The Hunger Games

What a wonderful set of books and so very timely. My friend Andy summed up the emotional feel of the books quite well:
I did not enjoy a diet of one bitter pill after another, and felt somewhat cheated that all the tension only ever paid off with misery and more tension.

See, the games are quite horrifying and creatively so. 'Chosen' children from each district battle to the death, in an arena designed to enhance the excitement, because the entire affair is televised! Each book shows suceessively deeper human suffering, through the eyes of children. A natural reaction is to ask - why? Why, within the narrative, why to the question of evil in the world, why even read these depressing series of books? Well every tragedy must address the problem pain and the problem of evil. But didn’t we get enough of that in school? Andy again:
We didn't need to read tragedies in English class. We already had an entire class dedicated to tragedy and suffering. It was called "History".

I wholly agree and remember the many hours of forced reading in school. I am convinced now, that it was to make us hate literature :(

I think the “why” in this book is quite telling. Specifically, what kind of society heaps praise on such a horrifying spectacle? See, I don’t think the books are about the games, rather the games are the emotional hook, to interest you in the context – the society that produces the games.
The setting is a distopian America, where the "Federal" government exerts near complete control over the "districts" - each district specializes in what it produces and the majority of the output is taken and redistributed by the central government. Personal liberties are few, productive capital is virtually non-existant. As the series progresses, more of the economy and political structure of the country is revealed. The "redistribution" seems to mean that much of the goods produced in districts, end up in the capital, while the districts are left in various stages of near starvation and squalor. The only real prosperity is in government work (which a couple of the districts and many individuals have managed) or, of course, the lucky chance of winning the Hunger Games.

Ah yes, lest we forget the stated reason for the games: to punish the districts for rebellion. Not to mention, entertainment for the people of the Capital!
What is wrong with this society ends in poverty - and that always begins with property. It is not clear if the Capital owns everything, but they exercise direct control over seemingly everyone and everything. Suffice to say, it is a command/control economy, run by a dictator (President Snow). Without robust property rights, individuals make little improvements in the land (other than the slave masters command) and little capital is accumulated. That puts the breaks on any real economic growth. All this coupled with the powerful exploitation of the districts - we should not be surprised that everyone is hungry. Central planning and malinvestment that follows will always produce shortages. Price, is simply the most efficient tool for achieving highest marginal utility for scarce resources. But of course, that is a “free market” price.

These novels are half observation, half warning. To what extent does this dystopia already exist?
Increasingly the problems of our country are at root, the results of central planning and centralized administration. Finance, education, agriculture, healthcare, transportation, media – all in a crisis of having to sell a homogenous product, to a non-homogenous customer.

The poorest districts produce agriculture and coal – if they had property rights, those would be the richest districts. They produce energy for people and energy for machines, literally, the motive power behind all development. If you had to guess about the United States today, would you guess that the coal mining and agricultural areas were the most wealthy?

These books are an innoculation, against the tide of cultural force that says: "obey - even in the face of abject failure." Though I wouldn't force it on youngsters, though that would be the hieght of irony.