9/9/2012 c1 Guest
Yes the books were a little harsh but this story ment the the poor children still had to fight to the death. in the books the rebelion happened for a reason to let inicont lives live not fight to the death every year. yes many were killeed in the rebellion but many more would have been killed in later hunger games in even bloodyer hunger games!

9/6/2012 c1 1Helpless Romantic01
I can see your reasoning. I can also relate. Catching Fire and Mockingjay were definately NOT my favorite books. I know it was niave to hope for some closure, some small measure of relief after the series ended, but I did. Peeta, my favorite character, was kidnapped and hijacked by the Capitol. Katniss was driven WAAAAAAAY past insanity because of everything she'd expirenced. Gale was ultimately the cause of my poor Prim's death. Finnick died and Annie was left alone with a baby to raise.

So... I can see how you'd view death as the better alternative, but if everything happened this way, The Games would still be going on. Children would still be dying for a crime they didn't commit. I agree that the way the author portrayed the events were harsh, but they were real. If The Hunger Games were a real life event, it wouldn't turn out with rainbows and sunshine. Happily Ever After is a far too distant dream that no one dares to have. It's ugly in some places. It hurts the empathetic heart in others, but so is life. So is war.

I'd love to read more from you. Your writing style is wonderfully refreshing.

Until next time,
Deni