r/Hungergames

I feel like in the original trilogy of hunger games books Effie is much less likeable than in the movies, largely due to Elizabeth Banks phenomenal performance.
But I think making her so kind and likeable in Sunrise on the Reaping (which takes place 24 years before the original book), takes away from her character arc in the original books.

In the movies, I feel like Effie is likeable honestly from the get go, but in the books it takes a while for the reader to truly warm to her. It isn’t until some of her final sequences in Catching Fire that we truly can see she has grown to care for Katniss and Peeta, and can finally see the games for what they are, which she had never done before since all her tributes probably died early into their games and never won.

But her inclusion in Sunrise on the Reaping and her seeming to deeply care for Haymitch kinda defeats her character arc of a woman completely brainwashed by the Capitol who eventually lets the Capitol torture her rather than give up any information.

It almost feels like this decision has been made because of how likeable and popular of a character she was in the movies, rather than trying to be consistent with the books.

I don’t know about anyone else, but when she first was mentioned in the Sunrise of the Reaping book, I genuinely rolled my eyes so far back in my head because it could not have felt more like fan service to me. I was shocked when I went online and everyone was so happy she was there, because it just felt like she was included for the sole purpose of fans nutting themselves from excitement at her inclusion.

Maybe some of you guys have a different opinion. If so I would love to hear your takes!

I remember reading a comment about this somewhere on the subreddit, so I can't take all the credit for this, but I wanted to expand on it a bit more. (This is also my first ever post here after lurking for a while!)

In the cave, Katniss tells Peeta the story about getting Lady the goat for Prim, and claims that the day made her happy because she 'knew that goat would be a little gold mine' i.e. Lady was a valuable investment due to her milk, so buying the goat was a practical decision.

However, Peeta sees right through this and sarcastically comments 'Yes, of course I was referring to that, not the lasting joy you gave the sister you love so much you took her place in the reaping.'

Katniss may want to act like buying Lady for Prim was solely a practical choice, but it's blatantly obvious that she did it because she adores Prim and wanted to get her something that she absolutely knew Prim would be overjoyed with, seeing how much she loves animals. 'In a moment of complete giddiness, I bought a pink ribbon and tied it around her neck.' Doesn't seem practical, to spend money on something frivolous...

This interestingly parallels the situation that is going on between Katniss and Peeta in these scenes where she's looking after him - when Katniss hears that there can be two winners if they come from the same district, she churns out all these practical reasons why she should team up with Peeta:

'Peeta, who's now been wounded, is now my ally. Whatever doubts I've had about him dissipate because if either of us took the other's life now, we'd be pariahs when we returned to District 12. In fact, I know if I were watching, I'd loathe any tribute who didn't immediately ally with their district partner. Besides, it just makes sense to protect each other. And in my case - being one of the star-crossed lovers from District 12 - it's an absolute requirement if I want any more help from sympathetic sponsors.'

However, when she finds Peeta and sees that he's extremely wounded, she does note 'I've made myself more vulnerable than when I was alone. Tethered to the ground, on guard, with a very sick person to take care of. But I knew he was injured. And still I came after him. I'm just going to have to trust that whatever instinct sent me to find him was a good one.'

You could still argue that at this point she couldn't up and leave him without turning people against her, so she's still 'motivated by practicality', but that flies out of the window when the feast is announced - right after the goat story, in fact.

Katniss is putting herself at tremendous risk to go get the medicine for Peeta, willing to have to go against Cato, Clove, and Thresh (Foxface isn't much of a physical threat, but the other three definitely are) just to save his life.

This parallels buying Lady, when Lady was injured - 'Something, probably a dog, had mauled her shoulder and infection had set in. It was bad [...].', so it was clearly a risk to spend her money on something that very well could have completely failed if Prim and Asterid hadn't been able to save the goat's life.

Collins even includes direct comparison between Lady and Peeta:

"The goat has paid for itself. Several times over," I say in a superior tone.

'"Well, it wouldn't dare do anything else after you saved its life," says Peeta. "I intend to do the same thing."

"Really? What did you cost me again?" I ask.

"A lot of trouble. Don't worry. You'll get it all back," he says.

"You're not making sense," I say.

It's notable that Katniss has to ask what Peeta 'cost' her again, when it's very obvious and something that she already commented on. Despite his being a liability, she doesn't seem to see it as being something that 'costs' her in any way; she actually feels guilty that he's dying in her 'incompetent hands', blaming herself more.

'Cost' also blatantly alludes to spending money, which she took a gamble on with buying Lady because she knew Prim would be overjoyed, paralleling taking a gamble by risking being out in the open to take care of Peeta, not because of pure practicality - if that was what was driving her, she'd probably be more tempted to have not sought him out - but because she feels something for him ever since he threw her the bread.

Peeta is saying that in return for saving him, he'll pay it back like Lady did, i.e. making what Katniss is doing for him worth her while. The fact that Katniss is puzzled by this speaks volumes; she isn't saving him just so he can help her in return by making a good ally, which is practical, but because she genuinely wants him to live.

She doesn't even consider not going for the medicine, despite the danger.

'"What am I supposed to do? Sit here and watch you die?" I say. He must know that's not an option. That the audience would hate me. And frankly, I would hate myself, if I didn't even try.'

And then after the feast, when Peeta insists that she shouldn't be risking her life for his, we get this:

'"Maybe I did it for myself, Peeta, did you ever think of that? Maybe you aren't the only one who... who worries about... what it would be like if..." I fumble. I'm not as smooth with words as Peeta. And while I was talking, the idea of actually losing Peeta hit me again and I realized how much I don't want him to die. And it's not about the sponsors. And it's not about what will happen back home. And it's not just that I don't want to be alone. It's him. I do not want to lose the boy with the bread.'

All of the 'practical' reasons she gave when originally going to find him upon the rule change have been swept away, and Katniss is able to admit to herself her determination to save his life is solely because of him and her feelings for him.

Like buying Lady for Prim, her actions aren't motivated by pure weighing of advantages or disadvantages of doing something, but her feelings of love for the person considered. Prim and Peeta are the two people in the trilogy that she loves most and would risk anything for. Even in the first book where she hasn't realised the depths of her feelings towards Peeta, it's obvious that there is love there, which Collins displays wonderfully with the parallel.

Hi I’m new to the books. Is it ever said that there was a game with no winner? I’ve tried looking it up but I only get ai responses or completely unrelated answers from existing sites.