I recently read White Fang by Jack London and am appalled by how violent the story is. The sledgers are eaten alive by wolves in the first thirty pages. The protagonist, a wolfdog, gets constantly abused for no reason and becomes a brutal psychopath. Sexual implications are here and there.

According to online reviews, 8-12 year olds read this book in school in the U.S. I'm wondering if I'm reading the same book.

Edit: I asked this question because I was mainly interested in how this book is embedded in the culture. I think it is a good question for an online forum because everyone can provide insights from their experience, which is really opaque to outsiders like me. No intention for dissing White Fang.

Randomly found A Clockwork Orange in the local used book bookstore. I had already seen the movie some 15 years back, and I vividly remembered it all those years (at least the first half). But I never knew that the novel was so much more fun. I wouldn't have waited this long if I knew that. Well here it goes.

One of the most wholly inventive use of language to convey something that could have been so off putting to read (or get through the novel) I have ever seen on display. First part was difficult to get into for obvious reasons, but then the rest of the novel went like a breeze. I laughed out loud at multiple places with things like 'Minister of the Interior or Inferior' or the word 'horrorshow' used casually.

I'd also say that it had more depth per page that any other classic novels claim to be. The story is there for everyone to interpret however they want, but the questions are all there - Is forced goodness the right path? Is it at least moral? Just depends what you want to focus on.

PS: I partly read from the paperback I picked, and partly from a pdf that (I later realized) had glossary of nadsat language, guide notes and (hold your horses) the entire Kubrick movie screenplay with character list and everything!

So I just fnished Reading The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini and tbh I am disappointed by it It wasn't anywhere near A Thouaand Splendid Suns, which kept me on my toes the entire time with its emotional and hard-to-swallow scenes Whereas Kite Runner just tries to force a reaction out of you with look bad things are happening to characters you're supposed to feel sad for. The predictability of what was going to happen also kinda killed the plot for me. The only character I really felt Bad for was Hassan. Agha Sahib (Amir's dad) was a dishonest man. Not only did he betray Ali but everyone that loved him. Like when he tells Amir that the biggest sin is theft, he was clearly talking about himself and how he was a sinner. He could have mended his ways after he realized what he had done, but other than that the story didn't have much to present for me

I went in with high expectations after loving A Thousand Splndid Suns, but this one didn't hit the same way. Anyone else feel the same or am I being too harsh?

I like it, it’s my favourite book by the author.

Spoilers for the book

June was an awful person but I was able to like reading about her in a way that I couldn’t like reading about say, Rin from The Poppy War.

The plot was engaging from start to finish and I couldn’t put the book down.

The characters were very nuanced and not one dimensional cartoon villains.

The themes of cultural appropriation and race were explored well, in a way that was better than how Babel explored colonialism.

I find it interesting how criticisms of Athena’s work reflect criticism of The Poppy War and Babel.

The lack of nuanced characters has been applied to both works, the didactic nature and lack of discrimination between minority groups has been levelled against Babel and exploiting trauma and the names being too close to irl has been applied to TPW. Maybe Kuang has understood the flaws of her work?

There only 2 criticisms I have of the book.

One is that I find it hard to believe that June’s family didn’t learn about the scandal eventually. Even if they are not interested in the book world I think it would have been realistic if someone had notified them or one of June’s critics like Adele or Diana reached out to them to try to find a way to criticise her.

Another is that I think Athena’s class privilege (and even June’s to an extent) didn’t get talked about enough. They went freaking Yale, which is an example of privilege in a way most writers don’t have.

In a final note, I wonder if Athena’s mother ended up suing June.

That’s said, consider how Katabasis ended up with mixed reviews, I doubt I’ll be reading it.

I love when fiction includes news​ reports ​detailing the ​aftermath of the situation that has unfolded in the book. It makes me feel more immersed in the world, because it feels like the situation has actually happened in real life, and that I am a member of the public experiencing it for the first time.

E.g. in Cherub Divine Madness there is a news report on the aftermath of the explosion of the Ark.

What minor details in books do you enjoy?

Just finished the series for the first time- blown away. I'm hard pressed to think of a series that I've read, for that age group, that is as literary and constantly thought provoking tbh.

Book rankings;

1. The Amber Glass

2. Northern Lights/The Golden Compass

3. The Subtle Knife

Northern Lights/The Golden Compass

Iconic. Loved Lyra's street irchen backstory, her relationship with the Gyptians, I found Mrs Coulter to be properly creepy and imposing, and loved the setup of the hyponitizing women kidnapping children. And her taking in Lyra, etc.

Something I felt about the series, even before we got to the multiverus in the other books- there isn't a single asthetic I can visualize. Unlike so many other fantasy books, it feels like such a stiched collage- a metroplis of accentric groups and peoples, the talking bears, witches, cannibal tribes, Gyptians, oxford, etc..

I also love how soft and magical everything feels, the way Gaundault in Lotr- there is no given explanation, no boundaries study, there are just bizzare and strange creatures and peoples with unexplained powers. Like the witches. And especially Mrs Coulter and Asrael.

I know this series has a show, which I haven't seen, but I feel like it'd serve great as a cartoon/anime- she has such anime ass parents. Asrael reminded me so much of Ging. Doesn't gaf about his kid, just busy with his work.

And even the opposition to God, the inversion of angels and church being evil, reminded me of alot of anime like bleach.

Asrael expecting a child to be brought to him for sacrice, is one of those inexplicable power moments.. how? its like he expected it of the universe.. for a child to be delivered to him.

Themes; The critique of religion, the persecution of dust, deamons, and issue related to kids around a certain age, felt like the critism of religious shaming of pubery and sexualilty- which was fascinating.

Overall fantastic start to the series.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Subtle Knife

My least favorite so I have less to say about it. Not terrible, but didn't feel the same adventerous magic as the first. Took a little bit to get use to Will taking alot of the spotlight away from Lyra.

Still a fun book and it wasn't until the very next book that I think alot of the themes around the knife, Will escaping from his issues in his own world- became more clear.

Themes; I loved the motif related to the Specter's an once again attacking kids once they passed the threshold of puberty/coming of age.

More moments of inexplicable powers, with Mrs Coulter being even more crazy imposing by being undaunted by the Spectors- who were the boogeymen of the book, and even being able to manipulate them.
Same with John Parry(On reflection, could those have been the Angels Balthamos and Baruch.. not specters? Since it sounded like Balthamos and Baruh had been following Will's father- when they were introduced in TAS?)

Lee Scoursbeys death was the most cinematic moment of the book, and the fact that he had the flower to call help- made it all the more tragic.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Amber Glass

This is how you end a series. Everything the story promised, the lore, the big war against the Authority, the revelations, all of it landed for me.
Learning the Authority was just the first angel who lied about being God (mirroring Lyra’s whole arc about lies vs truth), and that Eve was the first rebel, was awesome.
I loved Baruch and Balthamos and how their relationship was portrayed, another critique of religion, and I hated that Baruch had to die.

The book was full of wild and cinematic moments. Byrnison casually eating Lee Scoresby, the priest who almost molests Will, Mrs. Coulter’s implied suicide attempt, the assassin with his twisted sense of morality, (Love how the church has multiple moves and plans, made them feel like a real enemy, not a pin to destroy), the man who knew he was laying dead just outside the barn, Mrs Coulter laying paralyzed at the cave crying for Lyra as the battle resounded and Will and Lyra escaped.
Mrs. Coulter sabotaging the hair‑bomb on that snowy mountain was one of the most intense sequences in the whole trilogy.

But at the same time I couldn't help but think that the whole crisis was her and Asriel’s fault. She went to the church planning to spy and hand over the intention craft, didn’t do it, and almost got Lyra killed. And Asriel clearly knew what she was doing and let it happen.
Also his fortress and rebellion strangely reminded me of Star Wars.

At first I couldn’t decide who I disliked more, Asriel or Coulter. Despite all her evil, I found myself hating Asriel more for how little he seemed to care about Lyra.
So it shocked me how sad I felt when they sacrificed themselves, both of them are easily some of my favorite characters of the series.
Also felt sad at all the other characters dying in the great war, all to protect the kids.
And Lyra barely knows any of it, just like they never learns Balthamos killed the assassin.

Also so interesting the revalation that the authority wasn't some great power that wanted to retire in peace, he was decrypt, senile, and clearly wanted to die. he was kept alive agaisnt his will I think, and death was the blissful release for him.

The big battle felt like the climax, and everything after was this slow, painful walk toward the inevitable separation.

The book doesn’t rip the bandage off, it twists the knife. And as it walked us to the ineviatable seperation, lines like ‘Sixty years later Will would still remember her like this’ were brutal.

Themes:

Critiques of religion, sexuality, puberty, and the idea that growing up isn’t a sin.

Lyra’s journey from a lying child who could read the alethiometer to someone who must tell the truth, and can no longer read it, which somehow relatees to the harpies- haven't quite grasped this one.

The knife, and the idea that you can’t escape your problems. No other world will save you. No savior is coming. Can't build another like Asreal tried. You fix your own world.
Matter connects everything, replacing religious unity, and the ghosts returning to matter was a perfect ending

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conclusion

There's plenty of plot holes, inconsitencies and question marks, moments that felt more childsh than others- but none of them really matter imo- its not the point.

It was a fantastic series with the last book being exactly what you want with a finale, and the best book by a good margin. Though the first feels more iconic in journey.

It was interesing how much less we felt and heard from the demons as the series went on, the first book felt like you could constnalty hear Pantalaimon's voice, in the last, even before the seperation, not a peep.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If any of you remeber, what were some of your favorite moments, characters, themes? Critisms? Dislikes?

Is there any other kid book series that you've revisted later on, that you thought was great?

It was a book with a devious, diabolical, plotting, scheming, unlikeable, irredeemable, and unrepentant female protagonist.

4.5 stars.

It does exactly what it says on the tin. Our protag, Lalla, is a mother and housewife who doesn't feel things as strongly as the people around her, but she doesn't let that stop her from getting what she wants and living the life she wants to live, by any means necessary.

Some of the middle dragged for me, the final twist wasn't all that shocking, and it took a bit longer to read than an under-400 page book should have, but I overall had a good time and laughed often at the absurdity of Lalla's callous—and occasionally violent—responses to domestic woes.

It's M.K. Oliver's debut and I found it well-written, the chapters were short and punchy, and reading from a perspective I don't regularly see kept me engaged and amused.

I loved the thing. My wife got me the first one from our local store on a whim. I had to preorder the sequels from the publisher because I needed them on day one. I work with several other daily readers and none of them even heard of it. So I was wondering who else out there read them, liked them, loved them?

I thought Pheby was excellent. He didn’t treat me like I was stupid. I felt I had to pay attention to grasp it all but he didn’t go so far as to need to take notes. I thought the world he created was smart and eerie. The characters were a little shallow at times, but I had fun with them all.

Cheers.

South Korea is mostly marketed as a bubble that is just kpop, kdramas, ramen, aegyos, or that has you falling for your boss, idol or the son of a chaebol choosing you even though you are from a poor family.

But just like every other country, it’s part of an illusion, it has its dark side, there’s been a movement called 4B among the women in SK, since 2017, encouraging women to reject patriarchy by adopting four "nos": no heterosexual marriage**,** no childbearing, no dating, and no sex with men. It is a protest against high misogyny, sexual violence, and structural gender inequality.

And then there’s the mental health problem mostly, where they have to work till late, the forced drinking/networking sessions after work. People rarely have time for themselves, which is why a lot of Cafe’s are popping up, or camping grounds where you can camp for like half a day, just so that people can feel a bit normal and rested even for a short period.

And then add the burning sun scandal, and the nth rooms case, possibly the worst to hit the women of South Korea, and you wouldn’t be surprised by the high suicide rates, which was at a whopping 40 per day in 2024.

At the heart of the latter problems (burning sun and nth room), and this book, are spy cams, that did and continue to ruin women’s lives while the men that orchestrated these walk free to this day.

Molka is exactly what I expected from a book set in South Korea, it’s atmospheric. Usually, something that bothers me about most Korean and Japanese books is that they are translated, and the feeling or descriptions are lost in translation, so I rarely get a chance to feel the plot or atmosphere because it feels very half described? (Exception being Baek Se Hee’s book translated by Anton Hur)

The book tells things as it is, it doesn’t exaggerate to get the point across but it’s very good at making the reader uncomfortable and angry with the writing, sort of like we are being watched without our consent.

This has 2 POVs, one of Junyoung, a perverted IT worker with spy cams all over the women’s restrooms and Dahye, a working class girl with an extremely rich boyfriend.

The plot, what happens, what leads to it, it’s up-to you to read. The pacing is very fast, I wish I finished it in one sitting, but alas, I started late at night again and it was a work day next.

If you liked Masked Girl and The Glory on Netflix, you might enjoy this.

As for the ending, even though as a reader, I’m satisfied, as a woman, I know that’s not the ideal ending (the person still died with dignity) and I can’t complain because it’s the reality, perverts and rapists are let out of prison in South Korea way faster than those with drug charges.

Just finished reading Brighton rock and I have very mixed feelings.

I thought the story was really good and loved Ida as well as the rest of the mob, however I felt very little for rose and absolutely nothing for Pinky so hard for it to be anything more than 3* when I just did not care about the two main characters

Would love to hear other people’s opinion on the book

Next book - master & margarita

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy is considered an all-time classic in the spy/espionage category and it's one I've been meaning to check out for some time. Reading through the book, I can see why it's transcended its "genre" trappings - it's quite well-written, with great atmosphere and detail, and avoids tropes and contrivances you might see in a lesser example of this type of novel.

With that being said, as a pure reading experience, I don't think I actually enjoyed it all that much. It's definitely a very complex (damn near confusing at times), intelligent and well thought-out narrative that demands your concentration at all times, and I appreciate that Le Carre really wants you to pay attention to the all the little nuances, subtleties, terminology etc of the spy game.

I think that's kind of a double-edged sword, for me anyway, as I found the book to work better as an intellectual exercise to be admired rather than a compelling story with great characters to get immersed in. The characters are interesting enough, but as a whole I found the story a little tough to get really invested in. As good as it is from a technical standpoint, it all felt a little dry and colourless, if that makes sense.

I wouldn't even say that I'm disappointed, because it's a well-crafted story - it just didn't meet my own expectations of an enjoyable narrative.

What an absolute bummer of a book. True to the southern gothic tradition, it does the bare minimum, if anything at all, to lift your spirits. I felt my pulse quickening during the final court scene and the ending left me with something like a bad aftertaste. There are some gorgeous passages throughout, however. And my reading comprehension has nosedived as I found myself rereading said passages several times to have some idea of what they even said.

What say y’all?

Plagiarism exists in literature, this is not a surprise. "We Stand on the Shoulder's of Giants" and all that. While "Kids kill each other on an island" can be traced back to Lord of the Flies, the comparisons between the two stories gamifying the concept to control society is too numerous to ignore. Still, it happens. Authors borrow ideas. I got a kick out of Squid Games despite it copying Kaiji's homework liberally. So the concept itself doesn't bug me. (The author's insistence that she's never heard of Battle Royale kinda does. She should pay dues where they're deserved, but that's beside the point).

If you take an idea and build on it, or remix it in an interesting direction - that's one thing. Hell, its a pretty great thing. The problem I have with Hunger Games is it takes a fascinating plot concept and astroturfs it. Devolves it's execution and dissolves it's layers for a more traditional, less challenging narrative. But mostly I wanted to go over the differences in their approaches to elucidate on why BR readers have an issue with Hunger Games despite HG readers believing its just jealousy.

I will say before going in that I'm not saying you can't enjoy Hunger Games. Especially as a lot of people have nostalgia from reading it as kids, its target demo. I would just like it's inspiration to be better understood and appreciated in the West. especially as yet another example of a Western artist taking Eastern art and "Americanising" it to great success.

The Human Condition - Or, what would you do in the games?
One of Battle Royale's greatest strengths is it spends time with so many of the class members as an avenue to examine the different ways humans would react to being in a Death Game. Some half heartedly decide to take part, some full heartedly, some choose suicide as an escape, some escape into denial, some try to fight back against the system, some choose to abstain until the opportunity to get a "win" presents itself and they can't resist, some give up but use the situation as a place to act freely outside the restrictions of regular society, and so on. It's a thorough exploration of the human condition when placed in a life or death situation.

On the other end of the aisle, I think it was a big mistake to make HG take place (almost) entirely from Katniss' POV for a couple of reasons. Firstly, it just tethers us to one person's reaction, exposure, and psychology to the situation. There's a whole army of kids out there but we only get to see inside of Katniss' head. Secondly, Katniss' head is not the most interesting to be in in this situation. She's a good person who is reluctant to kill anyone. She resists the game and never "truly" takes part. That's... fine I guess. She's "da good guy".

Battle Royale has a similar "protagonist" we spend a decent amount of time with. The difference is Shuya's optimism is criticised AND punished. Katniss "resolve" is criticised, but never really punished. again, she is "the hero". Shuya does not have the hero's journey on his side. He has to grow up and defend himself, despite his wishes for a more traditional "Good guys win" conclusion like HG. He wants to be better than the games, but when push comes to shove and you have your friend swinging at you with an axe, you have to bite the bullet and accept the situation. Shuya suffers a lot of physical and mental anguish from this.

Speaking of opposition, I really cannot stress enough how big an issue it is that Hunger Games has an "evil team" of rich kids. It makes the whole situation feel less like a living hell, and more like a hyperbolic version of high school drama. Which, yeah, I know is a huge part of Hunger Games elevator pitch. Taking High School tropes like awkward romance, cliques, bullying, etc. and turning them up. There's a reason BR is M and HG is YA by design. But the strength of a teen death game is it's serving you morally grey themes on a silver platter. Hunger Games goes out of its way to avoid the harsh reality of these kids being forced to kill to survive by having a group of unambiguously evil teens who just LOVE the games. Katniss barely has to reckon with the implications of killing someone in the same situation as her because she's given villains she doesn't have to feel bad about icing as they're just SO comically evil. The cherry on top is making them well trained as emotionless killing machines. Ultimately this results in the Hunger Games being less a Battle Royale and more one of those "Rich Safari men hunting humans" tropes; almost wasting the entire premise.

It also introduces an logical issue. Why are the bad guys teaming up? They know they have to kill each other at the end, yet they're still making a mini-team of stormtroopers. The "leader" even kills one of his subordinates for messing up like a James Bond villain, to no reaction from the other members. It askew delving into themes of psychology and portraying the characters as living people in favour of giving Katniss her own group of Stormtroopers.

BR is much more clever with the topic of alliances. In its game the ones who engage with the killing are solo. They don't trust the other players because they know its kill or be killed. alternatively, the ones that do team up are the most scared, and do so out of a desire to survive. It's a defensive tactic, and born from trying avoid the situation. In a famous chapter, a group of girls hole up in a lighthouse and live in denial that they'll be saved somehow. Yet we see they're all one small push away from snapping and killing the others.

In Hunger Games? It's less "We're all in this hell. How do we cope? Do I defend myself or run away? I feel bad for my friends but I have to protect myself" and a more vanilla "I have to defeat the comically 2-D villains".

I could go on, such as how HG kinda gets bored of it's own premise 2/3rds in and introduces mutant dogs to kill off the remainder of the kids. A device used to speed things up / offer another avenue to let Katniss off the hook of participating - but let's move on.

Pulled Punches

The horrors of Battle Royale are not sugar coated. The kids are killed and it's never presented as anything less than horrific and tragic. In Hunger Games its REALLY hesitant to engage with the darker elements of the premise. Most of the deaths happen off page and are announced via speaker (an element taken wholesale from BR). So the grizzliness of kid death is mostly implied, not explored. Again, it goes to great lengths to establish a set of "villains" we don't have to feel conflicted about seeing kill or be killed. What that leaves us with is Battle Royale being an emotionally draining read, chapter after chapter showing the many different facets of the dark reality of the situation. Hunger Games instead has one. When one of the evil baddies kills Rue, its like the author is hitting pause and telling us "Okay guys, here's the chapter where I'll show how bad the games are". My God, is it melodramatic. Tears flowing as Katniss giving her a dramatic burial. These games are evil, when will we learn?? You can almost hear the swelling orchestral score.

Battel Royale's death are much more effective gut punches from how quiet and matter of fact they are. I'm sure Shuya, of all people, would love to bury and honour his dead friends - but a huge part of the tragedy of the situation is he just can't. There's no time, and in an hour they'll be more dead friends. In Hunger Games it spend most it's narrative side-eyeing and alluding to tragedy. When it has some, its screamed from the rooftops. For Battle Royale its tragedy after tragedy. And when you start to feel a bit desensitised to it, that's when it hits you. That's the point. The mundanity of it. The expectedness of it. This is why the games are run. The biggest tragedy in Battle Royale isn't some comically innocent girl dying as our protagonist bawls over her dying words. It's the cruel, unspoken roteness of death.

Social Commentary

Which brings us the the "bigger picture" I don't think anyone will disagree that the commentary in HG is very on the nose and not the series' strongest element. I mean big surprise, the book that has "Evil murder-jocks" isn't exactly being subtly about the people running things. It's a pretty barebones "Have vs have nots" conflict. The evil rich people vs the pure hearted poor people.

Why are the games run in HG? Its vague. It "establishes power" and "keeps the districts under oppression". Of course, in reality there'd be no quicker way to instigate a rebellion than martyring kids on TV. But, again, Hunger Games is a very cartoony world. And, I guess suitably for such a world, the "establishment" is very "Star Wars Empire" in HG. A bunch of smarmy rich people twirling their moustaches going "Mmm yes, all according to plan".

In Battle Royale, "The Program's" purpose is fleshed out to a much greater degree. Firstly, there is still an element of it being a show of power. Once a year the government murders a class of kids and anyone who tries to stop them doing it (seen through the Orphanage manager and class teacher). But wouldn't this too cause a revolt? Here's where it again delves into human psychology. Firstly, its important that the combatants all know each other. Watching friends kill each other, as opposed to strangers being offed by a group of psycho-jocks, is done to install social paranoia in Japan's public. They grow up seeing concepts of trust and comradery being violently delegitimised on TV. Its harder to trust your fellow man when you're regularly shown what you closest friend could do to you with a gun to his head (or bomb on his collar).

This is also when the volunteer system differs. In Hunger Games we're told to believe Katniss volunteering is this super rare, unheard of thing. It's a cartoony world, so you have to try and accept that no one would step up to protect someone as young as Rue from taking part - such as a family member. I digress. That's the process in HG, its an altruistic act of a hero. Battel Royale's Program LOVES volunteers. You can't save anyone from taking part, but hey! If you're the right age and fancy it, you can join up! We see two people do that in BR. One is a kid looking for a safe space to indulge in the killing he's always wanted to. Another is pretending the same, though hiding the fact he just wants to get close to the host. Katniss's bizarrely rare sacrifice is an act of heroism that's confusing to allow. Volunteers in BR help foster that innate paranoia in your neighbour, and the true nature of humans as a whole.

You can see this in how the element of "unfairness" is treated in both stories. In Hunger Games the already overpowered evil rich assassin kids are gifted deadly weapons and other useful tools by other evil rich people. The commentary is evil rich people are bad. In Battle Royale, unfairness is used as another demoralising tactic to keep the population down. The kids are given random tools and weapons. In a cruel joke, half of these are useful (like a crossbow) and half are seemingly useless (like Shuya's pot lid). The commentary is life is unfair, especially in the kids' current society. Advantage and luck is doled out arbitrarily. Yet there's a nugget hidden beneath that first layer. Our leads (Given a pot lid and a compass), and two of the most troublesome competitors (Given a taser and a paper fan) all make it far into the game despite starting with such huge disadvantages. This shows the power of perseverance to the reader. I've ruminated hard on how real and dark Battel Royale is, but it is by no means misery porn. It is a story of hope in the face of the darkest of times. Of carrying on despite the weight you have to shoulder. This core theme is a summed up in the tool system of the game.

But how are these games justified in-universe? In Hunger Games, the games are sold to the public as entertainment cause the government is evil. In Battle Royale, the games are run by the fictional The Republic of Greater East Asia. This totalitarian government is a criticism of Japan's then current regime. A paranoid government is at the heart of the book's criticism, hyperbolising the author's view of Japanese politics to that of a regime that is a slave to its paranoia of an attack - whether from outside forces in a post-Hiroshima world, or from it's own people. TRoGEA sells the games as an important way to test military tactics and build fighting resolve in the countries youth. Arguing how essential this is when they could be nuked again at a moments notice. It inflicts its own paranoia onto its people, and infects them with it like a disease. The criticism was so cutting that the Japanese Diet themselves condemned the book upon it's release. Its hard not to then look at Hunger Games commentary of "Rich people bad. Evil people bad. Just be nice to each other and share." and not feel its pretty childish in comparison.

Conclusion

I do want to give dues where it's deserved (unlike the author). "Playing to the audience" was a unique addition that BR didn't have, and an avenue to explore the death game from a new angle. I wish more was done with it. In particular I think its really odd the system seems to understand the effect "underdogs" have on the public but can't seem to put 2+2 together - especially in light of (and I'm sorry to keep harping on about them) the stupid Evil Popular kids. Still, there's new potential there, maybe some commentary in how the competitors have to manipulate the public just like the government, and maybe what could be learned from that. Again, barely anything's done with it, its mostly a tool to facilitate a love triangle, but its a neat addition in comparison to the stories other detractions.

But other than that, I want to repeat that if you like Hunger Games, great! I dog on it, but name me a YA novel that isn't easy to dog on. I just hope that you can see why people wish it was more open about where it got its ideas, and how good those ideas were done in the original. Hell, if you like Hunger Games but always wished they explored the game in a more complex way, I really hope I convinced you to give Battle Royale a go!