I'm on holiday...

[attack_laurel]

But really, this article about The Hunger Games spoke to me on a deep level. And I would definitely choose Alice from Resident Evil (no matter how silly the movies are) over Katniss if the zombies were coming. Hell, I'd want Rayne even more.  I also do not like Twilight or THG, and it's an instinctive dislike; I don't want to read a book with

Comments

[hlwoods]

Thank you for the link. It was thought provoking ... I found the author explaining why I had so strongly disliked the books. (I disliked them, but could't put my finger on why. Agen)cy is an interesting concept.)

[attack_laurel]

Isn't it interesting? I also didn't like the books (actually, the teasers, blurbs, and quotes), so didn't read them, which some would say negates my argument, but I think the fact that I rejected them with a feeling that I wouldn't enjoy them would be my point. These books were not for me. They weren't written for people like me, and people like me are not going to like them or identify with the characters.

Which is not to say the books and films are *bad*, just that the linked post points out what may not be obvious, even for those of us who didn't like them. Until I read the post, I didn't consciously think about them, and I self-identify as a feminist. :)

"Twilight" is a little easier to deconstruct, but there is an interesting dichotomy between the people that think watching someone while they sleep and are unaware of (and have not given permission) being watched is madly romantic and freaking terrifying. And that what might be appealing in fiction is not desirable in real life.

[hlwoods]

I read a fair chunk of Enid Blyton growing up, including her Famous Five series. Which included three siblings and a cousin George (because she hated the name Georgina), and the dog makes five.

What always struck me as amusing was that Anne, who was the youngest, enjoyed playing house and keeping track of domestic chores, while George, who was older, was very much an active character, so that girls could choose who they preferred.

And dammit, I hadn't realized the first book was published in '42. Sigh. Such a long time ago.

[chocolatepot]

I thought it was an interesting article, but in the end I can't get on board with it. The idea that women prefer Katniss over Alice in general doesn't make sense to me, because it's predicated on all the women and girls who like Katniss having seen Resident Evil, which IME isn't true, and then on women not getting wish-fulfillment from super-heroes, which again isn't true IME. And I'm a little grossed out by the tone in several paragraphs that he has all the secrets and the women who identify with Katniss or see her as a decent female character for younger girls to be into are deluded and need him to straighten them out, and the line "women still secretly believe they are inferior to men".

Although I'm strongly prejudiced against him because of the "hipsters on food stamps" articles. If someone can't see that my generation's problem finding jobs is at least as much the fault of the economy as our strange insistence on going to college for all sorts of majors, they have some major blinders when it comes to looking at society in

[my_stitching]

Sorry, but I think both of the articles are a big steaming pile of bullshit. ;) The author claims to have read the books, but then says things that happened in the movie but that happened much differently in the book. And the author also says things that may be partially right in the first book but are totally wrong in the second two books

[my_stitching]

I've been thinking about this since my post and I wanted to clarify why I felt the author was full of it. As I said previously, I have read all three of the books three times. I know this story backwards and forwards. And that person is so full of their own hubris they obviously decided what the book said either without bothering to really read it or made up their argument before reading and looked for things that might make it fit. We all know some SCA folks that document their research like that

[ladyaneira]

Ya, the movie was a very . . . condensed version of the book. They got most of the *action* into the movie, but very little of the social critique or insight into the characters. Movie definitely fell flat.

[standgale]

Definitely condensed - I read the books first, and I kind of wish I'd watched it, then read it, then watched it again, because I'd like to see how my perception of the story changed and how the story appeared with just the movie. It's hard to see, having read the books first, how anyone who hadn't read the books even understood the movie since there was so much background and explanations and REASONS for things that couldn't fit into the movie.

cathgrace

[anonymous]

Happy Christmas Laura! We loved getting your card, and we miss you both loads and loads, I wish I could come and sit with you and embroider some more!

Catherine

Re: cathgrace

[attack_laurel]

Same to you! :)

[jillwheezul]

I thought that the female lead in both the Twilight series and Hunger Games seemed to be too childlike to be engaging to someone with my life experience. I found them boring.

In contrast though, I loved the character development in Lisbeth Salander in "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo". I'd hire her if I had some serious stuff going down. But then I don't tend to favor lawful good characters in fiction at any rate - usually the story line motivation is flat and doesn't make for good plot tension IMHO. I did like how the latest Snow White donned her own armor and fought in the latest movie iteration of that fairy tale.