The Giver vs. The Hunger Games
"These are both stories that deal with dystopian futures - and they are both read by readers younger than the original intended audience - The Giver through use in classrooms (i.e. 4th & 5th grade) and Hunger Games through popularity. Are these tween books? Should they be read with guidance (book club?) Or does the dystopian future mitigate this concern? You can argue that The Giver is, and Hunger Games isn't - be specific, and refer both to books and readings to this point."
I believe that
The Giver is, far and away, more of a tween book than
Hunger Games. Both take place in a dystopian society, this much is true. However,
The Giver is tightly controlled emotionally. The members of society don't feel as they should, don't see as they should (colors) or hear as they should and society was designed that way to create what they thought was a more healthy and peaceful society. They don't even fear death, but simply call it "release", which offers almost a sense of relief and naivite. Because of this, and because the lead character, Jonas, isn't in immediate physical danger or serious and constnat fear for his own life, throughout the majority of the story, it is easy to assess the society as a whole rather than being tranferred into the terrifying reality of the main character living or dying while disassociating emotionally from any potential attrocities or injustices.
However,
The Hunger Games doesn't offer that same kind of respite. The main characters are in a battle to survive on a daily basis. There is talk of starvation and hopelessness, entire communities on the brink of collapse because of lack of resources and basic necessity, where bread becomes a luxury item and to accept additional rations from the government means more and more chances that you could die brutally as a consequence. The major difference is that
Hunger Games is constantly high emotion, where the reader is constantly engaged and invested in the characters and unable to detach emotionally. That is one of the main elements that makes this book so good and so popular and why it was turned into a motion picture (though
The Giver is currently being developed for the screen as we speak). It's a nail biter with relatable characters struggling every day to stay alive, to learn skills that make them valuable and to change the dysfunctional society that keeps them all living in fear under the thumb of tyrrany.
Jonas, in
The Giver, really only makes one, or arguably two, meaningful relationships in his world, though his life is the communal ideal of external developmental support assets (adults actively engaged in supporting and helping the child, open communication, supporting the community, feeling safing,boundaries, high expectations, etc) . His deeper relationships with The Receiver (External Assets #3: Other healthy adult relationships) and with the baby Gabriel, change everything but only after he stops taking the pills that would control his urges and emotions. These relationships, though still somewhat shallowly explored, are where the real meaning of the story comes from and through which Jonas learns to question the way things are and learns who he is and what he must do. He yearns for that feeling of home and of connecting to other humans like he has been discouraged from doing his entire life.
He wants to develop internal assets, such as positive identity, positive values and social skills, like understanding and appreciating differences and sticking up for what you believe is right.
Hunger Games, on the other hand, has meaningful relationships from the get-go. Katniss has her little sister, Primrose, to look after and protect, a tenuous and questionably romantic relationship with Gale and the protective but disappointed relationship she has with her mother. Protecting the only family she has is a driving force for her actions, even when she rages inside to fight against injustices. Only when she is forced into the arena, forced to fight to the death which other children, watching alliances form and disolve with bloody intensity, being forced to question everyone's motives and who she can really trust, does she begin to form attachments to other people, like Rue and Peeta. Even then, she constantly questions her relationship with Peeta, whether she really has feelings for him or not. It's tumultuous, and painful, constantly developed and constantly in your face. She has no sense of safety or major communal support, and very few healthy relationships with adults. Her journey is about finding those assets, external as well as the same internal assets Jonas seeks. There is no ignoring those emotions and they make it easy to empathize with a character that feels so deeply and is forced to keep it hidden, because many of us feel the same way, even if we aren't fighting against a capitol force. It makes her actions seem much more reactionary out of primal necessity, where as Jonas's fight seems more cerebral.
Reading with guidance is always a good idea with young readers. If a tween is to read
Hunger Games, there can be no doubt that discussion needs to be had so that they can understand the content, and the violence, and understand the reason and right behind Katniss's fight, instead of simply believing it to be a story that relays that all authority is bad and must be fought against with brutality. They need to be able to analyze the setting and how it relates to their current situations and how things are different as well. They need to be able to truly analyze the book critically instead of accepting it for face value. This is the reason, I believe, that
The Giver is used in curriculum. The associated discussions and activities that will accompany the reading of this book help explain the context and content as well as how it applies to students' lives and teaches them how to analyze the text and the concepts.
I picture it like this in my head. Every story, as you read it, develops into a sort of map or storyboard in your head as the story progresses. Picture this map or storyboard on a transparency. The unguided reader takes that transparency and lays it over a map of their own world, points at the result and says "same". Whereas, the guided reader, after discussing all possible points and arguments for and against the book and its content, allows the reader to pull apart that construct, that transparency, and lay pieces of it over the map of their own world to where it applies, instead of using it like a blanket. That dissection allows each one of us to evaluate similarities and differences and come up with ideas on how to make our own worlds better places, to determine our own morals and ethics and those that are carefully constructed in the laws that govern our behaviors. Some might even say that this critical thinking is the beginning of social activism and responsibility.
