Elizabeth Damavandi
Professor Harrison
English 115
1 December 2011
Corruption and Intrigue
It is scary how the corruption of government can actually be a reality. Governments are designed to protect the people. The sole purpose of a government is not a dictatorship; it is a democracy, which includes all the people and the votes of the people. Thus, since the government is the core of a nation, and if it is corrupt and it is promoting corruption such as the fascination of death, there is a problem and the citizens must stand up to their government. But sometimes it is not that easy. In addition to the corruption, it is much scarier that even the government promotes fascination when it comes to sensitive subjects like death and killing. These two things are a battle with our ability to be able to rise above them, and our ability to have the standard and basic morals it takes in doing so. Although we may not be able to truly change the governments that may be corrupt, we can at least change our mentality about the corruption and about the universal fascination of death.
As we all know, a true and passionate love always can conquer anything, even if it means having to commit suicide despite it, or having to go against the government's rules, but sometimes it does not. In the case of The Hunger Games novel, Katniss and Peeta have a love-hate relationship. They tug and they pull, and Katniss does not really understand the relationship she has with Peeta, or whether she loves her best friend Gale instead. Yet by going through the ritual of the Hunger Games and by being against the corrupt ways of the Capitol, Katniss and Peeta form an alliance and stay together in spite of a potential punishment. They understand that although the government may be corrupt and devious in its ways by trying to prove a point with the Hunger Games, they know that they can still stay true to themselves. When entering the games, Peeta says that, “I want to die as myself…I don’t want them to change me in there. Turn me into some kind of monster I am not” (Collins 141). Therefore when in the middle of the game it is announced that there can be two winners, this makes Katniss and Peeta hopeful, that maybe there is a change for once. But then all of sudden when Katniss and Peeta are the only ones left, it is announced that there only can be one winner. This makes Katniss and Peeta angrier than they are, and they decided to go against this, even if it means that they are committing suicide, or that they will be punished and their families will have no food. They put the poisonous berries in their mouth so that if there is only one winner allowed, there won’t be any winners at all. Then all of a sudden it is announced that there can be two winners after all. Persistence and a "Love" relationship that Katniss and Peeta portray, in a way conquers the government and the game makers. Although they may have not been able to change the corruption, they still stood up for themselves and what they believed in to stay true to their own sincerity.
Although it may seem that the government in The Hunger Games is not that corrupt, it actually really is in its own way because it promotes killing and the fascination of death; it is basically government sanctioned death in disguise. Since the government makes sure that there is a Hunger Game enforced annually to remind the citizens that rebellion has consequences, they are also promoting violence and fascination. The government of Panem promotes violence to citizens of a young age, from ages twelve to eighteen. Not only does it promote violence at a young age, it promotes that violence and the fascination of the horrible deaths that come with it is acceptable. By blowing up the actual Hunger Games, and televising the whole “fight until the death” motto, it forces people to watch it, and to potentially be intrigued and fascinated by the horrifying deaths. While the whole town is filled with TV’s and huge crowds watching them, to revolt against the government’s cruel ways would be to denounce the games, and look away from the TV and not find it appealing. The strong mentality towards the games and the fascination would be the first thing to do to start fighting the corrupt government.
This idea is common throughout many books and movies, including 1984. The idea of a government, "Big Brother" watching their every move is prevalent. In 1984, there is a similar conclusion. Although in The Hunger Games, and in 1984, the characters are presented with road blocks because the government limits them to what they can say and do, they still choose to go against it despite even if there is a potential punishment. In 1984, the love and persistence of it between Winston and Julia, rise above and go against what the government expected of them. In the Party of the Big Brother, any type of relationship and sex is forbidden, and sex in marriage is only for reproduction, to ensure that all love is kept for loving the Brotherhood. Winston and Julia rebel, and become lovers, but by going against the government, they are punished and are taken away from each other and killed. Winston says that they can make him confess, but that they will never be able to take away his true feelings for Julia. This is somewhat similar to what Peeta said about how the government may be able to control the games, but they cannot control his mentality and morals.
Yet sometimes no matter how hard you fight, the outcome may not be what you want. Trying to maintain ones mentality and morals may be a weakness for some. This is the case for Winston when he is caught by the government and is taken into Room 101. They torture him with his utter fear of rats; yet he cannot just take the torturing that is the consequence for his actions. So he yells that Julia should be tortured instead of him. Party members then rape Julia. When they see each other after, they do not love each other and they love Big Brother again. These sad mind games make this story be one of the governments conquering all. Yet by rebelling and doing what Winston and Julia did, it is still worth it because they both had no real lives to begin with, they were controlled and limited by the government. In addition to that, since The Hunger Games is a trilogy, we do not really know what will truly happen with Katniss and Peeta with the government. Maybe their fate will be just like Winston’s and Julia’s, by rebelling there may be consequences because usually there is no way of winning when it comes to a corrupt government. Yet this fascination of what will happen next intrigues us and excites us.
Fascination of death is universal. The unknown is what we fear, yet we are still intrigued by it. I honestly do not understand why this is so, but in reality it is true. This fascination is shown throughout the entire book of The Hunger Games. The entire book is focusing on the survival of the fittest and who will win the battle. Millions of viewers tune into the games and watch innocent children and teens kill each other. And this is thought to be entertaining? Seriously? Not only do these children have to fight to live in an enclosed forest, they have to fight each other until the death. How people are fascinated by that beats me. What if it were us in their shoes, it would not be entertaining then, would it? The fact that the government of Panem is so cruel and corrupt allows this sabotage to go on.
This fascination is a reality. By reading The Hunger Games, and Stephen King’s “Why We Crave Horror Movies,” I am very mortified that people enjoy watching the pain of others, even if it is through watching movies. We as readers are not so different than the millions of Panem citizens avidly tuning into the Games on television. Although we are different because we are just reading a fictional story that Suzanne Collins wrote, we are not so different. What is left from stopping us from one day actually having a real life game that people do fight to the death, just to quench our thirst for our fascination? In Stephen King's witty article about "Why We Crave Horror Movies," he concludes that this fascination is derived from our humanity being "ill" and that we need to see other people die in movies, to be thought as sane in our own lives. This fascination needs to be controlled, before it gets out of hand. But it is already too late. This fascination has spiraled out of control. The Hunger Games may already be a reality in a way. TV shows like Survivor create an intrigue for the audience. The theme of the “survival of the fittest” and of death will always be a fascination for humans.
Yet although it may be argued that us as humans it is not in our own hands to stop the corruption of the government or the fascination of death, that really is not the case. Although we may not be able to change the government, we can still choose to reject the corruption that our government may be flawed with. We can stand up for our rights and protest. If that does not work, then we can die trying. In addition to that, while humans are prone to fascination and that no matter what the brain will always be wired to be intrigued by ideas such as death, we still have the ability to control it. Since no one can die and live to tell about the experience, it is natural to have some type of fascination about it. It is rooted in our biology and in our brains psychology for such subjects to spark an attraction. But the way we react to it, and promote movies and shows that have to do with it is the bigger problem. So by limiting ourselves and deciding that it is ethical to reject the fascination, we can ultimately stop the mentality that goes with it. It is in our hands to bring the change. “People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people” (V for Vendetta).
Word Count: 1,768
Works Cited
Collins, Suzanne. The Hunger Games. New York: Scholastic Inc. 2009. Print.
King, Stephen. “Why We Crave Horror Movies.” N/D. Web 2011.
Orwell, George. 1984. New York: Signet Classics- A New American Library. 1977. Print.
“Survivor” CBS.TV.com. Dir, Scott Messick. 2000. Web. 2011
V for Vendetta. Dir. James McTeigue. Perf. Natalie Portman, Hugo Weaving, Stephen Rea.
2006. Film.
No comments:
Post a Comment