I have read the whole series but the twist at the end of book 1 is my favorite. When I first read it I was shocked and mad. Would you guys have done what Katniss did? Did you think it was as big a deal as the Capitol made it?
Why do you think Katniss's stunt could potentially cause rebellion?
I think that the reason her berry stunt was such a big deal was because it showed the Capitol and all the districts that the Capitol does not have full control over them. The whole point of the Hunger Games is to show all the Districts that they can do whatever they want to them and their kids. Katniss is defying the Capitol and shows the District people that they do have a choice and a say in what happens to them. It can ignite hope for change, and therefor cause rebellion.
I really thought it was very clever of Katniss to do that, and that the Capitol made it a bigger deal then it really was. Ovbiously it was quite dangerous to do that and could cause rebellion but it didn't seem that different to the rest of the things that happened in the book if that makes sense. This part didn't really stand out to me as much as I thought it would by the way everyones talking about it. But i dont know..maybe i just didnt fully understand it.
ReplyDeleteI think her berry stunt was such a big deal because she was disobeying the rules. One person was supposed to win, and if they both died, there would be no winner. the gamemakers had made this trick--told the tributes that only one could win, then changed it to 2 from the same district, then changed it back to 1 person. So i think the capitol is mad because they wanted one person to win, and with the berry stunt, the only 2 tributes left were about to die, and they wanted 1 winner. When katniss and peeta were going to eat the berries, they were killing both of themselves, and then there would have been no winner and that would have been aggravating to the capitol because the point of the games is to have a winner and to entertain the audience.
ReplyDelete