taking them back to the Bureau. In that moment,

Tobias’s mind is settled on what side of the battle he lies on, in the genetic war that is afoot. The cinematography of this scene Schwentke shot, shows the glory of a double layered battle, where on the surface, we see children being captured in a desert barren of almost any color besides yellow sand and white dust, yielding the saddest of protection for its outcasts (Insurgent 1:01:30-1:05:05). The glory though, lies not with the soldiers’ victory over the outcasts and the retrieval of the genetically damaged children, but with

Tobias’s epiphany. His eyes grant the viewers the vivid color of red as he sees the soldiers’ captures play out, the remaining outcasts’ escape, and the actions of the memory swiping bursting in full color for him. The vividness of color in combination to the musical score picking up the beat to an extremely agitated and suspenseful tone, dramatizing the moment upon this barren scene, symbolizes Tobias’s understanding of not genetically damaged problems, but of immorally wrong actions.

The rebels that are found within David’s Bureau have their own agenda. They are the little pawns trying to usurp the king’s rule of unjust subjugation. Since every social status, community role, and work position is dependent on one’s genes, many of the rebels belong to the inferior GD status. These GDs have a reason to desire change, “GDs are told they are equals, yet they live every day with inequalities. A murder of a GD by a

153

GP might be prosecuted as a case of manslaughter, if it’s prosecuted at all. GDs are not

allowed to move into positions of authority in the Bureau, included in decision-making,

or allowed to have leadership roles” (Karr 198). History is strewn with social inequalities,

from slavery to gender and sexuality. There has always been a cause to fight for. Fighting

for justice across history, there has yet to be a time of true equality and peace for all. The

only hope is contingent upon a future that does not repeat the mistakes of our past.

Equality is the fleeting hope that never fully extinguishes. Fukuyama comments

on this burning desire, “The demand for an equality of recognition or respect is the

dominant passion of modernity” (186). Recognizing this passion, this desire, and fueling

hope is also the climax to any dystopian narrative. When the hero sees that fight is not yet

over, and acknowledges that even the new world is not perfect, that is when the crisis cycle returns to its most pivotal moment of potential to bring about change once again.

Tris shows this cyclical effect upon her realization behind David’s darker aims, “I should have known, then, that he would gladly trade thousands of GD memories--lives--for

control of the experiments. That he would trade them without even thinking of

alternatives--without feeling like he needed to bother to save them. They’re damaged, after all” (Roth, Allegiant 378). Trusting someone only goes so far until his hidden

agenda is revealed. Until his lack of sincerity and complete disregard for all human life is

made evident.

Tris’s moment of reckoning comes when she sees how similar David is to

Jeanine, how carelessly he treats the lives of those he feels inferior, and how he is willing

to shut down this underground rebellion at the cost of many innocent lives, if only to save

his experiments. The sacrifices David was willing to make parallels to the genocide

154

Jeanine was willing to initiate. Gender restrictions be damned, these are villains that disregard humanity at large, and therefore themselves. It is no longer the question of who can play the better villain, a woman or a man. It is the question of where did they leave their sense of humanity behind altogether?

The moment in Allegiant when Tris can no longer take David’s side and support

his cause for divergence research is the sixth step of Campbell’s monomyth (hero’s

journey formula). It is the moment of a hero’s crisis, when she must face her darkest hour and come to new realizations in order to move forward (Campbell 16). Tris comes to the realization that her new teacher and guide is another tyrant, and a false idol. She never passed judgement on the new order of things within the Bureau until Tris finally saw

David’s true priorities. Seeing David’s Bureau treat GDs as not fully human but as

expendable goods is her red flag, “To them, the people in our city are just containers of genetic material--just GDs, valuable or the corrected genes they pass on, and not for the brains in their heads or the hearts in their chests” (Roth, Allegiant 377). Tris may have been swayed by the comforts of belonging to this new world, but not for long.

Tris’s moral code does not allow her to close her eyes to the actual priorities of the leader within this world: “Often, such prejudices, and the reasoning they hinge on, simmer just under the surface. But an unscrupulous leader can bring these prejudices to a boil and manipulate them to meet his or her own needs” (Karr 199). When David’s manipulation goes too far, and he recommends resetting everyone’s memories by implementing a widespread memory erasure into all of Chicago and even towards the rebels within his own Bureau, Tris is horrified that no one on the council disagrees with him. They do not question their leader because he has set a comfortable standard that they

155

live by as GPs. So in order for him to protect this standard and the results of his

experiments, David pushes forward with this behavioral modification on a mass level.

Tris, who has lived within Chicago and known the people within all five factions, and upon joining the outside world has also become familiar with both GPs and GDs,

condemns any such radical measures that would take away from their free will: “Tris sees

the idea of a memory wipe as equivalent to murder. Taking away someone’s identity is

taking away who they are, and thus their entire life” (Krokos 183). From Tris’s

perspective, a person’s memory entails not just who they are but it helps them decide

what they want and should do based on what they have done in the past, it is their free

will to shape thoughts and actions based on their personal memories. Erasing memories

in order to neutralize the threats within Chicago and then erasing memories of thousands

of Bureau employees because they do not side with you, is a sacrifice that Tris is not

willing to take.

The final battle between David and Tris starts with one simple decision based on a

superior moral code that not everyone can adhere to. Gyatso put it simply, “The higher

the level of knowledge and power, the greater must be our sense of moral responsibility”

(133). The well-beloved comic book hero, Spider-Man, was taught these similar words

by his father figure, Uncle Ben: “With great power comes great responsibility” (Webb,

The Amazing Spider Man 0:37:16-0:37-46). Wise words echoed across philosophy and

popular culture, but not received by everyone. David initially introduces himself as a man

who not only has great knowledge and power, but seems to have a keen understanding of

responsibility for all people and the potential to help every single one of them.

156

In the third film, actor Jeff Daniels brings to life David’s kind facade when he

calls Tris into his office for a welcome greeting. In a point-of-view shot, Tris takes the elevator all the way up to the top of the Bureau headquarters and walks into David’s futuristic office full of trepidation and wonder (Schwentke, Allegiant 0:38:40-0:41:10). A lavish layout is presented before her eyes, full of open space that not one other place within the Bureau happens to have, because space is precious and therefore limited to everyone but the leader. The very top, where David’s office is conveniently located, symbolizes the social order that David instills into his reign. He is at the pinnacle of it, and he determines the placement of everyone else beneath him. Director Robert

Schwentke prefers to focus on the heroine’s reactions throughout the film, as do the directors of The Hunger Games films, and this welcome scene is indeed shot on the axis of what Tris sees and therefore reacts to. The unique factor that establishes the oppositional forces between these two characters pushes Schwentke to go from a point- of-view shot to a reverse-field cutting that allows the alternation of shots between Tris and David as they start to converse and react to one another. This is very important to understand because as Schwentke closes up on Tris and David, the viewers can see the innocence of Tris’s reactions to the more practiced and knowledgeable expressions of

Jeff Daniels as the deceivingly kind David.

There is a back lighting to David’s profile, the illumination from his office windows creates a soft incandescent effect to highlight his outline and make him appear even more docile as he carefully approaches the cautious Tris. Looking at her face directly, David carefully and calmly comes closer to Tris as if edging towards an unsuspecting prey, as he says: “To your people, you are divergent. To the council, you

157

are a freak. To me, you are a miracle,” opening his arms as if to welcome her home

(Schwentke, Allegiant 0:41:40-0:42:15). Tris does not want to be won over so quickly though, so she asks if David is aware of the growing tensions within her Chicago community. He smiles and even laughs a little before answering her: “I don’t want you to worry about that. Restoring order in Chicago is as important to me as it is to you. It is the only way to save the damaged” (Schwentke, Allegiant 0:42:44-0:43:05). By his choice of words and the way he reacts when the GDs are brought into the conversation should have been her first warning clue that something was amiss, because that is the first time in the scene that David actually turns his back to her. As he explains what the genetically damaged are and how important it is to rescue and cure them, David becomes more scientific and less empathetic to what it actually means to be declassified.

The more time Tris spends with David, the more she learns about who he really is and how he really thinks. When he delivers his speech to the council on why Chicago needs to be cleansed and restarted, Tris cannot believe her ears and asks him what he is doing. David’s reply echoes the horrors of Jeanine, Coin, and Snow: “I’m bringing back the factions. I hope the Allegiant will take care of the problem for me because factions work Tris. They keep the peace, they created you,” (Schwentke, Allegiant 1:16:10-

1:16:32). David is using his manipulative reasoning to explain why the brainwashing formula needs to be deployed within Chicago. In horror, Tris shakes her head and replies,

“I cannot believe I trusted you,” which makes David turn towards her and deliver the words of a man who sees only one way. And that is his way, “You want change with no sacrifice, you want peace with no struggle. The world doesn’t work like that” (1:18:20-

158

1:18:41). David does not even bother to further explain his motives after that, he just

takes Tris out of his inner circle and continues on with his agenda for eradication.

This is David’s blindspot, Tris. She is the one who costs him not only his success

in deploying the memory erasure but also his reign of power. Sunstein makes the

comparison to many fictional and real leaders based on a case study of behavioral biases

and draws a specific example to Star Wars: “Darth Vader and Emperor Palpatine suffer

from both unrealistic optimism and self-serving bias; they think that everything is going to work out in their favor. Their overconfidence leads them to make big mistakes at critical moments” (75). Taking Sunstein’s Star Wars comparison and applying it to

David’s behavior and actions, shows that it is not just the Sith lords of a futuristic space opera that suffer from behavioral biases. David falls into the same pitfalls as Darth Vader and Emperor Palpatine. He is optimistic that his radical plan will proceed even as the rebels loom around him, his self-serving bias keeps him from worrying about Tris’s voiced doubts and concerns, and his overconfidence leads David to underestimate the potential of ruin.

In the Allegiant film, David’s mistake in underestimating Tris comes at the critical moment when he is about to deploy the memory serum throughout Chicago. As the rebels charge the headquarters and Tris mounts her attack on the very machine that could stop his serum from being released, David remains calm and confident that these loose cannons will not succeed. The scene sets up a cheat cut perspective that sustains continuity between the positions of David in his control room seat and Tris as she runs through the mazes of tunnels to get to the machine room. She struggles to find her focus while deflecting David’s cameras, and as he closes steel doors in every direction she

159

turns, there is a reaction shot of David happily responding to her failure to proceed: “Tris,

I control everything, just stop fighting. This is foolish, just stop. I made you. You might as well be my child, which is what you are acting like. A spoiled child. It’s over Tris”

(Schwentke, Allegiant 1:43:57-1:44:21). The ironic part is that while David is gloating over her failure, his behavioral bias clouds his judgment and, therefore, any feasible calculation that Tris might succeed.

David’s weakness becomes Tris’s moment of strength, because while he is gloating, she focuses and finds her target and shoots down the very machine David

should have been more concerned about the progress Tris made through the tunnels.

Finding her target, Tris confidentially says to him: “You’re right David, it’s over”

(Schwentke, Allegiant 1:44:54:1:45:00). An eyeline match cuts a link between the shot of

Tris looking at a wall and then a shot of her seeing the machine just beyond the wall,

allowing her to shoot through and stop the memory serum from deploying, stopping

David’s plans in its tracks. Director Schwentke’s parallel editing sequence also allowed

for a match-on action sequence that shows not only Tris’s unexpected success, but

David’s surprised reaction as a result. He sees everything from his droid cameras, and

when Tris wipes out the machine, this is the only time the Bureau leader ever shows any

expression but confidence as he screams “NO,” with a look of complete fury (1:45:10).

David had complete control of every element the whole time Tris was struggling; and yet

she still defeated him, this makes the close-up shot of David’s scream of fury that much

more meaningful.

Regrettably, the final book, Allegiant, does not follow Tris’s success with a

conclusion as happy as Schwentke’s film does. In contrast, the stakes are much higher

160

and the victory much more bitter. Even though David calls Tris a child, he fails to

understand that by showing fear of his tactics, that does not mean she would be fearful to not try to stop them. David fell to see the potential of Tris’s unpredictability, even if he saw her as a child, his child even: “Children manage their fears by different means, and react to danger in a variety of unpredictable ways” (Jenkins 477). Though Tris is indeed a young heroine and treated as a child by David in multiple scenes, he should not have underestimated how far Tris would be willing to go to react to the dangers he was projecting onto the people she cared about.

What is bravery if not acting in the face of fear? Tris stopped Jeanine’s genocide, she thwarted Evelyn’s attempt at gassing Chicago, and now she faces David head on, despite the fact that he holds her fate in his hands. Norris attests to what kind of bravery

Tris shows in her final moments, “True bravery is doing the right thing even if you’re afraid, being kind in the face of cruelty, pursuing knowledge no matter what you might find, being honest, putting others before yourself, and staying true to who you are” (110).

By staying true to who she is, Tris was not afraid to find out David’s plans and was honest enough with herself to acknowledge the risks if she did not stop him. When

Evelyn failed to gas Chicago with the memory-erasing serum David provided for her,

David took to Plan B by sending the serum from his Bureau’s hidden laboratories himself

(Roth, Allegiant 460-9). David locked himself within the laboratory and turned on the safety measure of deadly gas being released behind him. Then, he initiated the sequence of releasing the memory-erasing serum towards Chicago and the lower levels of the

Bureau where the rebels were fighting. In doing so, David set forth an action that could not be undone by anything but ultimate sacrifice.

161

In that moment, Tris and her friends knew the consequences of David’s radical

decision. Someone had to sacrifice their life to get through the deadly gas, in order to stop

the serum from being weaponized into the air systems of so many other innocent lives.

Tris’s friends all pushed Caleb, her brother, to volunteer, in order to make up for all the

betrayal he did at Jeanine’s orders. Tris however paid homage to her Abnegation roots,

and she made the most selfless act a human being can do for another. Tris whispered of

forgiveness and love to Caleb, then took his place, and entered the chamber containing

the death serum (Roth, Allegiant 473-6). Upon entering she showed true bravery by not succumbing to fear, pain and weakness: “The Death Serum smells like smoke and spice, and my lungs reject it with the first breath I take. I cough and splutter, and I am swallowed by darkness...But the fire, the fire. The desire to live. I am not done yet, I am not” (Roth, Allegiant 475). With the fire of her inner strength and purpose of saving others, she willingly sacrificed her life. In denying her Abnegation upbringing by going to Dauntless, Tris finally made a full circle back to the Abnegation core of selflessness.

Facing David in this chamber of death is her unexpected hurdle before she can stop the memory serum. As Tris struggles with the death serum to get to the memory serum, she must now face her ultimate opponent as well.

Tris is greeted by David’s condescending inquiry as she battles the death serum internally, “‘You can’t survive the death serum without an inoculation, and I’m the only person in the compound who possesses that substance’” (Roth, Allegiant 475). These

words show once more how underestimated Tris is, and how overconfidence has become

David’s biggest downfall. Tris she still stands despite the impossible calculation he took in ensuring she could not. She did not have that inoculation as he did, Tris was not

162

afforded that extra precaution that David took, and yet here she faces him head on. Eco’s

oppositional theory applies to the strength of Tris’s contrast with David in this situation.

Strinati quotes Eco’s theory in saying that, “Both types of story involve transformations

of the basic elements embodied in the binary opposition between good and evil. They

express a universal structure of basic oppositions which, because it is universal, will

ensure popular success” (105). The elements of goodness prevail in Tris’s determination

to survive the death serum long enough to stop the memory serum from being released.

However, following the logic Eco presents, David must comply with a further

transformation of evil to embody the binary contrast, and this he does.

As Tris types in the code and presses the green button to halt the memory serum’s

release, David shoots her fatally. The last feeling Tris has is of this betrayal, “The gun

goes off and pain races through my body. I don’t even know where the bullet hit me...I

slide to the floor. I feel something warm on my neck, and under my cheek. Red. Blood is

a strange color. Dark. From the corner of my eye, I see David slumped over in his chair”

(Roth, Allegiant 476). Tris was so focused on her mission, which she did succeed in, that

she did not take precautions in protecting herself from her so-called teacher and guide.

Tris sacrifices herself to save everyone else. She takes the ultimate risk and though it

pays off for all the GDs, rebels, and Chicago-based individuals, it cost her her life in this version of the story. The only factor that does not add up in Eco’s guaranteed formula for popular success: a living protagonist conquering her foe. And unfortunately, we do not get to see the happier variation play out in the fourth adaptation that was never released.

In the purest form of heroism, Tris does not murder David even after he has shot her. She lets David live, though she takes his memory as her final act of good. David will

163

not remember killing Tris, nor his agenda for subjugating and controlling the genetically

damaged. What remains is a tyrant who no longer remembers what he once was even

capable of. Roth is an author who does not partake in happy endings. Roth believes in using psychology to further the themes of dystopia to the point where the lesson is learned but the readers cannot move on in contentment, alongside their martyred heroine.

Sunstein also believes that pain is a lesson worth keeping around, even though it comes with a cost, “An understanding of human psychology opens up opportunities for hurting people--for using their own intuitions against them” (174). Pain and hurt are what the readers feel, in the absence of a living heroine whom they wished to fulfill her own happy ending at the story’s denouement. Instead, we are given a taste of reverse psychology.

Learn the lesson, heed the warning, and regardless you will not be happy.

In Tris’s sacrifice, we not only see her true Abnegation colors, but her Dauntless spirit, and her divergent identity. There is a bittersweet triumph in feeling the depth to this young woman’s character, due to such a demise that heightens our emotions. Claeys states that, “Such a perspective provides us with brief and fragile glimpses of optimism, albeit mixed with desperation” (Searching for Utopia 203). Tris’s mission was a success,

David’s plans were thwarted, and both Chicago and the outside Bureau rebuild and moved on to hopefully brighter prospects. Claeys warns that this rebuilding is an optimism that is as brief as it is fragile, and that is plausible. Especially for where the dystopian genre is concerned.

The most vital point here is that the horrors of genetic modifications that David was so keen on were shown to be a greater evil worth stopping. The kind facade that

David presented only hid a masterful puppeteer who saw lives as expendable, and in the

164

end, he took the most valuable life of all. By taking Tris’s life, David inadvertently added more value to her moral code over his own end-goals. Moreover, David proved Tris’s bravery to be most valuable asset of all. In the end, Tris understood this: “There are so many ways to be brave in this world. Sometimes bravery involves laying down your life for something bigger than yourself, or for someone else. Sometimes it involves giving up everything you have ever known, or everyone have ever loved, for the sake of something greater” (Roth, Allegiant 509). The greater the opponent, the greater the risk; but greatest of all, is the heroine who took the risk regardless.

165

CHAPTER TEN: HUNGER FOR WAR, HUNGER FOR VIOLENCE IN

THE HUNGER GAMES

“‘If we burn, you burn with us” (Collins, Mockingjay 106).

On the pages of our dystopian novels here, when you read of how Tris helped stop

Jeanine’s takeover and gave up her life to keep David from wiping out the memories of her people, do not weep for the great sacrifice of a pure martyr. When you return to

Katniss, and consider how she conquered President Snow and annihilated President Coin, do not just clap for her victory. Wonder, instead, how it got to such drastic measures in the first place. The answer is absolutely frightening in its simplicity, because each story does not start and stop with the dictators who reign supreme destruction upon their lands.

No, it starts with the societies that created the need for such leadership in the first place.

Violence, war, death, and the greed for more are the root causes that unite each society in their downfall.

Five happy factions somehow yielded the horror that is Jeanine. Thirteen hardworking districts somehow succumbed to the ironclad will of President Snow. Where did this need originate from? Inherent human behavior, simply put. The need to follow the mainstream, even if it at the risk of your own conscience. The dystopian genre merely magnifies what is already inherent and radicalizes the possibilities behind collectivist thought processes that unite cultures and societies. Claeys sheds light on the fact that as a human race bent on forward movement, we are less worried about how collectivist

166

regimes emerged, and more focused on the common elements found within each of us that made that collectivist ideal work in the first place. He states that the truth behind dystopian mentality shows our inner workings most acutely, “Whether it brings out our better or (as commonly) our less desirable attributes, both individually, when the monsters within are released, and in the groups which increasingly dominate us” (Claeys,

Dystopia: A Natural History 489). The Hunger Games and Divergent series dwell on these very attributes which form our heroines as individuals, but unite them to their larger

groups even more so. It takes one person to light the fire of rebellion, but it takes a larger

group to fight that war.

What makes us tick as individuals and group members, even Roth sought to

answer this question through Tris’s attempt in becoming Dauntless: “Every faction

conditions its members to think and act a certain way. And most people do it. For most

people, it’s not hard to learn, to find a pattern of thought that works and stay that way”

(Divergent 441-2). Conditioning human behavior to follow a certain pattern of thought as

Roth says is the forewarning that Claeys gave earlier. Thinking and acting a certain way

allows for the general public to move forward together, even if the direction they are

moving in is not the best one.

Wasik called this the “bandwagon effect” and said that it was common human

practice to do as others do, regardless of precautions or risks ahead. He also asserts this

practice to be an integral part of our history since the earliest beginnings: “Homo sapiens

have been jumping on bandwagons, as the expression goes, since long before the vogue

for such vehicles in the late 19th century; since long before, even the invention of the

wheel” (Wasik 482-3). Forward movement towards releasing inner monsters and

167

revealing personal vices, in the hopes that everything is conquered in the end, we have been doing this for far too long and do not consider the consequences until far too late.

Said best by George Orwell: “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past” (44). Following bandwagons towards giving out control to leaders who become our dictators, Orwell was not far off in making predictions that continue to be true.

The point being that our past, present, and future is united by the bonds made with our own two hands, joined together with another pair of hands following in the same belief. The Hunger Games and Divergent series are merely projecting the possibilities of taking our collectivist mentality towards the future. The future however, will remain bleak, if these dark desires for violence, war, and death continue running rampant: “That the future could fundamentally surpass the present...is stone dead. Few envision the future as anything but a replica of today...There are no alternatives. This is the wisdom of our times, an age of political exhaustion and retreat” (Mohr 2). The concerns of repeating past mistakes are not just undeniable, they are unconquerable. Dystopian writer Dunja M.

Mohr expresses these concerns in a similar method to the storylines that depict their feasible consequences.

Collins and Roth fixate the problems of their dystopias on our present, their futures are envisioned on the replicas of today’s problems. Today’s problems, as mentioned earlier, do not start and stop with the creation of tyrants, but with the openings that grant them space to excel in. Introspectively, we are our own worst enemies because we seek the violence, chaos, and destruction thrust upon our fictional heroines. Consider the reality of today’s worries and concerns that plague global affairs, “Living in an era of

168

economic uncertainty, conspiracy theories and fear of environmental collapse. Western

civilization used to produce literary utopias, but in the past century of world wars,

financial panics, murderous totalitarian regimes and nuclear threat, dystopias have

outnumbered sunny projections by several orders of magnitude” (Bethune 61). As

utopian literature is no longer the rising fashion, Bethune is not wrong to link the success

behind dystopias into the disasters of this era. Disasters that spell into nuclear threats, numerous wars, and unceasing violence means that peace is the more elusive hope. Not

one novel can happily settle on an everlasting harmony because we have yet to feel it

permanently ourselves, “War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength” (Orwell

6). Again Orwell is not wrong in creating this radical binary that would seem to be the

fitting slogan not just with his Big Brother regime, but also with Jeanine and David’s eras

of control, and even more so with the damage done by Snow and Coin.

Due to this principle pattern of unceasing war, threat, and violence, freedom and

peace would seem not only elusive, but possibly stifling and uncomfortable as they are

not around long enough in reality or fiction to be felt permanently. Take the leaders out

of the equation, and there is still disturbance in the air. Put them in, and it makes them the

easy scapegoat to loathe and blame. Regardless, the equation of anticipating the elements

of danger and violence remains, just as much as ignorance is retained. This deadly loop is

not only reciprocated in The Hunger Games, it is played up and valued as mainstream

entertainment.

The mirror reflection of our society’s dark desires yields in horrifying shows

paraded around as leading entertainment. Even historically, gladiator games were prized

entertainment from the times of Ancient Rome, dating as far back as 264 BC, where

169

slaves were paired up to fight to the death to honor the leaders of their nation (Popper 2:

301). The players were forced into this game, the stage was a grandiose arena, and there was always an eager audience to watch the blood and gore. This is historical fact. It is also glorified in popular culture to this day. Films, such as Russell Crowe’s The

Gladiator (2000), is a great example of how honored these narratives are, as this particular film envisioned the horrific backstory of one brave gladiator, and it went on to receive five Academy Awards and two Golden Globes (“Gladiator,” Box Office Mojo).

The difference being that this incredibly awarded film focused on the story of an older war hero who is forced into slavery and ends up fighting in the gladiator games to honor the memories of his family and his pride. The Hunger Games presents much younger heroes from the ages of twelve to eighteen, who are chosen from a nationally enforced lottery, and required to participate in these similar gladiator games if they are the unlucky chosen ones.

Two chosen tributes from all twelve districts fight for their lives, as the entire nation of Panem watches them on the big screen. Katniss describes this process for what it truly is though. It may be paraded around nationally as top entertainment, but if you look long and hard, you start to see the actual damage done not just to its contestants, but to its viewers as well:

Taking the kids from our districts, forcing them to kill one another while we

watch – this is the Capitol’s way of reminding us how totally we are at their

mercy. How little chance we would stand of surviving another rebellion.

Whatever words they use, the real message is clear. “Look how we take your

children and sacrifice them and there’s nothing you can do. If you lift a finger, we

170

will destroy every last one of you. Just as we did in District Thirteen. (Collins,

Hunger Games 76)

It is not just a reminder to cease any future rebellions, it is an ironclad way to ensure obedience on a massive scale, as well to program fear into the minds of all citizens.

Picking tributes from innocent children by way of a lottery, and then making them into sacrifices, without offering a way to shield and protect them, is a failsafe method of ensuring strict conformity to the policies laid out by Snow. When individuals come out to protest and fight the injustice, they get signaled out and punished.

To keep the districts in competition with each other, and to implement a system of rewards showered upon the one victor who defeated all the other districts’ tributes is a politically tested strategy to divide and conquer the people. By making the districts hate and fight each other, it also keeps them in line. To make this strategy even more effective by taking out any further desire to rebel against the government, simple necessities are rationed and enforced through this lottery. Katniss mentioned that to feed her family, she had to enter her name into the lottery more and more each year (Collins, The Hunger

Games 73). The lottery serves as this binary symbol of entrapment and alleviation, to a certain degree, because it helps alleviate starvation by allowing extra rations with each additional time you enter your name into the lottery. At the same time, it entraps your future, should you be the unlucky winner of the year, and therefore the next victim of the games.

Rationing basic food supplies to districts that are already starving is a devastating punishment, but again, it is one that further enforces obedience. Starvation as a tactic has been used by dictators many times over, and unfortunately not just in literature, but

171

throughout history as well. By keeping people in line, literally, as they wait to receive what meager rations they can, the will to fight the government that is ensuring these policies dwindles drastically because little energy or impetus remains to even contemplate revolution, when you are barely able survive day to day as is. Simply to recall the Holodomor, also known as the Famine-Genocide of 1932-33 in Ukraine, and you will know that to kill by starvation is a time-tested horror. Under Stalin’s orders, an estimated seven to ten million people were killed that way. A decade later during the

Holocaust, millions more perished under Hitler’s reign, as he too ordered mass starvations. Thus, the obsession with obtaining food, no matter the risk (be it illegal poaching or volunteering yourself for the games) is not an altogether fictional fear that only Katniss lived with.

China during its Cultural Revolution, North Korea throughout its dictatorial existence, and even today in third-world countries such as Cuba and Venezuela, people still stand in long food lines and fight each other for the next available rations. Thus, food scarcity and enforced starvation have served or continue to serve each respective regime very well. While standing in line all day for a couple of paltry food items, or even finding that such a long wait can still yield nothing, surviving takes priority over protesting and rebelling. Katniss herself ate from the discarded and burned food items thrown out behind

Peeta’s family’s bakery shortly after her father’s death, just because there were no other options at the time, as she was still too young to put her name into the lottery (Collins,

The Hunger Games 170). When people are too hungry to protest (though of course they may complain), scarcity of food becomes a powerfully destructive ploy engineered against them. Be it in history, present time, or through Katniss’s traumatizing

172

experiences, hunger was and continues to be a disturbing tactic deployed by totalitarian leaders who aim to instill order through such strategies of dividing and then conquering the people.

Katniss also got to witness this enforced cruelty firsthand when she went on to tour through District Eleven, after winning the 74th Hunger Games. Having connected with the young tribute, Rue, from District Eleven during the games, Katniss and Rue were able to show Panem the possibility of innocence and friendship on a platform designed for destruction and death. When Rue was brutally murdered by another tribute,

Katniss’s genuine grief was felt deeply by District Eleven citizens. To the point that they sponsored supplies for her during the end of the games, even though District Eleven citizens barely had anything to scrape up for themselves, as they were one of the most starved districts within Panem. But Katniss’s loyalty and strength pushed them to sacrifice not only the few rations they were afforded, but also their own lives. This kind of fortitude shows that sometimes even starvation tactics can never fully divide people who grow closer together through pain and suffering.

To further solidify this point, District Eleven citizens decided to show their allegiance to Katniss’s cause when she visited their district in person, “Every person in the crowd presses the three middle fingers of their left hand against their lips and extends them to me. It’s our sign from District 12, the last good-bye I gave Rue in the arena”

(Collins, Catching Fire 61). District Eleven citizens show their understanding, allegiance, and support with this public salute. But by doing so, they are defying Snow’s rules and therefore breaking the conformist cycle. They are committing an act of treason, “I have elicited something dangerous. An act of dissent from the people of District 11” (Collins,

173

Catching Fire 61). Katniss gets to see in person what this act of dissent means, when

Peacekeepers (the Capitol police force) separate the crowd and shoot those they felt responsible for initiating this small gesture of rebellion. An innocent elderly man is shot in the head right there in front of Katniss, as a direct consequence of what she inspired.

Katniss inspired change, she gave strength to defy the conformist laws instilled by

Snow’s reign. But she also gave light to a very dangerous hope that Snow attempted to weed out as quickly as it sprouted up. Even if meant outright murder, as long as it sent a message to stifle dissent, then it was worthwhile. And as long as Snow reigned, it was not even considered murder. Instead, it is the protection of order and might of justice prevailing: authoritarian government justice. It also helped ensure the image of the games, that their policies are upheld not just within the arena, but within each district.

Appearances though are deceiving and deadly, if not analyzed through every possible angle. Going back to the policy that demands for two tributes from each district, there is a reason that these chosen tributes are important not just to their home districts, but also to the Capitol that invests time and money into each tribute. Katniss did not become a national icon overnight, just by volunteering in her sister’s place. No, once the tributes are chosen and brought to the Capitol, they are made into celebrities and icons representing their districts. They are pampered, given makeovers, interviewed as stars, and then trained to be weapons. The purpose behind this glorification process is to mask the actual intent of their sacrifice. They may be made into stars, but these innocent tributes still have to die in the end. That is why Katniss’s survival and impact on other districts is even more dangerous to Snow.

174

Presenting the tributes’ platform of death as a gateway into a more elevated lifestyle offers certain concerns. What do we want to see versus what is actually happening, “The Hunger Games goes into the questions of reality versus illusion and the examination of the media’s current fascination with manufactured reality, as well as humanity’s enduring fascination with violence” (Brennan 3). Brennan addresses this morbid concern of illusion versus reality. These children may be dressed up nicely, presented beautifully, but they are still pushed into the arena of death. The notion of children who have not yet even begun to live their lives, fighting and killing each other is bloodcurdling, and yet not repulsive enough to be avoided or stopped for more than seventy years. Remember, by the time Katniss volunteers, it is for the 74th Hunger

Games, meaning 73 years of completed cycles of purposeful murder paraded as entertainment. That is just speaking to the world of Katniss. In our world, the fascination with violence is even longer: “History is all about this encounter, the moment in which impression is transformed into event” (Bartov 3). What moment in history made such an impression of war and violence, that we would turn it into a glorified event and age it down to an even more unacceptable range of victims turned fighters?

That answer is bound deep to human nature, and becoming harder and harder to separate out. To discern the origins behind such a darkness that pervades our human behavior, War historian Omer Bartov suggests to objectively reflect on the larger picture,

“Repeated images, seen from different angles, provide a prism through which we can distill a clearer understanding of the origins, nature, and impact of the atrocity” (Bartov

3). We need to investigate the defining events of our modern history in order to create the prism of certainty behind our decisions and actions into perpetuating violence. Collins

175

herself uses her novels as a prism to not glorify violence, but to understand why we glorify it as a culture.

Collins’s hope was to use her controversial ideas as a breaching topic of discussion for younger generations. Media studies scholar Henry Jenkins attests to this hands-on approach in using such a platform for families to come together and discuss the radical storyline seen in The Hunger Games. Initially meant for middle school-aged students, Collins’s series took off because other age groups joined into the discussion her books warranted. Students, parents, families were brought together by Katniss’s journey, but in discussing the events that took place within The Hunger Games, they also showed the value of learning together, “The importance of the family as a site for learning about democratic life, while stressing the ways that the family must conform to larger social and cultural norms. Starting with the explicit acknowledgment of the threat posed by nuclear weapons (Jenkins 496). The importance of learning about relevant current threats, and not just nuclear weapons, from even larger concepts such as foreign wars to topics closer to home such as school fighting and online bullying. Each of these topics must be brought home for discussion, through platforms such as Collins’s series. If parents bring these topics up and find an educational approach to addressing them, such as reading novels and covering television programs that deal with these violent themes, they make their children not only more aware at a younger age, but also more able to deal with it growing up.

Case in point, Collins was taught from early childhood to not look away from war but analyze the reasons for it. Her father, a veteran of the Vietnam War, took her to war museums and monuments, he described their history and relevance to current events; and

176

as a result, they left an impression on her from an early age. Collins was taught not to be desensitized and ignorant of controversial topics, but to analyze and understand the importance of war and its consequences: “A historical event can only be understood within its context, just as its significance can be grasped only at some historical distance”

(Bartov 6). Using her books as her current platform, Collins now desires her readers to reach this form of understanding as well. She does not want young readers to see these games as a desirable escape for themselves, but as an event worth grasping at some distance. You do not want to read of the blood and gore behind the 74th and 75th Hunger

Games and think: I want to be there too! That is not the intent or purpose. Bartov warns against this unfitting point of view when digging into painful moments of history. We need to remember to see them not as glorified events, but as memorialized mistakes.

Mistakes that we need to learn from, “We learn about other instances of inhumanity”

(Bartov 6). In learning about the Hunger Games, young readers and viewers have the experience of seeing inhuman actions played out before their eyes. The hope remains that they understand what is not meant to be glorified, but simply understood as a created instance of inhumanity worth circumventing in reality.

Separating Collins’s dystopia from our reality is similar to fighting the illusions created by other forms of popular media. It is a fascinating relationship in which we want more and more, “The evil presented by the Hunger Games is so terrible, and in this society so all-encompassing, that we watch Katniss’s adventures with instantly evoked sympathy, horror, interest, and simple terror” (Brennan 3). No matter how gruesome and dark Katniss’s journey becomes, that does not stop the desire to keep on reading and feeling what she is feeling. Wanting Katniss to succeed, but also wanting to see how bad

177

its going to get for before she does. That is the fascinating relationship between reader and protagonist, joined together by a link of “sympathy, horror, interest, and terror” as

Brennan outlines. Campbell feels that it is not only a relationship of interest, but a closer grasp into ourselves the more we invest in a protagonist: “They are fiendishly fascinating too, for they carry keys that open the whole realm of the desired and feared adventure of the discovery of the self” (5). As Katniss begins her heroic journey and starts to learn about what she is capable of, in a manner of introspection, so too does the reader learn a little bit more of themselves, in what they feel and think, while reading.

Consider simple thoughts, simple actions expressed by our heroine and the reaction it gets from us. The connection between the two is as powerful as it is instantaneous. When Katniss declares: “We’re going to be thrown into an arena to fight to the death” (Collins, Hunger Games 33), what do you feel? Are you excited and tense, as she is, hoping to survive but planning to battle to the death? Anticipation is part of the thrill for the reader, but to be sympathetic and cautiously aware of the risks, is part of the learning curve for all the loss that follows. This is the pattern not just for literary success, it is the inherent pattern behind human behavior. We react to what we feel, then we think about what to do.

Directors Gary Ross and Francis Lawrence, of The Hunger Games’ films, fought for their PG-13 rating because they wanted to display the full scale of violence that

Collins imagined, not just to horrify viewers, but to make them realize the impact of it all.

Not just what is felt like on the pages, but how it felt on the big screen, as it played out before viewers’ very eyes. Giving it a new dimension gives it an even stronger edge for the emotional roller coaster that follows: “The images of violence and fantasies of

178

destruction that became so prevalent...were directly related to the reality and trauma of the front experience” (Bartov 13). When Bartov brings up the front experience, he does not just mean as a viewer of the film, but the front experience to the actual horrors of war, that serve as inspiration in the first place. Children die fighting for their lives in these games, and children died fighting for their lives in actual wars as well. That is the implication Bartov wishes all viewers would take away. That is the message that Collins hoped for, and that the directors wish for. War and violence is not for glory on screen, but for an introspective analysis of why it is so prevalent in the first place.

The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) gave the Hunger Games films the rating of PG-13 because of what they felt was: “Intense violent thematic material and disturbing images--all involving teens” (“Hunger Games Parents Guide,”

IMDb). They were not wrong to do so, this is not a children’s fairy tale that plays out.

One of the most controversially disturbing and violent scenes in the book and film is what director Gary Ross has dubbed to be the “Cornucopia Bloodbath” (Weintraub,

“Director Gary Ross Talks…”). The 74th Hunger Games begins when all 24 tributes are raised up into the arena from their launch rooms. The countdown initiates for the game to start with ten war cannons ticking of their last moments of freedom. The countdown itself is strategically thematic, as the war cannons symbolize both the fight that is to begin, and later for each life that is taken, a cannon will sound again. Not exactly the shotgun of a race, because it is meant to be more impactful and instilling of the fear and anxiety that would come if you were actually on a battlefield.

Once the countdown hits the tenth cannon, only Peeta and Katniss run the other way, away from the Cornucopia full of supplies and weapons (Ross, The Hunger Games

179

(1:09:48-1:10:29). Most of the other tributes run directly for it; and as they do, the background sound is your next warning of how traumatic the scene is going to become. It is not an uplifting battle song or even an orchestra score that you hear, it is the ringing you would hear in your ears after a bomb has exploded. The symbolism is that deep, that even one sound evokes a feeling and a warning. The entire “Cornucopia Bloodbath” scene occurs to the background of ringing, the intention is for the audience not to become complacent or desensitized to what is unfolding in the scene, instead they are made uncomfortable by the sound before the sight (Weintraub, “Director Gary Ross Talks…”).

As for the sight, a few seconds into the games after the official countdown, the fastest tributes already have their hands on weapons, and the scene erupts into a murderous bloodbath as the stronger and faster equipped tributes use machetes, hunting knives, and even arrows to cut down their opponents.

The visual slaughter begins almost immediately, when the blond boy from district two literally hacks away at a smaller tribute who got in his way, blood coming away on his face and machete. A smaller twelve-year-old representing district eight tries to hide behind equipment boxes in order to grab a few supplies, when he is caught by the larger and older district one tribute, his throat sliced on the spot. Other tributes attempt to grab weapons and supplies at the same time, only to lose focus and awareness of their surroundings, and therefore have someone stab them in the back or over the head (Ross,

The Hunger Games 1:09:48-1:11:15). It is a warzone, bloodbath at the site of the cornucopia that is meant to represent bounty and thanks. It is indeed intensely violent and disturbing, and rightfully so: “Fantasies of glory breed traumatic disillusionment” (Bartov

45). The tributes that survive are the ones that kill brutally or run away with reckless

180

abandon. Showing how they kill each other does not make for much in terms of glory. In terms of disillusionment, that is much more on point with the horrendous portrayal of child on child violence, destruction, and death.

Bartov uses the example of WWI survivors, and explains that those who participated and witnessed the horrors of the war did not come back to share happy stories. He recalls the impact of survivors who returned from that war, “Bereft of heroes and ideals, we are haunted by nightmares of catastrophe, as the gallant tales of the past turn out to have been nothing but smoke and mirrors” (Bartov 45). The WWI survivors did not see their experiences as beautiful tales of glory and adventure, instead they were haunted and destroyed by what they tried to forget. Director Ross, in particular for the first Hunger Games, drew that as his fundamental point of access to convey the haunting nightmarish quality of real-life war sensations that Collins expressed as her own inspiration. During interviews, Ross would try to explain that he captured Katniss’s experiences of traumatic events because their visual interpretation was important enough for him to convey, “I’m trying to capture what was visceral in the books...this was a very conscious decision to create a very subjective style because the books are so subjective, they’re first-person and they’re urgent and you see the world as she sees the world”

(Weintraub, “Director Gary Ross Talks…”). The subjective urgency of Katniss’s first person narrative allows for the viewers to understand that her experiences in the 74th, and later the 75th Hunger Games are not just entertainment on behalf of the Capitol, they are viscerally painful memories in which Katniss lived whiles others died. Katniss comes away from these games with survivor’s guilt and PTSD. Not exactly the hero’s happy story here either.

181

Even before the battle scenes, the survival choices Katniss made, and the people she lost along the way hardened her character. Katniss had an unusually distanced and apathetic look towards the entertainment preferred by the Capitol elite as a direct result to all the loss she already suffered in her sixteen years of life. She knows what the games are, what they mean to her people, but Katniss is also aware of their value to the upper classes: “The arenas are historic sites, preserved after the Games. Popular destinations for

Capitol residents to visit, to vacation. Go for a month, rewatch the Games, tour the catacombs, visit the sites where the deaths took place. You can even take part in reenactments. They say the food is excellent” (Collins, Hunger Games 143). Katniss describes this situation as an outsider, scoffing at the entertainment value behind the games. Now that she is a part of the games, it is even more disgusting to her. As Katniss waits to be raised up into the arena, she looks around her preparation room and thinks:

“In the Capitol, they call it the Launch Room. In the districts, it’s referred to as the

Stockyard. The place animals go before slaughter” (Collins, Hunger Games 143). This is the duality of her reality, she knows she is a sacrificial animal being offered up as temporary entertainment piece.

Katniss is not disheartened or optimistic, instead she remains genuine about her situation. Simply because the Capitol residents can look at her for momentary enjoyment does not mean she wants to play it up for them: “Katniss-in typical Katniss fashion- schools her face to be devoid of emotion, refusing to let the rest of the world see her tears, and this reluctance to give the Games’ viewers anything real continues throughout the series” (Barnes 16). Katniss volunteered for her sister and she willingly gave up her life back home to join this charade. But her reluctance to partake in the fabricated acting

182

to give her more points in the games is simply something Katniss cannot abide, “The

Capitol has already taken away her future and she doesn’t owe them anything else”

(Barnes 17). This is a warrior who knows what is ahead, and her outlook is akin to

Bartov’s descriptions of soldiers preparing for war. The Capitol may dress her up, interview her for the nation to fall in love with the character she puts out, and her team may hope that enough viewers see something entertaining or valuable enough within her, to later sponsor Katniss in the days to come within the games. Those are the hopes and intentions of others though, they are not the primary or even secondary concerns Katniss has in her mind.

Instead of seeing the arena as a playing field, instead of mentally preparing herself for the role of an actress out to get more favors, this is a young woman counting her last days and hoping to survive for a few more. Katniss is aware that there will be an audience and is apprehensive of what they expect and want from her: “The scope and relentlessness of this new type of industrial killing also created a sense of breathless, if often morbid, fascination and, for some, even an overpowering enchantment and intoxication with the horror being perpetuated” (Bartov 95). Those who read of war and watch the documentaries pick up on this similar frenzy, it is a kind of “intoxication with the horror” as Bartov describes. More drama, more action, emotion and connection, these are the expectations held by a captive audience hungry for more, more, and more.

Peeta knew this going in and that is why he expressed to Katniss his desire to die as himself, not as some puppet (Collins, The Hunger Games 83-4). Katniss could not even afford to worry about how others saw her, because she knew how she already saw herself: a prisoner walking out to meet her sentence of death. Bartov calls this the

183

survivor’s outlook, “A grim, probably inevitable glorification of one’s helplessness, of pain and death, just as much as of heroism and sacrifice; it was, that is, a glorification of victimhood” (95). Katniss is helpless to the grim situation ahead, she knows there will be inevitable pain and certain death. So her desire to be heroic and sacrificing diminishes as more victims stack up. And more overwhelming fear sets in as the possibility of coming out alive sets in. Right before the games, Katniss was at her most honest on the outlook of her chances: “Nervousness seeps into terror as I anticipate what is to come. I could be dead, flat-out dead, in an hour. Not even” (Collins, The Hunger Games 145). She is not glorifying up her chances of survival, Katniss is a real human being in fear of every moment that brings her closer to fighting the other tributes.

Katniss is helpless to stop time or escape the game, and she is fearful of the risks and challenges and dangers ahead. The audience does not have the privilege of seeing this side to her, even readers have to dig to truly find the scope of her feelings: “Katniss keeps her private thoughts private and keeps most of the world at least an arm’s length away...Katniss identifies as a loner, never getting too close to other people, never expecting too much of them so that she is never disappointed” (Barnes 16). This loner is presented for all of Panem to see, for them to invest their feelings in for the next amount of days that the games prevail. On top of that, she is presented as the heroine to this larger story for readers to grasp onto and want to travel with.

In the films, as director Ross clarified, it is her first person perspective that holds the viewers’ attention. When asked about how important this is point of view is for the audience, Ross stated: “In order to be in Katniss’ point of view and in her shoes—what being in a character’s point of view is, is restricting the information that the audience has

184

to what that character has, and not being writer omniscient. I’m not cutting from place-to- place, I’m moving in this serpentine, destabilized path as Katniss wanders through this world” (Weintraub, “Director Gary Ross Talks…”). The road ahead for Katniss is uncertain and horrifying, and as she cautiously makes her way through it, she takes everyone on that journey with her. Not one of a typical heroine, but of a closed-off loner who just wants to come home to her family. With that deeply hidden hope of hers, viewers and readers only get moments of validity here and there. Those few moments though are enough to grab and hold your attention. Katniss becomes the darling of Panem for a very good reason.

Those reasons surface with the way Katniss thinks and fights through the games.

She stands out not just because of her difficult personality, but because she is heartfelt and passionate and true to her core. For a dystopian narrative, Katniss is set apart because of this unique difference that does not let her blend in. Her individuality is a stark contrast in the world of conformity that everyone else is used to, and it yields towards psychological progress of personality victory over authoritarian control. Strinati sees this character development as a strong bonus towards independence from past cultural practices, “The erosion of once secure collective identities has led to the increasing fragmentation of personal identities. It is argued that we have witnessed the gradual disappearance of traditional and highly valued frames of reference in terms of which people could define themselves and their place in society” (Strinati 238). In a collectivist or conformist society that is traditional to dystopian narratives, district members do not attempt to singularize themselves out. To stand out is to be a threat, therefore the erosion

185

of personal identity is more of a safety precaution to place themselves in the role given to them within Panem.

Katniss, by volunteering and playing the games, erodes away that collective identity and starts to show more fragments of her unique hidden self. In times of crisis, violence, and war, what we have here is a young woman who is realistic, cautious, and above all a survivor. Katniss also takes with her, the knowledge of the previous games she watched growing up, “A lifetime of watching the Hunger Games lets me know that certain areas of the arena are rigged for certain attacks” (Collins, The Hunger Games

174). Not going in totally blind, Katniss wishes to at least arm herself with some circumstantial training. Having been taught by her father how to survive in the forest, what herbs and berries to eat, and how to use what nature gives you, she relies on those skills to separate from the pack of tributes and live on the edges of the arena for as long as possible: “I’ve lost a lot of weight in the arena, I need some extra calories. And having the bow and arrows makes me far more confident about my future prospects. I slowly peel and eat a handful of nuts. My last cracker” (Collins, The Hunger Games 227).

Katniss calculates her supplies, hunts small prey, only eats the herbs and berries she knows. These small activities keep her away from the violence of the other tributes’ fights, they also reveal how resourceful she is to any viewer watching.

Those thirsting for violence will not get it as easily from Katniss. Until of course, she finds an opportunity to get an upper hand: “The weapons give me an entirely new perspective on the Games. I know I have tough opponents left to face. But I am no longer merely prey that runs and hides or takes desperate measures” (Collins, The Hunger

Games 196). Getting to those weapons ended up giving Katniss an advantage, but she

186

never sought out opponents directly before then. Katniss only ever plays defense. She can react as quick as lighting, but to initiate a battle is never her game plan. Not during the first Hunger Games, not during the second, and not even during the rebellion against the

Capitol. Katniss will do what she is told and when she is told to do it, she will react to survive and help others as much as possible. But do not count on her to be an obedient pawn when she can think her way out through alternatives.

By thinking up alternatives, taking precautions instead of seeking out direct confrontations, Katniss does not feed the thirst of violence-hungry viewers. She is participating, but not partaking: “Katniss remains true, even in the face of crushing loss and the prospect of her own death, to an ideal” (Borsellino 37). Katniss is aware before even volunteering what the games symbolize, acknowledging that the arena is a stage for entertainment, she looks the other way and ensures her own agenda for survival. Her ideal is to remain true to herself, not to what others expect of her. By doing so, Katniss also teaches us a lesson.

While we are eager for the games to start, for the fight to begin, Katniss performs her Mockingjay miracle by enlightening us with another perspective: “Her heart is a weapon, and the way to keep fighting against all the horror and cruelty of the world is to wield that weapon” (Borsellino 39). In times of violence, war, death, and the greed for more instead of less cruelty, find a weapon that lets you take another course of action.

Even if society conforms to the popular practices of the time that yields these actions of destruction, be the loner who sees through the illusion and fights the mainstream pressures. Katniss shielded her heart and emotions from those who wanted her to play

187

them out; but in the end, every little tactic and maneuver she showed in surviving, also showed her heart of steel was one for evading darkness instead of perpetuating it.

188

CHAPTER ELEVEN: DIVERGENT’S NEW GENERATION OF SOLDIERS

“Becoming fearless isn’t the point. That’s impossible. It’s learning how to control your

fear, and how to be free from it” (Roth, Divergent 239).

Past horrors and future nightmares are strong elements that continue to dictate the journeys Katniss and Tris travel through before they find some semblance of closure on their identities, lives, and futures. Katniss lost her beloved sister, her home district, and some of the most personal relationships she ever made to break the cycle of injustice put in place by Snow and Coin. Tris lost both of her parents, friends, and eventually her life in order to put a stop to the unnecessary violence and destruction initiated by Jeanine and continued on by David. It takes great sacrifice and personal strength to find your footing, stand your ground, and not surrender no matter the inner turmoil, pain, and suffering undertaken. It takes a warrior.

For our Divergent warrior to make the ultimate sacrifice at the end of her journey,

Tris first has to accept her unique identity and find that inner strength to make the right decisions, even when destruction and death come knocking. For that reason, Tris left

Abnegation for Dauntless. She found within herself the capacity and curiosity to want something else and from the beginning, she showed courage in leaving behind the only community she ever knew to give herself a chance to discover something new. The pivotal decision that Tris makes at the choosing ceremony is the breaking point between how she was raised and what she now wants to become. Campbell calls this the call to

189

adventure, and for Tris, it is a call she cannot refuse, because it wages war from deepwithin her. This is the period that brings in personal conflict and inner turmoil because they are Tris’s obstacles to overcome in order to stand tall against exterior forces of evil.

Tris consciously acknowledges her thirst for change, adventure, and even danger when she finds her Abnegation lifestyle stifling. By pinpointing where her displeasure comes from, she finds qualities within herself that are not welcomed in Abnegation: “I am proud. It will get me into trouble someday, but today it makes me brave” (Roth,

Divergent 57). This is where Dauntless is introduced as that fearless faction that pride themselves on the qualities that Tris feels shameful to have within Abnegation. Dauntless is the community for the brave, and they draw to them those who seek adventure and danger. The Dauntless faction represents the soldiers and police force of Chicago, their focal responsibility is to protect the other four factions and retain peace within the limits of the city by guarding the wall that keeps them safe.

Even in Roth’s first description of the Dauntless members, they are radical and extreme. They set themselves apart on every level, starting with appearances: “They are pierced, tattooed, and black-clothed” (Divergent 7). Their physical appearance alone makes them unique and intrigues Tris all the more, “They should perplex me. I should wonder what courage—which is the virtue they most value—has to do with a metal ring through your nostril. Instead my eyes cling to them wherever they go” (Roth, Divergent

7). Though the Dauntless responsibilities are important, Tris is drawn to them for these other reasons first. To see only the appealing aspect of Dauntless is what Tris’s naivety comes down to. She separates her Abnegation lifestyle from the appeal of the Dauntless

190

lifestyle based on such superficial preferences initially, “Abnegation discourages anything done strictly for my own enjoyment” (Roth, Divergent 50). Tris knew what she did not like in the faction she grew up in, she observed the way Dauntless children behaved in public, and created an illusion of their lifestyle that she found tempting.

So as soon as Tris chooses Dauntless at the choosing ceremony, her first activity that involves speed and recklessness, is Tris’s first impression of freedom given to her by her newly chosen faction. The important duties that her new faction carries out, their brutal training styles, the manifesto of their community beliefs that bind them to the ideal that “pain and death are better than cowardice and inaction” (Roth, Divergent Bonus

Materials 48) are still unknown to Tris. All she knows is what she feels, that early adrenaline rush that makes her feel alive by participating in the first activities of the

Dauntless initiation. Confusing excitement of the moment for later happiness is an early indicator that there is a personal obstacle ahead for Tris to face. Daniel Gilbert, author of

Stumbling on Happiness, applies his psychological expertise to the study of happiness and comes to one simple conclusion: “People are rarely able to predict with any accuracy how they will feel in the future, and so are often quite wrong about what will make them happy” (210). Being short-sighted creatures, when our initial desires are fulfilled, our feeling of happiness seems imminent but tends to be short-lived due to consequences that we did not calculate into the equation.

Tris is initially ecstatic about her choice to join Dauntless. Her first Dauntless activity that includes running makes her feel liberated, “I have not run anywhere in a long time...my lungs burning, my muscles aching, the fierce pleasure of a flat-out sprint”

(Roth, Divergent 50). All these early sensations are overpowering, but they are also only

191

temporary. Gilbert states that the harsher tones of reality stand stronger than the happier tones of misplaced illusions, “Under the right conditions, the costs of this inaccurate belief would be outweighed by its many benefits” (Gilbert 214). The argument can be made for Tris’s sake that she felt there were more benefits to joining Dauntless, and that it did not just come down solely to her impulsive desire for feeling free. Presented under the right conditions, she may have felt as if she had no other choice because the life projected for her in Abnegation was too stifling: “With a gasp I can’t contain, I shift my hand forward, and my blood sizzles on the coals. I am selfish. I am brave” (Roth,

Divergent 47). In these vital moments of her most life-changing decision, Tris sees the life she will lead if she continues within Abnegation and cannot find it within herself to remain. So, she turns and lets her blood spill onto the coals that resemble Dauntless, onto a choice she acknowledges as selfish because she leaves behind her parents, but brave because she accepts the challenge.

Little does Tris know that the challenge she undertook would be one of her most difficult ones ever, because it would take her life on a path that not only changes her to be a tough forward-moving heroine, it also takes her community apart and breaks down the gates of the outside world as well. Knowing that the call to adventure is hard to ignore,

Campbell sees it as a necessary mistake to make in order for a heroine to find herself:

“This is an example of one of the ways in which the adventure can begin. A blunder— apparently the merest chance—reveals an unsuspected world, and the individual is drawn into a relationship with forces that are not rightly understood” (46). Such is the case with

Tris, a sudden decision and she is shocked to find herself approaching the unsuspecting

192

new world of Dauntless full of relationships that will fuel her forward and change

everyone and everything within Chicago, forever.

What Tris should have considered before making the decision to change factions

at the choosing ceremony, is that Dauntless is not just about being reckless and brave.

Tris may have read some parts of the Dauntless Faction Manifesto, such as: “We believe, not just in bold words but in bold deeds to match them” (Roth, Divergent Bonus

Materials 48). Yes, when you hear this kind of a spirited manifesto, it pushes you to want to join in their bold deeds full of daring action. Despite these brave first lines, Tris should have considered the full Manifesto and the duties that Dauntless carry out on a daily basis before making her choice. Reading on, Tris would have caught onto a little more of what lurks beneath the surface if she had paid attention to the ending of the Dauntless

Manifesto: “We do not believe in living comfortable lives. We do not believe that learning to master violence encourages unnecessary violence” (Roth, Divergent Bonus

Materials 48). Suddenly, there is more at stake than the naive impression that the

Dauntless live to be brave. There is a hint of the lifestyle that they actually lead, not one suited to comfort but to hardcore training.

Memorizing the Faction History textbook, Tris becomes acquainted with the tasks

each faction is actually responsible for. For the Dauntless, it comes down to protection:

“Dauntless provides us with protection from threats both within and without” (Roth,

Divergent 43). Her first impression is they are the protectors of the city, the valiant

guards that keep the other four factions safe. During her first week of training, Tris learns

the actual jobs they do are not as glorifying as she once imagined: “The Dauntless have

limited options. We can guard the fence or work for the security of our city. We can work

193

in the Dauntless compound, drawing tattoos or making weapons or even fighting each

other for entertainment. Or we can work for the Dauntless leaders” (Roth, Divergent

125). Within the community and bound to the limits of their city, the Dauntless are the

police force of Chicago and all their tasks are relegated to security, protection, and

training.

The logistics of the Dauntless labor force demands a Spartan lifestyle,

emphasizing the bare minimum military focused all-in train or die mentality. Those born into Dauntless are already accustomed to this Spartan lifestyle and tend to stay within their faction, raised to be the new generation of soldiers. Karl Popper made an unbelievably accurate description parallel to Dauntless in his discussion of the closed society that historical Sparta formed for itself. Though he acknowledged that Spartans were known for their bravery and self-sacrifice in battle, the way they operated made them out to be a militarized regime that refused individualistic ideologies and focused primarily on: “Protection of its arrested tribalism...Mastery to dominate and enslave your neighbors” (Popper 1:182). Individuality is sacrificed to secure the demands of the state, which included protecting its form of tribalism where mastery of violence led to a social hierarchy which allowed for them to dominate and control others.

In describing the tribalistic principles that allowed Sparta to remain as a closed

society focused on creating the strongest warriors above all else, Popper’s words also ring

true to the way Dauntless leadership runs their own faction. Hardcore, closed off from the

other factions, driven to mastering combat and weapon techniques above practicing law

and peace. From their initiation process to the training practices, it is a dangerous and

volatile education that ensures the survival of only the toughest recruits: “I tell myself, as

194

sternly as possible, that is how things work here. We do dangerous things and people die.

People die, and we move on to the next dangerous thing. The sooner the lesson sinks in, the better chance I have at surviving initiation” (Roth, Divergent 56). Now that the thrill is wearing of, and a few recruits have already lost their lives, Tris looks over the fallen bodies of dead teenagers who did not make it past the initiation process of jumping buildings and onto moving trains, and she has come to a realization.

Tris cannot simply seek out thrills and find happiness in being liberated from

Abnegation, because now she has to focus on surviving and passing the tests if she wants to remain within her new faction. Gilbert calls this imagination’s third shortcoming because once the short-term happiness wears off, a new realization hits hard:

“Imagination’s third shortcoming is its failure to recognize that things will look different once they happen” (221). That failure to recognize how different the expectations and realities of the Dauntless lifestyle would be, comes at a terrible cost. If Tris does not pass the initiation process and land in the top ten rankings before the three initiation tests are up, she will be cut. What that means is that Tris will either die beforehand, as some initiates have already failed and paid with their lives, or she will be forced into the dreaded factionless part of the community. The options are grim, the need to learn and adapt becomes more urgent, because it is a matter of life and death. As one of her

Dauntless teachers, Eric, loves to express: ‘“You chose us,’ he says. ‘Now we have to choose you’” (Roth, Divergent 73). The tests train the initiates physically, emotionally, and mentally. During the process, the teachers weed out the weak and force those lower ranking initiates into the exiled factionless. To be chosen means to prove yourself, make yourself stand out above your fellow initiates and prove that you are stronger and better.

195

The ranking system brings into the prospects not only a survivor mode, but a conquering mode. With Collins, tributes fought each other to the death just to survive.

This fight or die principle is not that different within Roth’s storyline either. Initiates train not only with each other but on each other, in fighting and combat practice: “Beating each other senseless in physical training, as the initiates are encouraged to do” (Norris

98) is only one of the grueling aspects that helps teachers rank the stronger fighters.

Weaker ones are given only so many chances before they are kicked out and forced into exile. On top of that, teachers put the initiates into death-defying situations to prove themselves, “Hanging over the chasm to prove one isn’t a coward, as Christina [Tris’s fellow initiate and new friend] is forced to do, are not actions that stem from bravery. In fact, they’re more for cruelty’s sake than bravery’s” (Norris 98). That ideal for bravery is tested multiple times and interpreted very cruelly by those in command.

Stemming from a desire to play into a participatory culture bent on cruelty and violence, Roth instills those practices into her novels, and forces her protagonist to withstand all kinds of mentally, emotionally, and physically draining acts of cruelty just to survive. Jenkins touches on this subject when saying that violence does come up when children are growing up, and that to a degree, it is necessary: “Don’t try to stop this kind of war play. Play is the language of children, their way of working out the matters that concern them deeply at the moment” (478). In this manner of speaking, war games and other activities that initiate or result in violence, are seen as a necessary tool of maturing.

Jenkins goes on to analyze that when this simulated experience of cruelty crosses the line is when unnecessary risks are taken.

196

The critique of contemporary society and its fascination with violence, war,

cruelty and even death is one that fueled Collins in her display of child-on-child violence

within The Hunger Games. The relationship Collins solidifies through the citizens of

Panem and the tributes of the 74th Hunger Games is a kind of participatory culture where

children fight and kill each other, and the citizens watch passively or passionately but do

not stop the violence regardless. The message is the same: we watch and see, but are not

affected, due to quantity of gore and violence accumulated over a lifetime. Tris was not

used to this approach however, and upon joining Dauntless, is thrust into their violent

training methods and abrasive approaches towards reckless danger without any precautions. Tris’s initial reactions of shock and horror therefore, are not the same passive reactions we received from the Panem viewers.

Though on the larger spectrum, violence is continually glorified and built up as a necessary part of the action in any given fast-paced narrative of the 21st century. Literary critic Angus Calder made a study of narratives that focused on war and violence, and he came to this conclusion: “As a feat of production--reproduction of destruction-- it is astounding...Horrors emphasize the heroism” (24). We glorify death into the detail of horror applied to film scenes, we make heroes out of killers, and we count bodies as numbers and not as lives that are lost. Take for example Tris’s first fighting session, in which her teacher, Eric, forces her to take on a much larger and more experienced partner. Within this fighting sequence, director Neil Burger attempted to portray not the horror that emphasizes the heroism behind violent activities, but instead he tried to bring the reality out of the situation as it would have felt to Tris.

197

Director Burger’s approach was not to glorify violence or death in any of the

Dauntless training sessions, but to show the actual brutality of it in order to horrify his

viewers instead of sway them into desensitized wonder. Therefore, when Shailene

Woodley enters the rink for her fighting match, Tris is shown as a young woman who

signed up for battle without knowing what it actually entailed (Burger, Divergent

0:36:47-0:37:48). Using a close-up angle, we get to see the genuine fear on Tris’s face as

her eyes open wide in terror, and her cheeks shake in anticipation of the coming

moments. When her larger partner starts attacking, we see Tris’s hands come up in

defense without much avail. Everything in the background, even the score silences, so

that Tris’s sounds of shock and pain with each blow she takes are emphasized and felt

that much more excruciatingly off the screen, as they were portrayed on the screen.

The difficulty and pain are meant to toughen Tris up, and with her refusing to give

up even after taking multiple beatings and sustaining countless injuries, well that shows

us her fortitude. Tris is on the path to becoming a true Dauntless solider. However, when

the training turns to real-life practice, and at her hand people die, that is when Tris starts

taking not only physical blows, but mental ones as well. Bartov states that soldiers who

only trained versus soldiers who are coming back from war are able to show these same

two stages of suffering. First the physical when you are training your body, but even

more painful is the stage that comes when you encounter what you trained for, and then

your mind must take the punishment as well. Glorified soldiers who went in to save day but came out as scarred killers is not the outlook that they themselves would have wanted, “A capacity, born of suffering, to perceive the humanity of the murderers and to grasp the potential for evil even among the victims” (Bartov 147). Firsthand experience

198

ruins the innocence of heroism and brings in the dark outlook that there is no pure soul in the world that is not tainted as a result of the violence endured. Acknowledging that murderers have something within them worth saving, that is something that returning soldiers hope to retain though, because in times of war, decisions are made out of dire circumstance. And for Tris, war comes too abruptly when Jeanine takes over, and when her actions make her a killer, retaining her previous strength becomes a challenge as well.

Taking a step back from the consequences of actual battle, Tris’s initial introduction into the practices of war are a matter of cultural significance. An obsession with over-the-top violence for the sake of cruelty becomes the true problem of a participatory culture that cannot mediate out such practices that have now become the norm: “It is important not to stop with such purely negative measures since the real causes lie elsewhere” (Jenkins 479). Instead of blaming those who perpetuate these norms, Jenkins urges to analyze the larger reasons behind such commonly accepted practices. Taking into account Tris’s experiences within the Dauntless Initiation process, there are too many moments where the tests were taken too far. The consequences could have been foreseen and stopped, but were not.

For example, when one of the initiates (Al, a Candor transfer) starts seeing his rank lower, he attempts to bully Tris, who was climbing higher in the ranks. When that did not work to his advantage, he suicided and Eric (Dauntless teacher) glorified Al for his final act of bravery. Norris evaluates the Dauntless perspective given to Al’s suicide,

“Eric praises him, and instead of a somber funeral, the Dauntless celebrate his ‘bravery’ for going to a place unknown. We know that Al wasn’t brave. He didn’t choose to jump into the chasm in order to face the unknown. He wasn’t cut out for Dauntless life” (98).

199

Al was a representation of a weaker character who could not withstand the pressures placed upon the Dauntless initiates. Al felt threatened, fearful, and panicked when it came to step up and be responsible for his acts of cowardice. In the end, it was easier for him to face the unknown of the chasm and certain death, then to go forward with the shame he felt for his cowardly actions and the continuing expectations of this relentless Dauntless lifestyle. Tris knew this and still persevered forward. Even as she was made a target during practices and remained a threat simply by existing within the faction system, Tris acquired her endurance capabilities early on. She also learned about the importance of fear. Both of these lessons gave Tris the ability to shoulder the weight of responsibility and guilt when she put her skills to use at the cost of others’ lives.

Tobias is the one that opened Tris’s eyes to the difference of being fearful and conquering those debilitating fears in the first place. Through his lesson, Roth provides a new perspective on how to face difficult times that are full of such aspects to danger, cruelty, violence, and death without giving in to their darkness. When Tris started to panic before a mental simulation, Tobias urged her to strengthen up: “Learning how to think in the midst of fear” (Roth, Divergent 237) is what he told her, pushing her to differentiate between being fearless and actually showing true bravery. Knowing how to separate between the two extreme emotions is how Tris learned to find that inner strength within herself. Her core foundation becomes stable and strong with the assistance of the honest guidance, support, and love from Tobias.

After all, Tris first joined Dauntless because she thought they were the brave and fearless faction. It was Tobias who showed her how much more there is to learn of the brave and fearless soldiers, “Becoming fearless isn’t the point. That’s impossible. It’s

200

learning how to control your fear, and how to be free from it, that’s the point” (Roth,

Divergent 239). Tobias had the mindset of a hardened warrior and his experience gave him the power to know the difference. Instead of jumping in recklessly thinking you are brave, be cautious and master the fears you have beforehand: “Fear isn’t the enemy of bravery. Driving people to free themselves completely from fear doesn’t necessarily mean their actions will be brave. Fear is what makes people brave--feeling afraid, yet acting in spite of that fear” (Norris 99). The hardest task of all is to act despite the fears that are meant to hold you back, to keep on fighting instead of giving up. That is the lesson Tris learned from Tobias, and understood even more powerfully from the mistake that Al gave in to. To create a new generation of soldiers is to form a new generation of minds, that are dependent on guidance in order to keep the fight going.

In order to keep the fight going, you have to build these undeveloped initiates into stronger soldiers. This is especially true after the bloody tasks that must be undertaken in order to conquer other factions, which is what happens when Jeanine takes over. Once under Jeanine’s control, the Dauntless become her soldiers. Their given task is outright murder of divergents and Abnegation members, which would break the mental state of any untried solider untested on the field. Bartov traces this broken state of mind found in actual soldiers, and shows relevant psychological patterns as far back as WWI: “Fantasies of glory breed traumatic disillusionment. Opening the century with a wave of exhilaration, WWI swiftly transformed Europe’s mental landscape into a site of mourning and anxiety, loss and trauma” (45). Tris parallels this traumatic disillusionment on her journey of heartache as well. Since she is part of the young initiates, she is tasked with killing members of her first community, Abnegation. By refusing to do so, Tris ends up

201

killing other Dauntless initiates who could not refuse their given orders in an attempt to protect herself and other Abnegation members. It becomes a twisted game of traumatic disillusionment, and this is where Tris’s first shard of internal pain overcomes that previously conquered internal fear.

Though Tris is able to defeat Jeanine from wiping out the entire Abnegation faction and taking over the remaining ones, Tris had to murder those brainwashed friends who were going to kill her, and she had to say goodbye to loved ones who gave up their lives in order for Tris to succeed. For a sixteen-year-old who jumped on too quickly for a change of faction, Tris had more consequences to bear than a typical soldier at war. Each choice and each loss Tris suffers take a great psychological toll, to the point that Al’s suicide makes her reconsider herself: “For the first time I feel like I understand Al. I am tired of being Tris. I have done bad things. I can’t take them back, and they are part of who I am. Most of the time, they seem like the only thing I am” (Roth, Insurgent 157).

Before, Tris thought how weak and cowardly it was of Al to take the easy way out. Now that her journey has forced her to make decisions that cannot be undone, friends and family members that can never be returned as a result of her choices, she sympathizes with what Al must have gone through to jump into the chasm.

The kind of desperation a protagonist must feel to not want to go on is the portrayal of a realistic human being who needs time to heal. When Tris starts to doubt herself and begins to have recurring nightmares that are common to those who suffer from PTSD, Tobias remains strong and tells her to keep moving forward. He believes in her and knows Tris will not succumb to her internal weaknesses. When Tobias gives positive words of encouragement that any soldier would desire to hear, the reality is that

202

not everyone would be ready or receptive to accept them: “I don’t want to tell him the truth: that he is wrong, and I do not want to survive this” (Roth, Insurgent 365). Tris is in a state of mind that is broken, grieving, and suffering to the point that suicide is on her mind, as it once was on Al’s. The situation that brought her to this state is not that different from veterans that return with psychological scars that do not heal, or even from teenagers that go through extreme amounts of bullying.

Be it the aftermath of war, bullying, or personal loss, there is a setback that implants itself into our society. Rising epidemics of suicide in the last few decades brings psychologist Eve K. Sedwick to study the causes behind it, “Face a hostile and condemning environment, verbal and physical abuse, and rejection and isolation from families and peers” (231). These kinds of reasons circulate behind the mentality of taking your own life, and they are on the rise even now. When the environment is toxic, when the people you are surrounded by see you as a threat, and when your choices begin to isolate you, that is when Sedwick cautions to think twice and to push yourself to find affirmative alternatives. Otherwise, it is the fear of “trivializing apologetics, or, much worse, a silkily camouflaged complicity in oppression” in the absence of a strong and positive influence that will push the broken individual towards a life-ending decision

(Sedwick 238). As Tris’s friends start judging her for the choices she made, when her brother turns his back on her, and her faction continues to see her as a target, Tris is pushed into this oppressive situation that Sedwick warns about.

It is with Tobias’s continual positive affirmations and an introspective analysis of her own self that Tris finds a way back from the brink. The scene that makes her reassess her mental state is in the aftermath of Jeanine’s execution in Insurgent. There, even

203

though a tyrant has been thwarted, too many innocent lives had been lost in the sudden siege of power. Unable to accept the loss of her parents and friends, Tris tries something drastic: “Another few inches and my weight would pull me to the ground. I would not be able to stop it” (Roth, Insurgent 157). This is what Tris is thinking as she stands on a literal ledge and holds herself by the side of the nearest window. Tris is on the edge that

Al gave into, and she knows it now. The most important hurdle of her entire journey comes down to these few moments. When Tris actually finds her own self, that was previously lost in all the pain and regret that led her to that drastic step. There on the ledge, Tris is able to stop what Al did not: taking her own life.

In that moment in time, Tris regains her inner strength to move forwards, as

Tobias had been pushing her to do the whole time. The only problem was that she was not ready to hear him before the ledge. The person has to be receptive and ready to take a positive leap forward themselves, and not a deadly fall downwards instead. Dan Savage and Urvashi Vaid discuss positive social movements that helps individuals to rebuild themselves anew, and they speak of choices that separate true bravery from complete hopelessness: “There is nothing inevitable about change for the better. The only reason big changes happen is when people like you and me decide to fight for things to change, when we take action to make things different” (431). Change for the better, Savage and

Vaid argue, comes first from within, in order to propel positive action.

That big change to live on and move on comes from within Tris as well, and it is that defining moment that makes her worthy of being recognized for trailblazing heroism.

She had been to the brink and was able to come back, “I can’t do it. My parents lost their lives out of love for me. Losing mine for no good reason would be a terrible way to repay

204

them for that sacrifice, no matter what I’ve done” (Roth, Insurgent 157). Tris looked within and found a motive to keep her from taking the path Al took before her. Later, when Tris is captured and tortured horrendously, even then, she no longer breaks down because she already found that inner strength at her darkest hour.

Tris conquered the sixth step in Campbell’s monomyth formula. The hour of crisis, as he calls it, when a heroine faces her darkest state of being (mental or physical), is able to stare death in the face and then return, that is when the protagonist returns strong inside and out (Campbell 117). The moment of strength that makes change possible for the better is that moment you reclaim yourself. Tris saw what her life was worth and reclaimed it. Savage and Vaid put it this way, “You can do what you want.

You can come out, you can move away, and maybe, if the damage we’ve done isn’t too severe, you can recover and build a life for yourself” (429). No damage is so severe as taking one’s own life, because there is no recovery from that. Tris acquired that truth and now holds herself accountable, “Part of me wishes I could burn them [the memories of her lost ones] from my mind, so I would never have to mourn for them. But the rest of me is afraid of who I would be without them” (Roth, Insurgent 158). Tris takes responsibility instead of the easy way out, she holds onto the memories that give her pain. But by holding on instead of forgetting, Tris takes strength from the loss that overwhelmed her previously.

Director Robert Schwentke took charge of the Insurgent and Allegiant films, and of all the scenes he shot with Tris at the center, very few touched him as the moment of her breakthrough. The challenge for Director Schwentke was to show how much Tris changed after coming back from the brink of desperation, in order to truly display that

205

inner strength she now possesses. Acknowledging that cinema itself uses imagination to create the illusion of reality, the tribulation is to still make it as powerfully believable as if real-life is happening right before the viewers’ eyes. French film critic André Bazin takes up the challenge of explaining this hurdle that director Schwentke had to go through in order to make Tris’s moment that much more persuasive on screen. He states, “In their imaginations they saw the cinema as a total and complete representation of reality; they saw in a trice the reconstruction of a perfect illusion of the outside world in sound, color, and relief” (Bazin 235). For Bazin’s reconstruction of that perfect illusion to touch the sense of reality within the dimensions of cinema, director Schwentke used not only his go-to point of view shots, but he applied his editing techniques, lighting and dialogue to emphasize the realistic appeal of Tris on screen as a character of immense inner power.

The scene that furthers Tris’s inner strength and distances her from her earlier moments of personal conflict and weakness comes at that pivotal sequence of torture at the hands of Jeanine. After being horribly tortured and put through many grueling simulations, Tris uncovers the message left by the outside world and she proudly looks upon the confused faces of Jeanine and her soldiers as they come to a shocking realization (Schwentke, Insurgent 01:15:11-01:21:09). In this moment of parallel editing where Schwentke shows the alternates of Jeanine’s shocked reaction outside her laboratory, to Tris’s physical release from inside the simulation room, this is the shot that sells the illusion Bazin proclaimed to be so important to cinema. It is the moment where the deep focus remains between the two forces of power as they finally come to a halt, because Tris finally prevailed in proving her worth to Jeanine and the rest of the doubters.

206

What took Tris so long to find, grasp, and hold onto is now proven for the rest of the world to understand. Looking at her enemies with confidence, Tris says: “You were wrong about us. We were never the problem. We’re the solution” (Schwentke, Insurgent

01:21:10-01:21:28). Tobias helps separate Tris from the torturous simulation machine that Jeanine used to forced Tris to find this message: that divergents are the solution to their faction crisis. Saying these words, the key lighting of the scene focuses around

Tris’s enlightened and confident expression of success. With centered framing and an eyeline match shot of Tris looking through the glass at Jeanine, director Schwentke achieves the moment of glory in finding a position that enables every obstacle facing Tris to stand separate from her. Proclaiming that divergents are the solution in a simulation room that forced her to the brink of sanity, Tris is engulfed by bright white light, while the dark chains hang behind her. The symbolism of the light and dark becomes profound as result of the forces divided into these two shades, of Tris versus Jeanine.

On the other side of the glass, Dauntless soldiers in black uniforms wait with their weapons ready to shoot Tris down. The frozen and shocked Jeanine stands at the center of her dark lab full of computers and machines. Yet, the golden reaction shot is sold to

Tris looking on all of them and not blinking once in fear or doubt. Bazin proclaimed cinema would be a complete success when the illusion would be as believable as life itself, “Nothing less than a total cinema that is to provide that complete illusion of life which is still a long way away” (235). Well, this complete illusion is no longer that far distance away. Not with scenes such as this one shot by director Schwentke that show protagonists at their highest moment of inner power, when they prevail, and their words are not the only things that leave the viewers speechless. A close up of Tris’s face

207

engulfed in white, showing how far she was pushed and how much it took to come back from that darkness: that glorious moment is as realistic as it is priceless.

It takes these kinds of awe-inspiring moments on screen to break the veil of uncertainty one might feel on the pages of Roth’s books. When doubt and fear and uncertainty pushed Tris to the brink, and you read it and worried for her, thanks to directors such as Schwentke, relief is as transparent as are Woodley’s spellbinding expressions on screen. Strinati once warned of the consequences behind a broken identity, “Problems are exacerbated because no comparable and viable forms emerge which can take the place of traditional sources of identity. No new institutions or beliefs arise to give people a secure and coherent sense of themselves, the times in which they live and their place in society” (238-9). When an individual cannot look back to something dependable and cannot arise to a higher standing of awareness without some traditional source of support, the times becomes dark and society falls back to aggressive means of expression. Maybe, that is why there is a call to violence, cruelty, death, and war as a means of norming cultural institutions and beliefs to better accord our place in society. In times of darkness, habits fall back to aggressive means of survival. If war is a way to express that energy, showcasing it becomes a necessity.

The only way out is to understand the destruction such dark forces leave in its wake. Not only upon society at large, but also upon individuals who lived through it.

Bartov states, “Inverted and perverted every value and belief, exploited to the limit humanity’s willingness to sacrifice itself for a higher cause in order to perpetuate the most heinous crimes” (45). Crimes against humanity, be it world war or genocide, take a toll on the individual as well. Returning to The Hunger Games, with Katniss we see the

208

first evidence of this cause and effect. Katniss suffered immensely (physically, mentally, and emotionally) in order to prove to the world that war takes on many shapes, but none of them should ever be desired. Not on the platform of any Hunger Games, and not by way of rebelling between districts in order to better your own status as President. This pervades every value and belief accorded to the goodwill of men.

Then, to stand on the brink of suicide and find a way to rebuild yourself anew to the point that no one and nothing can ever shake your core again, that is our heroine from

Divergent lighting the way back to sanity and inner strength. Tris showed us this route as she battled the heinous crimes of leaders bent on destruction rather than unity. Through each heroine’s harrowing obstacles, readers and viewers are shown not only the realistic consequences of perpetuating violence, but the difficulty of coming back sanely from such dark places. Bartov begs the world to learn the meaning of true sacrifice instead of being dragged down by grandiose illusions built on the foundations of cruelty: “Bereft of heroes and ideals, we are haunted by nightmares of catastrophe” (45). To not be haunted by the catastrophes of the past or nightmarish projections of the future, it is time to take heed of the ideals placed forward by Katniss and Tris. Katniss lost everything valuable to her and Tris sacrificed her life, for us to better understand this message. That carnage and destruction only lead to ruin. It takes great sacrifice and personal strength to look for positive alternatives instead. But, are you willing to look?

209

CHAPTER TWELVE: SURVEILLANCE CULTURE AND TECHNOLOGY

IN BOTH SERIES

“I used to think about giving my life for things, but I didn’t understand what ‘giving your

life’ really was until it was right there, about to be taken from me” (Roth, Allegiant 28).

The age of the dystopian narrative has changed and adapted to its times ever so

acutely, as can be seen in the perspective that both The Hunger Games and Divergent

series take on towards the subject of technology. Where technology first fueled societies

towards doom, now it is integrated so deeply into the daily lives of all its characters, that

there simply is no way without it. The reality of today is that the overwhelming presence of technology is taken for granted and accepted as fact. The forefathers of dystopian

fiction forewarned of the blinding effects and devasting consequences of letting

technology, specifically surveillance technology, overpower the future of humanity. And

yet while it has yet to suppress us into an era styled after the Terminator envisioned

future of a robotic apocalypse, there remains a tremendous fear and caution to the

potential.

Today’s dystopian narratives implement advanced technology into everyday

scenarios without blinking an eye, because the focus remains on the bigger picture. The

long-term consequences of using this technology and how it will directly affect humanity

entirely, genetically speaking. Within The Hunger Games, the fear is placed on nuclear

weaponry and genetically designed mutations to torture and kill. Within the Divergent

210

series, the emphasis is directly on genetic warfare, down to the DNA level. Together,

both series also demonstrate how their authoritarian governments depend on and

implement an overwhelming presence of surveillance culture to ensure order. When

diving into the technology-driven details of The Hunger Games and Divergent novels and

films, a map can be traced from the changed perspectives on approaching and using advanced genetic and surveillance specific technology, to seeing the need to implement a

moral code, and towards considering the long-term consequences.

Historically speaking, technology entered literature through the path of science fiction. Ideas of new advancements such as the telegraph and first use of electricity, all the way to flying machines, took over society’s capacity to both imagine great things and then fear them. The evolution of technology therefore became a popular concept to analyze, in terms, of how far humanity would be willing to take the next step. When advanced weaponry joined into the discussion, so did the strength of dystopian focused narratives because they displayed not only the possibilities, but more so the consequences. Science fiction became the genre for pushing the boundaries on what is possible, and dystopia claimed the corner of how it would be made possible. The forefathers of dystopian literature (Zamyatin, Huxley, and Orwell) initiated this first wave of caution through their fictional projections, “Examination of humanity’s relation to its own material constructions...repeatedly described as technophobia, through fictions articulating fears of human displacement” (Seed 47). With Collins and Roth, we do not see that specific technophobia that fears human displacement. Instead, the idea that sprouted in the 1920s formulated into a different phase of approaching advanced technology.

211

Instead, when the dystopian classics warned of authoritarian governments taking

over, that is the specific angle that both Collins and Roth adapted more acutely. Huxley’s

Brave New World may have created a storyline driven by the “contempt of his class for

the machine,” but who deployed the machine and how they used it became more central

for our modern authors (Hillegas 120). Huxley, Orwell, and Zamyatin all presented these

similar cases of cataclysmic conclusions due to an overwhelming reliance and presence

of technology. Technophobia was closer and dearer to their era because all three were

living within the first and second generation of workers who were being swallowed up by

the industrial revolution. For the benefit of the wealthy who pushed the industrial agenda,

these early authors feared the consequences enough to implement them into their novels.

What remains relevant to this day is not only this initial fear that technology will

take over, but also how it might help to create “a massive centralization of power” which threatens individual liberty by giving those in higher positions the ability to control everyone underneath them (Seed 82). Katniss and Tris are born into such worlds where this has already occurred, where individual liberty is sacrificed daily for the larger good, as taught by those in power. Snow, Coin, Jeanine, and David: these are the faces of tyrannical power who used genetic and surveillance technology in order to ensure their personal agendas. The most accurate fears of old centralized around allowing this technology to advance without paying attention to those who controlled the advancements. Blind ignorance of the general public creates a “concentration of economic and political power” acquired by only a few, at the top, and they are able to yield and control society without much conflict (Seed 83). Until our heroines start their

212

journeys to upset this balance of power, that remains the case, from the 1920s up until now.

This current phase of dystopian literature as illustrated by The Hunger Games and

Divergent series, shows exactly how technology is implemented into daily life, in order to first emphasize how predominant its influence is without our mindfulness to its presence. In the films especially, many little gizmos and gadgets are futurized and made to appear as harmless necessities, such as hologram televisions, digital binoculars, and even vaccine-styled trackers. And this is all just from the first novel and film of The

Hunger Games. Even the poorer districts have forms of advanced technology that do not stick out as being superfluous but are simply accepted as a part of one’s daily lifestyle.

For example, all the citizens are able to watch the Hunger Games on community screens or home projectors, in all twelve districts (Collins 13). The reason behind such easy

access is so that the government is able to ensure that even the most impoverished

corners of District Twelve have a way to watch the highly important annual rites of

passage. And it is not just enforced entertainment made easy by advanced technology. In

the work fields of every district, surveillance technology is always present as well.

Projected camera screens, flying monitors, and armed guards ensure that every worker

does his or her task without exception (Collins, Catching Fire 79).

This overbearing technological presence applies even more so to the Divergent

series. Roth worked hard to make the closed-off Chicago city appear technologically

advanced, even as they were authoritatively cut off from the rest of the world. Each

faction has its own techniques and adjustments to futuristic living, from advanced

Abnegation dwellings that emphasize practicality over leisure and comfort (Roth,

213

Divergent 18) to Dauntless security systems adapted to be throughout the city all at once without ever being seen directly (Roth, Insurgent 176). Even, Divergent rites of passage implement advanced technology to ensure accuracy and probability. Specifically, I am referencing the aptitude test that helps teenagers decide which faction to live in after their sixteenth birthday. The aptitude test is based on a bioengineered drug combined with digitally enhanced wire technology, connected directly to the brain, to stimulate certain scenarios and portray them back to the test-taker (Roth, Divergent 25-29). It may not be as horrific as participating in the annual Hunger Games, but this aptitude test also prepares you for the next big step: the choosing ceremony. One cannot be done without the other. Therefore, another social custom is dictated by who designed the aptitude test and how they intend to use it later. Which Jeanine does, to see which aptitude test scores yield divergent results in order to hunt the test-takers who remain unaware of the danger their willing participation put them into in the first place (Roth, Divergent 41).

In the opening scenes of the first film of Divergent, every faction is depicted with not just advanced private residences, but also schools that are adapted from old buildings but designed within as futuristic classroom layouts (Burger, Divergent 0:03:15-0:21:18).

Even down to the smallest visual, with something like the Dauntless training weapons, every detail is accounted for both on the premise of advanced technology and futuristic appeal. The practice knives have unique designs, the paintball guns shoot neon projected paints, even the training facilities adapt today’s gym layouts but stock them with what appears as basic but unusually complex fitness machinery (Burger, Divergent 0:47:04-

0:48:33). Everyday items are digitalized, lifestyle choices are adapted, and our acceptance of such fine technological detailing goes unfazed. Why? For the reason that

214

we have become accustomed to seeing it in our own lives, just not to such a degree as

Divergent shows it. Though the easy acceptance of what we see on screen already implies

that we are prepared to welcome those fictionized details into our own lives without

raising an eyebrow.

Consequently, one of the long-term consequences of depending on and overusing

technology, is the manner in which the government uses it as well. This was something

that Zamyatin and Orwell touched on in the greatest detail and implemented as major

themes into their storylines. The idea of big brother and secret surveillance was born and

mastered with these dystopian forefathers. However, it did not die with them, as this

continues to be a pressing anxiety and concern even to contemporary society. If nothing

else, it is more amplified and made to appear more horrific, due to virtual technology and

its limitless abilities of being hacked, surveilled, and even controlled without one’s

knowledge.

Both Collins and Roth incorporate the overwhelming presence of surveillance

culture into their series and address it as a major concern for our future. Peter Singer in

fact, breaches this very question in his essay “Visible Man: Ethics in a World Without

Secrets.” He brings up the overwhelming aspect of surveillance culture that has not only

embedded itself into the fictions of our future, but also into the practices of today’s

society. Singer state that, “The modern Panopticon is not a physical building, and it

doesn’t require the threat of an inspector’s presence to be effective. Technological

breakthroughs have made it easy to collect, store, and disseminate data on individuals,

corporations, and even the government” (462). Referencing the philosopher Jeremy

Bentham’s creation of a panopticon building that allows for easy observation by being

215

placed at the center, as a watchtower, Singer implicates that the modern panopticon is

wired into all the technology we use on a daily basis: “We blog, tweet, and post what we

are doing, thinking, and feeling” (462). Instead of having a guard or inspector watching

us 24 hours a day, we supply this information freely and willingly.

Collins and Roth tap into these modern-day habits and implicate the dangers of following such a lifestyle blindly. That is how Snow ensured decades of blind obedience, by watching suspicious citizens through their communications and blackmailing them when they stepped out of line (Collins, Mockingjay 27-9). That is also how David knew of all of Jeanine’s plans for genocide, through her digitalized plans and constant surveillance access (Roth, Allegiant 176). Though knowing did not push him to stop her actions, instead David fed Jeanine’s despotic ideas even more by giving her access to advanced formulas that would help her engineer the very serums used to control the

Dauntless into killing divergents and Abnegation members. Those in control apply the technology at their hands to influence others ‘course of actions, and usually without their knowledge either. That is the horror of long-term consequences playing out from blind acceptance early on.

Furthermore, the storylines presented by Collins and Roth can further these consequences to a higher extent. Firstly, these totalitarian governments that control the

future societies of Panem and Chicago implicate extreme surveillance culture, as a

scenario of current American living conditions, “[We] not only dramatize but also visualize our subjective fears and desires about technology not as it might be in the future but as we experience it in the present” (Sturken, Thomas, and Ball-Rokeach 145). To the point that we have drenched our contemporary lifestyle into young adult dystopian

216

narratives, by showing the overdependence of technology in every aspect of daily routine.

Currently, members of our society live in a constant rotation of phones, computers, and

televisions. But the characters in these dystopian narratives suffer from it and are pushed

to even further extremes as a result of early ignorance.

This is where we cross into the second point, in which the protagonists depict the

negatives of extreme surveillance culture by showing how it murders individuality. As an

added bonus, the need to eliminate these dangers becomes part of the journey that Katniss

and Tris must take on in order to ensure a different mentality, besides simple conformity.

Consider this example, of when Katniss is shocked by how she is injected with a tracker,

so that she is never lost at any single moment within the games (Collins, The Hunger

Games 98). Is it not similar to a cell phone GPS, only Katniss’s GPS is installed into the bloodstream directly? Now, let us take it a step further.

The entire Hunger Games are a staged panopticon because every player knows they are being watched, just not where or when. This horrific feeling of constantly being watched is not paranoia however. In The Hunger Games film, there is a scene that emphasizes this panopticon feeling. During the second day of the 74th Hunger Games,

when Katniss is resting on a tree branch, hidden from other tributes, we as the viewers,

still get to see her being watched by someone else. The hairs on Katniss’s neck rise and

the close camera shot shows us this very detail, to stress how anxious Katniss is in being

watched (Lawrence, The Hunger Games 0:51:13-0:51:52). Then from her viewpoint, we see her look above, at the tree branch tilting down towards her, and at the tip where the branch meets the tree, something sticks out. A very small black camera lens, marking

Katniss’s every move.

217

It is not paranoia that Katniss is dealing with, it is the reality of her world. And it

extends outside of the games as well. When Katniss returns home, the eyes still keep

watching and monitoring her. From her clandestine hunting trips to the forest, to a stolen

kiss with Gale between buildings in town, everything is tracked and recorded, to be used

as blackmail by President Snow, at any given moment in time (Collins, Catching Fire

34). Fear of doing anything to displease Panem’s leader becomes an obsessive dread that fuels Katniss’s need to overcome her personal phobias and her PTSD symptoms, in order

to fight for freedom from these tyrannical surveillance methods of ensuring obedience.

The same level of analysis applies to Tris, who is monitored all the way from her

placement exam to her initiation period within Dauntless. Readers get a first inkling when

Jeanine approaches Tris and her family before the choosing ceremony, and addresses Tris and her brother directly (Roth, Divergent 28). Jeanine knows their names and who is who, and even which personality traits they prevailed in during the testing phase. And this knowledge Jeanine has at their first physical meeting, never having seen Tris or her brother in person beforehand. How did she do this? The same way David monitored

Jeanine’s movements and actions. There is never one moment in the trilogy that Tris is not being watched, or anyone else within Chicago for that matter of fact. Tris just did not know the scope and severity of her surveilled world, which Katniss at least had the advantage of knowing, going into her journey.

Tris is only alerted of the surveillance technology when Tobias points them out on the cavern walls within the Dauntless private rooms and hallways. When she wants to discuss their private relationship, he puts his finger to his lips to keep Tris quiet, until he moves her outside onto the Dauntless building roof. The secret corner of the outside roof

218

becomes the one place they can talk without fear of being watched and heard. It is also at that point in time that Tris becomes aware of the world she lives in, “I’ve never noticed it before—it blended in with the rock wall. But Tobias seems to know it well” (Roth,

Divergent 334). Nothing is as it seems, and blind ignorance is not an excuse. Without

Tobias, our protagonist would have remained unaware of her mistakes within the larger reality of constrictions she lived in.

This need for privacy becomes more interestingly depicted in the Divergent and

Insurgent films. Characters attempt to catch private moments away from security cameras and digital surveillance by whispering on roofs, in bathroom stalls, and between outside storage units, if only to catch a few seconds of discretion. Of course, this is only vamped up when Jeanine attempts to use bioengineered serums to affect everyone’s mental capacities and controls the Dauntless members in that incapacitating manner. This also brings up another aspect to futuristic surveillance culture: not just watching its citizens but taking control of their minds completely. Divergent shows this through bioengineered

serums controlling the mental capacities of Dauntless members, and The Hunger Games

does this through mental torture and brainwashing to the same effect. All in order to

watch the citizens and then to control them. This is the totalitarian approach of using

surveillance culture to the next degree, to the forecasted next step of contemporary

society’s fears.

Some would say this fear is a paranoia brought on by the science fiction elements present in these two series. However, the presence of such a connection to futuristic technologies and science fiction potential should not and cannot diminish its implications: “Science fiction brings to the utopian genre, namely an awareness of the

219

effects and importance of science and technology. By this I do mean technology as a tool for social transformation” (Claeys, Utopian Literature 139). Regardless of the mixture of elements and genres, Claeys makes it a point to acknowledge the awareness brought on by the presence of such technology that dictates change for the future. Singer even uses

Bentham’s panopticon creation to portray this social transformation that has already been initiated. He state that, “The gradual adoption of this ‘inspection principle,’ would,

Bentham predicted, create ‘a new scene of things,’ transforming the world into a place with ‘morals reformed, health preserved, industry invigorated, instruction diffused, public burdens lightened’” (Singer 462). Well, the utopia that Bentham imagined full of positive transformations for an enlightened society becomes the surveillance culture that Singer fears, while Collins and Roth simulate its substantive consequences.

The Hunger Games and Divergent series extend the effects of technology into the aspect of social living most severely. Bentham’s hope for society to be lightened of its public burdens by being constantly monitored was not a solitary ideology either. Popper even argues that this perspective is what kept closed societies such as Sparta so successful at its zenith: “The ‘patriotic’ movement was partly the expression of the longing to return to more stable forms of life” (1:184). To return to those glory days of stability, a closer security of their city meant not only being regularly watched, but also it instigated a separation from the rest of the world and their toxic influences.

For Panem, it is a horrifying history riddled with natural disasters and civil war that enforced a need for such extreme surveillance styled protection: “The Treaty of

Treason gave us the new laws to guarantee peace and, as our yearly reminder that the

Dark Days must never be repeated, it gave us the Hunger Games” (Collins, The Hunger

220

Games 18). To lift the public burden of allowing the country to come to ruin once again,

to ensure that those Dark Days never return, personal freedom is forsaken. Individuality

is a risk no longer afforded but penalized instead, by the Capitol and more specifically,

by the dictums of President Snow and later President Coin.

The importance of the self must be forsaken for the benefit of the larger

community, that is the principle of conformity and the golden rule of authoritarian

regimes. Plato argued along these same lines when he said: “The Part exists for the sake

of the whole, but the whole does not exist for the sake of the part...You are created for the

sake of the whole and not for the sake of you” (qtd. in Popper 1:100). Popper uses Plato’s

words to suggest that the belief for strong and unquestionable conformity was at the head

of ancient societies that urged each citizen to think of the greater good, instead of

personal priorities. For Ancient Greeks and Spartans, it was as simple as stating that to be

individualistic meant to be egoistic, but to be part of the collective meant to be altruistic:

“Plato suggests that if you cannot sacrifice your interests for the sake of the whole, then

you are selfish” (Popper 1:100). That is what the Hunger Games are for, to ensure a

national conformity to an unforgiving law that does not bend to the will of the people. It bends to the influence of one man alone: President Snow. Who ensures that each district is willing to sacrifice their youth in order to prove their altruistic belief in Panem itself.

For such a nefarious reason, the Hunger Games are used to gather every district and enforce their obedience through the very technology that once gave them hope.

Technology of the future that is meant to enforce social transformation for the better and aid each citizen in a progressive life becomes the inspector above your head, keeping you on the straight and narrow. The “inspector principle,” also thought up by Bentham, was

221

initially meant to be for wardens, supervisors, caregivers, and teachers (Singer 462).

Now, it is every screen, monitor, listening device, and tracker that serves out Bentham’s

“inspector principle” just as accurately, if not more so.

When the districts gather to watch the annual Hunger Games, they need to be reminded that they are also being watched: “The mayor looks distressed. Since all of this is being televised, right now District 12 is the laughingstock of Panem, and he knows it”

(Collins, The Hunger Games 20). Public figures, such as District Twelve’s mayor, carry that burden directly and attempt to enforce good behavior from their citizens in order to avoid the penalties that come with being noticed. Being noticed for public indecencies or insubordination means that a punishment is forthcoming as well, while the rest of the nation watches. This is the illusion of safety and order, monitored by the big screen controlled by the President. Katniss learns quickly, “A lot to learn about presentation. A lot about televised behavior” (Collins, The Hunger Games 47). How you behave in front of the screen and therefore in front of the rest of the nation that is watching, is a performance as Katniss learns from her mentors, Haymitch and Effie. How well you sell your act of loyalty and obedience depends on how severe your punishment will be afterwards.

Visiting District Eleven forces Katniss to not only see the barriers placed for protection, but also their implications. Katniss notes the first visual of District Eleven, “A fence rises up before us. Towering at least thirty-five feet in the air and topped with wicked coils of barbed wire, it makes ours back in District 12 look childish. My eyes quickly inspect the base, which is lined with enormous metal plates...Then I see the watchtowers, placed evenly apart, manned with armed guards” (Collins, Catching Fire

222

55). The physical reminders of enforced security are enough to question the reasons

behind it. On screen, director Francis Lawrence, made sure to emphasize the barriers of a

surveillance culture by first using these physical markers as a visual warning. Electric

fences, guarded walls, towers with spotlights: you would think you were watching a prison scene come to life here in Panem.

Everytime Katniss entered a new district or left her old District Twelve, her eyes being the narrator of the story, would direct the cameras to these fences, towers, guards, and monitors everywhere on the borders. Using establishing shots, which provide a complete view of the scene ahead, with high angles and cool colors to symbolize the oppressive nature of always being looked down on in a depressing setting, director

Lawrence creates the ideal environment set forth by Collins's descriptions (Catching

Fire, 0:21:18-0:22:35). Dystopia has never appeared any grayer than it does in the second film, when Katniss sees the stark contrasts between districts and is forced to visually accept what her mind attempted to close off previously. That Panem is not divided equally, and that the people of Panem are not treated equally with respect.

Coming from District Twelve, where they had electric fences that barely even worked and seeing the drastic difference in District Eleven, forces Katniss to accept with her eyes the differences of their worlds. Katniss is distressed by what she has to acknowledge, “The impression that the rules in District 11 were more harshly enforced.

But I never imagined something like this” (Collins, Catching Fire 55). To physically see the barriers is to see firsthand how separation is used to enforce subordination. How extra security is used not to protect but to ensure obedience. Katniss starts to pick up on these hints when she sees what these towering fences and watchtowers and extra guards are

223

actually protecting: “Manned with armed guards, so out of place among the fields of

wildflowers around them...now the crops begin, stretched out as far as the eye can see”

(Collins, Catching Fire 55). What is all the extra protection for? Not for the flowers and

crops, but to ensure that district Eleven citizens do not run away, do not steal, do not

disobey.

The Capitol expects a certain number of crops from District Eleven, and even if

they are starving, District Eleven citizens still need to supply the Capitol before

themselves. This goes back to the ideology envisioned by Plato, one that President Snow

followed flawlessly: “That the state does not produce men ‘for the purpose of letting

them loose, each to go his own way’” (qtd. in Popper 1:102). Each district serves a

purpose, and every citizen must fulfill their duty to the state. In the case of Panem, every district must supply the Capitol before they get their own portions of food and supplies.

To ensure a swift and effortless transaction, that is what all the extra security guarantees.

When someone steps out of line, they call attention to individualistic signs of

defiance. Individuality is a crime for a totalitarian regime, “Injustice is an act against the

state, not against a particular man, and though a man may commit an act of injustice, only

the collective can suffer from it” (Popper 1:105). An act of injustice in our world could

be interpreted as freedom of expression, but in a closely surveilled totalitarian society, it

is a crime against the state. For example, when Katniss thanks Rue’s family (Rue is the

little twelve-year-old girl who helped Katniss survive in the 74th Hunger Games) for

their sacrifice and Peeta donates part of their winnings to the families of fallen tributes in

District Eleven, it initiates an overwhelming reaction of sincere gratitude from the crowd.

That reaction is interpreted not as freedom of expression, but as an act of injustice:

224

“Every person in the crowd presses the three middle fingers of their left hand against their lips and extends them to me. It’s our sign from District 12, the last good-bye I gave

Rue in the arena” (Collins, Catching Fire 61). In the film, this is one of the most moving scenes because as soon as Katniss thanks Rue’s family, the crowd reacts in hope.

Where everything is oppressive and dark, director Lawrence creates a moment of hope by giving an open framing of the scene and extending towards the entire audience the first warm hues set to the background of continuously dark and cool tones. The crowd raises their hands in unison, and a whistle is heard (Lawrence, Catching Fire 0:32:14-

0:33:09). The call of the mockingbird is now a symbol of freedom. In the book, Katniss and Peeta give their speech and are about to leave, when they remember her congratulatory flowers and turn around to retrieve them. Instead, Katniss and Peeta bear witness to the horror of Capitol justice, “A pair of Peacekeepers dragging the old man who whistled to the top of the steps. Forcing him to his knees before the crowd. And putting a bullet through his head” (Collins, Catching Fire 62). This public display of instilling justice is so horrendous, so coldblooded, and so despotic. Befitting the tyranny of the leader who set this as a standard of order: President Snow.

In the Catching Fire film, this display of coldblooded murder is visualized and represented as the dark side of totalitarian protection and technological advancement. As

Jennifer Lawrence, playing Katniss, faces the crowds of District Eleven, her expression is breathtakingly painful. Her eyes are tearing, and her cheeks are shaking, from the effort to not weep before the crowds. However, with such a close-up reaction shot, the viewers can see every facial tremor as Katniss quivers her last words to the microphone: “I couldn’t save her, I’m sorry” (Lawrence, Catching Fire 0:32:01-0:33:12). Those words

225

are the instigating cause to what comes next on screen. An elderly and blind African

American man in the middle of the crowd whistling the call of the mockingbird as he is the first to raise his fingers into the air. On the pages of the book, we are presented with a nameless victim who represented one moment of strength. On the screen, that nameless

character is given a face, a race, and an even larger strength in going into the act of

reckoning without seeing the authority figures all around him. Remember the words, “A

man may commit an act of injustice, only the collective can suffer from it” (Popper

1:105). Well, these words are brought into action in this very scene.

Those few moments that the elderly man held the focus of the camera, that was

director Lawrence’s one shot of truth in the midst of great oppression. As soon as the

whistle is heard, the rest of the crowd raises their fingers in unison, and it is a sight to

behold. The awe-inspiring bandwagon effect in full power, “The instinctive tendency of

the human animal to reply on the actions of others in choosing its own course of action”

(Wasik 482). This is what Wasik has already proven, social instigators start and end with

one’s influential but individualistic behavior to stand out and do something unexpected or

different. That unexpected reaction to Katniss’s sincere apology instigates a social

movement, though in this scene, on a much smaller scale, but to a horrendous conclusion.

The sound of the orchestra playing for about twelve seconds, full of high notes

and harmonious flute instruments, this is a symbolic and musical interpretation of the

elderly man’s inspirational moment of bravery (Lawrence, Catching Fire 0:32:14-

0:33:09). The short score piece adds to the hope of the fingers that keep on rising

throughout the crowd of District Eleven. The extended scope of the camera allows the

viewers to glance at the sunset highlighting their moment of liberated expression, another

226

symbolic expression of a regime that is faulting and falling apart, just like the setting of a sun. The sense of conformity taking on another meaning, that of rebellion.

This match-on action, with the District Eleven crowd’s few seconds of hopeful rebellion is cut short by the second camera shot of the helmeted guards. These guards are known as “peacekeepers,” armed in white body armor and futuristic surveillance helmets, they take out black police batons and force their way into the crowd. Katniss is dragged away by two of these peacekeepers as she screams, “No, please leave him alone, no” and the doors start to close on her line of vision. The last thing she sees and we as the viewers of her narrative, is of that elderly man dragged to the stage in front of the crowd, frightened and confused but forced to his knees. Katniss’s screams of “NO” echo as a shot is fired and the double doors of the justice building in which they are in are abruptly closed. What remains is one uninterrupted image left static: a bullet released in fire

(Lawrence, Catching Fire 0:33:10-0:34:51). It does not take much to diffuse that beautiful moment of inspirational rebellious hope. It just takes cruelty, coldhearted inhumane cruelty.

This one scene of hope ends in one shot of horror. It is a provoking message in images as Collins expressed in words, “The full impact of what I’ve done hits me. It was not intentional--I only meant to express my thanks--but I have elicited something dangerous. An act of dissent from the people of District 11” (Catching Fire 62). Katniss never intended this act of rebellion, an innocent's death, a sight caught on camera for not only the President but the rest of nation to witness as well. Suddenly, advanced weaponry and extreme surveillance technology is not enough. Suddenly, a ripple effect has been released.

227

CHAPTER THIRTEEN: FORGIVING CRUELTY IN BOTH SERIES

“There are many ways to be brave in this world. Sometimes bravery involves laying

down your life for something bigger than yourself” (Roth, Allegiant 509).

The ripple effect of dissent amongst the general public is a dangerous element for

any leader because that takes control out of their hands. Trouble, opposition, chaos:

things quickly spiral out of control if allowed to spread. That is why authoritarian rulers

depend on a surveillance culture to maintain order, that is why they urge the collective to

report any small infractions, and that is also why they discipline those who step out of

line with the cruelest penalties. A mockingjay whistle is not a serious offense, but the meaning behind it carries a death sentence. Katniss learned this firsthand in the second book of The Hunger Games. Same with Tris, who showed strong indicators of being selfless, brave, and smart. Having multiple strengths to deepen your personality should never be considered a disadvantage, but in Divergent, it is not only a drawback but also

one that carries its own death sentence.

Katniss and Tris had to learn to hide certain parts of themselves in order to

survive in their respective conformist societies that would have otherwise singled them

out and annihilated them before their journeys ever started. Gratefully, these two young

women not only survived but adapted to their environments while inspiring the people around them to start thinking and acting otherwise. Katniss and Tris inspired change based on forgiveness. Believing in forgiveness is a remarkably righteous capability when

228

analyzing the origins of our obsession for violence, cruelty, war, and death. It is also that

vitally important first step towards implementing changes into society for the better of all,

and not just the few in power.

From the perspective of an authoritarian leader, change is a danger that takes control out of their hands. Therefore, the one cause to a totalitarian society’s misery is when someone sticks out and goes against the grain. Claeys describes these rebellious citizens not only as implementers of change, but also as the targets of the leaders who

want to annihilate them before their cause grows a following. He states, “The most ‘total’

element in the totalitarian formula was this simple moral postulate: there was one cause

of human misery and one solution” (Claeys, Dystopia: A Natural History 174). The cause

to human misery is the one who breaks from conformity, and the one solution is to

eradicate them. Katniss does not start the rebellion, but she does end up as the

mockingjay symbol and the icon to represent the suppressed. The target was planted on

Katniss’s back the moment she rescued herself and Peeta in the finale of the 74th Hunger

Games. Tris does not seek out trouble, but her divergent DNA does not allow her to hide

from it either. So, when Tris seeks to protect her family and friends within Abnegation,

she ends up joining not just one, but two different rebellions (first within Chicago, and

then outside within the Bureau). Katniss and Tris both had transgressions that started

small, but unfortunately were noticed as well.

The principle is simple: recognize a problem and get rid of it. Left unchecked, a

simple protest may become a rebellion. An infraction may lead to an outcry. The solution

is to stifle dissent, weed out the ones that rebel, and break them before their voices grow

powerful. President Snow attempted to implement this strategy when he visited Katniss

229

in her home in District Twelve to warn her of this ripple effect she had started: ‘“I have a

problem, Miss Everdeen,’ says President Snow. ‘A problem that began the moment you

pulled out those poisonous berries in the arena’” (Collins, Catching Fire 20). Katniss

created an alternative for herself and Peeta at the end of the 74th Hunger Games that

resulted in an unheard of double victory, and it cost the gamekeeper Seneca his life,

because he allowed it. Now, with her display in District Eleven, other districts are rising

to the call of the Mockingjay: “‘If a girl from District Twelve of all places can defy the

Capitol and walk away unharmed, what is to stop them from doing the same?” he says.

‘What is to prevent, say, an uprising’” (Collins, Catching Fire 21). President Snow is

voicing the very concern that eventually becomes his undoing, as it is for any closed society that begins to open up.

As a dictator, President Snow’s priorities are to continue a reign without disturbances. As an antagonist, his flaw of obsession becomes his downfall. The factors

that add towards a successful equation of ruin are simple: “The pattern of fiction is

therefore one that recognizes disorder--gratuitous actions, demonic intrusions, obsessive

motives” (Hassan 116). Snow’s mistake was not in eliminating Katniss, but in attempting

to use her after her influence had begun to grow tremendously. His obsessive motive is

that element of disorder that is desirable in the pattern of fictional literature of any kind,

because without Snow’s need to control Katniss, he might have considered more

effective alternatives to dissipate dissent. More practical or hands-on solutions that could

have involved implementing new policies instead of releasing an agent of chaos, which

Katniss did become for him, would have continued Snow’s ironfisted reign on Panem.

230

Instead, Snow kept his tyrannical intrusions focused on the girl on fire. Knowing

the patterns of politics, acknowledging the ideologies of control and chaos, Snow even

predicted the collapse of his own reign. The second Snow acknowledged Katniss’s

potential, was the second he started to fail, “Katniss Everdeen, the girl who was on fire, you have provided a spark that, left unattended, may grow to an inferno that destroys

Panem” (Collins, Catching Fire 23). As Katniss is the chosen spark that can set his country on fire, Snow’s obsessive motive is to use her through fear and manipulation,

“That fear has become ‘the emotion through which public life is administered’” (Claeys,

Dystopia: A Natural History 12). The instrument of fear evokes a form of obedience;

manipulation ensures it. But for how long?

In order to display to the districts that are beginning to rebel how obedient their

mockingjay icon really is, during her tours and 75th Hunger Games, Snow threatens

Katniss’s loved ones. If she does not act the part Snow has designated for her, they will

be the ones paying for Katniss’s disobedience. Living in a society that has adapted a

surveillance culture to the nth degree arms Snow with enough damning evidence to make

Katniss fearful and paranoid. In fact, Katniss starts to constantly wonder and worry,

“Surely they haven’t been tracking us in there. Or have they? Could we have been

followed? That seems impossible. At least by a person. Cameras? That never crossed my

mind until this moment” (Collins, Catching Fire 24). Knowing what she does when

Katniss thinks she is not being watched makes her anxious and suspicious. She poaches

illegally, she kisses Gale privately when she is meant to be publicly in love with Peeta,

and she even hides Gale after his punishment. These are just a few of Katniss’s illicit

actions that Snow’s cameras caught a whiff off. And as a result, her private moments

231

become Snow’s artillery of blackmail. Being alerted to what Snow has and how he can use it against her makes Katniss not only fearful, but aware. Aware of the world she actually lives in: our world.

Projecting the realities of America’s current state of participatory surveillance culture onto Katniss’s situation illuminates the extremes to which our modern technology can be taken. Something so private as a clandestine kiss with Gale, “I flinch when he whispers in my ear. ‘By the way, I know about the kiss’” (Collins, Catching Fire 29) should be a cherished memory. Instead, it is accessed information used as blackmail by the one with more power: Snow. Derrick Jensen and George Draffan, analysts of modern technology and surveillance practices implemented by governments, identify where current American misconceptions can lead to future dystopian possibilities, “The point is that we should never be deceived that technologies are neutral. They are controlled by those in power, which means those in power have the ability to gain access to information about those under their power, whether or not those under their power desire this information known” (Jensen and Draffan 124). The threat is imminent, even if the majority remain ignorant, that is the point they make. Modern technology does not just sanction overactive surveillance though, it remains at the disposal of the one with most power and influence.

Another direction of advanced technology lies within the scope of evolving genetics, medicines, and drugs. Biotechnology is the weapon of the future, though its designs have already been imagined, and have already been integrated into practice.

Francis Fukuyama introduces one of the more relevant forms of advanced drugs that we see implemented into both The Hunger Games and Divergent series: psychotropic drugs.

232

He state that, “The rise of psychotropic drugs has coincided with what has been called the

neurotransmitter revolution—that is, a vast increase in scientific knowledge about the

biochemical nature of the brain and its mental processes” (Fukuyama 42). Fukuyama

discusses this neurotransmitter revolution through cautionary tales of advanced drugs

manipulating behaviors and even instigating permanent changes in mental processes

altogether.

The threat of biotechnology in the modern age is no longer a dubious science

fiction concept, it is a relevant concern plaguing the present age. How much is in control

of the general public versus the government, that is another aspect represented in both our

series. It is also the same aspect that Fukuyama makes a warning about, “The term social

control, of course, conjures up right-wing fantasies of governments using mind-altering drugs to produce compliant subjects. That particular fear would seem to be misplaced for the foreseeable future” (Fukuyama 53). Would seem misplaced but in actuality, is already deployed by pharmaceutical companies with their own agendas, as Fukuyama exemplifies through popular drugs such as Prozac and Ritalin. Drugs that do change mental processes in order to control habits that are now seen as disorders. That is today’s reality. Addressing these concerns by weaponizing them is the horrifying next step accomplished in both The Hunger Games and Divergent series. Just as effective as employing surveillance technology to elicit blackmail, suddenly there is another horrifying tool at the disposal of tyrants, bioengineered weaponry that allows an even more direct method to control dissidents.

Experienced firsthand by Katniss in the 74th Hunger Games when she is bitten by the tracker jackers. Tracker jackers are one of the first genetic mutations forecasted by

233

Collins in her series. Now while genetic advancements are a different biotechnological

advancement altogether, that is not the case with these tracker jackers. Designed in the

lab, these genetically altered wasps actually contain a drug-permeated venom that induces hallucinations and eventual death. Suddenly, new connections become even more frightening in their capacity to do harm. Collins introduces these tracker jackers in the

74th Hunger Games as a cautionary tale of scientific advancement taken too far in nature:

“These killer wasps were spawned in a lab and strategically placed, like land mines,

around the districts during the war...Most people can’t tolerate more than a few stings.

Some die at once. If you live, the hallucinations brought on by the venom have actually

driven people to madness” (Collins, The Hunger Games 184). After all, the tracker

jackers were created initially as a biogenetic weapon during the early civil war. Now,

they are used as a jeopardy move within the games.

Katniss herself is bitten by so many of these killer wasps, that she hallucinates

until she faints from the pain. Director Gary Ross portrayed this hallucinatory stage with

a dream sequence within the first Hunger Games film, in order to stimulate the mental

duress Katniss was under before actually fainting. These same genetic mutations, or muttations as Collins dubs them, are used as weapons to annihilate District Thirteen soldiers as they attempt to take control of the Capitol during the third book, Mockingjay.

Created or applied on animals with new drugs that had untested side effects, the

muttations become experiments gone astray. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is no longer

the most frightening creation, not when you consider Collins’s creative alternatives and

the havoc they wreak.

234

Again though, it is not a creative alternative that remains safe in our existence,

only because it was envisioned for Katniss’s world. The potential consequences of using

advanced drugs remains just as pertinent outside the pages of The Hunger Games series,

as Fukuyama points out the feasible short-term concerns relevant to our present: “New

drugs are invented, tested, and approved for use all the time without the manufacturers knowing exactly how they produce their effects. It is often the case in pharmacology that side effects go unrecognized” (79). This is of course, does not even include the

pharmaceutical-psychology matrix involved with these scenarios. What is considered

small side effects for today can yield horrendous disasters for tomorrow, and Fukuyama

is not alone in worrying about such possibilities. That is why Collins creates these worst-

case scenarios, not to surpass past literary monsters, but to point out possible future ones.

Accidental side effects created in laboratories become weaponized monsters in

the field. What was thought up or created for science ends up being a weapon: “Each

light is called a pod. It represents a different obstacle, the nature of which could be

anything from a bomb to a band of mutts. Make no mistake, whatever it contains is

designed to either trap or kill you” (Collins, Mockingjay 250). Katniss’s group triggers

many pods in their hike through the streets of the Capitol, yielding atrocious biogenetic

weapons of all kinds—from mutated gnats to flesh-eating rats to rose-scented lizard mutts to homicidal wolves and monkeys; so many biogenetic mistakes that become effective

weapons of murder, killing soldiers off one by one. All at the disposal and command of

Snow, who hoped to first use Katniss as an obedient pawn through his surveillance

technology, but who now resorts to biogenetic weaponry to kill anyone and everyone

until he can annihilate Katniss altogether. This of course he fails to do, regardless.

235

Snow’s worst act of tyranny is when he resorts to forms of torture to turn

Katniss’s loved ones against her. He has her designer, Cinna, killed, for creating her

Mockingjay dress. Members of Katniss’s makeup crew are tortured, just for supporting her during the Games (which they did because it was simply their job). The most frightening weapon Snow creates though, is Peeta. After the 75th Hunger Games, Katniss is rescued by District Thirteen, while Peeta is captured by the Capitol. During Peeta’s capture, Katniss finds out what is being done to him: “Thinking that Peeta was in his possession and being tortured for rebel information was bad. But thinking that he's being tortured specifically to incapacitate me is unendurable” (Collins, Mockingjay 154). When

Katniss can no longer be accessed as a pawn or manipulated into obedience, Peeta is manipulated and tortured in her stead.

From the perspective of the victim, Peeta’s experience becomes a representation of real pain. The physical and mental duress that he suffers is terrible, but it is also an emotional pain that Katniss has to live through as well. Katniss knows that Peeta was made a victim of torture directly because of her, and that is devastating. How Collins is able to balance these representations of pain symbolizes not only the difficulties of true relationship skills but also cultural expectations in overcoming painful hurdles, “Cultural representations of pain and terror must achieve a fragile balance between the difficulty of presenting that which is too painful to think or to say aloud--and perhaps too painful to be heard” (Goldberg 246). Peeta’s experiences are not only too painful to be thought or heard of as remembrances during his long recovery, they also form a fragile balance to his shared pain with Katniss.

236

Katniss bears the responsibility of Peeta’s torture and, therefore, can never fully forgive herself either. This becomes a scar they both must bear going forward together, another mark of the war inside and out. Orwell envisioned the depths to which torture can take someone and twist their insides, but even then, Orwell felt that there was this essential self that should be held onto: “They could be squeezed out of you by torture.

But if the object was not to stay alive but to stay human, what difference did it ultimately make? They could not alter your feelings: for that matter you could not alter them yourself, even if you wanted to” (211). For the forefather of such a dark genre, Orwell did take torture to such a degree that that essential self was eradicated, leaving his protagonist, Winston, with only an outer shell of resemblance to his past self. As a protagonist fighting an authoritarian rule, Winston lost his cause and himself, his last thoughts are as a loyal party member, loving Big Brother. Winston’s memories were brainwashed away, and with them an essential part of himself was killed as well. Torture,

Orwell retained, was a conclusive method for changing the individual, no matter how much we may hope for that deeper self to remain unscathed. Unimaginable pain can, in the end, alter a person’s deepest feelings.

Collins puts this notion to the test by showing that torture can not only wipe a slate clean, it can even make the victim into a weapon. Katniss learns this firsthand as well, “The Capitol has been subjecting him to a rather uncommon technique known as hijacking” (Collins, Mockingjay 180). In times of war, torture is not only a device used on prisoners, it is a technique that advances with its times as well. For Peeta, Snow orders such a torture that induces fear conditioning in order to warp the mind. By using the venom of tracker jackers, Peeta is brainwashed and his good memories of Katniss are

237

replaced with distortions of pain and fear. Finding out the degree to which Peeta was tortured is something that Katniss cannot even understand nor accept at first, “‘Is that what they’ve done to Peeta? Taken his memories of Katniss and distorted them so they’re scary?’’ Beetee nods. ‘So scary that he’d see her as life-threatening. That he might try to kill her’” (Collins, Mockingjay 181). The chosen torture technique of this projected future enables bioengineered poison to brainwash the victim to the point that their memories become the enemy’s blackmail.

Peeta’s mind becomes brainwashed to a level that he is pushed to not only fear the one he once loved, but his mind now has been chemically induced to want to kill Katniss.

This form of war is personal and inherently malicious because it convolutes the deepest part of ourselves: “Our aggression inevitably leads us to the death we fear; not only is this aggression impotent to protect us from the inevitable, but these destructive patterns deliver precisely what they are supposed to protect us from” (Jensen and Draffan 80).

Changing one’s mental process to not be able to decipher from what is dangerous and what is safe, who is loved and who is a threat, creates a form of aggression that Peeta displays without even knowing why. His destructive pattern is not his fault, Peeta is a victim of war.

However, due to such advanced technology, Peeta does not just become a victim, he becomes Snow’s personal weapon. When Katniss finally gets to see Peeta in person, after his rescue from the Capitol, their reunion is directly affected by Snow’s dark intent:

“My lips are just forming his name when his fingers lock around my throat” (Collins,

Mockingjay 177). The first sight of Katniss sends him into a frenzy. Peeta ends up doing what Snow could not do for such a long time—attacking Katniss directly. Their short

238

reunion ends with a severely wounded Katniss, “Damage to my spinal cord, airway, veins, and arteries” (Collins, Mockingjay 178). And these are just the physical injuries

Katniss receives. The emotional recovery takes longer. The friendship and romantic relationship between the two takes years to reform. Katniss almost losing her closest ally, friend, and lover to show us that warfare of the future is one horrifying concept. But The

Hunger Games is not alone in saddling this kind of burden, as the Divergent series aims to tackle this very issue as well.

Roth perfects the concept of biogenetic warfare even further, because while individualized torture is effective, mass produced bioengineered manipulation is absolute.

A ruler who can get his hands on such technology does not have to worry about insubordination. Jensen and Draffan make a note on one direct consequence, “Advanced forms of biological warfare that can ‘target’ specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool” (46). In Divergent, Jeanine is able to create such a politically useful tool when she targets the genotype of all Dauntless members in order to cloud their judgment and make them subservient to her commands.

Using a process similar to Fukuyama’s forecast of socially engineering neurological processes, Jeanine applies the technology of the future to make servants of men.

Following today’s interests, “As we discover not just correlations but actual molecular pathways between genes and traits like intelligence, aggression, sexual identity, criminality, alcoholism, and the like, it will inevitably occur to people that they can make use of this knowledge for particular social ends” (Fukuyama 16), that inevitable possibility occurs to Jeanine and later to David as well. Knowing which qualities to make dormant such as intelligence and free will, and activating aggression and criminality to

239

higher levels makes for a powerful social tool in order to eliminate threats before they

even happen.

Initially, Jeanine introduces such a serum that can do just that as a testing tool to

create hallucinations in order for Dauntless initiates to conquer their personal fears in

simulated environments. Jeanine achieves two ulterior purposes with her invention: “In

addition to containing the transmitter, the serum stimulates the amygdala, which is the

part of the brain involved in processing negative emotions—like fear—and then induces a

hallucination” (Roth, Divergent 231). First, the serum that is injected into every initiate,

allows for Jeanine to see where every single initiate is at all times, through that

transmitter. With such a method, the advancements geared towards surveillance culture occurs at a quick pace.

No one is secure, and no one is safe in such a reality that has every individual carrying Bentham’s panopticon in their own neck. Jensen and Draffan connect to

Bentham in this situation as well, when warning of the frightful correlation between people and their machines, “A machine for creating and sustaining a power relation independent of the person who exercises it; in short, that the inmates should be caught up in a power situation of which they are themselves the bearers” (9-10). Bentham intended for a prison where inmates had no way to hide their wrongdoings. The situation here is which individuals will never be able to hide themselves again. This new-fangled phobia retains its roots in Orwell’s creation of the Big Brother watch system, “A society whose members spy and report on each other, but even more disturbingly never know when they are being watched by Big Brother, the extrapolated image of this state surveillance”

(Seed 86). Only now it is less about being reported by someone else, and more about not

240

knowing as you report yourself. The disturbing image of the next step in state surveillance. This is the future panopticon, where that power relation Jensen and Draffan discuss resorts to each individual becoming their own inmate.

Jeanine’s second nefarious purpose in injecting those serums into not just every initiate, but eventually every Dauntless member, is to prolong the hallucination state even though the serum was intended to be used in test form only. How the serum starts working seems harmless enough, “You stay in the hallucination until you calm down— that is, lower your heart rate and control your breathing” (Roth, Divergent 231). The initial tagline to this serum seems quite docile. It is controlled by the teste, up until the test-taker can control their own body and conquer whatever fear they are fighting in the simulation. Seemingly harmless and ideally useful for training these new initiates to become fearless soldiers. Literary scholar, David Seed, concludes that such ploys are frankly some of the “most powerful explorations of institutionalized deception” because what the government or corporation is selling, the masses buy without questioning until it is too late (89). Jeanine is known for her cunning inventions. The Erudite mass produce what she creates, and the Dauntless buy and apply it without question.

It takes Tris a direct confrontation with Jeanine, a desperate request by her mother to investigate, and the inside help of her brother, Caleb, within the Erudite compound to finally uncover this powerful institutionalized deception. Four elements of concern are the results Tris learns of as a result, “One: Colored serum contains transmitters. Two:

Transmitters connect the mind to a simulation program. Three: Erudite developed the serum. Four: Eric and Max are working with the Erudite” (Roth, Divergent 415). Piecing together these four elements, Tris is able to uncover the master plan of deception that

241

everyone else is under. Eric and Max, the leaders of Erudite, willingly submit their entire

faction to Jeanine’s creation to not only uncover divergents, but to use the prolonged

hallucination state to deploy the Dauntless into mass-murdering the Abnegation faction.

On the large scale of biotechnological warfare, this is the best-case scenario for a dictator,

and the worst-case scenario for a heroine trying to terminate the coming genocide. Tris

realizes this on the very brink of Jeanine’s plan becoming active, “Eric said every

Dauntless was injected yesterday. So now the entire faction is brain-dead, obedient, and trained to kill. Perfect soldiers” (Roth, Divergent 418). The perfect soldiers that do not stop to think, that are well trained, and have no free will to falter in the mission laid out

for them.

Tris calls them “sleepwalkers,” because every single Dauntless individual that

received that serum is now in that hallucinatory state where they cannot separate reality

from their own fear landscape or dream state. Jeanine’s weapon of choice creates for her

a zombie army. After seeing her friend fall under the spell, Tris describes the

transformation: “Her eyes are open, but blank, and her facial muscles are slack. She

moves without looking at what she’s doing, her mouth half-open, not awake but seeming

awake. And everyone else looks just like her” (Roth, Divergent 417). Tris’s friends and

fellow Dauntless initiates are no longer the capable human beings she trained with freely,

they are possessed and deployed for warfare. The only ones not susceptible to the serum

are the divergents, such as Tris, who stand out and become immediate targets.

Before these sleepwalking soldiers even arrive at the Abnegation compound, they

are already killing the divergents who do not step in line with the rest of the possessed

Dauntless members, without knowing they are actually killing their own. In this horrific

242

scene during the Divergent film, director Neil Burger creates a strong contrast of light

and dark to symbolize the transformation of humans turning into sleepwalking killing

machines. As seen through Tris’s point of view, the camera provides a low angle, where

she is lying in bed as the rest of the initiates slowly get up. Everything is covered in

darkness, as they file out like drones, to the shock of Tris, whose point-of-view shot provides the axis of her terrified eyes as they follow the back lighting of each initiate

(Burger, Divergent 01:43:20-01:44:05). The perspective of this scene was intended by director Burger, to represent not only the radical extremes of light and dark, but also the radical extreme of one young woman sticking out for being divergent, as everyone else simply blends into the darkness of mindless collectivism.

Being different on the page of the novel is frightening, but seeing Tris attempt to blend in when she clearly does not, makes the heart pump faster in fear and anticipation that she may get caught. Film critic, David Bordwell, ascribes this principle to the realistic motivation a film can produce, if done right: “‘Realistic’ motivation, in this mode, consists of making connections recognized as plausible by common opinion (‘A man like this would naturally…’)” (29). Viewers will, of course, hope that Tris naturally adapts to survive, notwithstanding the situation she is in. Director Burger adds to the element of suspense by the way he unfolds the scene. As Tris walks in line with the rest of the sleepwalking Dauntless, as she looks around for anyone who sticks out, as her eyes zoom down when Eric crosses her eyeline match. This scene is paramount in representing not only the heroine’s fear in facing the unknown situation of bioengineered zombism, but in motivating the viewers to follow along in her reaction to the horrors that unfold.

For Bordwell, director Burger is plugging into the element “aimed at suspense (positing a

243

future outcome)” (29). The future outcome that all this suspense is building up to is the beginning of mass-murder, the beginning of genocide.

Using single shots and the building of the orchestra as the background score to reach those higher notes that create discomfort, Burger shows lines of Dauntless forming, weapons being handed out, and then the key light showing one Dauntless member standing out. Confused, not following the order, he starts asking questions, and Tris immediately knows: he is also divergent. Before she can help him quickly or quietly, Eric approaches him and shoots the poor boy directly in the head. Tris is horrified and looks away, the camera following her lowered eyes, evading the gore and blood of the crumpling divergent (Burger, Divergent 01:44:27-01:44:49). That kill shot is not only violently horrific, it is relentlessly inhumane. It instigates in Tris the reaction shot of a frightened young woman who suddenly takes on a look of determination to not only survive, but to end unnecessary future bloodshed.

Signaling a change in herself, Tris is able to solve the problem of her resolve within that conflict of an innocent dying before her eyes. Eric presented to Tris a direct man vs man conflict, and it allowed for Tris to open her eyes to actually doing something about it, instead of accepting the helplessness of the situation. Bordwell demonstrates the possibility of such a change within Tris as a result of Eric’s actions, “Psychologically defined individuals who struggle to solve a clear-cut problem or to attain specific goals.

In the course of this struggle, the characters enter into conflict with others or with external circumstances” (18). Tris was struggling with herself and only sought to survive the current situation. This moment defines her conflict with these external circumstances

244

laid out by Jeanine and carried out by Eric. It is no longer a struggle, but a conflict Tris enters into to defeat them.

Using this defining moment, director Burger shows Tris going from a survivor to a fighter, and another girl on fire is born—one who breaks the ranks, stops Jeanine from committing full out genocide, and proves once and for all what true bravery is. It is about stopping the hurt and pain because they further the cause of violence, “It’s not about hurting people or wishing pain on people who have hurt you. It’s the realization that violence begets more violence. It takes a truly brave person to break the cycle of cruelty and violence” (Norris 102). Having sacrificed friends and family to save the larger community, Tris knows the worth of life enough to protect it despite its crueler edges.

Regrettably, her great sacrifices and astonishing victory do not stop the cycle of violence.

Taking out tyrannical Jeanine and saving her native Abnegation faction does not halt the remaining factions from edging towards civil war against each other. Nor does it prevent a more threatening authoritarian leader from taking control. It is at this point that

David welcomes Tris into the outside world, only to unveil the next form of technological warfare. David is also cunning and does not present his goals outright. Instead, David approaches his agenda the way Aldous Huxley once warned the world dominating forces would blind the public. Seed brings forward that long-ago reminder and shows how relevant it remains still, “Huxley expresses his deepest anxieties about public receptivity towards processes which were operating beneath the surface of society” (83). On the surface, there is this gentle leader attempting to save all the genetically damaged individuals out in the experiment cities and on the fringe of society. Beneath the surface,

245

David operates a eugenic nightmare. He is a tyrant who is preparing new weapons of mass destruction that would put even Snow to shame.

David pushes for scientific progress and for the welfare of all, his incentives come off as pure and positive in changing society for the better. He represents the traditional lead in what Fukuyama asserts to be skewed leadership: “Mankind's constant efforts at cultural self-modification are what lead to human history and to the progressive growth in the complexity and sophistication of human institutions over time” (13). On the one hand,

David’s efforts fulfill the cultural self-modification needed to progressively grow

forwards in knowledge, science, and technology. On the other hand, he does it

obstinately. That link between control and power is an integral part of David’s character,

“The key to controlling the masses is absolute power. And the tool each uses to obtain

and retain that power is deception” (Driza 158). Using deception and manipulation to

justify the ends rather than the means, David presents a facade that the public and even

Tris willingly buy into, while he furthers his nefarious intentions to perfect the fully

healed divergent DNA. Upon Tris’s group’s first meeting within him, David not only

gives Tris’s group the history of how their experiment city began but also how far David

went to keep them safe: “We have gone to great lengths to protect you, observe you, and

learn from you” (Roth, Allegiant 126). In his welcome speech, David attempts to come

off as nurturing and hospitable, but even his words are clouded in double meaning.

The first warning that Tobias catches onto before Tris, is that “observing”

comment that makes him retain his doubt, even as Tris jumps aboard willingly. When

questioned, David does not attempt to hide this capacity of his influence: “‘You’ve

always known that the Dauntless observe the city with security cameras,’ David says.

246

‘Well, we have access to those cameras too.’ They’ve been watching us” (Roth, Allegiant

129). In the spirit of the prevailing surveillance culture, David attempts to come out with

this approach of his, as if there is nothing intrusive about it. No need to hide something

that is supposedly for everyone’s protection, “Preventing a repressive government from misusing information is to have alert and well-informed citizens with a strong sense of right and wrong who work to keep the government democratic, open, just and under the rule of law” (Singer 465). This is the illusion David portrays. By informing everyone of

his surveillance capabilities and tendencies to continuously survey Chicago without their

knowledge, David is saying that the government under his rule does not misuse the

collected information. Instead, they collect it to study and protect. To allow for those

living outside of Chicago to learn about those living within, and as a result, create more

alert and well-informed citizens. Similar to the justifications of today’s time, where we

see a similar surveillance society at large, just not to the degree of dystopian level quite

yet.

This perspective is not wholeheartedly accepted by Tobias, and eventually by Tris

either. The detail that starts bothering and nagging at Tris’s conscience is this: “‘They

were watching us. Everything that happened, everything we did. They didn’t intervene,

they just invaded our privacy. Constantly’” (Roth, Allegiant 135). Invasion of privacy

becomes an edging concern for Tris the more she learns of how little she actually had.

With the cameras, trackers, and every other piece of technology homing in on her actions,

suddenly the world makes her feel just as paranoid as Katniss felt, when she was visited

by Snow in her own home back at District Twelve. It makes Tris come to the same

conclusion that Jensen and Draffan came to as well, “Privacy does not exist. I am not

247

alone. I can never be alone. I do not exist independent of everyone else. I affect those

others, and they affect me” (223-4). Accepting the reality of living in a surveillance

culture means to accept the forced interconnectedness each individual has to each other, an uncalled-for collectivism out of our control. Katniss caught on early, now so does Tris.

The other threat David poses to society is how far he is willing to go to fulfill his

eugenic dream. When rebels threaten from within, and Chicago is about to erupt in civil

war, instead of seeking peaceful resolutions and considering politically safe alternatives,

David jumps to bioengineered warfare to control the masses. He is, as Singer calls this

kind of tyrannical antagonism, a technocrat. Described as modern villains, “Technocrats

inevitably share two unifying beliefs. The first is that they’re already winning; the second

is that they’re going to push things forward, regardless of what that progress entails.

Resistance to either principle is futile” (Singer 227). David never considers his losses,

because he aggressively pushes forward with his agenda. Even as his Bureau is erupting

in battle, rebels attacking just floors beneath his office, David believes it is their

resistance that is futile, because he has created and plans to deploy the ultimate weapon at

the moment that he considers them an actual threat: “‘A serum would have been released

into the air . . . one that masks could not have protected against, because it is absorbed

into the skin,’ says David. ‘One that even the genetically pure cannot fight off’” (Roth,

Allegiant 327). A biogenetic serum transformed into a gas that will be released publicly

and effect everyone but him.

To ensure his agenda carries itself out, David has created protocol upon protocol.

One is to reset the people’s minds by erasing them. Snow took the longer route through

tortuous brainwashing, David had his scientists concoct a memory serum instead:

248

“Memory serum,’ she says. ‘Alan and Matthew came up with a way to make the serums

behave like viruses, so they could spread through an entire population without injecting

everyone. That’s how they’re planning to reset the experiments’” (Roth, Allegiant 382).

Using the realistic concern of today’s world where bioengineered viruses can be deployed

against an entire population, Roth applies the same idea to David’s protocol. Instead of

settling the disputes within the experiment cities that are erupting in civil war, David

plans to reset them by depriving entire populations of their memories. A quick fix, in

order to focus on more important things.

David needs the experiment cities, such as Chicago, to keep on operating so that

genetically pure children can be born down the line. His goal is the endgame: “The ability

to makes sacrifices for the greater good. If we are going to win this fight against genetic

damage, if we are going to save the experiments from being shut down, we will need to

make sacrifices” (Roth, Allegiant 326). Memory loss is a minor sacrifice in David’s

playbook, the next step is his death serum, which is another concoction that works like a

mutated virus. The death serum serves as David’s cutting-edge executioner, to which

only he has been inoculated. To ensure that no one else gets their hands on his serums,

his operations, and his agenda, David is willing to sacrifice even Tris, his greatest eugenic achievement.

To Tris, David admits that it was not even Jeanine who came up with the initial serums in the first place. Without apprehension about future backlash, David says: “‘You know Jeanine’s simulation serum? Well, it wasn’t hers’” (Roth, Allegiant 307). David opens up his devious playbook and makes the previous leaders pale in comparison to what he has done. He has been the master manipulator and puppeteer for more than two

249

novels, even though he was invisible. David becomes somewhat more transparent about

all his dealings towards the end of Allegiant, due to the fact that his hand is finally forced

with all the simultaneous rebellions: “When officials keep the masses underinformed in

hopes of achieving a ‘greater good,’ it relieves the government of accountability and

opens the door to corruption” (Driza 159). Great power is something that cannot be taken lightly, it corrupts so easily. David held all the cards and deployed all his weapons to ensure absolute power for as long as possible, in order to fulfill his destined dream of a genetically pure society.

Tris, who was supportive and eager to take on David’s leadership and guidance cannot stomach all the dark secrets that he reveals to her before her untimely demise, in the final book of the Divergent series. Everything that David says will help to create for a beautiful future is interpreted as another form of genocide for Tris, “I see the tilt of a vial, the quick press of a button on an aerosol can. I see Abnegation bodies and Erudite bodies sprawled over streets and staircases. I see the little pieces of this world that we’ve managed to cling to bursting into flames” (Roth, Allegiant 281). The difference between the righteous and corrupt is this line that separates Tris’s reactions from David’s. He talks of every dark deed he has done: killed, brainwashed, manipulated, and experimented on masses of innocents. To him, they are all minor casualties and sacrifices for that greater good. For Tris, it is the end of the world as she knows it, and she is not willing to accept more sacrifice to continue down the same path David has laid out.

David’s weapons of choice, all those serums deployed through secret vials, master buttons, even planes that dropped memory serums over entire cities to reset their structures: in her mind, it is genocide after genocide. When asked to join or die, Tris still

250

cannot condone David’s and the Bureau’s actions: “If only the Bureau had been able to

evolve, to maintain the ideals of their cause without stooping to murder. If you’re trying

to make the world a better place, it’s hard to be credible with blood on your hands. All

the Bureau ends up illustrating is that genetically pure people are capable of immense

destruction and oppression, too” (Krokos 179). The amount of destruction and oppression

that is unveiled becomes too unbearable. The superior government that seemingly sought

to improve society becomes another tyranny that needs to be torn down. The cycle of this

violence is unceasing, and it pushes Tris to her own extreme decision. She wipes the

Bureau’s memories before they can annihilate the experiment cities, and Tris does it with

the last breath in her body.

Tris never finds out if her last extreme decision actually put a stop to the cruel

cycle that destroyed her along the way to discovering how dark her dystopian world

really was. The horrors of the Bureau may have been interrupted, but the parallel to its

regime remains as a haunting criticism of something quite akin: “The Bureau reminds me

too much of the current dystopia we’re living in, a nation where the citizens are spied on

and controlled, albeit through things like laws and distribution of wealth rather than

serums” (Krokos 186). According to the authors of The Hunger Games and Divergent

trilogies, our contemporary world holds many dangers of its own, and it initiates precautions that turn realities into nightmares frighteningly easily.

Be it as a surveillance culture driven by cutting-edge technology, or by advanced weaponry created and deployed to curb our violent passions, our actions have rippling consequences. Those consequences are projected in The Hunger Games and Divergent

series to show the extremes not just of one’s imagination, but the extremes of our current

251

dilemmas: “If technology isn’t neutral, and using it isn’t free, and beating it is difficult, maybe we need to redefine the problem” (Jensen and Draffan 214). Redefining problems takes courage. Courage that is given to us by heroines who never give up on this sliver of hope, “Can I be forgiven for all I’ve done to get here? I want to be. I can. I believe it”

(Roth, Allegiant 476). Tris’s last thoughts shape a final hope before she succumbs to her gunshot wounds. Believing in forgiveness is a remarkably righteous capability when analyzing the origins of our obsession for violence, cruelty, war, and death. It is also that vitally important first step towards initiating change.

252

CONCLUSION: CULTURAL DECAY AND ENLIGHTENMENT

“I’ll tell them that on bad mornings, it feels impossible to take pleasure in anything because I’m afraid it could be taken away. That’s when I make a list in my head

of every act of goodness I’ve seen someone do” (Collins, Mockingjay 390).

There is an evident gap in the literary criticism and acceptance of contemporary young adult literature, many simply disregard it as childish stepping stone onto more well-defined narratives. The New York Times Magazine journalist Michelle Dean is one of many who clarifies the very reason behind this negligence and bias, “I supposed I’m admitting that those people who call young adult readers ‘childish’ are onto something.

It’s just not the pure desire for regression they pompously diagnose. It’s a desire for stories substantial enough to withstand the ages” (“Our Young Adult Dystopia”). In comparison to other literary masterpieces that have withstood the times, Suzanne

Collins’s The Hunger Games and Veronica Roth’s Divergent trilogies help to clarify where our time stands. Collins’s and Roth’s series do not regress, but instead show growth within our society, culture, and youth.

Dystopian fiction is not as fleeting as one might think, considering that the dystopian subgenre has only gathered more steam since the times of Zamyatin, Huxley, and Orwell. To put it into further perspective, timeless classics such as H.G. Wells’ canonical set of outwardly literature, was actually considered to be the dime novels and temporarily popular pulp fiction of his era. Now they are part of literary tradition, and

253

Wells is one of the great forefathers of genres that define and redefine our sense of time

and presence. Seed presents this outlook, “It is above all a literature of change, and

change by definition implies that the present is perceived in relation to perceptions of the

past and expectations of the future which shape the present” (97). Giving his readers a

feeling of the future, interpreting it through his relation to the past and present, the world

now looks back to Wells and sees more than a figure in popular culture. Wells is a figure

representing not only his time period, but all the ones to come. To consider the young

adult dystopian fiction of today not worthy of attention and credit is to severely

underestimate our own time period. It also neglects the serious undercurrents in our own

population that fuel recent obsessions directly into literature and film.

Though The Hunger Games and Divergent novels and films have completed their cycle of fame in the spotlight, their residual effect and long-term consequences remain to be analyzed and fully understood. Not only can these series withstand the test of time as their predecessors have, they can and do offer a valid critique of contemporary society’s fears, anxieties, and creative outlets. Harari acclaims this as a power that prevails through literature, “Written language may have been conceived as a modest way of describing reality, but it gradually became a powerful way to reshape reality” (167). Reshaping reality by addressing contemporary concerns and projecting them forward in uniquely extreme ways changes not only our perception of the world, but our perception of our ourselves.

Through the investigation of several significant themes that I found within the two series (the desire for stronger female protagonists, horrifying dictatorial antagonists, the revolutionizing of social values, showing great disdain for social class, desensitization

254

towards violence, and integrating an overwhelming appeal for technological influence and surveillance culture), I was able to draw a parallel to the concerns of today that are quickly becoming part of our tomorrow. In contemplating tomorrow, Klosterman has this to say: “You might not like where we’re going, and tomorrow might be worse than

yesterday. But it’s still going to happen, whether you like it or not. It’s inevitable” (225).

The beauty of Klosterman’s prediction is that in fiction and film, tomorrow’s inevitability

needs to be made much worse than that of today. It needs dystopia to spell out the worst that could become for us. It needs authors such as Collins and Roth to paint a worst-case

scenario in order for there to be an understanding of what needs to change today.

Analyzing these significant themes cannot be considered a complete or fully

comprehensive mission either. It is a journey of a hero/heroine with a thousand faces

traveling one path. Campbell set down the formula to this monomyth where every hero

starts with a call to adventure and ends by changing the status quo. The heroine may have

a map, and the reader may start to pick up on the signs of what is to come, but the beauty

remains in the unknown that is still always present. He positions this element of intrigue

in such a manner: “The representative of that unconscious deep (‘so deep that the bottom

cannot be seen’) wherein are hoarded all of the rejected, unadmitted, unrecognized,

unknown, or undeveloped factors, laws, and elements of existence” (Campbell 48). The

elements of existence cannot be easily recognized or claimed, not until the journey has

been completed.

Not until the authors have let their message be heard, and not until the directors

have had a shot at projecting these messages, and certainly, not until readers and viewers

have had a chance to interpret the represented depths of Katniss and Tris as they struggle

255

through their stories, can we know what they mean to us now and in the long term. By

analyzing their storylines and by attempting to grasp these themes and messages, I was able to sample my own journey of discovery. At the end of road, I have discovered that it is still not done. It is still not complete. There are more angles to consider, more unknown depths to aim for, because that is the beauty of literature. Every reading contains a new lesson, “In literature, particularly, past and present, tradition and experiment, submit to the strange dialectic between a creative imagination and the constancies of the human heart. A radical form may sink its roots deep in archetypal forms. This justifies our mythical perspective of a modern development in literature” (Hassan 122). Hassan’s idea

of the strange dialectic is one that unites authors and readers, directors and writers,

thinkers and doers. Traditions are created, but experiments are built to further not only

one’s imagination through the fictional, but what is also possible within the realm of

reality.

The intertextual relationship between The Hunger Games and Divergent novels

and films is just the beginning. Do not close your eyes to that which you do not

understand just yet, for that is the sure path to dystopia. Dystopia is a realm of darkness

that “evokes disturbing images” more often than not, because within it there are places

that cannot be unvisited, ideas that will never be forgotten, and haunting messages that

fight to the surface of our attention: “Our symbols of species power stand starkly useless:

decay is universal” (Claeys, Dystopia: A Natural History 3). Universal decay is what it

might take for our society to gain a cultural enlightenment. Before then, it may be wise to

consider alternative paths and more positive solutions. Before then however, it may be

wise to gather the lessons of Katniss and Tris and apply them forward.

256

Katniss, the girl on fire, the Mockingjay, symbol of freedom and rebellion did not

start out as a mature young woman, and she certainly did not come out unscarred. From her, readers can gain perspective on the sheer power of determination to survive. Survive first, fight for freedom second. Katniss sings an old folk song within the books, that becomes a metaphor for the very journey she takes herself: “‘Are you, are you/ Coming to the tree/ Where I told you to run, so we’d both be free./ Strange things did happen here/ No stranger would it be/ If we met up at midnight in the hanging tree’” (Collins,

Mockingjay 124). The strange things that did happen to her in order to gain freedom for herself and others started from Katniss’s initial sacrifice. Katniss volunteers instead of

her sister for the 74th Hunger Games, she survives the games only to be chosen once

again for the 75th Hunger Games, and then ends up leading District Thirteen to take

control of the Capitol, wiping out two dangerous dictators along the way: Katniss did all

this not out of desire, but out of necessity. One thing Katniss never did, was run away.

Dealing with immense loss, personal torture, and constant fear creates a

horrendous existence that anyone in their right mind would want to escape from. Katniss

herself did not get the heroic death out of her situation either. She never has the chance to

sacrifice herself in order to become the ultimate martyr. Instead, Katniss lives on and

teaches us one of the most valuable lessons of all: “She survives--and that leaves her

doing the hardest thing in the world: living in it once so many of the ones that she loved

are gone” (Barnes 28). Campbell would argue that that is Katniss’s status quo, not

bringing peace to Panem, but finding peace within herself in order to carry on in the

ashes of painful memories.

257

Panem is a closed society shaped in the image of totalitarian dystopias inspired by

the greats themselves, but the districts also come to represent the displacement of social

hierarchy and power. Coming from the poorest district within the nation, Katniss had her

share of responsibilities and burdens from the age of eleven, when her father died and her

mother broke down. She became the breadwinner of her family from such an early age, and took this gender-bending twist even further, as her story progressed throughout the

trilogy. Katniss may be criticized for lacking awareness and decision-making skills of her

own, but her ability to breakdown gender boundaries is still one of the strongest elements

that cannot be downplayed within Katniss’s character: “Even more remarkably, no one in

the stories finds this startling--for all their other sins, in these dystopias gender equality

has arrived” (Bethune 70). Bethune is not wrong to highlight this element because every

role Katniss takes on shows that she can handle both sides of gender constrictions. From

the breadwinner to the noble sister and daughter, Katniss goes on to take the stage as a

District Twelve celebrity. Forced into creating a publicly performed love story with

Peeta, Katniss is still able to find true friendship and real love. Manipulated into

representing first her district and then the rebellion, she successfully claims the role of

icon and leader. And this is notwithstanding the circumstances that thrust Katniss into

these positions in the first place.

Katniss revolutionizes gender roles by disassembling the differences in between

and representing both worlds equally. She shows that it takes more than stereotypes and

limitations to withhold her from what is most important. Although Collins challenges the

binary gender pattern that is part of American and other cultures, she also reflects on the

fact that in our contemporary society this change is eagerly sought after, even if not fully

258

realized just yet. This also happens to reinforce both gender roles and contemporary

reflections on them through the lens of what dystopias represent as well.

Every aspect, every element that strengthens the dystopian narrative is one that is

worth taking apart and analyzing separately. Borsellino reminds us of this, in her comparison with Orwell’s 1984 and director James McTeigue’s V for Vendetta (2006 film): “Katniss remains true, even in the face of crushing loss and the prospect of her own death, to an ideal that Winston has in 1984 but is ultimately unable to uphold himself:

‘the object was not to stay alive but to stay human.’ Katniss retains that last inch of integrity and love that Valerie of V for Vendetta prized above life” (37). The ideal that not only redefines but breaks all gender boundaries is that ability to remain true to yourself, to have integrity and continue to love despite all the terrible casualties. Katniss lives, loves, and, at the end of the day, represents more than a woman surviving in a man’s world. She represents a true warrior who finds a way to carry on righteously.

Roth’s Chicago-set dystopia yields another warrior whose amount of loss and endurance make her just as trailblazing. With Tris, we get to see another young woman who is able to rise above the usual gender roles, stereotypes, and limitations. Tris comes from the selfless faction of Abnegation, decides to take on the more thrilling and dangerous faction of Dauntless, and goes on to not just survive the grueling initiation process but to dominate it as well. Her hardest task is to come to terms with her divergence and, therefore, a larger part of herself. Norris states, “That is a huge part of her struggle throughout the series-- coming to terms with her own identity” (109). Tris

never felt as if she truly belonged in the selfless Abnegation. She stuck out too much in

the fearless Dauntless. But to accept her divergence, she needed to first accept that she

259

was different altogether. By putting together pieces of her abilities, preferences, and

strengths, Tris is finally able to grasp the ultimate lesson: “Our minds move in a dozen different directions. We can’t be confined to one way of thinking, and that terrifies our leaders. It means we can’t be controlled. And it means that no matter what they do, we

will always cause trouble for them” (Roth, Divergent 442). By accepting her differences,

her inability to be controlled as easily, and her strength in sticking out of the system, Tris

accepted that she is trouble and trouble is not all that bad. Katniss learned the truth of her

integrity through every challenge she survived; Tris learned the truth of what defines

bravery by challenging herself to not only survive but to change.

Tris not only changes how she sees herself either, but brings positive change with her into the society she lives in. She joined Dauntless to be brave but found that such a concept was not so easily defined, “There are so many ways to be brave in this world”

(Roth, Allegiant 509). Tris revolutionizes her world and by doing so, enhances our

understanding of ours. Tris shows that it is not about gender-defining roles, because she can and does take on both sides of the false dichotomy easily and interchangeably, just as

Katniss does. Instead, Divergent is about the moments that make Tris strong enough to

act, strong enough to go against the mainstream, and strong enough to sacrifice. That is

Tris’s true epiphany, “Real sacrifice...should be done from love, not misplaced disgust

for another person’s genetics. That is should be done from necessity, not without

exhausting all other options. That it should be done for people who need your strength

because they don’t have enough of their own” (Roth, Allegiant 473-4). On the brink of

facing David and his fatal gunshot towards her, Tris is neither afraid nor distressed. She has reached her moment of enlightenment.

260

In her final moments of life, this is the epiphany that gives Tris her conclusive

state of peace—the knowledge that every soul is worth saving and fighting for, that every

option needs to be considered before taking life, and that true bravery means giving

strength to those who need it more than you. Orwell wrote that, “In the face of pain, there

are no heroes” (302). In a certain state of mind, when pain and torture take unbearable

heights, it would be hard to argue with Orwell’s words. When those times come however,

we need someone to look to and give us the strength we lack. We need heroes, like Tris

and Katniss, who have gone to the end and come back willing to take on more.

Despite facing master manipulators, torturers, and tyrants, if a sliver of hope can

still remain, then even the darkest dystopia can become not just bearable but

surmountable. In our own histories, we have seen the overwhelming influences of such leaders that would put fictional antagonists to shame. Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, and Mao

colored the world in blood during their reigns, and they were but a few. Today’s world

faces its own reign of dictatorial leaders pushing to leave another trenchant mark upon

the world. The times seem to evolve, but the patterns of people do not. As Claeys puts it,

“When the age of enchantment gave way to that of Enlightenment and the conquest and

taming of the most unknown world, the physical domain of monstrosity first appears to

shrink dramatically...But while credulity is dented, monstrosity does not disappear”

(Dystopia: A Natural History 75). Claeys makes the argument that pushing into this new

age of Enlightenment and showing how little there is left to discover in the world does

not mean there is actually nothing left to reveal, because there is. Humanity needs to turn

the page and reveal its better side, for the monstrosity that was, is, and continues to be is execrable.

261

In The Hunger Games, Collins draws such a parallel in the hopes of enlightening

her readers to these realistic horrors on and off the page. President Snow and President

Coin are bloodcurdling antagonists that contrast to Katniss’s protagonist role, and their forms of power, while starting differently from one another, seem to end in the same cruel manner. Littman acknowledges these initial differences but draws a unique parallel to both Snow and Coin: “We’re meant to think that Snow and Coin are opposites, but as we learn by the end of Mockingjay, Coin’s name is no accident. The leaders are, as the old saying goes, two sides of the same coin” (203). Their reigns are bloody, their political tactics both cunning and deviously manipulative, and people to them are but numbers that can be lost if the ends justify the means. Snow and Coin are representations of our past and our possible future, based on how we are projecting the present.

By observing the worst-case scenario in which leadership can bring down a nation, the message we need take away should be just as definitive. Let the chosen leaders not curse their people with dark days, and therefore create a need for revolution in the first place. In the times of Snow and Coin, Katniss stood up to their policies enough to make the readers wonder: “It is about asking questions, fighting for what you believe in, and holding our leaders accountable. It’s about making sure that they don’t take us down a path that is antithetical to what we stand for” (Littman 204). Young readers and viewers, the original target age of this trilogy, are not only coming into their personal identities, they are growing up and forming political and ethical minds as well. Showing a world such as Panem is worth debating and questioning, because it sharpens their ability to form those opinions in the first place. When Littman interviewed Collins about this connection, she had this to say: “‘How elements of the book might be relevant in their

262

own lives. And, if they’re disturbing, what they might do about them’” (Collins as qtd. in

Littman 207). If and when reading, you ask those questions too, then you are on the right path—the path that the author intended for you, shown through Katniss’s journey and fight against tyranny.

In Divergent, as Tris has her own big bad duo to face. Where Katniss’s leaders were strategists of the war and political spheres, Tris’s foes are scientists and geneticists at heart. The problem of the future, as Fukuyama attested earlier, is within humanity’s obsessive approach to technology, even more specifically, biotechnology: “What should we do in response to biotechnology that in the future will mix great potential benefits with threats” (10)? Roth created Jeanine and David to answer that question. Jeanine shows herself to be the obsessed Erudite leader, who is focused on strategizing away the

Abnegation faction and eradicating all divergents because they are a threat to her system.

Jeanine plots and deploys her strategies through science and technology, and it was her advancements and theories that made her the Erudite leader in the first place. Jeanine’s inventions are deployed through every faction, and though most are seemingly harmless and intended to help the community, that is only the facade.

Confident in her capabilities, Jeanine persuades other factions to not only integrate her inventions but also her policies into their lives. That is one of her fatal flaws, as Lockwood reasons it to be: “Our overconfidence in our abilities can often lead us to bad places, because we fail to predict what our inventions will actually do” (121). What the Chicago community at large failed to do, was to predict or even understand the consequences of following blindly and accepting her inventions without knowing the full extent of what could be done with them. That is how Jeanine turned the entire Dauntless

263

faction into a zombie army and almost completely eradicated the Abnegation faction,

through her overconfidence. On the part of the people, it was their lack of awareness and

attention to long-term consequences that almost spelled their doom. Senator Amidala of

the Star Wars saga once made the renowned proclamation that liberty dies when people

follow blindly, so too did the lack of accountability lead to the rise of Jeanine’s influence.

That is also how David of the Bureau succeeded in puppeteering such eager scientists, like Jeanine, who thought they were in control, when in actuality, they were simply fulfilling their goals through the master agenda of the man behind the curtains. Or in the case of the Divergent film, the man behind the invisible force field that kept his world a secret. David projected the facade of a benign leader moving genetic progress forward for the benefit of all society; meanwhile, he employed teams of scientists who created hallucinatory serums, memory serums, and even death serums. The scientists’ intentions were for the sake of science and progress, and Lockwood agrees with this outlook as well: “Scientists in our world...often develop new inventions with the desire to help us, but what either intends isn’t always what ends up happening. Once you create a technology, even with the best intentions, you can’t always control how it’s used or what the consequences are” (119). What they created was twisted around to become bioengineered weapons used on multiple experimental cities and used to almost destroy

Tris’s Chicago.

The scientists’ good intentions are discredited by the consequences detonated to

infinite new levels of extreme destruction. That is why the Gyatso cautions so vigorously

to be aware of what is created in the present, rather than pay the price of long-lasting

consequences. He makes this bold recommendation, “The higher the level of knowledge

264

and power, the greater must be our sense of moral responsibility” (Gyatso 133). David refused to acknowledge the immoral lack of responsibility that pushed many innocents towards their death, he denied the legitimacy of the murders he did initiate, and he did not even carry the burden of our heroine’s death at his own hands. His eugenic agenda outweighed any casualties along the way, until his own precious memory serum took away the accountability that he should have been held to after the dust of his disastrous reign settled. The irony behind David’s punishment remains overwhelmingly appropriate.

Dismally enough, casualties are inscribed upon David’s reign as they are upon every leader who takes center stage in Collins’s and Roth’s novels. Leadership is made to be questioned by the extremes that these dystopian series present. Littman makes the comment that, “Not only does it raise the difficult, eternal questions of war and humanity, grief and revenge, but one hopes it will encourage all of us to become more politically aware and active, and not to ever allow ourselves to risk the erosion of our democracy and civil liberties for panem et circenses” (207). The honorable hopes of our authors and critics retain the idea that the questions these series evoke are disturbingly powerful enough that readers will not just read the stories and watch the films, they will make us more aware of the parallels: to not allow leadership to take a turn towards dictatorship; to not allow genocide to happen so blindly; and most of all, to be made aware of this cycle of cruelty, violence, war, and death that pervades our culture. The currency of violence and coercion is powerful, in that it is always immediate and obtrusive. It is effective in that it never subsides, due to prevailing patterns of current events and human behavior that cannot got without it. It is a cycle without an end.

265

The plethora of violence is not the only issue, it is how accepting of it we are as a

society on the whole, especially after a series of real tragic events. Just consider for a

second, the incidents that happened within the timeline of Collins’ and Roth’s

publications: there was 9/11, Hurricane Katrina, the housing crisis, and the 2008

economic depression. People are particularly vulnerable when things are bad in the real

world, especially after such tragic events as these. The Hunger Games and Divergent

series are a response to the dire circumstances in which people found themselves at that

point in time. Katniss and Tris are born from our need of rescue, from this dark age.

Collins thrust children into a public arena to murder each other, it is the Gladiator

games brought into a dystopian future. Roth trained children as a new generation of

Dauntless soldiers, and she sold it under the guise of wanting to be brave and fearless in

service to the community. The reaction of the readers and viewers made it a glorified experience that gave birth to our epic heroines. The real message is completely different, the intention of these writers was not to glorify such horrors. That is why when The

Hunger Games series was blacklisted in so many schools and libraries, it became apparent how disconnected Collins’s intentions were from public realizations. Parents failed to see that this created space was a chance to discuss the problems at hand with their eager young children. These are the idealistic desires of an author who continues to

hope that necessary discussions will not be avoided but engaged as time goes on.

The trials of Katniss and the sacrifice of Tris are not just literary successes, they

are active learning experiences, and they are grounds to explore the relevant concerns of

our time period. Film critic J. David Slocum makes the argument that by understanding

the reasons behind violence, only then can we fight them. He states that, “More

266

thoughtful inquiry raises larger questions about whether or how understandings of violence bridge experiences of representations and actual life, about the pleasures of viewing barbarous images or committing actual incidents, and about the necessity to confront destructive tendencies in order to resist or at least comprehend them better”

(Slocum 3). Slocum raises the very questions that Collins and Roth hoped their series would address, not glorify. Violence and war may be presented as entertainment through one lens, but to confront the destructive tendencies behind that angle is even more vital.

To better comprehend, if not to resist the necessity to continue this cruel cycle, that is the most imperative lesson of all. It is this lesson that is so strongly codified into the outcomes of The Hunger Games and Divergent books and films.

Collins feared that younger audiences were not only desensitized to these dark themes, that they were becoming ignorant of the lines that blur reality from reality television. Obsessive participatory culture has yielded an era where viewer interests and ratings take on more significance, resulting in the intended messages of authors and directors being downplayed. We want to see something that has the wow factor, and therefore digress from the depth and merit of any given material. Author Carrie Ryan discusses this relationship between viewers and creators to show that the real power is behind the viewers who want more. This forces creators to give the viewers more of what they want in order to keep ratings high, “The only difference between us and the viewers in the Capitol is that we have agency to turn off the television at any time; we just choose not to...the obsession with ratings, which is driven by our desire for more and more compelling narratives, can turn ugly when such a lens is applied to news reporting-- especially that of war--rather than so-called Reality TV” (Ryan 100). In today’s popular

267

culture, ratings are what matters. They are the currency that defines quantity. How much depth and complexity we are shown is dictated by how much needs to be downplayed to the pressures of such a reality where violence can continue to be glorified only so long as it draws in enough eyes.

This emphasis on the fact that as long as people are watching, they do not need to be understanding the complexities of what they are watching: this is a haunting concept.

That is why news reports on current war statuses are not found as engaging as reality television shows and do not bring in as much viewership, because one is designed to inform us of the state of our world, while the other is created to distract us. Deciphering between news reports on war and violent reality television shows is what pushed Collins to create The Hunger Games in the first place. Collins blurred the lines intentionally, between what seems like fun and what is actually dangerous and real.

The annual Hunger Games of Panem could be our version of one the longest running reality shows of all time, Survivor. Survivor is fun, risky, and violent at times, just like the games Katniss went through. Only Katniss’s games have actual risk factors, and the fun is never had by her, but by the Capitol audiences who are engaged at her and the other tributes’ expense. That is why Collins wants to send the message of our ignorant acceptance of entertainment in place of understanding the implications to what we are seeing as entertainment value. Ryan draws on this point to show how dangerous this can be, “The extent to which media can be manipulated as a means of controlling the populace and how we as viewers have abdicated any agency in the process” (100).

Entertainment should not be taken at face value, it should be interpreted at the deeper levels to which we are capable of. To regain control to what and how we watch, read, and

268

interpret in and of the world, we must take a step back and actually start to process.

Removing the blinders on our eyes, retracting the desensitized mode to which we have become prone to as a society, now is the time to actually enhance our minds.

Just as reality television shows can divert our attention from the hidden undercurrents of violent themes, so to can the quickening pace of technological advancement, when combined with ease of access. This crazy pace of technological advancement causes people to react just as strongly, if not more so. The very mode of exchange, communication, and ease of access to information is consequently geared towards this increasing and unstoppable pace. Everything is geared towards us on the ever-developing pace of technology. On every screen that our eyes gather to watch the latest episode of our favorite new show, ease of access becomes the highest form of comfort. Collins and Roth subvert this established chain of technology daily life has integrated seamlessly and depict the inexorable undertones that we neglect to fully grasp as potential short-term and long-term consequences.

Ease of access can lead to more misinformation, which can also lead to greater errors in judgement. Singer does not shy away from outlining these real-time concerns that are traced to our modern habits, “We sign away our privacy in exchange for the conveniences of modern living, giving corporations access to information about our financial circumstances and our spending habits, which will then be used to target us for ads or to analyze our consumer habits” (462). Short-term consequences are legitimate problem areas, as privacy becomes more and more of an illusion due to our practices of giving up personal information all too willingly.

269

The forms of technology that we integrate into private and social living

conditions, without a second thought, end up costing us on many different levels. Singer

emphasizes this point even more vehemently: “With surveillance technology like close-

circuit television cameras and digital cameras now linked to the Internet, we have the

means to implement Bentham’s inspection principle on a much vaster scale. What’s

more, we have helped construct this new Panopticon, voluntarily giving up troves of

personal information” (Singer 462). The modern Panopticon is this surveillance culture

that we have took upon ourselves zealously. With every post, chat, and tweet, each user

reveals where they are, what they are doing, and even what they are thinking. These are

the facts of today’s existence, these are the truths to which each individual abides by and

freely participates in.

Orwell once wrote about such frightening potential in his novel 1984, but it was

also during Orwell’s time that Stalin traumatized the Soviet Union in a similar manner.

This historical precedent inspired Orwell’s fictional recreation. Being watched is nothing

new then, now, and in the worlds of Katniss and Tris. It is how we separate our inner

selves from our outer shells that remain under surveillance, that inspires Orwell to

consider the distance between the two: “They could lay bare in the utmost detail everything that you had done or said or thought; but the inner heart, whose workings were mysterious even to yourself, remained impregnable” ( Orwell 211). For Orwell, it was a radical extreme that made him want to consider such inner working of the human potential. That radical extreme of his Big Brother dystopia is our actuality, because everything we have done, said, or thought is now traceable as digital evidence. Even the

270

inner working of our mind and heart, carelessly posted or snapped or tweeted can be held

accountable to who we are and what we may do next.

The only difference is that our world has not turned into a dictatorship yet. There

remains the threat, and Collins with Roth interpret the potential of such a threat. Based on

the existing circumstances of tragic events such as the financial market crash of 2008, historical and literary precedents bring forth similar possibilities for our future. Collins fuels the potential behind our existing surveillance culture to portray how terrifying it can and should be, when eyes are finally opened. Katniss herself was terror-stricken of how her movements and actions were constantly being watched secretly by President Snow.

Paranoia took hold of her and made her obligated to think twice about every word and action she said and did, not just outside but in private too. Katniss slowly started to accept one undeniable truth: “Between the ceremonies and events and the reporters documenting my every move as I presided and thanked and kissed Peeta for the audience, I had no privacy at all” (Collins, Catching Fire 25). Katniss first thought that it was only in public that she had to be aware of herself and her performance to the nth degree. It is when she learns that there is no such thing as privacy, on or off the cameras, that the message hits home. Privacy is an illusion.

Maybe that is why Katniss’s song remains so haunting: “‘Are you, are you/

Coming to the tree/ Where I told you to run, so we’d both be free’” (Collins, Mockingjay

124). The image of being able to escape and actually consider oneself fully liberated is the mirage that Katniss hoped for, everytime she ran away to hunt in the forest. It is the mirage that she accepted as an impossibility, because of the environment in which she found herself in. By extension, it is the critique of our circumstances as well, we are

271

simply not forced to acknowledge it just yet. Big Brother remains on the pages of

Orwell’s creation, for now. Stalin’s Soviet Union remains in the history of another country, for now. And for each now, there is a conceivable then.

Tris on the other hand, was pushed into this knowledge unwillingly, and despondently had to accept the consequences early on. When she noted who and how she was being watched, Tris came to an unpleasant realization: “On one of the smaller screens above her is an image— a piece of the surveillance footage we just watched, frozen at a particular moment in time” (Roth, Allegiant 365). Frozen moments in time, caught on camera, become evidence to what people do even in their private moments.

Tris sees that, in the control room of Dauntless and then in the many control rooms of the

Bureau, and this knowledge hits her hard. No one can ever truly be alone: “The creepy cameras that followed my every move? I pull my arms tighter across my chest” (Roth,

Allegiant 365). Katniss’s paranoia becomes Tris’s as well, and it not without legitimacy either. Every moment can be held accountable towards any crime because of someone higher up in power saying it is so. Being watched constantly for protection, that is the naive acceptance of the surveillance culture we find ourselves in. The paranoid-infused experiences of Katniss and Tris show us, that it does not matter that their storylines come from dystopian young adult fiction, they are still pertinent outside in our world. They school us in the ways of dangerous potential that remains hidden and untapped.

Being made aware of this is one of the most horrifyingly authentic messages these series can shed light on. To push it even further, Ryan implicates us not only as observers, but also as citizens with a duty: “We are responsible, as citizens, to look beyond bread and circuses and not to accept information as it is handed to us but to

272

search for a deeper truth” (Ryan 111). Living in the age of technology does not mean to remain desensitized to its deeper truths. Responsibility should not be placed on the government to surveil and protect without knowing why and how they do so. Finding out those reasons led Katniss to confront the Capitol and restructure Panem completely anew.

Finding out for Tris meant breaking the faction system within Chicago, and the bureaucracy system just outside her city walls. Being made aware of these heroines’ remarkable struggles and unbelievable journeys should push us to not only enjoy but learn from the mistakes of their societies in order to address the ones in ours.

We live in the time of great advancements and wondrous scientific progress. We also live in the time of silenced revolutions and desensitized ideals. There are narratives out there, such as Steven Pinker’s The Better Angels of Our Nature, that gives an alternative to the constant cycle of danger and violence. Through a comprehensive analysis of not just our contemporary times but of all history, he states that humanity has the potential to examine our own practices and improve upon them: “Humans are not innately good (just as they are not innately evil), but they come equipped with motives that can orient them away from violence and toward cooperation and altruism” (Pinker

25). This positive alternative involves empathy, self-control, clear-headed reasoning, and a strong moral sense. These qualities are not fictional either, every single one of us has the potential to tap into them and integrate them into our lives. Unfortunately, actually doing it is much harder than knowing you can do it. Now that we have the knowledge of our own potential, we need heroines such as Katniss and Tris to lead the way.

Traveling the path of Katniss Everdeen in The Hunger Games yields a frightening look into what happens when voices remain quiet for too long in the shadows of tyranny.

273

Walking alongside Beatrice “Tris” Prior in Divergent gives innovative perspective to how complacency turns into blinded collectivism. Dystopias are not merely speculative fiction, imaginary worlds created by unconventional authors. They are projections of our future, calculated by the choices we make today. Instead of continuing on ignorantly with eyes cast downwards, Suzanne Collins hoped to initiate change by branching controversy. That is why she pushed her protagonist to the brink, so that we would not have to follow to such desperate depths of despair in order to learn our lesson. Veronica

Roth sacrificed her heroine in the hopes that political manipulation and governmental deceit will claim no more innocent souls. We have been shown a way to break the cycle of needless violence and death, but will we take it?

I personally started this dissertation as an eager fan wanting to dig deeper, and I conclude it now as an observant citizen who cannot help but to see these two breathtaking series as tales of caution. To foresee is to be forewarned. Love the heroines, learn their lessons, consider their stories and their consequences. Most of all, open your eyes to the now. The next Hunger Games is around the corner, and Dauntless soldiers stand there waiting for eager captives who cannot tell the difference between reality and illusion. Are you that next captive?

274

WORKS CITED

Adorno, T.W., Else Frenkel-Brunswik, Daniel J. Levinson, R. Nevitt Sanford, Betty

Aron, Maria Hertz Levinson and William Morrow. The Authoritarian Personality.

Harper & Brothers, 1950.

Allegiant. Directed by Robert Schwentke, performances by Shailene Woodley, Theo

James, Naomi Watts, and Jeff Daniels. Summit Entertainment, 2016.

Arendt, Hannah. The Origins of Totalitarianism. World Publishing Company, 1966.

Aristotle. The Politics of Aristotle. Trans. Ernest Baker. Oxford University Press, 1962.

Arrow, V. “Mapping Divergent’s Chicago.” Divergent Thinking: YA Authors on Veronica

Roth’s Divergent Trilogy. Ed. Leah Wilson. Benbella Books, 2014. 45-73.

Averill, Lindsay Issow. “Sometimes the World is Hungry for People Who Care: Katniss

and the Feminist Care Ethic.” The Hunger Games and Philosophy: A Critique of

Pure Treason. Eds. George A Dunn and Nicolas Michaud. John Wiley & Sons,

2012.179-80.

Balkind, Nicola. Fan Phenomena: The Hunger Games. University of Chicago Press,

2014.

Barnes, Jennifer Lynn. “Team Katniss.” The Girl Who Was on Fire: Your Favorite

Authors on Suzanne Collins’ Hunger Games Trilogy. Ed. Leah Wilson. Benbella

Books, 2011.13-26.

Bartov, Omer. Mirrors of Destruction: War, Genocide, and Modern Identity.

University Press, 2000.

275

Bazin, André. “The Myth of Total Cinema.” What is Cinema. Vol.2. Ed. Hugh Gray.

University of California Press, 1967. 23-7.

Bethune, Brian. “The Hunger Games Taps into Adolescent Issues of Dating and Death.”

Violence in Suzanne Collins's The Hunger Games Trilogy. Ed. Gary Weiner.

Greenhaven Press, 2015. 60-70.

Bewley, Alison L. "Literary Traditions on Fire: Mimetic Desire and the Role of the

Orphaned Heroine in Suzanne Collins's Hunger Games Trilogy." Children's

Literature Association Quarterly 40.4 (2015): 371-85,

https://muse.jhu.edu/article/603106/pdf. Accessed 17 January 2017.

Booker, M. Keith. The Dystopian Impulse in Modern Literature: Fiction as Social

Criticism. Greenwood Press, 1994.

Bordwell, David. “Classical Hollywood Cinema: Narrational Principles and Procedures.”

Narration in the Fiction Film. University of Wisconsin Press, 1985. 17-33.

Borsellino, Mary. “Your Heart Is A Weapon The Size of Your First.” The Girl Who Was

on Fire: Your Favorite Authors on Suzanne Collins’ Hunger Games Trilogy. Ed.

Leah Wilson. Benbella Books, 2011. 29-40.

BoxOfficeMojo. IMDb.com, 2018, http://www.boxofficemojo.com/. Accessed 3

Oct. 2016-10 Dec. 2017.

Brennan, Sarah Rees. “Why So Hungry For The Hunger Games?” The Girl Who Was on

Fire: Your Favorite Authors on Suzanne Collins’ Hunger Games Trilogy. Ed.

Leah Wilson. Benbella Books, 2011. 1-27.

Campbell, Joseph. Hero with a Thousand Faces. Princeton University Press, 2004.

Claeys, Gregory. Dystopia: A Natural History. Oxford University Press, 2017.

276

—. "News from Somewhere: Enhanced Sociability and the Composite Definition

of Utopia and Dystopia." History 98.330 (2013): 145-73.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-229X.12005/abstract. Accessed

15 November 2016.

—. Searching for Utopia: The History of an Idea. Thames & Hudson, 2011.

—. The Cambridge Companion to Utopian Literature. Cambridge

University Press, 2010.

Clement-Moore. “From Factions to Fire Signs: Personality Types and the Elements of

Heroism.” Divergent Thinking: YA Authors on Veronica Roth’s Divergent

Trilogy. Ed. Leah Wilson. Benbella Books, 2014. 6-26.

Collins, Suzanne. Hunger Games: Catching Fire. Scholastic, 2009.

—. Hunger Games: Mockingjay. Scholastic, 2010.

—. The Hunger Games. Scholastic, 2008.

Croteau, David and William Hoynes. Experience Sociology. 2nd ed. McGraw

Hill Education. 2013.

Dean, Michelle. “Our Young-Adult Dystopia.” The New York Times Magazine. 31 Jan.

2014. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/02/magazine/our-young-adult-

dystopia.html. Accessed 15 Sep. 2016.

Divergent. Directed by Neil Burger, performances by Shailene Woodley, Theo James,

and Kate Winslet. Summit Entertainment, 2014.

“Divergent: Exclusive Interview with Veronica Roth.” Uploaded by ScreenSlam.

YouTube, 13 March 2014. https://www.YouTube.com/watch?v=uM9Dgw4tGrY,

accessed 20 December 2017.

277

“Divergent Introduction.” Shmoop. Shmoop University, 2017.

https://www.shmoop.com/divergent/, accessed on 3 Oct. 2017.

“Divergent Series.” Box Office Mojo, IMDb.com, 2016,

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/search/?q=divergent, accessed 31 March 2018.

Dobbins, Amanda. “Chasing Katniss; Divergent Author Veronica Roth Builds Her

Dystopian Empire.” Vulture, 20 March 2014,

http://www.vulture.com/2013/10/divergent-author-veronica-roth-builds-

empire.html, accessed 27 March 2017.

Dominus, Susan. “In This Dystopia, Teens Must Choose Wisely.” The New York Times,

12 May 2011, https://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/15/books/review/young-adult-

books-divergent-by-veronica-roth.html, accessed 22 April 2018.

—. “Susan Collins’s War Stories for Kids.” The New York Times Magazine,

8 April 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/10/magazine/mag-10collins-

t.html, accessed 9 March 2018.

Driza, Debra. “Secrets and Lies.” Divergent Thinking: YA Authors on Veronica Roth’s

Divergent Trilogy. Ed. Leah Wilson. Benbella Books, 2014. 154-70.

Ehrenreich, Barbara. “Feminism and Religious Fundamentalism Merge in The

Handmaid’s Tale.” Women’s Issues in Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale.

ed. David E. Nelson. Greenhaven Press, 2012. 80-6.

Elsaesser, Thomas and Malte Hagener, eds. Film Theory: An Introduction Through the

Senses. Taylor & Francis Group, 2010.

278

Evanescence, “Sweet Sacrifice.” The Open Door, Wind-Up Entertainment, 2007,

https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/evanescence/sweetsacrifice.html, accessed 31

March 2018.

Flyleaf. “Arise.” Memento Mori, A&M/Octone Records, 2009,

https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/flyleaf/arise.html, accessed on 31 March 2018.

Ford, Rebecca. “Divergent Author Veronica Roth on Her ‘Whirlwind” Rise and Letting

Go of Her Book.” The Hollywood Reporter, 5 March 2014.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/divergent-author-veronica-roth-her-

685844, accessed on 20 December 2017.

Fukuyama, Francis. Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Future.

Farrar, Straus And Giroux, 2002.

Gaudiosi, John. “Hunger Games Trilogy Beats Harry Potter Series to Become All-Time

Bestselling Book Series.” Forbes, 17 Aug. 2012.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johngaudiosi/2012/08/17/hunger-games-trilogy-

beats-harry-potter-series-to-become-all-time-bestselling-book-

series/#b8630557dc11, accessed 18 Feb. 2017.

Gilbert, Daniel. Stumbling on Happiness. Vintage, 2007.

“Gladiator.” Box Office Mojo. IMDb.com, 2000,

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=gladiator.htm, accessed 31 March

2018.

Goldberg, Elizabeth Swanson. “Splitting Difference: Global Identity Politics and the

Representation of Torture in the Counterhistorical Dramatic Film.” Violence and

American Cinema. Ed. J David Slocum. Routledge, 2001. 246-70.

279

Gyatso, Tenzin. The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science and

Spirituality. Harmony, 2006.

Hall, Mollie.” ‘I Can’t Think About Kissing:’ Strong Female Protagonists and Romance

in Dystopian Young Adult Fiction.” Eastern Michigan University Digital

Commons, 2012,

http://commons.emich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1356&context=honors.

Accessed 3 Oct. 2016.

Hanson, Carter F. "Postmodernity, and Digital Memory Versus Human Remembering in

M. T. Anderson's Feed." Children's Literature Association Quarterly 40.3 (2015):

257-76. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/588773, Accessed 6 March 2018.

Harari, Yuval Noah. Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow. HarperCollins

Publishers, 2017.

Hassan, Ihab. Radical Innocence: Studies in the Contemporary American Novel.

Princeton University Press, 1961.

Heit, Jamey. The Politics of the Hunger Games. McFarland, 2015.

Hillegas, Mark R. The Future as Nightmare: H. G. Wells and the Anti-utopians.

Southern Illinois University Press, 1967.

IMDb. IMDb.com, 2018, http://www.imdb.com/. Accessed 3 Oct. 2016-10 Dec.

2017.

Insurgent. Directed by Robert Schwentke, performances by Shailene Woodley, Theo

James, and Ansel Elgort. Summit Entertainment, 2015.

“Is Katniss Everdeen Actually A Strong Female Character?” HuffPost Books,

HuffingtonPost.com, 11 June 2014,

280

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/11/katniss-everdeen_n_5481087.html.

Accessed 17 January 2017.

Jenkins, Henry, editor. The Children’s Culture Reader. New York University Press,

1998.

Jensen, Derrick and George Draffan. Welcome to the Machine: Science, Surveillance,

and the Culture of Control. Chelsea Green Publishing, 2004.

Karr, Julia. “Factions: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly.” Divergent Thinking: YA

Authors on Veronica Roth’s Divergent Trilogy. Ed. Leah Wilson. Benbella Books,

2014. 188-203.

“Kate Winslet on Divergent.” Posted by TheEllenShow. YouTube, 18 March 2014.

https://www.YouTube.com/watch?v=Anu25ijZnno. Accessed on 3 October 2017.

Kahneman, Daniel. “Surety of Fools.” Emerging: Contemporary Readings for Writers.

Ed. Barclay Barrios. 3rd. ed. Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2016. 214-220.

—. “The Riddle of Experience vs. Memory.” TED Talks, 2010.

https://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_kahneman_the_riddle_of_experience_vs_memo

ry/transcript?language=en#t-39523. Accessed November 2016.

Keegan, Rebecca. “Violence in The Hunger Games is a Reflection of Our Own World.”

Violence in Suzanne Collins's The Hunger Games Trilogy. Ed. Gary Weiner.

Greenhaven Press, 2015. 71-85.

Kelly-Sneed, Caitlin. “What North Korea Sees in the Mirror.” Asia Society, 11 Feb. 2010.

http://asiasociety.org/what-north-korea-sees-mirror. Accessed 17 December 2016.

Klosterman, Chuck. “Electric Funeral.” Emerging: Contemporary Readings for

Writers. Ed. Barclay Barrios. 3rd. ed. Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2016. 223-234.

281

Krokos, Dan. “Bureau Versus Rebels: Which is Worse?” Divergent Thinking: YA

Authors on Veronica Roth’s Divergent Trilogy. Ed. Leah Wilson. Benbella Books,

2014. 172-187.

Lam, Bourree. “The Friendship that Created Behavioral Economics.” The Atlantic. 3

January 2017. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/01/undoing-

project/511958/. Accessed on 5 January 2017.

Lawson, Richard. “From Hunger Games to Ender’s Game: The Teen Dystopia Boom,

Ranked.” Vanity Fair, 18 March 2016.

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2016/03/young-adult-dystopia-movies-

ranking, accessed 5 March 2017.

Littman, Sarah Darer. “The Politics of Mockingjay. The Girl Who Was on Fire: Your

Favorite Authors on Suzanne Collins’ Hunger Games Trilogy. Ed. Leah Wilson.

Benbella Books, 2011. 193-207.

Lockwood, Cara. “Not So Weird Science.” The Girl Who Was on Fire: Your Favorite

Authors on Suzanne Collins’ Hunger Games Trilogy. Ed. Leah Wilson. Benbella

Books, 2011. 113-125.

Machiavelli, Niccolò. The Prince. Translated by N.H. Thompson, Dover Publications,

1992.

Milgram, Stanley. Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View. Harper & Row

Publishers, 1974.

Mohr, Dunja M. Worlds Apart: Dualism and Transgression in Contemporary Female

Dystopias. Eds. Donald Palumbo and C.W. Sullivan III. McFarland & Company,

Publishers, 2005.

282

Moylan, Tom. Scraps of the Untainted Sky: Science Fiction, Utopia & Dystopia.

Routledge, 2000.

Nelson, David E., editor. Women’s Issues in Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale.

Greenhaven Press, 2012.

Norris, Elizabeth. “Ordinary Acts of Bravery.” Divergent Thinking: YA Authors on

Veronica Roth’s Divergent Trilogy. Ed. Leah Wilson. Benbella Books, 2014. 95-

111.

Orwell, George. 1984. Harvill Secker, 1949.

Paik, Peter Y. From Utopia to Apocalypse: Science Fiction and the Politics of

Catastrophe. University of Minnesota Press, 2010.

Pinker, Steven. The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined. Penguin

Group, 2011.

Plato. Republic. Trans. C.D.C. Reeve. Hackett Publishing Company, 2004.

Plutarch. On Sparta. Penguin Classics, 2005.

Popper, Karl R. The Open Society and Its Enemies. Vol.1-2. Princeton University Press,

1963.

Robehmed, Natalie. “The World’s Top-Earning Authors: Veronica Roth, John Green and

Gillian Flynn Join Ranking.” Forbes, 8 Sep. 2014.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/natalierobehmed/2014/09/08/the-worlds-top-

earning-authors-veronica-roth-john-green-and-gillian-flynn-join-

ranking/#5ee806e52944, accessed 5 March 2017.

Roth, Veronica. Allegiant. Katherine Tegen Books, 2013.

—. Divergent. Katherine Tegen Books, 2011.

283

—. Four: A Divergent Story Collection. Katherine Tegen Books, 2016.

—. Insurgent. Katherine Tegen Books, 2012.

Ryan, Carrie. “Panem Et Circenses.” The Girl Who Was on Fire: Your Favorite Authors

on Suzanne Collins’ Hunger Games Trilogy. Ed. Leah Wilson. Benbella Books,

2011. 99-112.

Sargent, Lyman Tower. Utopianism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press,

2010.

Saunders, Debra J. “‘The Hunger Games’ Bread and Circuses.” TownHall. 5 April 2012.

https://townhall.com/columnists/debrajsaunders/2012/04/05/the-hunger-games-

bread-and-circuses-n748061, Accessed on 6 August 2016.

Savage, Dan and Urvashi Vaid. “It Gets Better.” Emerging: Contemporary Readings for

Writers. Ed. Barclay Barrios. 2nd. ed. Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2013. 425-33.

Scholes, Robert and Eric S. Rabkin. Science Fiction: History, Science, Vision. Oxford

University Press, 1977.

Sharrett, Christopher, editor. Crisis Cinema: The Apocalyptic Idea in Postmodern

Narrative Film. Maisonneuve Press, 1993.

Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky. “How to Bring Your Kids Up Gay.” The Children’s Culture

Reader. Ed. Henry Jenkins. New York University Press, 1998. 231-40.

Seed, David. Science Fiction: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press, 2011.

Serenity. Directed by Joss Whedon, performances by Nathan Fillion, Alan Tudyk, and

Adam Baldwin, Universal Pictures, 2005.

284

Singer, Peter. “Visible Man: Ethics in a World Without Secrets.” Harper’s Magazine,

Aug.2011.http://pages.uoregon.edu/koopman/courses_readings/phil123net/privac

y/singer_secrecy_wikileaks.pdf, Accessed on 5 Nov. 2016.

Slocum, J. David. “Violence and American Cinema: Notes for an Investigation.”

Violence and American Cinema. Routledge, 2001. 1-34.

Sophocles. Oedipus Rex. Dover Publications, 1991.

Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith. Directed by George Lucas, performances by

Natalie Portman, Hayden Christensen and Ewan McGregor, 20th Century Fox,

2005.

Strinati, Dominic. An Introduction to Theories of Popular Culture. Routledge, 1998.

Sturken, Marita, Douglas Thomas, and Sandra J. Ball-Rokeach, eds.

Technological Visions: The Hopes and Fears that Shape New Technologies.

Temple University Press, 2004.

Sunstein, Cass R. The World According to Star Wars. HarperCollins Publishers, 2016.

“Suzanne Collins Biography.” Biography.com. A&E Television Networks, 1 Sep. 2016,

https://www.biography.com/people/suzanne-collins-20903551. Accessed 23

December 2017.

“Suzanne Collins on the Vietnam War Stories Behind The Hunger Games and Year of the

Jungle.” Posted by Bibliostar.TV. YouTube, 8 October 2012,

https://www.YouTube.com/watch?v=6MiVBAPg6TU, accessed 20 December

2017.

Takami, Koushun. Battle Royale. Gentosha, 2002.

285

Tasker, Yvonne. Spectacular Bodies: Gender, Genre, and the Action Cinema. Routledge,

1993.

The Amazing Spider Man. Directed by Mark Webb, performances by Andrew Garfield,

Emma Stone, and Rhys Ifans. Columbia Pictures, 2012.

The Hunger Games. Directed by Gary Ross, performances by Jennifer Lawrence, Josh

Hutcherson, and Liam Hemsworth. Lionsgate, 2012.

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire. Directed by Francis Lawrence, performances by

Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, and Liam Hemsworth. Lionsgate, 2013.

“The Hunger Games Introduction.” Shmoop. Shmoop University, 2017.

https://www.shmoop.com/hunger-games/. Accessed on 3 Oct. 2017.

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay. Directed by Francis Lawrence, performances by

Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, and Liam Hemsworth. Lionsgate, 2014.

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part Two. Directed by Francis Lawrence, performances

by Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, and Liam Hemsworth. Lionsgate, 2015.

“United Nations Treaty Series.” United Nations Treaty Collection. Vol. 231, 1956.

https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%20231/v231.pdf. Accessed

3 October 2017.

“Veronica Roth Interview.” Posted by The Guardian. YouTube, 13 Dec. 2013.

https://www.YouTube.com/watch?v=qDS1k3LYZyo, accessed on 20 Dec. 2017.

Wasik, Bill. “My Crowd Experiment: The Mob Project.” Emerging: Contemporary

Readings for Writers. Ed. Barclay Barrios. 3rd. ed. Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2016,

473-90.

286

Weiner, Gary, editor. Violence in Suzanne Collins's The Hunger Games Trilogy.

Greenhaven Press, 2015.

Weintraub, Steve Frosty. “Director Gary Ross Talks The Hunger Games, Catching Fire,

Deleted Scenes, and a Lot More.” Collider, 22 March 2012.

http://collider.com/gary-ross-hunger-games-interview/, accessed 11 Dec. 2017.

Wilson, Leah, editor. Divergent Thinking: YA Authors on Veronica Roth’s

Divergent Trilogy. Benbella Books, 2014.

Wilson, Leah, editor. The Girl Who Was on Fire: Your Favorite Authors on Suzanne

Collins’s Hunger Games Trilogy. Benbella Books, 2011.

Winkler, Matthew. “What Makes a Hero?” YouTube. Uploaded by Ted-Ed. 4 Dec. 2012.

https://www.YouTube.com/watch?v=Hhk4N9A0oCA&t=202s, accessed 26

March 2018.

Zamyatin, Yevgeny. We. Translated by Mirra Ginsburg. Harper Voyager, 1983.

287