maritteknewtheenemy

[maritteknewtheenemy]

everything that gets "revised" about the games in sunrise on the reaping is less interesting than what we can infer from the original series. which is a big issue if your book is about propaganda. haymitch's story as we inferred from the trilogy is as follows: a sixteen year old kid randomly gets chosen for a nightmare death match, is lucky enough to find an arena loophole and gets punished ruthlessly for it, and then goes into substance abuse and retreats from society as he has to watch two kids from his home die every year for 23 years.

all of that is so much more interesting than a 16 year old who is chosen to go into the arena after an act of rebellion, who gets chosen to be an agent of the rebellion before entering the arena for no reason, who personally stands up to and defies the fascist leader, who somehow does not die a brutal death in the arena as soon as possible because of said defiance (so that snow can kill his girlfriend in front of him? each collaborator dies brutally but for some reason haymitch lives and it makes no sense). and then descending into madness and alcoholism explicitly and immediately because your puppy love girlfriend dies and you can't handle it.

also collins took one of the most interesting and multifaceted characters of the trilogy and was so afraid of exploring negative qualities. haymitch is known for his mean streak, his intelligence, and his deep-rooted care. none of that is seen here. in fact, he reads (and reads himself) as dumb, his intelligence eclipsed by his rebellious girlfriend, who teaches him big words and that maybe the world could be better. he's never mean - the haymitch of sunrise on the reaping would never tell 17 year-old katniss "you could live a hundred lifetimes and not deserve that boy." in the arena, everything he does is out of kindness for the weakest tributes. every alliance and action pure, when it could have been really interesting to navigate what being placed in a "49 other kids or me" death trap does to your psyche in the moment.

[maritteknewtheenemy]

She worked SO HARD in sotr to make sure no one in the seam was indigenous coded, going so far as to pretty much leave out any physical descriptions altogether, just so Hollywood could cast a white actor in Haymitch's role. She has quietly and loudly retconned so much but especially the indigenous coding in the seam, and consistently gives characters described with dark skin the most horrific endings or erases them altogether- a trend which is consistent throughout all of her works. Louella isn't meant to be an allegory for MMIW, and if she was the handling of it was done so incredibly poorly. Seriously, look at how many times LouLou is described as animalistic or beastly and tell me with a straight face she's meant to be good indigenous rep. Look at how Haymitch doesn't ever tell Louella's family what really happened and actively preventing them from getting any kind of closure, despite being close/friendly with them, having no reason not to, and it having no personal cost to him. Supposedly he loved Louella enough for her to forever be his sweetheart and yet he doesn't think her family whom she loved and cared about and who loved her and knew something was wrong deserve to know the truth that he is privy to. Tell me that was an intentional and well written part of the supposed allegory. Jfc

you guys cannot seriously believe that Suzanne Collins cares enough about indigenous people to write an allegory for missing and murdered indigenous women with Louella. she has proved for almost two decades that she doesn’t care about native issues and does little to no research for her writing, just relies on lazy stereotypes. give me a break

[maritteknewtheenemy]

Maysilee and Prim being reaped is symbolic.

Maysilee, one of the wealthiest girls in the district, who didn't have to worry about the tesserae and had her name in the bowl only a few times was reaped. Prim, a 12-year-old who only had her name in the bowl once was reaped. The Donners and the Everdeens were sure their girls were safe. They did everything they could to ensure their odds of being reaped were as low as possible, right? But that's the thing—no one is safe from the Hunger Games. Not the richest girl in town, or a 12-year-old with her name in once.

[maritteknewtheenemy]

It seems like your internal misogyny is showing…

Hi bad faith anon! Super cool of you to leave this here without any sort of meaningful attempt to have a discussion or example of this so called misogyny, but okay, I’ll bite. What makes me so misogynistic? I’ll assume this is about my outspoken dislike for Lenore Dove (because it’s always about Lenore fucking Dove.)

I'm only going to say this once, so listen closely (this goes to all the other bad faith anons in my inbox too, you're not each getting a response). Disliking Lenore Dove- or any other female character- is not inherently misogynistic. In fact, there's a real problem in pretending any character is above criticism just because she's female. Disliking a female character 'for no reason' or because they 'have a bad vibe' is misogyny. Disliking a female character just because she's female is misogyny. Disliking a female character just for being good looking is misogyny. Disliking a female character for 'getting in the way' of a ship or dumping your favourite character is misogyny. none of these reasons have any bearing on why I dislike Lenore Dove.

Disliking a female character because she is poorly written, two dimensional character, is not misogyny. I dislike Lenore Dove because she has no characterisation beyond being a reckless wannabe 'rebel' and being Haymitch's perfect, infallible girlfriend. Disliking a female character because the narrative refuses to acknowledge any of their flaws or give them any in the first place is not misogyny. I dislike Lenore Dove because she falls into this trap. Haymitch can't fathom her being anything but perfect, and sure you could argue then that it's just his narration that makes her this way, but it's pretty clear that Suzanne Collin's wanted Lenore Dove to be a martyred, saintlike figure who was so noble and tragic and unproblematic in any way. Which makes Lenore boring at best and insufferable at worst.

Disliking a female character for perpetuating negative stereotypes is not misogyny, especially when those stereotypes themselves are misogynistic in nature. Unfortunately, Lenore Dove manages to somehow fit the manic pixie dream girl stereotype and the dead wife trope both within the span of one book, which sucks for her but doesn't endear me to her in the slightest. Google 'manic pixie dream girl stereotype' and this is the first thing that pops up: "The Manic Pixie Dream Girl is a female character trope, often seen in stories written or directed by men, where a quirky, seemingly "different" woman serves primarily as a catalyst for the male protagonist's growth and self-discovery, rather than having her own agency or development." This definition fits Lenore Dove to the letter. She only exists to explain to Haymitch why the capitol is bad and evil, the only reason he needs to get home is to see her, the only reason he gets reaped is because he tries to save her. The epilogue would have us believe the only reason Haymitch does anything worthwhile with the rest of his life, making her the ultimate culmination for any sort of character 'growth'. Lenore Dove fulfils the 'not like other girls' part of the trope by being Covey, inherently separating herself from the rest of the district, neither a poor seam worker or a snooty merchant, but something 'special' and 'different' and 'better'. She doesn't work in the mines or town- she plays the piano! She's pretty without makeup! She wears dresses but not the way Maysile wears dresses, she's not that shallow as to care about her looks! She'd never keep a canary in a cage like evil Maysilee (wait until she finds out what they do to canaries in the coal mines). Then she dies via her untimely gumdrop demise, and because Suzanne Collins spent the whole book establishing that she's perfect and Haymitch's entire world revolves around her, her death is the reason he devolves into alcoholism but she also ultimately becomes the reason he rejoins the rebellion so he can fulfil his promise to her. This cements the two things needed for a male character suffering from the dead wife trope: an explanation for their coldness and descent into substance abuse, and a reason for their later 'redemption'. Lenore Dove robs Haymitch of his agency, but she only ever existed as a plot device to further his story and growth (if you could call Haymitch's progressive character assassination in this book 'growth').

Personally anon, I find the way Suzanne Collins wrote Lenore Dove and the choices she made with her character to be misogynistic and deserving of criticism, criticism which I have contributed to. But disliking a character who only exists to further a man's story and who is nothing but a poorly written amalgamation of various misogynistic tropes is not misogynistic, it's just part of reading critically and not putting Suzanne Collin's work on a pedestal just because she's the one who wrote it. If Lenore Dove existed in a popular fanfic, the fandom would hate her. She'd be ripped to shreds. No one would be crying 'misogyny' then, but because Suzanne Collin's wrote her and she's vaguely similar in appearance to Lucy Grey, apparently Lenore Dove criticism is an unfathomable sin.

I would have LOVED Lenore Dove if she was written better. She had great potential, but the execution of her character was straight up horrendous and she ended up being insufferable to read and impossible to care about.

Misogyny is a huge issue in society and in media, including in fandom spaces. It's dangerous and in the real world it kills people. This is a pretty loaded thing to leave in someones inbox just because they don't like a character that you do. Maybe think about that. It's free to keep your mouth shut, just like it's free to block tags and keep scrolling if you're not mature enough to have an adult conversation about a piece of media or a character you enjoy and be able to disagree constructively. But don't drop into a strangers inbox, hiding behind the anonymous button, and leave bad faith comments like this. Either be open to a conversation, willing to explain your side and your viewpoints without resorting to insults or callouts, or just move on. Like I said, I'm only saying all this once and will not respond to any other anons like this, so don't waste your time typing them out.

For a story that tells you straight up on the first page that it's about the dangers of propaganda and groupthink a lot of this fandom takes one idea or one interpretation of a character and treats it like gospel that must be defended at all costs. Crying misogyny to anyone who dislikes Lenore Dove seems to like seems to be the weapon of choice of her defenders, and I'm begging y'all to not do that. There's a difference between disliking Lenore Dove because of how she's written and disliking Lenore Dove because she's a girl, and it's dangerous to conflate the two. Words mean things. Misogyny is a huge problem. If you're calling out misogyny, make sure you're actually calling out misogyny, otherwise the word is going to lose all meaning and it will be a lot harder to call out real misogyny when you see it.

Yes, I dislike Lenore Dove and always will. No, this does not make me a misogynist. Learn what misogyny actually is before you start saying stuff like this to strangers on the internet who just happened to dislike a character you enjoy.

[maritteknewtheenemy]

Ppl say that Lenore Dove criticism is misogyny but if Haymitch were female and she were male ppl would hate on Suzanne for making him "too dependant." on the opposite gender. People don't criticize her for bc of her sex..They criticize the writing.

Some people think any criticism of a female character (especially one they like!) is misogyny which is...so misguided and untrue. Disliking a female character because they're female or because they're pretty or because they get in the way of a ship is misogyny. Disliking a female character because she's flat and two dimensional, or because the narrative refuses to give her flaws/acknowledge her flaws, or because she exists only to further the character development of a man isn't misogyny, it's disliking a badly written character. In fact, writing female characters like that *cough, Lenore Dove, cough* actually shows some internalised misogyny on the part of the author in my opinion.

But yeah anon, you hit the nail on the head with this one.

[maritteknewtheenemy]

I will say one of that saddest, most fucked up parts of sotr is when Haymitch goes back to District 12 and the McCoys are trying to corner him because they obviously have questions, and he dodges their attempts. It was obvious to Haymitch and Mags and Maysilee immediately that Lou Lou wasn't Louella. Her behaviour at the interview was enough for the Capitol citizens to realize she wasn't quite right. So District 12? Her family? They knew. They absolutely knew that something terrible had happened to their little girl before she even got to the arena, they just didn't know what. And given the end of the book and the epilogue it's quite possible Haymitch was never stable enough to tell them. The McCoys may well have died without ever knowing what happened to their little girl.

[maritteknewtheenemy]

thank you for respecting me enough to tag it as anti lenore dove, even if you don’t have to, you don’t owe me anything afterall , but thank you, i appreciate it very much. i will admit i’m new to tumblr and it didn’t even cross my mind that i could mute the anti sotr tag instead so i’m sorry about that, that was my fault. i will be making sure to do so!

i had just seen a couple of anti lenore dove opinions here and on twitter and i impulsively decided to reply here to share my own opinion because i really like the character and wanted to share why i have this different view on her. i wasn’t trying to change your mind whatsoever and apologize if i came off strong, (i guess i like her because we share the same impulsive trait lol)

really appreciate you for posting the asks though and engaging with me, and willing to have this conversation!!! no bad blood whatsoever, this is fiction after-all!

Never apologize for strong opinions, this is the strong opinions website. Like I said, I enjoyed our debate very much, and I can see why you like her, just like you can see why I don’t.

I get being new to Tumblr, I was once too. The main thing to remember is that you are responsible for curating the experience you want. Enjoy the rest of your fandom journey!

[maritteknewtheenemy]

sejanus wasn’t more self aware than lenore dove whatsoever though, he ran into the arena & when he got punished for it by becoming a peacekeeper, he went to work with the rebels. one could argue that spraying graffiti on a wall and comforting a grieving mother is nowhere near the same level as working with the rebels. if sejanus didn’t have the family he had and somehow found his way into that arena, when they got out he & his family would’ve been killed instantly. he wasn’t “protecting” his family they just had plot armor, just like lenore dove had plot armor in the reaping scene for the sake of it. and comparing her to teenager snow is still a mischaracterization in my eyes, especially when the poor girl did absolutely nothing that was aiming to hurt anyone else or for her own benefit whatsoever😭 all her actions had impulsively got HER into trouble not the ones around her (if we ignore the reaping scene, which one could also argue that haymitch didn’t HAVE to get up to go to her, and neither did she ask him to do so)

i appreciate you willing to have a conversation about this though, and i’m glad you can see both sides (even if we disagree) but could you, please, start censoring her name when you talk badly about her 🥲 i know we’ll never agree on her character, but she happens to be a character i love and i don’t reallyyyyy enjoy seeing slander on her when i want to search on her tag. (also this is not me trying to be mean whatsoever, i just hope you understand) maybe tagging it antilenoredove would be better instead? thank you!

I appreciate you also being able to have a conversation and not resorting to personal attacks, it’s more than I’ve come to expect from a lot of the fandom, and this sort of dialogue is actually fun for me. I do so enjoy a debate!

You do make some really good points about Sejanus, and maybe he did have plot armour, but at least when he was working with the rebels he only told his supposed best friend he trusted implicitly instead of directly telling the whole district. It’s about the ability to be subtle for me, y’know?

Again we really don’t have any proof that none of Lenore’s actions had no malicious intent, we really don’t, and yeah she lucked out in that Haymitch ended up the only collateral damage but that in itself was a small miracle. At some point willful ignorance and carelessness and a refusal to learn from past mistakes does become malicious, and Lenore Dove in canon seems to be at that level.

I suppose I could tag my posts anti Lenore Dove, but my viewpoint is this. I already have my posts tagged with anti sunrise on the reaping. Anybody who doesn’t have any interest in seeing anything remotely negative about the book should have that tag blocked, and thus, my posts shouldn’t be an issue. But the character I’m talking about in my posts IS Lenore Dove. Yeah, it’s sucks to see criticism of a liked character but I’m also not attacking anyone who likes her. Stumbling across one of my posts, clicking on my blog and seeing I routinely post critical analysis of sotr should be enough for people to filter out the anti fandom tag and never see my posts again if they don’t want to. But the way I see it, my posts still belong in the Lenore Dove tag, because im talking about her as a character. Character tags are pretty broad, I’m not out here contributing to ship wars, and all my critiques have textual basis. I really am just sharing my interpretation of the character as written. So I do think my posts belongs in the Lenore Dove tag.

Out of respect for you anon, and the conversation we’ve had, I will make an effort to tag anti Lenore Dove going forward. That said, ask yourself why- in an absolute sea of positivity about her- any criticism of her is enough to send you to a strangers inbox asking them to tag their own posts differently, when you could block the anti sotr tag and avoid any criticism about the book you don’t want to see. Why is it up to me to censor my posts beyond the reasonable generally publicly agreed upon way that involves tagging the anti fandom tag?

[maritteknewtheenemy]

i completely understand not liking lenore dove’s character, everyone’s entitled to their own opinion but comparing a 16 year old girl who lives under an oppressive government to the actual dictator of said government who kills people for fun is a big stretch in my humble opinion.

lenore dove is seen as a “pixie dream girl” because we are seeing her from haymitch’s pov and he is very much in love with her, he oversees anything “bad” that comes with her because he lives her down to his BONES. one could argue that she’s NOT being seen as perfect by the reader because we can read between the lines and see her impulsive, teenage, rebellious antics coming out. but who can blame her? she’s been living under oppression her whole life, she’s been taught by her two folks left (out of an entire family mind you), that people from her family have died under said oppression, that they used to live an adventurous, free and happy life traveling from place to place and then found, killed and then rounded up in twelve. she was radicalized from a young age, possibly from her uncles telling her the story of lucy gray (who hurt too much to even share with haymitch)

she is a character who, if she dies, she knows she won’t leave anyone behind. she’s not the main caregiver of her house, she doesn’t hunt for her family, doesn’t bring food to the table like katniss OR gale. she’s mostly closer to sejanus when it comes to paralleling characters. they’re both hungry for justice but don’t know how to execute it that they end up putting themselves in danger. they do NOT want to put their loved ones in any danger, they want to go through everything on their own.

snow was wrong because he misunderstood both lucy grays’ character AND lenore doves’. she does not plan without haymitch because she doesn’t love him. she did all these rebellious acts without haymitch knowing because in her eyes he has a family that he is the main caregiver for, a whole life in twelve, he fits PERFECTLY in twelve, he was not someone who could risk it all like she was.

she wanted a life with haymitch and does state so in multiple parts of the book, and she does see it happening in the future. she believed that she could hide that part of hers and still somehow, somewhere in the future she could’ve helped the cause and still have her happily ever after with haymitch, because she was just that, a kid with big dreams. she didn’t realize that her playing with fire would’ve gotten her burnt because even though she’s seen many people get tortured, she always managed to slip away unscathed and at that age you think you’re invincible when that happens multiple times.

she loves haymitch so much her guilt was eating her up when he got reaped. she blamed herself nonstop she ended up doing something impulsive AGAIN and got locked up because of it. (which in the end caused her her demise) then she proceeded to lie to haymitch so he doesn’t worry about her in the arena and focuses on getting out of there alive.

the only selfish(?) thing she’s done was when she condemned him to life. (if one could even call her selfish for that). she knew he would try to follow her after death so she made him promise not to. she made him stay alive, to fulfill his promise to her.

lenore dove in my opinion is a multidimensional character that you either end up loving or hating. i loved her because she was realistic (if you manage to look between haymitch’s lovestruck glasses) their unconditional love for eachother at such a young age is just something extra for me to appreciate. his puppy love ended up becoming the small, first cobblestone in the big mountain of haymitch’s road to stopping the sunrise on the reaping.

i understand not liking the book, i just find it unfair to mis-characterize lenore dove like that. a sixteen year old is naturally flawed and has traits as impulsiveness, and naturally thinks they’re untouchable and so subjects themselves under bad conditions that get them lectured by grown ups.

I'm not comparing Lenore Dove to the dictator we see in sotr or thg triology though. I'm comparing her to Coriolanus Snow before he became the head of said fascist government. I don't think Lenore Dove is who Snow became, but I think they have the same potential to do terrible things they convince themselves are right and that they think in very similar ways. Of course, this is all speculation, but it is my reading of her.

Lenore Dove as written would still be a pixie dream girl, even if the story was from anyone elses perspective. Lenore Dove tries very hard to be a pixie dream girl- she prides herself on it in fact. Haymitch just makes it more obvious, though I hesitate to label his unhealthy obsession with her as love.

Yeah, her uncles raised her on stories of the covey but it's pretty clear Clerk Carmine and Tam Amber both are basically begging her to cool it with her antics. They may have planted the seed of Lenore Dove's rebellion, but she's the one who grew it into the all consuming, destructive torrent it became. I've seen some posts comparing her to Sejanus, and while I do think they are a stronger reading than say, comparing Lenore to Lucy Grey or Katniss, Sejanus still knew when to shut up or distance himself from his family enough that the hammer wouldn't fall on them- granted the Plinth fortune made it easier for them than it is for Tam Amber and Clerk Carmine to distance from Lenore Dove- something Lenore Dove really, genuinely never seems to care about or think about. She may not WANT to put her uncles in danger, but she does, and she does so over and over again, and then acts like they're being overbearing when they have an issue with it.

You CAN argue that Lenore Dove hid things from Haymitch to protect him because she loved him that much, just like you can just as easily argue that Snow was right, because theres nothing in the text that convinces me or SHOWS that it was out of love. I'm sorry but their big ol' 'I love you' declarations don't count, not when I'm not convinced they ever loved each other in the first place. (I believe they THINK they do but whatever that dynamic was, it wasn't love).

Sure, Lenore Dove wanted a life with Haymitch, but I think she thought she could have her cake and eat it too which absolutely isn't the case in the world she lives in. Also, believing you're invincible as a teenager in our society is pretty commonplace, but we never see ANY teenager in the original trilogy who believed that because Panem is not a nation that allows for that kind of thinking or those kinds of mistakes. Katniss is scared to mutter about starvation in the woods. Remember her mother used to be terrified of her speaking her thoughts about Panem as a child until she learned to keep her mouth shut. Panem is not forgiving, and children grow up- and more importantly wise up- pretty quick. Katniss and Gale are both aware they break the law by poaching and that technically, the law could come after them at any time, but it's a calculated risk to avoid starvation ('we both agree a bullet in the head is much quicker'). Madge probably held quiet anti Captiol sentiments passed down from Merilee because of stories about Maysilee but she wasn't stupid enough to run around graffitiing the district in Maysilee's name because she would have been jailed/assaulted/killed for it and she knows it. Yeah, Lenore Dove is a stupid kid, but one brush with the law should have made her a lot quieter and a lot more careful. Two should have gotten her killed a lot sooner than in canon. There aren't a lot of people like Lenore Dove in the district not because people disagree with her, but because people who make her mistakes don't make it far past childhood.

Lenore Dove should feel bad about Haymitch getting reaped because she is at fault for it (so is Haymitch though, he was just as much of a dumbass as she was in that scenario). It's hard to believe he's the supposed love of her life that she knows so well but she didn't think for a second he'd run to her aid when peacekeepers were getting rough with her, or that he'd be punished for it. Furthermore, were her impulsive actions actually due to her guilt or just the kind of thing she would have done anyway? I'm leaning toward the latter based on the everything we know about her. As for the prison phone call...that whole interaction was weird. Sure, maybe she wanted him to not worry about her but it's just as likely she actually thought she was getting released in the morning and Snow or the peacekeeeper Haymitch made fun of on tv gave the order to keep her there.

The only selfish thing she ever did being condemning Haymitch to life is quite a stretch given that pretty much all of her motivations seem to exist to enhance her self perception or get what she wants in some way. Honestly, the 'condemning him to life' shit is the least selfish thing she ever did, and I agree you can't really call it selfish because it stopped the active suicide risk from offing himself, even if it was in the worst way possible.

Lenore Dove is not very multidimensional, but sure, if you look you can find some substance (which, considering your meta and my answer along with the half dozen other post I've made about her, seems more than I initially thought.) That said, I don't think she's very realistic, especially not for someone raised in the world she was born in. No other District 12 character acts like her for a reason, and that reason is because they'd die. As for the romance...that's where you lose me. The book told me over and over and over that Lenore and Haymitch were 'in love' and it was never once believable. I believe they thought they were in love, but there was no real substance and no real devotion. Why are they so committed to one another? What's the foundation of their relationship? What does she even LIKE about him? I don't know because the book never showed us any of it, and it made me feel it even less. It read more as weird codependence and mutual obsession, not unconditional love. And making his dead sixteen year old girlfriend and their 'love' the reason he does anything else ever for the rest of his life? Bullshit. What about vengeance? What about the dozens of kids he mentored to their deaths? What about his fellow victors and the horrors they endured for decades as the capitol's puppets? What about the systemic injstices that ruined his and thousands of others lives? What about the family he forgot existed in favour of waxing poetic about Lenore Dove every second page? what about the myriad of other reasons and motivations for wanting the regime gone? Do they all mean nothing because he loved Lenore Dove just that much? The epilogue apparently wants us to think so, which in my opinion is the biggest tragedy of the entire book.

I'm glad you understand not liking this book. I understand liking this book. Believe it or not, I actually did like it- it was fun and it read like fanfic, which I love reading. But I stand by what I said. I didn't like Lenore Dove, nor do I think anything in my last post (or this one) is a mischaracterization of her, simply an interpretation free of rose coloured glasses. Impulsivity to the level Lenore Dove displays in Panem would be deadly (if you need proof look at Woodbine Chance's impulsive choice to flee the reaping), and she was stupid to believe otherwise. She's incredibly lucky she survived as long as she did, let alone that her biggest punishments were jail time or lectures.

[maritteknewtheenemy]

Agree with all your criticisms about sotr!

I personally really dislike Lenore dove. She’s too Mary sue manic pixie dream girl, as people point out the way Lucy gray was written can be defended as were reading about her through snows perspective, but the. What’s the defense for Lenore dove.

I personally think her character could’ve been very compelling if SC had just leaned into her flaws and the fact that Haymitch putting her on a pedestal is unhealthy rather than just shoving in our faces how virtuous and perfect Haymitch perceived her to be without any further depth beyond that. Snow’s conversation with Haymitch about covey girls is ironic to me because he’s actually right Lenore dove does keep secrets from Haymitch and Haymitch should have concerns about that.

I actually think it would’ve been really cool to see Lenore dove written in way that parallels her to Gale and his flawed view of rebellion and fighting against the capitol rather than as Lucy Gray 2.0. While the movies have flaws, Lenore Doves rant to Haymitch in the meadow at the beginning about the hunger games kind of perfectly parallels Gale’s rant to Katniss at the beginning of the first movie in the woods. Gale’s treatment of Madge in the books, the way he’s cold to her, compares that she must not have that many entries in etc. is an interesting parallel to Lenore Dove’s hatred for Maysilee. They both talk so much about rebellion but refuse to see that even the most privileged people in the districts are still victims of the capitol. They say us vs them but only the us that they deem worthy. I think that would’ve been a much more interesting way to go about Lenore doves character.

Just because Lenore Dove is covey doesn’t mean she can’t have depth and flaws and complexity. Ive seen people be very resistant to the idea of that because the covey are Romani and indigenous coded but like that doesn’t mean they all have to be the same flat “perfect” characters. The fandom jokes about fake but he’s really very complex and a great character and Lenore dove paralleling him rather than being a cheap imitation to Lucy gray just would’ve been so much better imo. I’ve never really shipped Haymitch with anyone, but people’s insistence that Lenore dove is his true love and his image of her is correct are just so frustrating . I think acknowledging the fact that their relationship had some unhealthy tendencies would’ve been so much better and made more sense than what we got.

Lenore Dove my beloathed. So glad at least some people can see what I see.

You're 100% right that she could have been cool if readers were allowed to read her as flawed instead of being spoonfed the idea that she's a special fairy princess above all criticism. If she'd expanded on Haymitch's unhealthy obsession with her and her manipulative, judgmental tendencies she could have been a really interesting character, and it's so unfortunate she fell so flat. Snow in SOTR was an epic failure in all proportions, so its unfortunate that his reading of Lenore Dove was actually so much closer to her as she was written that Haymitch's idealized version of her. It sure as hell wasn't much of a relationship.

Her paralleling Gale would have been a really cool angle to explore actually, and it's one I've never thought of before. She definitely tries and spectacularly fails to parallel Lucy Grey. However, I think anon, that you still tend to see her more favourably than I do. Personally, I think Lenore Dove is a lot dumber than people want to believe, and certainly a lot dumber than Gale ever was. (Even at his most hotheaded Gale was a very intelligent character). To me, Lenore Dove- entirely unintentionally- shares a lot more similarities with a different character, who is neither righteous like Gale, nor compassionate like Lucy Grey. To me, Lenore Dove as written shares a lot more similarities with a young Coriolanus Snow than any other character in the series.

She's obsessed with her image to an unhealthy degree, and she's cultivated a very specific sort of single minded devotion in Haymitch that seems similar to how Lucy Grey seemed to view Coriolanus before he indisputably revealed his true colours, despite there having been several red flags she ignored or failed to pick up on before hand. He was just so charming and he knew it. Well, Lenore Dove is charming too- at least to Haymitch- and he's willing to ignore so many red flags just to exist in the periphery of her world. And I do think he exists largely in her periphery. Lenore Dove is also manipulative, she hides things from Haymitch, keeps secrets, and deliberately misleads him, convinced she's always the smartest person in the room and he's far too stupid to understand the true complexities of her superior intellect. Sound familiar? I seem to remember Coriolanus infantilising Lucy Grey in his head and routinely hiding or changing things he says to keep her, or Tigris, or Sejanus out of the loop or deliberately misled. Lenore Dove is self aggrandising and it irks her when others fail to see how important she and her ideals are, even more when they call her on it (think of the feud between her and Maysilee). It goes without saying this feels like a mirror to a character from a formerly rich family operating from the framework of 'Snow Lands on Top'. Lenore Dove shows a callous disregard for everyone around her, and is willing to sacrifice countless innocents just to make a point or get ahead (what she views as getting ahead is just different than what Snow does.) Burning the flag could have gotten any number of innocent bystanders hurt, arrested, beaten, or killed. Fighting the peacekeepers is what got Haymitch illegally reaped, and what could have got others shot. She immediately breaks house arrest putting her uncles at risk- uncles who already face a lot of heat on her behalf- just because she wants to play outside. None of this seems that different from behaviour we see from Coriolanus, who is happy to sacrifice Clemensia, Sejanus, all the tributes, Highbottom, Mayfair, Billy Taupe, Ampert, and countless others to get what he wants or prove a point. Furthermore, from what we see and hear of Lenore Dove she's incredibly judgmental about everyone from Haymitch (the supposed love of her life) to Maysilee, to the district citizens and peacekeepers. Y'know who else views everyone around him- supposed loved ones and enemies alike- with unadulterated derision? I do. Lenore Dove is a rebel because that's what being raised covey told her she should be, just like Coriolanus is loyal to the capitol because that's what the Capitol told him to be. But put Lenore Dove in Coriolanus' circumstances and she very easily becomes him: a power hungry dictator obsessed with her image, and put Coriolanus in her life, and he easily becomes her: a wannabe rebel with a saviour complex.

One final note: in terms of the Covey being Romani coded, I think there was an argument to be made that that was the case in TBOSBAS, however Suzanne Collins was so careful to avoid anything but the vaguest, most ambiguous character descriptions in SOTR so that the movie can cast all white characters without facing backlash from the fandom, that she erased any effort to make the Covey Romani in her earlier work. I'm waiting for the casting annoucement for Sadie Sink as Lenore Dove any day now.

But yeah, all in all Lenore Dove is such a missed opportunity of a character and I will never not hate her.

[maritteknewtheenemy]

You can enjoy the fanservice in sotr while also ackowledging that it IS fanservice btw, the two aren't mutually exclusive.

"But it's like a small town, it makes sense that everybody knows everybody"- I grew up in a small town with >10000 people, and no, everybody did not actually know everybody. And if Distrcit 12 is smaller than like 8000 people, I would struggle to believe it's actually a functioning district. It's fanservice.

"But it makes sense he knew Asterid and Burdock and Otho and Maysilee, because they're all the same age and went to school together!"- Okay sure, whatever, I'll give you that one. The entire adolescent population of district twelve all go to the exact same school and share classes. That doesn't mean every name drop was needed for the story (especially Otho Mellark). But I'm less concerned about who WAS included and more concerned about who WASN'T included. We never see a glimpse of young Hazelle or Mister Hawthorne though they were probably in the same age bracket as Haymitch and the others. In the capitol Mags, Wiress, and Beetee all make mentor appearances but there's no Brutus, no Enobaria, no Chaff (despite him being Haymitch's canonical best friend). There's no offhand mention at any point of renowned past gamemaker Dr. Gaul or a capitol citizen with the last name of Dovecoat, because SC was making sure to only include fan favourites. Oh, but Haymitch's girlfriend is a Lucy Gray carbon copy because everybody loved her.

It's fanservice. And fanservice can be fun! But look at who is included but more importantly who ISN'T included, and don't pretend it's something it's not.

[maritteknewtheenemy]

Also a Lucy Grey callback to that one 'I'm gonna fight like all-fire to win" line because Lenore Dove is supposed to be Lucy Grey 2.0 but fails at this spectacularly

What the fuck does “I love you like all fire” even mean

[maritteknewtheenemy]

Y’know what? Digging my heels in even harder on this one. Wiress is relevant enough to be recognisable from the original trilogy but removed enough that her book wouldn’t open up half as much retconning or plot holes. Getting to know her pre madness would make the version of her in the original trilogy that much more heart wrenching to see. From the way Haymitch’s narration made it sound her games were pretty short so the majority of her book could take place before or after the arena itself allowing us to see more of Panem that we typically do. Her and Beetee’s mentor/mentee relationship could offer subtle parallels to Haymitch/Katniss’ without being stupidly on the nose like every interaction between anyone in sotr. Seeing Wiress’ family would make her loss in CF hit harder. It should’ve been her.

Genuinely the most compelling part of Sunrise on the Reaping to me was the two pages we got describing Wiress' games. It's indescribably fascinating to me how Haymitch seems to find her initial serenity and intelligence off putting and vaguely creepy. Like, to the point where I think I would have preferred if SC had written her games instead of Haymitch's for this prequel. Haymitch thinks she's 'bizarre' and notes it was hard even for the districts to root for her because of the eerie manner in which she outsmarted the capitol. It would have been fascinating to see what day to say life is like in a district other than 12 for once, and to see a tribute who won without killing anyone (a complete antithesis to the way the games are supposed to be played). It would be interesting to see the retribution she would face from the capitol in the immediate aftermath. I think it's safe to say prior to the arena that it's unlikely that Wiress was a fan favourite, but I want to see her interview persona, what angle was decided as her best shot of getting sponsors, and the outfits her stylist chose. I want to see her noting the shiny stuff in training and later kicking herself for not realizing it was connected to the games. We'd get to see Beetee as an actual mentor, showcasing his true brilliance with a pupil who could meet him on his own level something missing from the original trilogy and SOTR both. Hell, she could even include a mention of Ampert, or even a cameo of him at the District 3 reaping. We could hear Beetee potentially lament his fear of Ampert being reaped to Wiress, or it could even just be an offhand thought in Wiress' mind, that the eldest child of District three's most recent (and disliked/problematic) victor would be twelve next year. Maybe one of the careers in her games could be the child/neice/grandkid of a former victor and she could think back to meeting Beetee's family before leaving on the train and wonder if that would happen to Ampert? It would be interesting to explore Beetee's fear and Wiress' perhaps preumptive pity from that angle. It might have hit harder even, for us to see a brief cameo of eleven year old Ampert and hear about Beetee's transgressions against the capitol, but have Ampert's fate left ambiguous/a sword hanging over Beetee's head.

Also- the Nest of Mirrors? Come on. Katniss makes a point in the original trilogy of saying the arena can look like anything, but a Wiress book would be the first games we'd read about where the arena doesn't look- at least on the surface- like some random lanscape, not to mention the horror of the entire concept. Blood reflected off any and all surfaces, being unable to get your bearings, nothing being where it appears to the point you could end up impaling yourself on a sword you thought you were dodging? It's an arena with the highest and most blatant element of psychological horror we've ever seen and it would have been really interesting to see how those games played out, especially through Wiress' narration. Not only is Wiress very intelligent and grounded, but she hid in plain sight. She was IN the games but she wasn't an active participant. The narration would be almost from the point of view of a spectator, like those in the districts or the capitol, except with a level of scrutiny no one but a competitor could have. The fact she didn't directly kill anyone would further highlight this- but so would the fact kids might be dying literal feet away from her that she couldn't save or defend herself from if it came down to it. We even know we'd get to see her judgement call, the decision she had to make about when to stand up so the final Two boy would see her, charge at her, and brain himself. We know she understood how to play with the mirrors and how the light beams work, so she must have intentionally placed herself in a way she knew he'd run right into one of them. But how did she know he wouldn't try a long range weapon to kill her from a safe distance? And why did she wait so long after she won before letting the hovercraft pick her up? What was she thinking? What was her post game interview like? What did Beetee say?

I can see how this her victory and reticence could appear so eerie from an outsiders perspective- district and capitol alike- especially when it seems so antithetical from the way most contenders in a typical games play and participate. Wiress didn't participate and that's why she won. It's wild. It's facinating. It should be explored. She didn't participate and she won anyway which should be impossible. But she did it.

Then there's the fact that one of the themes of SOTR was propaganda (and was, imho, the most poorly executed element of the novel, please don't @ me). I think Wiress' book could have the potential to address this in a more subtle but better executed way. Just thinking about mirrors and the arena and the symbolism that could come from it. Something about the same image (or narrative or word or-) seen from a thousand different angles by thousands of different people, how they warp and change and become distorted. Something about retroactively convincing the public that the girl who didn't participate was a strong contender the whole time. Something about spinning the Capitol's inability to find her into something humorous instead of an unintentional display of weakness and gross incompetence. Something about playing up Wiress' 'oddness' so as to make her undesirable and unpalatable to even district citizens so no one would ever rally behind her much less take her or her refusal to participate as a viable option let alone a strategy.

Yeah, to me, not writing Wiress' story instead of Haymitch's will always be a missed opportunity.

[maritteknewtheenemy]

Yesterday, my friend and I were complaining about SotR (for the context: she just finished the book, I really have other interests too!). She was especially critical about Lenore Dove, and Haydove. Then, while agreeing with her, it struck me that... we never learn, how they got together?

We are told about their first meeting, back when they were kids; specifically, it's one of the first thing we learn about Lenore Dove. But then, the only thing about their relationship that we learn is that last year Haymitch sang her "The Raven" for her birthday.

And I think this is my main problem with Haydove. That, despite showing it down the readers' throat, Suzanne Collins put so little effort into both this pair, and Lenore Dove as a character, that she can't even tell us things that seem crucial about it.

Yes, they're 'childhood friends to lovers', but when did they turn from one thing to another? Who was the first one to take some action? What was their first kiss like? What exactly they do in their free time together? How the change in their relationship felt to Haymitch? What has changed in Lenore Dove through the years he knew her?

We don't know.

Funny enough, it's probably directly connected to the fact that Haydove is SC's first attempt at romantic relationship established beforehand. Because both Everlark and Snowbaird, hell, even Katniss and Gale, have those moments happening in front of us, so SC never has to go back and explain that they happened. But the moment two characters are already together, she doesn't even seem aware that there should be some substance. And here, you can't even blame BookTok, because boiii, do they love hearing about their ships first meeting for the 654867th time, especially from boy's POV.

I've said few times before that romantic subplots are not Suzanne Collins' strongest forte, but only now have I realized how much she's lacking in this department.

Also, I think this is why the 'sister' line was shoe-horned between Haymitch and Maysilee - because SC not only knew about a rival ship for Haydove already existing, but also because she saw that these two are the ones who share the built-up crucial for a believable romantic link. So instead of working on Haydove, it was easier to try and undermine the relationship she wrote quite romantically by accident.

[maritteknewtheenemy]

THIS! She's an incredibly strong woman and a strong character and Finnick is so unhealthily attached to her that his first thought when she is kidnapped is that he absolutely at all costs must kill himself because life isn't worth living anymore. Also, Annie Cresta is a victor in her own right. She has serious mental health issues but it's clear she wasn't always that way. She still won her games. Chances are she volunteered for them. And she's not a fucking body double, she literally just has mental health issues, you can't sanitize psychosis or PTSD or boil it down to a plot device because it makes you uncomfortable. Annie Cresta is a character in her own right and I will die on this hill.

like why are some of you so determined to make everything about Annie reliant on her man…her presence in the Games being because of him, her victory handed to her by him, him being the only one who can calm her down or keep her grounded, him being the only tool she has to handle her mental health, him being the only reason for any of her potential happiness. the narrative doesn’t see her as an independent person outside of him and you are falling prey to its misogynistic trap

[maritteknewtheenemy]

Suzanne Collins make a main character with a live father challenge impossible

[maritteknewtheenemy]

genuinely YEAH the epigraphs at the beginning made know that immediately, this was gonna be her worst one yet.

the day SOTR was announced, i was absolutely miserable. i've been saying for ages that we didn't need a haymitch book. that's not just because i consider myself his biggest fan, but BECAUSE we already had everything we needed to know in a way that would give us light and understanding to a character who prior, seemed like a drunken miserable ass.

but no, he gets revealed as extremely intelligent and 10 steps ahead of the game. and they punish him for it. he tells katniss that it was the forcefield stunt in which killed his family within mockingjay, and so many people have been arguing with me about "falling for propaganda" or "we didn't have the whole story!" OG trilogy haymitch had his story laid out for us perfectly.

i've been saying this very thing in particular, but sunrise on the reaping could've been the story where a young, intelligent and cunning teenager utilizes the things around him in order to survive, armed with snark and wit to do it. i would've had his relationship with his girlfriend be a motivation, but it would've been subtle. haymitch would think about the beauty of the arena, and THEN go "i hope i get back to my girl." with his family, they'd be at the forefront of his mind.

they are his biggest supporters. he is their breadwinner. one of his friends could be taking care of his mother and brother, sure! but haymitch would agonize over not being there to protect them, not being their man in the house to provide. sunrise could've so deeply been about family, right up until he loses them in this deep horrible way. his girl would be a thought of relief in his time of stress; not constantly in mention, but spoke of when it matters to him. his interaction with snow would've been tense and chilling, and the loss of his loved ones would have near put him in the ground, WERE I SUZANNE COLLINS. that boy would've been haunted by shadows on the wall, scared of the reaper for the rest of the people he cares about.

he wouldn't drink until he gets deep in mentoring, but a young, fresh out of the arena haymitch would be in so much pain, both physically and psychologically. he'd wake up screaming for his family, he'd struggle to form coherent sentences, he'd dissociate. he would try so hard to avoid reminders of how he (a guilt-plagued young man,) had failed to do the one thing he had the entire time; protect. and his saviour complex would be made then.

all this to say (and i'm totally Not having to develop all of this in my own work on him anyway,) SOTR could've been impactful without in your face callbacks and weakly mentioned politics. it could've been the BEST book if done right, and i don't understand how people consider it to be such now.

Omg hi! Yours is one of my favourite blogs on here, this feels like a celebrity sighting.

I agree we didn't need a Haymitch book but I can't pretend I wasn't excited when his book was announced. I love Haymitch and knowing that SC has historically done well with his character I was looking forward to it. Needless to say I was thoroughly underwhelmed.

You get it. Haymitch is supposed to be snarky and sarcastic and SMART, instead sotr gave us a character who is so glaringly unintelligent that it's hard to believe he's supposedly the same Haymitch we see in canon, because I refuse to believe a kid this dumb who's girlfriend is even dumber and has a knack for pissing off the cops + government would make it to adulthood. I'll die on the hill that Haymitch as we see him in sotr on the reaping could be a GREAT character if we weren't supposed to pretend this is Haymitch Abernathy from the hunger games. If she'd named this character Carl and wrote the rest of the story the same way I'd probably defend him a bit more. If she'd made Carl die suddenly with Ampert after his failed attempt to blow up the arena and either left the book there or suddenly switched to a different POV I might actually think Carl was tragic and the story kind of silly but ultimately a lot stronger than sotr. Carl would be my little blorbo. Him and his dumb as rocks girlfriend would serve as a cautionary tale. Alas, I'm supposed to pretend that Carl is Haymitch and so the whole story falls completely apart because I spent the whole time thinking He Would Not Fucking Say That.

Once we got past the reaping I genuinely wondered why SC even BOTHERED to include Sid and Ma as characters. Supposedly losing them was one of Haymitch's formative events, something he struggles to even mentions years after their deaths, but to be honest I forgot about them most of the time. And you're telling me I'm supposed to believe Haymitch loved Sid as much as Katniss loved Prim? I dont think so. And don't even get me started on how dirty SC did Ma. Needless to say I wasn't convinced Haymitch even LIKED his family, let alone that they were his motivation to get home, which is so unfortunate because the potential was there. (Also, while I liked Haymitch's bootlegging job I think it's unfair to say he's the main breadwinner. He helps out, sure, but Willamae doesn't scrub miners overalls on a washboard all day to not be given the credit she deserved. She kept them from starving after her husband died and before Haymitch started bootlegging and I hate the way I've seen the fandom pretending like her labour did nothing for the family.) In any case, if I actually was supposed to believe that Carl Haymitch cared about his family at all, he should have been planning to die the second Snow made his veiled threat about them and Lenore Dove living a 'long and happy life' without him. But maybe I'm just a cynic.

I wholeheartedly agree we should have seen more of his grief + trauma + descent into alcoholism. In my opinion, the games themselves should have played a much smaller part in the story, especially because we already knew the broad strokes and because we already knew Haymitch would win. Hunger Games was suspenseful because we didn't know if both Katniss and Peeta would make it out alive. TBOSAS games had an element of suspense because there was no guarantee Lucy Grey would win, especially because Snow was an outside narrator. Haymitch's games were supposed to be suspensful because...he had a plan we knew would fail? Idk, i was just bored. That's not what I was there for, I was there for the aftermath that we didn't really get. Honestly, SC should have let you ghostwrite it, you would have definitely done a better job. We should have at least seen his victory tour, and I think it would have been more impactful to have the last scene be the first time he gets drunk. Like, the beginning of rock bottom. It would have staued with people more. And no epilogue at all. (Dear GOD don't get me started on the epilogue). the epilogue was so unnecessary. We know what happened to Haymitch. We saw him in the original trilogy (and I refuse to believe everything he ever did was because his dead fairy princess girlfriend's ghost told him too. Maybe that would be true of Carl, but not Haymitch).

Finally, the callbacks. for fucks sake i hated the callbacks, which is very uncharacteristic of me. Usually I love parallels and the occasional callback, but the sheer NUMBER in this book were overwhelming. Did SC want nothing in this book to be new AT ALL? Call me crazy but I don't think every scene in the original trilogy needed a deeper meaning. I think Haymitch calling Katniss sweetheart to mock her and having it evolve into a sort of endearment was a lot more impactful and showed their relationship growth better than having it have been genuine the whole time because Katniss reminded him of a dead girl. Lucy Grey did not NEED to make a cameo, she haunted the narrative well enough given everyone remembered twelve had another victor but no one knew who she was. And we all know how I feel about Lenore Dove- I shan't get into that again.

Anyway, you're exactly right. The book had potential, and Haymitch's story could have been the best of thg books if SC put any amount of thought or care into it and it's unfortunate that she did not. I still think that she should have written Wiress' games instead, for a whole host of reasons I already detailed on another post. But yeah, sotr was such a missed opportunity and i'll never not be mad about it.