Hunger Games

I’ve been hearing people raving about this series for a while now.  Despite my YA antenna being so underdeveloped, and the book being slower to take off in Australia, the excitement about it leaked through to me a while ago.  It has been sitting on my towering pile of books to read for ages.  It took the imminent release of the movie to fire up my hunger enough to start reading.

Glad I did.  It is addictively good, and I found myself glued to the story much like the citizens of Panem are to the Games themselves.

What I love about The Hunger Games series is its resonance on so many layers of meaning and metaphor.  I devoured all three novels in quick succession, but I think they require another reading just to appreciate the craft of the subtext.  In fact, I’m looking forward to having a look at The girl who was on fire, a collection of commentaries by other YA authors.  There is plenty for an aspiring author to glean from The Hunger Games, because Collins does much with quite simple language.  She delivers an intricate story in very clear and quick writing.  Specifically, in short sentences.  Now, there’s something I could learn.

There is some lovely work in the story that ensures it will have wide appeal.  The hair/clothes/makeup in Capitol are richly painted, and the feasts are detailed for all the foodies out there.  I especially enjoyed the subleties of the character names and the added meaning they imparted - Peetr = Peter = Rock, steady, strong, versus Gale = tempestuous, changeable.  These names are woven all through the series (Snow, Trinket), but my favorite is Rue, because of the deep sorrow and regret that Katniss experiences as a result of their interaction.  The meaning of names has always fascinated me, and I just love it as a literary device.

I haven’t read much about Suzanne Collins’ writing process for this series, but there are some interesting shifts as the novels progress.  The writing in the first book is much sparer and tighter in its sentence structure than in the next two.  It is as if she finds her stride and starts to feel more comfortable to explore the expressive space inside the storyline.  There is progression too, from the very heavily plot-driven narrative of the first novel, to the series resolution which is nearly entirely psychological in nature.  She lures the reader from the bold, apparent facts of the story and into a more interior experience of the themes that she set out to explore. 

Despite having loved all three books equally, I will admit to denouement disappointment  in Mockingjay – I felt the finale was unnecessarily convoluted, and because of that it lost the fluidity and taut pacing that typified the previous resolutions.  However, credit should be given to Collins for creating a thought-provoking resolution, instead of the formulaic version which so often typifies both YA and speculative fic.

Suzanne Collins herself adapted the book for film, which makes me even keener to see it.  Her background is in screenwriting for children, and it has obviously served her well in developing both the experience and expertise to deliver a trilogy of this calibre.