American Freedom and The Hunger Games The Hunger Games, by Suzanne Collins, is a popular young adult book series filled with symbolism and meaning. There are many lessons one can take from the book as well as correlations that can be made between the book series and the story of American freedom. Furthermore, parallels can be made between The Hunger Games book trilogy and the American Reconstruction era, the fight for a living wage in the Progressive Era, the institution of slavery in the south, and the ultimate fight for freedom, the Civil War. The setting for The Hunger Games is a futuristic North America now called Panem. The country is separated into 13 districts, however, the 13th district was “annihilated” during a rebellious
…show more content…
A man wanted the “ability to protect one’s wife and children” with a living wage (144-145). In The Hunger Games, a man working in the coal mines could not provide comfortably for his family. A living wage was not possible, and, therefore, families went without food and lived in poverty. Consequently, the children had to sign up to receive flour and oil to make bread. Because of this situation, the black market, in The Hunger Games, was an important place to barter for needed items. Therefore, the black market was a place of freedom for the people because it was a place they could make the rules without interference from the Capitol. Furthermore, it was a way to provide for their families. In comparison, the market in America had much the same role. “The market… was the true realm of freedom: ‘the liberty to buy and sell, and mend and make, where, when, and how we please,’ without interference by the state” (p. …show more content…
Slaves worked the fields, cleaned the houses, and took care of the children. Therefore, slave owners did very little work but enjoyed the production of slavery. “To southern whites, it (freedom) conveyed mastership- the power to do ‘as they pleased with other men, and the product of other men’s labor:’” (97). This created a way of life in the south that made the slaves “the ‘cornerstone’ of the Confederacy” (95). The slaves were not able to see the fruits of their labor; nor did the slaves have rights of their own. According to Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, who made the famous Dred Scott decision, blacks could not be citizens because it was reserved to whites (75). In much the same way, the people of the districts were the slaves of the Capital. The people worked for the Capital, and almost all production was sent there. Therefore, the Capital was able to live off the districts without having to provide much for themselves. The people of the districts could not do anything about it, and, therefore, did not have rights just as the slaves in the
A man wanted the “ability to protect one’s wife and children” with a living wage (144-145). In The Hunger Games, a man working in the coal mines could not provide comfortably for his family. A living wage was not possible, and, therefore, families went without food and lived in poverty. Consequently, the children had to sign up to receive flour and oil to make bread. Because of this situation, the black market, in The Hunger Games, was an important place to barter for needed items. Therefore, the black market was a place of freedom for the people because it was a place they could make the rules without interference from the Capitol. Furthermore, it was a way to provide for their families. In comparison, the market in America had much the same role. “The market… was the true realm of freedom: ‘the liberty to buy and sell, and mend and make, where, when, and how we please,’ without interference by the state” (p. …show more content…
Slaves worked the fields, cleaned the houses, and took care of the children. Therefore, slave owners did very little work but enjoyed the production of slavery. “To southern whites, it (freedom) conveyed mastership- the power to do ‘as they pleased with other men, and the product of other men’s labor:’” (97). This created a way of life in the south that made the slaves “the ‘cornerstone’ of the Confederacy” (95). The slaves were not able to see the fruits of their labor; nor did the slaves have rights of their own. According to Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, who made the famous Dred Scott decision, blacks could not be citizens because it was reserved to whites (75). In much the same way, the people of the districts were the slaves of the Capital. The people worked for the Capital, and almost all production was sent there. Therefore, the Capital was able to live off the districts without having to provide much for themselves. The people of the districts could not do anything about it, and, therefore, did not have rights just as the slaves in the