A Therapist's Take on The Hunger Games

I inhaled Suzanne Collin's trilogy this past week (new Precor elliptical machine + iPad = 220+ pages/hour), and wanted to share my thoughts about this iconic cultural series.

There WILL BE SPOILERS BELOW in order to talk about this in any depth.


First, two overall general comments:

1) The districts and the Capitol make a stark commentary on society.

The discrepancy between the wealth of the Capitol and the poor people in the districts is a major part of this book that struck me. The Capitol and its inhabitants are portrayed as living in gross excess while Katniss and others try to survive every day on meager rations.

Those in the Capitol only care about what they wear or how they look. Effie Trinket and Ceasar Flickerman become the key examples in the book.

2) The Hunger Games turn reality television into a monster.

In truth, the television shows that are popular today aren't all that far off from teenagers killing each other. You might scoff, but Fear Factor and Ninja Warrior among others are prime examples of our culture being fascinated with violence and grotesqueness. That everyone in the Capitol looks forward to these Games as the epitome of entertainment (which is reminiscent of gladiator games) should be revolting to the reader, and it is. Death for entertainment...let's film every second.


More specifically, though, I want to focus on Katniss and what I believe her character conveys to readers.

She's a SURVIVOR, but to her moral detriment.

She does whatever it takes to stay alive. I get that. She becomes a mother to Prim. She disobeys district laws to hunt. She listens to Haymitch. She saws the tracker jacker nest at her own peril. She's going to push the Capitol 's buttons with those nightlock berries.

Perhaps most troubling, though, is that she lies to Peeta and the district audience by making him and everyone think she truly loves him, when at best, her feelings are confused. I realize that she does this under duress, but I'm not fond of this aspect of the story for obvious reasons. What does this teach teens? 

She's COMPASSIONATE, but kick butt.

We see her volunteering for Prim, a truly self-sacrificing act. She's trying to sell baby clothes for money to feed her family. She sings to Rue and buries her in flowers. She won't leave Peeta to die, and quite literally risks her life to get him that medicine.

And was it just me, or was Katniss like a PowerPuff girl on crack? It seemed Peeta ended up maimed physically or emotionally in each book...and somehow Katniss brings him back. Definite role reversal from the strong, white knight rescuing the damsel in distress.

She's BELLA SWAN, but stronger. 

Come on! She's got hotties Gale and Peeta who love her, and she literally strings them along (and the reader, of course) until the very end of the series. She kisses each of them almost willy-nilly. I believe Collins conveys Katniss' confusion about her feelings for both of them very well, but I thought she took a cheap shot at Gale in Book 3 and jipped us a satisfactory conclusion of their relationship. (Notice I didn't say of the love triangle. I thought that was handled quite well....real or not real? :)

Let's Analyze:

If you've seen the movie version of the book, did you like it? Lacking the internal monologue for Katniss definitely left a hole in the movie. I found myself telling my husband little details I thought were important to the overall story but were left out...ah, the limitations of film. But Stanley Tucci was the most perfect Caesar Flickerman, as was Woody Harrelson's Haymitch. Awesome casting.

Friday Free Association Chain

The words are....

FIRST DAY OF SCHOOL.

RULES: First commenter free associates (writes the first word that comes to mind) with the above word. Second commenter free associates to the first commenter's word, and so on. Remember - the FIRST thing that comes to mind.

Go!

"How Will I Know If He Really Loves Me?"

Okay Whitney Houston fans! Alert your coworkers, family members, or whoever is sitting next to you in the coffee shop...you're about to belt out some lyrics!

 ♫  How will I know (Don't trust your feelings)
     How will I know
     How will I know (Love can be deceiving)
     How will I know
     How will I know if he really loves me   ♫

Whitney brings up a really good question, one that I was recently asked as a Marriage counselor.

How will you know? How will our character's know? How will we portray them "knowing?"

I heard it said that in you should be better off with your mate than without, which is a great rule to apply to a fledgling relationship. By that, I meant that your life is more enriched somehow. It's like Jack Nicholson in As Good as it Gets when he said to Helen Hunt, "You make me want to be a better man." (Which, ironically, he equates with telling her that he started taking his pills for OCD!)

This is more than just a feeling, which as Whitney said, can't be trusted. No, it's a measure of accumulated actions. And what is love, really, than an action?

I propose here on my blog that there is a poetic verse that speaks to these actions better than anything I could come up with on my own. This passage is often hailed and cited at marriages as the pinnacle example of marital love for which to strive.

This definition of love is full of actions. If you were to take any of those traits and determine the opposite of that behavior, you have all sorts of relationship problems arise, like:

abuse (is not easily angered)                         adultery (always trusts)
infidelity (is not self-seeking)                       silent treatment (is not rude)
telling lies (rejoices with the truth)               holds a grudge (keeps no records of wrongs)
pushes buttons (does not delight in evil)      walks away (always perseveres)
not standing up for you (always protects)    jealous-minded (does not envy)
they always come first (not self-seeking)     makes you feel stupid (is patient)

As you can see, not all of these are eye-opening deal-breakers. If your character gets even a hint or trace evidence in their partner of any of the above, it needs to be addressed ASAP, or they need to cut their losses and walk away. Because I promise, years of marriage will only magnify these problems.

If you have your character getting into a relationship with hopes to change someone, then hopefully you'll show their character arc as one who learns how futile an exercise this really is by the end of the book.

Let's Analyze

How did YOU know that your spouse was the one for you? If you're not married, does the above sound like good advice to give?

To Medicate or Not, That is the Question

I feel the need to call out a double-standard which many times finds its way (or doesn't, I should say) in fiction.

It's no big deal for a character to pop a pill to improve a failing kidney, pancreas, or heart or reduce headache or blood pressure or regain cartilage. Should they not take these pills, they might even be considered foolish or foolhardy with their health.

It's a bit more risque to have a character take drugs to improve fertility or decrease mental deterioration. Or what about a non-Christian person taking the morning-after pill, which so many deem a simple medical procedure these days?

But it seems that no character takes psychotropic drugs near so freely as the others. By this, I mean, anti-anxiety, anti-depressant, or anti-psychotic drugs.

Why is this the case? 

If you have a chemical imbalance in the pancreas, you have diabetes. It's no different for the brain, but people don't accept this.

When I'm with a client, ethically I'm bound to explain to them that research shows that clients can achieve more lasting change with therapy and medication. I usually refer them to a psychiatrist for a med evaluation.

Many times, clients can be reluctant for a variety of reasons to seek medication for a mental condition. The roots of this vary, but below are three common reasons I've come across:

1) Stigma associated with medication - only truly ill people need meds. To take meds would be openly admitting (to at least yourself if not to family and friends) that you couldn't conquer the problem on your own.

2) Staunch Christian background - hate to say it, but many Christian people believe that if they only pray harder or gave more to charity that God will heal them of their affliction. Not to say He can't, but this shouldn't exclude medication.

3) Bad medication experience for self/other loved one - people are far less likely to want to take medications if they know of one who took psychotropic meds and had a bad experience. Many meds come with serious side effects, or the dosage isn't right at first, and their loved one was "zombie-fied."

As a counselor, I try to take the stigma away from medication as much as possible. I believe fiction should do the same!

Let's Analyze

Have do you feel about medication for mental illness? What about having a character take meds in fiction?

Weekend Funnies: Psychological Olympics

Never underestimate the power of positive thinking!

Friday Free Association Chain

The word is....

BBQ.

RULES: First commenter free associates (writes the first word that comes to mind) with the above word. Second commenter free associates to the first commenter's word, and so on. Remember - the FIRST thing that comes to mind.

Go!

Top 8 Unknown Bizarre Mental Conditions

In no particular order....prepared to have your mind blown. None of these conditions are found in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, but would fall into a "Not Otherwise Specified" category of anxiety or adjustment disorders, most likely. I've included links to Wikipedia if you want to read more. (Source: Listverse).

8. Diogenes Syndrome

Diogenes was an ancient Greek philosopher, who lived in a wine barrel and promoted ideas of nihilism and animalism. Famously, when he was asked by Alexander the Great what he wanted most in the world, he replied, “For you to get out of my sunlight!”

Diogenes syndrome, also called Senile Squalor Disorder, is a condition characterised by extreme self neglect, reclusive tendencies, and compulsive hoarding, sometimes of animals. It is found mainly in old people and is associated with senile breakdown.

The syndrome is actually a misnomer since Diogenes lived an ascetic and transient life, and there are no sources to indicate that he neglected is own hygiene.

7. Paris Syndrome

Paris syndrome is a condition exclusive to Japanese tourists and nationals, which causes them to have a mental breakdown while in the famous city. Of the millions of Japanese tourists that visit the city every year, around a dozen suffer this illness and have to be returned to their home country.

The condition is basically a severe form of ‘culture shock.’ Polite Japanese tourists who come to the city are unable to separate their idyllic view of the city, seen in such films as Amelie, with the reality of a modern, bustling metropolis.

Japanese tourists who come into contact with, say, a rude French waiter, will be unable to argue back and be forced to bottle up their own anger which eventually leads to a full mental breakdown.

The Japanese embassy has a 24hr hotline for tourists suffering for severe culture shock, and can provide emergency hospital treatment if necessary.

6. Stendhal Syndrome

Stendhal Syndrome, also called Florence Syndrome, is a psychosomatic illness that causes rapid heartbeat, dizziness, confusion and even hallucinations when an individual is exposed to art, usually when the art is particularly ‘beautiful’ or a large amount of art is in a single place. The term can also be used to describe a similar reaction to a surfeit of choice in other circumstances, e.g. when confronted with immense beauty in the natural world.

It is named after the famous 19th century French author Stendhal who described his experience with the phenomenon during his 1817 visit to Florence, Italy in his book Naples and Florence: A Journey from Milan to Reggio.

5. Jerusalem Syndrome

The Jerusalem syndrome is the name given to a group of mental phenomena involving the presence of either religiously themed obsessive ideas, delusions or other psychosis-like experiences that are triggered by, or lead to, a visit to the city of Jerusalem. It is not endemic to one single religion or denomination, but has affected Jews and Christians of many different backgrounds.

The condition seems to emerge while in Jerusalem and causes psychotic delusions which tend to dissipate after a few weeks. Of all the people who have suffered this spontaneous psychosis, all have had a history of previous mental illness, or where deemed not to have been ‘well’ before coming to the city.

4. Capgras Delusion

The Capgras delusion is a rare disorder in which a person holds a delusional belief that an acquaintance, usually a spouse or other close family member, has been replaced by an identical looking impostor.

It is most common in patients with schizophrenia, although it occur in those with dementia, or after a brain injury.

The paranoia induced by this condition has made it a common tool in science fiction books and films, such as Invasion of the Body Snatchers, Total Recall and The Stepford Wives.

3. Fregoli Delusion

The exact opposite of the Capgras delusion - the Fregoli delusion, also called the Delusion of Doubles, is a rare disorder in which a person holds a delusional belief that different people are in fact a single person who changes appearance or is in disguise. 

The condition is named after the Italian actor Leopoldo Fregoli, who was known for his ability to make quick changes of appearance during his stage act.

It was first reported 1927 by two psychiatrists who discussed the case study of a 27 year old woman who believed that she was being persecuted by two actors whom she often went to see at the theatre. She believed that these people “pursued her closely, taking the form of people she knows or meets.”

2. Cotard Delusion

The Cotard delusion, also called the Walking Corpse Syndrome, is a rare psychiatric disorder in which a person holds a delusional belief that he or she is dead, does not exist, is putrefying or has lost their blood or internal organs. Rarely, it can include delusions of immortality.

It is named after Jules Cotard, a French neurologist who first described the condition, which he called “le délire de négation” (”negation delirium”), in a lecture in Paris in 1880.

1. Reduplicative Paramnesia

Reduplicative paramnesia is the delusional belief that a place or location has been duplicated, existing in two or more places simultaneously, or that it has been ‘relocated’ to another site. For example, a person may believe that they are in fact not in the hospital to which they were admitted, but an identical-looking hospital in a different part of the country, despite this being obviously false.

The term ‘reduplicative paramnesia’ was first used in 1903 by the Czechoslovakian neurologist Arnold Pick to describe a condition in a patient with suspected Alzheimer’s disease who insisted that she had been moved from Pick’s city clinic, to one she claimed looked identical but was in a familiar suburb. To explain the discrepancy she further claimed that Pick and the medical staff worked at both locations

Let's Analyze:

Do you think any of these might end up in your manuscripts?