Just finished The Hunger Games ( grammar rant)

[VaKim]

I just had to see what all the fuss was about, so I finally read The Hunger Games. Although it was definitely a page turner, I doubt if I will be reading the rest of the trilogy simply because I prefer my fiction to have happy endings. Real life has enough "realism" for me.

 

Now, I knew from reading reviews on here in the past that it was not going to be well-written in any literary sense, so I was prepared for that. However, I just could not stand how often the phrase "try and" was used throughout the book! Drove me crazy! Don't authors have editors anymore?

 

Just had to rant somewhere where people would know what I was talking about. ;)

[freeindeed]

It is a great series. The second book, Catching Fire, is my favorite. I encourage you to get past the grammar and finish the trilogy. Also, it is written in the voice of a teenage girl, so keep that in mind.

[SarahW]

1st person voice is easy - but also difficult to do well. Honestly, I didn't care for the syntax at all. It was so stilted I often got confused. It wasn't as bad as Dragon Tattoo, which I couldn't read at all, but, ugh, I honestly would much prefer Bella's head over Katniss'.

 

I can honestly say that for this one I prefer the movie.

 

But I like fantasy and dystopian lit, so I'll probably read the other two. I think there's a summer reading program using the books, because all the library copies in the county are currently out. This doesn't bother me too much, I can wait.

[Crimson Wife]

Katniss comes from a working class family in the poorest district, so she would not have received a strong education.

 

However, I will say that if you prefer your books to have happy endings, you would likely hate the ending of Mockingjay. I won't spoil it for you in case you do decide to finish the books, but it isn't one I consider to be particularly positive.

[unfrumpable.]

I didn't rush out to read the second or third book after reading the first either. It was months later when I came across them at a rummage sale very cheap that I picked them up and read them. I am glad that I did! The series is good and now I wish I had kept the first book. :)

[Mom-ninja.]

I haven't read that book. However, I have a really hard time reading a book with shoddy grammar. If the author purposely uses improper grammar to portray character that's fine.

[Cinder]

re: try and. Here's what Grammar Girl has to say about it:

 

Try to Versus Try and

 

Hi, Grammar Girl. This is Shannon in Phoenix, Arizona. I was hoping you could set the record straight about the use of try and versus try to. For example, "I'm going to try and give Grammar Girl a call," versus "I'm going to try to give Grammar Girl a call." My inclination is that try to is the only correct construction, however I increasingly hear people say "try and." Could you please set this straight. I'm dying to have an authority hold forth on this. Thanks.

 

Hi, Shannon. I got really frustrated while researching this topic because none of my books seemed willing to take a stand. They all said "try and" is an accepted informal idiom that means "try to." They say to avoid "try and" in formal writing, but not to get too worked up about it otherwise. But none of them addressed what bothers me about the phrase "try and," which is that if you use and, as in your example sentence -- I'm going to try and call Grammar Girl -- you are separating trying and calling. You're describing two things: trying and calling. When you use "try to" -- as in I am going to try to call Grammar Girl -- you are using the preposition to to link the trying to the calling.

 

I may have to put this on my list of pet peeves, and as I've said before, people almost always form pet peeves about things that are style issues or where the rules aren't clear.

[VaKim]

I haven't read that book. However, I have a really hard time reading a book with shoddy grammar. If the author purposely uses improper grammar to portray character that's fine.

 

At first, I thought this was what was going on, because I have read many books with dialect and have no problem with that at all. However, just because the phrase itself annoys me so much, I couldn't help but notice that it was also used many times when quoting other characters.

 

I actually already looked for spoilers to see how the series ends, which is why I have decided not to read the rest. :) I don't necessarily need a "happy" ending, but definitely must have a "satisfying" ending in my fiction.

[Samiam]

Is pretty darn satisfying, IMHO. bad guys lose, good guys win.

[TeacherZee]

1st person voice is easy - but also difficult to do well. Honestly, I didn't care for the syntax at all. It was so stilted I often got confused. It wasn't as bad as Dragon Tattoo, which I couldn't read at all, but, ugh, I honestly would much prefer Bella's head over Katniss'.

 

I can honestly say that for this one I prefer the movie.

 

But I like fantasy and dystopian lit, so I'll probably read the other two. I think there's a summer reading program using the books, because all the library copies in the county are currently out. This doesn't bother me too much, I can wait.

 

I didn't love the Dragon Tattoo books but there it might be the translation not the original language :)

[unfrumpable.]

Yeah, I would definitely consider it a happy ending overall.

[Excelsior! Academy]

I didn't even notice. What does that say about my grammar?

[TracyP]

I thought the writing got even worse in the last book. I'm not a grammar expert by any means, so I can't even put my finger on examples. I just didn't feel like it flowed very well.

 

I was not satisfied by the ending. I felt sad and empty. Contradictory as it may be, I enjoyed the series and was glad I read them. I can't see rereading them, though.

[Word Nerd]

The grammar didn't bother me, and I correct other people's grammar for a living. I think it's also important to remember Katniss's depressed mental state, which is reflected in Mockingjay's narration style.

[momma2three]

The grammar didn't bother me, and I correct other people's grammar for a living. I think it's also important to remember Katniss's depressed mental state, which is reflected in Mockingjay's narration style.

 

 

I'm so glad you said that, because I've heard so many complaints about the tone of that book as the author just phoning it in, or writing an outline and not filling in any details. I thought it was really effective as the numbed voice of a teenager who has slipped over the edge and can barely recognize what is going on around her despite being an integral part of the action.

[Crimson Wife]

Is pretty darn satisfying, IMHO. bad guys lose, good guys win.

 

 

I disagree. The ending reminds me of a line from the Who song "We Won't Get Fooled Again": "Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss." It is rather depressing IMHO.

[nmoira]

I disagree. The ending reminds me of a line from the Who song "We Won't Get Fooled Again": "Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss." It is rather depressing IMHO.

 

Katniss bought only a period of respite, and she knows it. Nothing more. That she chose to have children in spite of this, I found simultaneously hopeful and devastating. It was like she'd given up and accepted humanity's dreary lot of repeated cycles of cruelty and subjugation while forging out her own little world away from it. All she'd wanted was to keep her family safe. And she failed, and she'll fail again, and she knows it.

 

I loved that Collins didn't let Katniss turn into anything bigger than a blip, a "malfunctioning" cog in the system. It took guts not to make her a hero in a traditional sense.

[soufflegirl]

I loved the series, but I wouldn't say the ending was really happy. Harry Potter had a reasonably happy ending (not that I don't cry my eyes out every time I read it.) This was more Lord of the Rings-ish bittersweet. The first book flows much better than the last one, but I think that was intentional on the part of the author. It's meant to be jarring and irritating, and I agree with momma2three, it's sadly pretty realistic.

[TXBeth]

Is pretty darn satisfying, IMHO. bad guys lose, good guys win.

 

 

Yeah, and then the "good guys" turn out to be no better than the "bad guys." For me, it doesn't get much more unsatisfying than that.

 

I did not enjoy the third book at all. I'm all for characters growing and developing, but it seemed like several characters are suddenly completely different people. For example, what's-his-name who went hunting with Katniss at the beginning....the guy we met in the first book would never in a million years have behaved the way he did in the last book.

[BrookValley.]

The grammar didn't bother me, and I correct other people's grammar for a living. I think it's also important to remember Katniss's depressed mental state, which is reflected in Mockingjay's narration style.

 

I agree (and I also correct other people's grammar for a living).

[nmoira]

For example, what's-his-name who went hunting with Katniss at the beginning....the guy we met in the first book would never in a million years have behaved the way he did in the last book.

 

I disagree. Gale believed in the The Cause, and wholeheartedly believed it was The Way to make things better. That a good person can get caught up in a movement that will only end up perpetuating what he is trying to put down is an all too familiar theme in history.

[myfunnybunch]

For example, what's-his-name who went hunting with Katniss at the beginning....the guy we met in the first book would never in a million years have behaved the way he did in the last book.

I thought about Gale and his character a lot when I finished the book, because I really wanted him to be a pure hero. One of Collins' points throughout the series was that none of us are heroes in the conventional sense of the idea. Superman is never going to swoop down out of the sky and save the earth. No one's motives and actions are entirely pure and perfect. Gale telegraphed his means-justify-the-ends philosophy earlier in the series. In order to be true to her story, I don't think Collins could make him the guy he appeared to be in the beginning. I thought the ending to the book was sad, with Katniss trying to pick up the pieces and keep moving with her life as best she could, as so many of us must when life doesn't turn out like a storybook. Had Collins written Gale differently in the end, I don't think his character or the story would have had the same impact or been as true to the overall theme. (P.S. The grammar didn't bother me. I noticed, but took it to be Katniss' voice, which was similar to that of many of the teen girls I know.)

[Hoot]

I absolutely loved the first book but felt like they just went way downhill after that. The second one was kind of 'meh, and the third one I thought was ridiculous. To be honest, I don't even remember why now but I just know I didn't like the way the series progressed at. all. I will agree with TXBeth above in that I felt the characters were totally unrecognizable by the third book.

[Mrs Mungo]

I did not enjoy the third book at all. I'm all for characters growing and developing, but it seemed like several characters are suddenly completely different people. For example, what's-his-name who went hunting with Katniss at the beginning....the guy we met in the first book would never in a million years have behaved the way he did in the last book.

 

 

What makes you think that?

 

You never know how a person is going to react to actual combat. It is very hard to tell ahead of time who will rise to the occasion in combat and who will fall apart or who will struggle and who will kill with impunity, even outside the rules of engagement. The military tries to figure that out with realistic training, high stress training environments, etc but it doesn't all come out until the rubber meets the road. That bit struck me as realistic.

[Georgiana Daniels]

I didn't even notice. What does that say about my grammar?

 

 

It says that you were able to dig in and enjoy a story :)

 

Honestly, story is king. A great story covers a multitude of sins!

[soufflegirl]

I think part of the problem is it is written in the first person, and that person doesn't have the firmest grip on reality by the third book. Had it been in the third person instead, Mockingjay in particular would have read completely differently, and Gale may have been a more sympathetic character. As it is, we're left to fill in a lot of blanks.

 

I didn't find it completely implausible that Gale would go along with the ends justifying the means. He's more conventionally sane than the others in Mockingjay, and being stuck underground longterm with a bunch of people that you can remember being "normal" who are now mentally shattered could be enough to impact your value system, especially if you had a dark streak to begin with.

[dirty ethel rackham]

. For example, what's-his-name who went hunting with Katniss at the beginning....the guy we met in the first book would never in a million years have behaved the way he did in the last book.

 

 

 

 

I disagree. Gale believed in the The Cause, and wholeheartedly believed it was The Way to make things better. That a good person can get caught up in a movement that will only end up perpetuating what he is trying to put down is an all too familiar theme in history.

 

:iagree:

I thought about Gale and his character a lot when I finished the book, because I really wanted him to be a pure hero. One of Collins' points throughout the series was that none of us are heroes in the conventional sense of the idea. Superman is never going to swoop down out of the sky and save the earth. No one's motives and actions are entirely pure and perfect. Gale telegraphed his means-justify-the-ends philosophy earlier in the series. In order to be true to her story, I don't think Collins could make him the guy he appeared to be in the beginning. I thought the ending to the book was sad, with Katniss trying to pick up the pieces and keep moving with her life as best she could, as so many of us must when life doesn't turn out like a storybook. Had Collins written Gale differently in the end, I don't think his character or the story would have had the same impact or been as true to the overall theme. (P.S. The grammar didn't bother me. I noticed, but took it to be Katniss' voice, which was similar to that of many of the teen girls I know.)

 

:iagree:

What makes you think that?

 

You never know how a person is going to react to actual combat. It is very hard to tell ahead of time who will rise to the occasion in combat and who will fall apart or who will struggle and who will kill with impunity, even outside the rules of engagement. The military tries to figure that out with realistic training, high stress training environments, etc but it doesn't all come out until the rubber meets the road. That bit struck me as realistic.

 

:iagree:

 

One other thing ... we meet Gale in the beginning through Katniss' eyes. She has a somewhat romanticized view of him. She ignores his rantings as just talk. She sees what she wants to see.

[Slartibartfast]

Yeah, and then the "good guys" turn out to be no better than the "bad guys." For me, it doesn't get much more unsatisfying than that.

 

I did not enjoy the third book at all. I'm all for characters growing and developing, but it seemed like several characters are suddenly completely different people. For example, what's-his-name who went hunting with Katniss at the beginning....the guy we met in the first book would never in a million years have behaved the way he did in the last book.

 

I actually thought the "good guys no better than bad guys" point very realistic.

 

I don't believe Gale intended for "his" weapons to be used in the manner that they were, he did state he knew his weapons could hurt innocents but I don't believe he would have planned what ended up happening.

[Slartibartfast]

I do believe the grammar was better than I would have anticipated from the region. There aren't many examples of others speaking in The Seam, but I am sure they would likely be worse than Katniss. I didn't mind the grammar or syntax, I am sure if it bothered some my car mechanic speaking would likely give them an apoplexy and he is a professional business owner.

 

I am surprised anyone would prefer to be in Bella's head. I found Bella to be horrifically tiresome. I can't imagine wanting to hang out with her, I would probably not mind having tea with Katniss but not when she is in her crazy-stabby phase. I would not ever want to be stuck spending time with Bella.

[unfrumpable.]

I'm really enjoying this discussion and the different points that are being brought up. :)

[Hoot]

I am surprised anyone would prefer to be in Bella's head. I found Bella to be horrifically tiresome. I can't imagine wanting to hang out with her, I would probably not mind having tea with Katniss but not when she is in her crazy-stabby phase. I would not ever want to be stuck spending time with Bella.

 

:iagree:

[VaKim]

Many of these posts confirm for me the fact that I would not enjoy the other two books at all. I am just not into that "brand" of realism. Not saying the rest of the world has to agree with me. I am obviously in the minority and have no problem with that. :-)

[Word Nerd]

My favorite language curmudgeon, John McIntyre, has this to say about "try and":

 

"Merriam-Webster’s points out that the idiom has been common in English since the sixteenth century and has been increasingly common in print for a century and a half, with a full page of citations. The basis for disparaging it, the entry says, is 'usually the notion that try is to be followed by the infinitive combined with the mistaken assumption that an infinitive requires to.'

 

So here you have one more concern you can cross off your list."

 

I wouldn't use it in formal writing, but it's certainly acceptable in a colloquial sense (and by a first-person narrator).

[ILiveInFlipFlops]

I'm really enjoying this discussion and the different points that are being brought up. :)

 

I am too! Both DD10 and I have read the series, and I want to read them again with her for our "mother/daughter book club" (aka secret literary study :lol:). This thread is bringing up some very good points that we'll enjoy discussing.

[Crimson Wife]

Personally, I felt that Gale's character changes in the 3rd book were a lazy way for the author to resolve the love triangle. Have him be involved in the one thing that could make Katniss never, ever, ever forgive him. I heard that the author was involved in the production of the first movie at the time so I think that she just wanted to finish the 3rd book as soon as possible. I'd be curious to see what she might've come up with had she been able to devote her full attention to Mockingjay.

[nmoira]

Personally, I felt that Gale's character changes in the 3rd book were a lazy way for the author to resolve the love triangle. Have him be involved in the one thing that could make Katniss never, ever, ever forgive him. I heard that the author was involved in the production of the first movie at the time so I think that she just wanted to finish the 3rd book as soon as possible. I'd be curious to see what she might've come up with had she been able to devote her full attention to Mockingjay.

 

 

I find the whole "love triangle" thing to be overblown. This was far from the main focus of the series. Katniss chose a quiet intimacy, and yes, a family over the The Cause, but this would have happened anyway, Peeta or not. Gale and Katniss were already doomed as a couple by the beginning of Mockingjay: she wasn't a believer.

[nmoira]

Although who doesn't love a good love triangle? I wanted her to get with Gale.

 

I would have been enraged, and not because I care a whit about Peeta (I would have been happiest if she'd ended up leaving the boys behind altogether, IYKWIM). The two archetypes that make me see red without fail are the Preacher Man and, to a far lesser degree, the Blind Adherent. Gale just wasn't self aware enough for me to get past his playing the latter role.

[freeindeed]

 

Although who doesn't love a good love triangle? I wanted her to get with Gale.

Not me. I wanted her to end up with Peeta b/c of all they went through together. I liked that part of the ending.

[ILiveInFlipFlops]

She went through so much with Peeta and felt so guilty about him. If she didn't end up alone, she would have ended up with Peeta. They were both so broken. Gale's betrayal, intentioned or not, was too much.

 

That was exactly how I felt about it. And ultimately, the cause was more important to him than she was, whereas to Peeta, she was everything.

[JumpyTheFrog]

As I was sitting here reading this thread, a teenage girl walked by and said to the boy in front of her that he looked like Peeta. He shook his head in a way that indicated he hears this often and doesn't like it. But she was right! He does look like a 10-11 year old Peeta.

 

I didn't like Katniss by the end of the third book. She was never a particularly likable character (although I did cheer her on) but by the end, I definitely wouldn't have wanted to know her.

 

I was disappointed she picked Peeta over Gale. DH pointed out to me once that "Katniss needed a lover, not a fighter."

 

I just finished the last Harry Potter book about an hour ago. I know it's not a dystopian series, so perhaps the comparison isn't fair, but he's really a much more likable character.

[Slartibartfast]

As I was sitting here reading this thread, a teenage girl walked by and said to the boy in front of her that he looked like Peeta. He shook his head in a way that indicated he hears this often and doesn't like it. But she was right! He does look like a 10-11 year old Peeta.

 

I didn't like Katniss by the end of the third book. She was never a particularly likable character (although I did cheer her on) but by the end, I definitely wouldn't have wanted to know her.

 

I was disappointed she picked Peeta over Gale. DH pointed out to me once that "Katniss needed a lover, not a fighter."

 

I just finished the last Harry Potter book about an hour ago. I know it's not a dystopian series, so perhaps the comparison isn't fair, but he's really a much more likable character.

 

 

Katniss wasn't a fighter, she was a survivor. Those are very different things. She rarely gets into hand to hand combat, all the people she kills during the game are from afar. By book two she was leaning so heavily on Peeta for support she was sleeping in his arms. Gale was never going to win, she just needed to figure out what she *needed*

 

By book 2 she was Peeta's. Finnick saw it and Finnick is always right about people.

[Mrs Mungo]

Peeta is her safe place in the storm. I know my husband is that for me. A relationship with Gale seems like it would be a huge amount of effort, and his expectations seem so high. Ugh. Give me the man who loves me, not an image of me.

[Mrs Mungo]

Yes, but didn't Gale help her sister and mom while she was gone?

 

 

But, she had been supplying his family with food too, yes? It's been quite a while since I read the books. It felt like almost more of a sibling relationship...or cousins maybe.

[JumpyTheFrog]

I think I wanted her to pick Gale because they had been best friends for so long. She couldn't even figure out if she was attracted to Peeta or not, although he was smitten with her. I thought the movie did a poor job showing her mixed feelings about Peeta. The ending made it look like she was falling for him as much as he was for her.

 

I can see why she wouldn't be able to forgive Gale. Still, I almost felt like she was using Peeta because she didn't know who else to turn to. The relationship seemed very one sided. (My relationship with my last boyfriend before DH was like this. He was head-over-heels for me, and I while I enjoyed the attention - when I wasn't a bit creeped out by it - I didn't actually like him much. I think perhaps that might be why I think Katniss doesn't really love Peeta like she unknowingly loved Gale at the beginning.)

[JumpyTheFrog]

It felt like almost more of a sibling relationship...or cousins maybe.

 

 

But they did kiss the one time. I think either Gale was waiting for her to grow up or they didn't realize they were in love. I'm sure they would've ended up together if she hadn't been sent to the arena.

[Slartibartfast]

Yes, but didn't Gale help her sister and mom while she was gone?

 

 

But I think Katniss has spent so much time caring for them that she really needed someone to take care of her. While most of the town was cared for by her mom Katniss didn't like her mom doing things for her and still resented her putting her in the position of caretaker.

 

Her mom didn't even stay near her at the end.

[Mrs Mungo]

I think I wanted her to pick Gale because they had been best friends for so long. She couldn't even figure out if she was attracted to Peeta or not, although he was smitten with her. I thought the movie did a poor job showing her mixed feelings about Peeta. The ending made it look like she was falling for him as much as he was for her.

 

I can see why she wouldn't be able to forgive Gale. Still, I almost felt like she was using Peeta because she didn't know who else to turn to. The relationship seemed very one sided. (My relationship with my last boyfriend before DH was like this. He was head-over-heels for me, and I while I enjoyed the attention - when I wasn't a bit creeped out by it - I didn't actually like him much. I think perhaps that might be why I think Katniss doesn't really love Peeta like she unknowingly loved Gale at the beginning.)

 

 

I just never got the vibe that she liked him in that way.

 

 

But they did kiss the one time. I think either Gale was waiting for her to grow up or they didn't realize they were in love. I'm sure they would've ended up together if she hadn't been sent to the arena.

 

 

Gale even comments to Peeta that Katniss never kissed him the way that she kisses Peeta. Peeta thinks it's all part of the drama, but as readers we know she felt something different when she kissed him versus Gale. I think she liked the idea of Gale, but didn't ever really feel anything for him. And maybe she would have eventually fallen for him, if everything else had not happened. But, life does get in the way of who we might or might not fall in love with...does that make sense?

[Luanne]

I don't even bother with books that I know before I read them are poorly written. I also don't read books that have little good points to them.

[ILiveInFlipFlops]

I don't even bother with books that I know before I read them are poorly written. I also don't read books that have little good points to them.

 

 

How can you tell if you haven't read them? And I think you mean *few* good points.

[Word Nerd]

I don't even bother with books that I know before I read them are poorly written. I also don't read books that have little good points to them.

 

 

How do you know a book is poorly written (or has little good points) before you read it?