thgthesis

[thgthesis]

“If he wants me broken, then I will have to be whole:”The Hunger Games Trilogy and Feminism: Katniss as a Feminist Heroine

Introduction

Project Overview

Suzanne Collins’ record-breaking series, The Hunger Games (THG) follows the series’ protagonist, Katniss Everdeen, as she is forced to fight in two Hunger Games, an event in which poor children from disadvantaged provinces between the ages of 12-18 are chosen to fight to the death until there is one victor for the entertainment of the rich in the Capitol. Through the Games, Katniss must navigate her romantic feelings for her best friend, Gale, and her fellow tribute, Peeta, while trying to keep her loved ones alive, and ultimately leading a rebellion against the corrupt Capitol and its leader, President Snow. I was eleven years old when I read THG for the first time. As a child crossing the threshold from elementary school to middle school—childhood to adolescence—the series was a formative part of that transition period for me. It not only served as a turning point for me as a reader, seeing as it turned what was once a casual hobby into a deep passion, but it instilled in me a desire to be the change I wanted to see in the world—because I felt that is what Katniss represented. 

At that time, there was much discussion about whether Katniss was someone young girls should aspire to be; I myself internalized the belief that she was and viewed her as a role model. As such, it came as a shock to learn that many people view Katniss as an example of a weak female protagonist; it was this new piece of knowledge coupled with a reflection of my initial experience with the series that made me consider how novels play a role in forming readers’ gender expectations. 

A decade later, now a graduating college senior, I have explored the critical literature discussing THG and gender and found that most scholars explore the series' relation to feminism. Feminism can broadly be defined as a blend of socio-political movements and ideologies that seek to establish equality between all sexes and gender identities. It begins from the recognition that women have historically been subordinated by men through patriarchal political, economic, and cultural institutions and, as such, seeks to end this subordination by empowering women and enabling them to be recognized as equal in all capacities to men.

 When discussing THG in the context of feminism, conversations tend to center around Katniss herself. Specifically, there is a longstanding debate on whether Katniss is a feminist heroine, that is, a female character who is held to a high esteem/regard because she acts according to the tenets of feminism. These tenets of feminism include autonomy—the capacity to make one’s own decisions and act upon these decisions according to one’s own values and interests—and collective action—a form of gathering in which a group of people work together to meet a common objective, usually related to a societal issue. In posing my answer to this debate, in this thesis, I will argue that Katniss is a feminist heroine by demonstrating the ways that she adheres to the two aforementioned tenets of feminism. Because the novels we read in our youth play a significant role in our development, establishing Katniss as a feminist heroine demonstrates the potential of THG to influence readers’ views on feminism

A Brief History of Feminism

While at its core feminism is the belief in full equality for women in all facets of life, the term can oftentimes be rather complicated to define as there are different types of feminist theories and eras of feminism. For many, feminism is best understood through its different waves. There are three waves of feminism and each has different goals.  The first wave of feminism (1848-1920) is mostly connected to the Women’s Suffrage Movement, the fight to get white women the right to vote and other forms of legal equality. The second wave of feminism (1963-1989) mainly concerned itself with fighting against traditional gender roles in society and sexist discrimination. Much like the first wave of feminism, the second wave also centered white women. As such, the third wave of feminism (1990-present day) has focused much more on intersectionality in order to be inclusive to women of different races and ethnicities. The third wave of feminism is also known for taking a more aggressive approach—for instance, encouraging women to express their sexuality—on the issues it set to address, such as sexual harassment and the lack of women in positions of power, as well as focusing on the intersection of feminist thought with other modes of activism around race, religion, class, and disability. 

The history of feminism has been contentious, producing a number of backlash movements alongside its internal debates about the best way forward for gender equality. One such backlash movement is the strain of feminist thought commonly called postfeminism, emerging in and after the 1980s. Postfeminism asserts that gender equity has already been achieved, meaning that there is no further need for feminist aims (Ruthven 48). Postfeminism’s refusal of feminism places an emphasis on the self—especially on choice, essentially suggesting that any choice can be a feminist choice so long as the woman making that choice is happy (Brown 170).

 I acknowledge that I am entering a conversation that is deeply nuanced because of the varying types of feminism. Discussing THG in a feminist context is not something that can be done without dispute because despite there being a shared core of feminism, the term still means different things to different people. Hence, there will always be arguments for or against this claim, and I recognize this. Furthermore, because I am a feminist and because I am a fan, I read the series with a specific mindset by looking for the ways in which it does cohere with feminism, and I am aware that this impacted the way in which I interpret the series now. I consider this a strength of my project: reading the series this way enabled me to identify small details that may otherwise be overlooked when analyzing the series within feminist contexts. 

Project Significance 

Unpacking what messages are being forwarded regarding feminism in THG through Katniss’ role as a feminist heroine is crucial because the texts we read as young adults play a significant role in our development. Young readers often turn to novels to form their gender expectations and values. Unfortunately, due to patriarchal norms, women have a history of being depicted as subservient in literature, especially in children’s literature. According to AB Diekman and Sarah Murnen, sexism has often been replicated in children’s literature through the idealization of women’s traditional roles: “to endorse the traditional feminine ideal or to view women in idealized, overly romantic terms or as delicate creatures who require protection” (375). Diekman and Murnen’s statement highlights the importance of feminist heroines such as Katniss existing within popular media. THG is particularly relevant as it has become a staple within the young adult (YA) fiction genre since its initial publication in 2008. Specifically, the series spearheaded the surge in popularity of YA dystopian novels in the early 2010s and served as a model text for several other YA dystopian novels, namely the Divergent series by Veronica Roth and The Maze Runner series by James Dashner. 

The phenomenon of young readers turning to literature to develop their ideas about the self is especially important within the YA dystopian genre because according to literary scholars Brendler and Tarulli, dystopian YA novels have been diminishing the gap that exists between “boy books” and “girl books'' (222). Through this phenomenon, a wider audience is being exposed to the ideas and values that are being promoted through these novels—especially THG. Hence, it matters whether or not Katniss is a feminist heroine—if she has autonomy and if she values collective action—because of the impact on THG readers. 

Moreover, considering the relationship between feminism and THG is contemporarily significant at the moment because of the November 2023 release of the movie for the series’ prequel, The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes (TBOSAS), which was published during 2020. The prequel tells the backstory of the original trilogy’s antagonist, Coriolanus Snow, by showing his rise to power; it also features a love story between him and the District 12 tribute of the 10th Hunger Games, Lucy Gray Baird, who has several qualities in common with Katniss, particularly their musical affinity. Because Lucy Gray’s character receives an ambiguous ending, in addition to her key similarities with Katniss, many fans have concluded that Lucy Gray is Katniss’ direct ancestor. Regardless of the truth of this fan theory, the film has generated global reconsideration of THG fifteen years after its original publication. Following the release of the novel, many old-time fans of the series took to social media to discuss the trilogy and its newest addition and share in fandom. This gave the series and its fans a very visible presence on social media. Following the news of the movie, this presence multiplied, giving the series a major resurgence in popularity. For instance, as I write this introduction in December 2023, when one searches The Hunger Games on Tiktok, there are several “edits”—a fan made video using transitions and effects—which have over one million views or over 400,000 likes. This surge in the popularity of THG is now not only from past readers—readers of my generation, who read the series during or shortly after it came out—but also new readers. Given that so many new readers—a fresh audience—are now being introduced to the series, it becomes pertinent to once more consider what messages lay between the pages of the series.

Finally, exploring the connection between feminism and texts such as THG is especially important considering the state of contemporary feminism. Contrary to the assertions of postfeminists, various contemporary issues have made it glaringly obvious that the goals of feminism have yet to be met. For instance, the U.S Supreme Court’s decision to reverse Roe v. Wade during the summer of 2022 has resulted in multiple states enforcing laws against abortion, such as Alabama which has a complete ban (Nash and Guarnieri). In response, there has been a resurgence in the movement for reproductive justice. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic and its aftermath has disproportionately affected women in terms of job losses and caregiving responsibilities (Bedford). Furthermore, contemporary third-wave feminists continue to emphasize the importance of intersectionality, especially following the death of Breonna Taylor in March of 2020, which helped spark the resurgence of the Black Lives Matter movement, consequently resulting in important conversations about the way Black women have often been overlooked by white feminists. These and a multitude of other issues shed light on the ways in which feminism still remains relevant in 2023. 

Background and Intervention

There is no shortage of scholarship on THG series; as one of the most successful YA series of all time, its popularity has generated much conversation. As mentioned above, much of the scholarship on the trilogy is centered on the debate regarding Katniss as a feminist heroine. Answering whether or not this title befits her requires a focus on two main tenets of feminism: autonomy and collective action. Scholars largely debate Katniss’ autonomy, yielding multiple divided responses. There are many scholars and fans who believe that Katniss is a passive character, thereby lacking autonomy. They hold this belief in relation to her involvement in the rebellion, arguing that she did not join it of her own volition, and her romance, in which she had to “choose” between Peeta or Gale. There are others, however, who believe that Katniss was able to assert her agency throughout the course of the series, making her an autonomous character. 

Likewise, scholars debate whether the series promotes collective action (a feminist ideal) or individualism (a postfeminist ideal). Scholars discuss the series’ relation to collective action in terms of Katniss’ actions, seeing as the ideologies are either held up or denounced through her character. Most scholars argue that Katniss rejects individualism and as such, rejects “the postfeminist narratives of fierce individualism” (Ruthven 50). They largely point to examples during the Games that demonstrate her commitment to collective action. With the exception of one scholar, who raises concerns over the use of a postfeminist trope in the final novel—which I will discuss below—scholars overall view Katniss as a character aligned with the feminist ideal of collective action.

To enter this existing conversation on THG and feminism, I will argue that Katniss is best understood as a feminist heroine when her character development throughout the whole series is considered. Accordingly, I will address the arguments made by scholars who claim that Katniss is a passive character that lacks autonomy; seeing as scholars typically speak of Katniss’ autonomy in relation to her involvement in the rebellion and her romance, these two categories will be the focus of my discussion. Firstly, I will address the arguments made by scholars regarding Katniss’ involvement in the rebellion. These arguments are weak in that they hone in on one or two scenes from the entire series and use them to argue that Katniss is passive. As such, I will be arguing against these claims, instead asserting that Katniss is an active, autonomous character—and thereby a feminist heroine—by providing a chronological analysis through all three novels of her involvement in the rebellion to show the ways in which she grows into her role as a rebel, free of the coercion of others, and completely motivated by her own values and beliefs. Similarly, with regard to her romance, I will demonstrate that Katniss is not passive in her relationships. I will explain the underlying assumptions that these arguments (regarding Katniss’ passivity) are based upon and why I take issue with them. Picking apart these assumptions will propel my arguments for Katniss as an active, autonomous character. 

The next section of my paper is concerned with the ways in which Katniss meets the demands of feminism by valuing collective action and rejecting individualism. Contrary to my previous section, I am in agreement with most of the scholars on this topic, seeing as most of them believe that Katniss does reject individualism in favor of collective action. As such, what I seek to do here is to expand the claims made by other scholars by providing more examples to prove that Katniss is a feminist heroine committed to collective action. I will, however, also be addressing the concern made against this claim, in order to refute it and strengthen my argument regarding Katniss’ rejection of individualism and its related ideologies. I will provide examples that span the course of all three novels; they will be discussed in sections that are broken apart based on similarity. 

Proving that Katniss is a feminist heroine is significant because there is a contemporary movement in which many people, on both sides of the postfeminist debate, are perpetuating a harmful notion that for a woman to be considered a feminist, one must reject motherhood and romance. This is harmful because it presents feminism as a sort of exclusive and restrictive movement which requires great sacrifice to join. As a result, many young women may be deterred from feminism which will negatively impact the fight for equality. Katniss demonstrates that being a feminist does not take on only one form; consequently, her own heroism serves as a reminder to young girls that they too can be feminists. 

Section 1: Katniss and Autonomy: Active or Passive?

Section Intro

To be a feminist heroine, a character must be autonomous because autonomy contributes to feminist ends. Firstly, when one is autonomous, they are more likely to question the acceptability of their oppression and more likely to act to end it (Khader 502). Seeing as feminists seek to end gender oppression and a lack of autonomy has been linked to practices of such oppression (Stoijar 96), it follows that autonomy is held to such a high regard. 

Women have historically been oppressed under the patriarchy, which is, “...the power of the fathers; a familial-social, ideological, political system in which men…determine what part women shall or shall not play, and in which the female is everywhere subsumed under the male” (Rich, 57). Patriarchy robs women of autonomy by putting men and male-dominated systems in charge of their lives. One of the most powerful ways the patriarchy has lorded over the lives of women is through the institutions of marriage and motherhood.  According to Claudia Card, “Marriage and motherhood in the history of modern patriarchies have been mandatory for and oppressive to women” (4). These roles have been so oppressive in part because they are presented as the only option for women, essentially stripping them of their autonomy. Bearing children has long been asserted to be the duty of women, tied into the very definition of what a woman is: “To have borne and reared a child is to have done that thing which patriarchy joins with physiology to render into the definition of femaleness” (Rich, 37). In effect, a woman’s worth is tied to her having children, often leaving women with no choice but to comply with this expectation in order to be deemed valuable. Similarly, marriage is an institution that was created to take women from the control of one man—her father—to the control of another—her husband—in order to confirm “men’s authority over women” (Coontz 6). As such, the practice of marriage has historical ties to removing a woman’s agency and essentially making her the property of a man. Such beliefs are visible in old laws, in which husbands could forcibly exercise their marital right to sex and punish their wives physically (Coontz 9). 

Autonomy contributes to feminist ends because autonomous individuals are deeply aware of their values, meaning they are able to identify when someone is trying to dominate them and can distinguish between their interests and that of their dominators ( Khader 502). This awareness is necessary in order to take action against patriarchal oppression. Essentially, acting against such oppression enables women to assert their agency—to make an active choice. Conversely, not being able to assert one’s agency—not being able to make active decisions—makes one passive. Feminists often discuss autonomy in terms of active and passive decision making; being active is synonymous with being autonomous, while being passive is equated to being subordinate. In sum, in order to move towards a society in which all genders are equal, “Feminists want the character ideal of autonomy to guide women to participate in anti-oppressive struggles, or at least act in ways that reduces the harms that oppression visits on them” (Khader 5009) 

Does Katniss have autonomy? This question dominates the breadth of scholarship on the series. Katniss’ autonomy is discussed in terms of “active vs passive,” referring to whether or not she is an active choice maker or a passive choice maker. Specifically, scholars often debate two topics concerning Katniss’ autonomy: her involvement in the rebellion and her involvement in the love triangle between herself, Peeta, and Gale. When discussing her involvement in the rebellion, the central question scholars debate concerns whether or not Katniss actively decided to become involved in the rebellion, or whether she only joined because others encouraged/forced her to. The overwhelming opinion for scholars is that Katniss is a passive character who was forced into the rebellion, thereby suggesting that she is not autonomous and that she cannot be a feminist heroine. In regards to her romance, the love triangle is discussed in terms of Katniss’ final choice to be with Peeta rather than Gale; it is questioned whether this was an active or passive choice, as well as what this choice says about Katniss as a character. Here, the conversations surrounding this topic are more split. Some scholars argue that choosing Peeta made Katniss a passive character as she was simply choosing what was put before her—reacting, in other words, while Gale would have been an active choice. Others, however, believe that Katniss was able to assert her agency by choosing Peeta over Gale, meaning that she is autonomous and can therefore be considered a feminist heroine. 

Part 1: Katniss as an Active Agent in the Rebellion

Intro

As established, Katniss must be a character that makes active choices to be considered a feminist heroine. In terms of the rebellion, this means that she must actively decide to join of her own free will, free from the influence of others. Multiple scholars believe the opposite to be true—they argue that Katniss was forced into the rebellion by others. Caroline Jones, for instance, argues that Gale is the one who makes Katniss see that they can rebel against the Capitol and do more than what is simply put out before them (231). She asserts that Gale is the true rebel, contrasting to Katniss’ passivity (232). Similarly, Amy L. Montz claims that Cinna forced Katniss into the rebellion when he dressed her as the Mockingjay without her permission, a moment that stripped Katniss of her agency (145). What these arguments have in common is a belief that Katniss lacks autonomy because she is not in charge of her own fate, thereby prohibiting her from being a feminist heroine (Baker and Schack 207). 

These arguments, however, are deeply flawed: they focus on specific moments rather than considering the series as a whole. Katniss takes a journey towards becoming a feminist heroine that can only be understood when tracking this journey throughout the entire series, seeing as Katniss’ commitment to the rebel cause grew and changed as the series progressed. To demonstrate, I will give a chronological analysis of Katniss’ ascent into the rebellion and consequential ascent into her role as a feminist heroine. 

First, Katniss begins the series in The Hunger Games (HG) with the belief that the Capitol cannot be fought against. However, as she comes face to face with the injustices of the Capitol through the Games and her time in the city, Katniss becomes moved to take a stand against the Capitol and begins to act accordingly. As the series continues in Catching Fire (CF), Katniss faces a brief moment of regression, deciding to run away and leave the rebellion behind in order to save her loved ones, but quickly abandons this plan once reminded of the cruelties of the Capitol. With her belief in the rebellion reaffirmed, Katniss sets out to defy the Capitol during the Quarter Quell in order to aid the rebel cause. Finally, in the last book of the series, Katniss initially rejects the role of the Mockingjay; however, she actively seeks out the role once her belief in the rebel cause is reignited. She becomes the Mockingjay solely according to her own terms, rejecting the performative aspects of the role and taking matters into her own hands to bring about the future the rebellion set out for. Though Katniss struggled at times with the thought of being involved in the rebellion, she was able to push through these doubts and make active decisions based on her own beliefs. As such, Katniss’ role in the rebellion was one driven by autonomous choices and it is through exercising this autonomy that Katniss becomes a feminist heroine.

Book 1 

Before and Directly After the Reaping

As the first novel begins, Katniss expresses her belief in the futility of speaking out against the Capitol, all the while engaging in acts that can be understood as rebellious. Because she was taught not to speak out against the Capitol as a child (Collins HG 6), she cannot bolster Gale’s complaints against their oppressors. According to Katniss, Gale’s rage is pointless because although she agrees that the Capitol is unjust, “it doesn’t change anything” (14). Her dismissal of Gale’s rage disproves Caroline Jones’ argument that Gale “provides a window to possible alternatives” as Katniss does not even believe in the possibility of another life (Jones 231).  In fact, Katniss views the districts as completely at the Capitol’s mercy, best demonstrated by the Games (19). Thus, at the series’ opening, Katniss does not believe in the ability for their circumstances to change, meaning that much has to change before she assumes her role as a rebel. 

However, while Katniss has yet to assume her role as a rebel, she has already begun to rebel in subtle, unconscious ways. As the sole provider for her family at the ripe age of 16, Katniss engages in illegal activities, such as hunting in prohibited grounds, for their well-being. According to Sonya Sawyer Fritz, her “determination to survive at any cost can be recognized as a subversive act” (27). In other words, by breaking the law to care for her family, Katniss has already begun to rebel in ways that she does not even recognize. During the Reaping, she similarly subverts expectations by volunteering for Prim. Volunteering is usually an act reserved for those from the wealthier districts that take pride in the Games, not something that a poor mining district like District 12 is accustomed to (22). Katniss’ decision here was not made in an effort to rebel against the Capitol’s norms, but the outcome is still noteworthy as it shows her inclination towards disobedience from the very beginning. Moreover, by volunteering for Prim, Katniss makes an active choice to defend someone she loves, thereby asserting her agency. 

The Games

Volunteering for Prim leads Katniss straight into the Capitol where she will come face to face with its injustices—though the change in scenery does not result in immediate change, as Katniss struggles to see how the Capitol can be overpowered. Being directly in the world of the Capitol allows Katniss to see firsthand the extent of the unjust difference in ways of life between the Capitol and the districts (65) and just how cavalier they are with the lives of tributes (101), which leaves her feeling angry. Still, Katniss has yet to fully assume her role in the rebellion. She again expresses her belief in the futility of fighting against the Capitol while speaking with Peeta when he states that he wants to die as himself without having been changed by the Capitol, to show that he is more than just “a piece in their Games,” (142). According to Katniss, the tributes are just a piece in their Games, and above all else—why does it even matter (143)? Katniss’ attitude demonstrates that going into the Games, she does not believe there is any point in defying the Capitol, or even any way to do so. While this attitude may seem to be passive—simply accepting the cards that she has been dealt—it is a premature assessment, as it is experiencing the horrors of the Games that will leave Katniss changed, thereby converting her into an autonomous character and consequently, a feminist heroine. 

After taking a stand against the Capitol following Rue’s death and mocking the Gamemakers by attempting suicide via nightlock, Katniss ascends into rebel status, thereby highlighting her autonomy; her experience in the Games serves as the catalyst that will set the rest of the series in motion. The Games enable Katniss to shed the belief that rebelling against the Capitol is futile. Chiefly, Katniss allying herself with Rue sets this belief into motion because in the wake of Rue’s death, she begins to see the Capitol in a new light. She states, “Rue’s death has forced me to confront my own fury against the cruelty, the injustice they [the Capitol] inflict upon us” (236). By coming face to face with this cruelty and injustice, Katniss begins to not only understand what Peeta meant by not being a piece in their Games, but strives to make the Capitol citizens see this by holding them accountable for Rue’s death. To do so, she covers Rue in flowers and sings her a song, giving her a proper burial to demonstrate that Rue was an individual and not just a tribute; this resists the dehumanization the Capitol enforces upon tributes. Furthermore, through this moment, she begins to understand how the Capitol is at fault for Rue’s death. Though the boy from District 1 dealt the killing blow, it is the Capitol who put them all in the Arena (236). In recognizing this, “Katniss begins to find her own sense of integrity, her own ideas about what is right, and her own realization that the real enemy is the system that made the boy from District One—and coincidentally herself—into killers” (Jones 241). Hence, it is through this moment that she begins to form her identity as a rebel and assume autonomy—to see that there are two sides in this strife and which side she wants to be on. Additionally, we see that decorating Rue’s body was not a one time act—Katniss feels compelled to do more. She states that she now not only wants to win the Games to return to Prim, but to avenge Rue and be unforgettable—suggesting that there is more to come (242). As such, this moment also disproves Jones’ claim that Gale introduces Katniss to the possibility of something more, as it is Rue’s death that prompts Katniss to come to this realization all on her own.

Following Rue’s death, another pivotal moment in Katniss’ first arena is her big finale with the nightlock (poisonous) berries. To Katniss, returning home without Peeta is unthinkable; she would rather die and begs him to kill her, but neither can find it in them to kill the other (343). In her desperation, she devises the plan with the nightlock, which is for her and Peeta to feed each other the berries so that they both die. Her plan demonstrates that Katniss fully understands how the Games works—how important it is to the Capitol that there is a Victor—and it is this understanding which leads her to believe that if it seems as if she and Peeta were both going to die, the Gamemakers would have no choice but to let them live (343). Though this moment is driven primarily by Katniss’ desire to not return home without Peeta, she also admits that her intentions have become blurred—what was for Peeta and what was done out of hatred for the Capitol (358)? It is this blurring of intentions that ought to be focused on; pulling out those berries was not simply a reaction, but rather something Katniss could only do because she understood the Capitol’s values and how to manipulate them. Hence, her act demonstrates that she has already begun to think as a rebel by considering how to successfully defy the Capitol, even if she is not fully aware. This decisive action should be recognized as an autonomous choice that reflects Katniss coming into her role as an active heroine.

Book 2

The Turning Point: No More Running

After being crowned a Victor, Katniss’ return to District 12 is marred by the realization that President Snow does not believe she is in love with Peeta, leading to a series of threats from Snow and the tightening of security (Peacekeepers) within the districts that ultimately results in Gale being publicly whipped. Following Gale’s whipping, Katniss reaffirms her hatred towards the Capitol and abandons her previous plans to run away. At the beginning of CF, Katniss sought to run away with her loved ones because President Snow suggested that he would act out on his threat to kill them after she failed to diffuse the early stages of uprisings occurring throughout the districts (74). Though she had set out to run away merely minutes before Gale’s whipping, his punishment changed everything. The whipping served to remind Katniss of the cruelty of the Capitol—how running away will not be enough to save her family from their grasp and how much they have already hurt them—thereby “reaffirming her understanding of the Capitol as the true enemy” (Jones 242). Though Katniss was no stranger to the unjust ways of life in District 12, Gale being whipped reminded her of the inhumane situations her loved ones like Prim and Rue have already suffered, stating, 

“...aren’t they the very reason I have to try to fight? Because what has been done to them is so wrong, so beyond justification, so evil that there is no choice?...Yes. This is the thing to remember when fear threatens to swallow me up. What I am about to do, whatever any of us are forced to do, it is for them. It’s too late to help Rue, but maybe not too late for those five little faces that looked up at me from the square in District 11. Not too late for Rory and Vick and Posy. Not too late for Prim” (123).

This is a pivotal moment for Katniss’ involvement in the rebellion. Whereas before she believed the best thing she could do for Prim was protect her by volunteering for her, she now realizes that she cannot protect her as she has already been hurt by the world the Capitol has created. Should she wish to protect Prim, she must fight to make the world a better place, to dismantle the power that keeps the Capitol on top; this is why she becomes a part of the rebellion—for the future of others. Thus, her decision to join the rebellion is completely autonomous, as it was motivated by personal desires. The significance of this moment in her journey towards the title of feminist heroine cannot be understated. 

Now that Katniss has declared her commitment to the rebellion, she executes several acts of defiance throughout the Quarter Quell in order to aid the rebel cause that demonstrate her autonomy. Firstly, Katniss has come to fully understand what Peeta meant during the first novel when he stated that he wanted to show the Capitol that he was more than just a piece in their Games, reflected during her performance evaluation in which she hangs a dummy and writes the name Seneca Crane on it—the name of the previous year’s Head Gamemaker who was killed by Snow (236-237). By hanging the dummy, she sends a message to the Gamemakers in order “to make them realize that while we’re vulnerable to the Capitol’s cruelties, they are as well” (236).  This act demonstrates that Katniss has not only come to understand what Peeta meant, but now lives by it. While she fully understands how this act may reflect poorly upon her and her loved ones, Katniss believed that showing her defiance was of the utmost importance because this message reflects that she cannot be controlled by the Capitol—that she is more than a piece in their Games. Hanging that dummy is in direct defiance to the Capitol; in defying them, she is proving that they do not control her. In this moment, she puts her hatred and contempt towards the Capitol into action, thereby exhibiting her autonomy.

Moreover, her acts of defiance extend into her time in the arena. She comes to the conclusion that President Snow has likely ordered her death, but she makes it her mission to “...[defy] the Capitol right up to the end…to give hope to the rebels” (243). In this moment, readers become aware of how dedicated Katniss has become to the rebellion, thereby proving that she was not coerced into the rebellion by others. Rather than seeking some way to avoid the Capitol’s death sentence—something she has set out to do in the past by running away—she wants her death to serve as a way to aid in the rebellion, hence emphasizing her genuine commitment to the rebel cause. To do this, she plans on keeping Peeta alive, an act of public interest, as it defies the norms of the Games and consequently the Capitol, but also a personal wish (244). By setting out to defy the Capitol in such a public display, Katniss also demonstrates that she understands her symbolic power (Jones 242). Understanding her symbolic power means that Katniss fully recognizes her importance to the rebellion, which is important as it is this understanding that moves her to do everything possible to aid the rebel cause—even if it means her own death.

Finally, her biggest act of rebellion in CF is her final one: shooting her arrow towards the forcefield in the arena. At this moment, Katniss believes that her and Peeta’s lives are in danger as the plan they were following—to electrocute the water to hurt Brutus and Enobaria—fell apart. When she hears Peeta calling for her, Katniss calls back in order to lure the other towards her, fully intending to die in order for Peeta to live. However, in a moment of clarity, she recalls Haymitch’s advice to remember who the enemy is and sets out to act on his words. She states, “I have always known who the enemy is. Who starves and tortures and kills us in the arena. Who will soon kill everyone I love. My bow drops as his meaning registers. Yes, I know who the enemy is. And it’s not Enobaria” (378). Immediately after, she shoots her arrow towards the forcefield, effectively ending the Games and sending a direct message to the Capitol: the war has begun. This moment is of such great importance because in shooting the first arrow of the war against the Capitol, Katniss directly contributes to the rebel cause. She was emboldened to make such a drastic move by marking the Capitol as her enemy and taking a direct stand against them while simultaneously recognizing that her fellow tributes are not her enemy. Here, Katniss is decisive; she makes an active choice, proving herself to be an active heroine.

Book 3

The Mockingkay Accepts—Belief in Rebel Cause is Reignited

Though Katniss opens the novel by insisting that she does not want to be the Mockingjay, she soon accepts—and even seeks out—the role after being reminded of the cruelties of the Capitol, reaffirming her belief in the rebel cause. Katniss is initially so adamant about not becoming the Mockingjay because she feels betrayed after the events of the Quarter Quell. She was saved by Haymitch and Plutarch Heavensbee, alongside Finnick and Beetee, who were all a part of an elaborate plan to save Katniss from the Arena at all costs because she is the face of the rebellion. This plan directly went against the promise Haymitch had made to her to save Peeta; it is this personal betrayal, as well as the feeling of being used as a pawn by her trusted mentor and fellow tributes, that leaves Katniss wanting nothing to do with the rebellion. However, a message from Peeta, currently held captive in the Capitol, is displayed among all the districts in which he calls for a cease-fire, and this changes everything. Hearing his call for a cease-fire leads Katniss to recall all the terrible moments she has witnessed—Rue being murdered, Gale being whipped, District 12 being blown to bits—all events that were caused by the Capitol. This reminder causes her to declare that they cannot go back to the way things used to be (30-31) and assume the role of the Mockingkay in order to prevent that very thing from occuring again. Here, Katniss makes a conscious choice by reaffirming her commitment to the rebellion. Though she is filled with fear and doubt, she prioritizes the creation of a better world free from the cruelties of the Capitol, accepting that she is the necessary leader for this cause. Peeta’s call for a cease-fire was necessary for her to accept the Mockingjay role because it reminded her of what they were fighting for and why she wanted to take part in the rebellion.

Though the Mockingjay role was initially created by others, Katniss does not let these people determine how, when, or even if she will become the Mockingjay. It is a position that she will only assume according to her own beliefs, demonstrated by the ultimatum that she gives Coin: should her demands not be met, they will need to find another Mockingjay (41). Katniss’ refusal to let others control how she aids in the rebellion confirms her autonomy, as it marks her as an independent choice maker. Similarly, it becomes clear that Cinna, one of the characters scholars accuse of pushing Katniss to take part in the rebellion, did not ever force anything upon her (Montz 145). It is revealed that the outfit Cinna made for Katniss as the Mockingjay would only be given to her under a sole condition that he set: Katniss come to the decision to become the Mockingjay on her own (43). Thus, Cinna respected Katniss’ right to choose; he believed in her potential to be a powerful leader, but never forced this upon her. Therefore, Katniss was not simply passively accepting a role others forced upon her because Cinna always left Katniss the right to choose. Making the choice to become the Mockingjay was autonomous and therefore makes Katniss an active, feminist heroine. 

As the war comes to a close, Katniss takes a direct role in bringing down the unjust powers. To begin, she demands to be on the front lines in order to take an active role in bringing down President Snow and the Capitol rather than be stuck in District 13 unifying the districts via propos, televised propaganda (233). In order to even be considered for the role, she must undergo a grueling training regimen—while injured. Katniss’ demands to be on the front lines, despite the risks, demonstrates that she is making the Mockingjay into what she both wants and believes it to be. While the others would have her simply fulfilling a performative role, she rejects this and molds the Mockingkay into a position that reflects her values—explicitly exemplifying her ability to make active choices. Additionally, her willingness to put herself through such a physically demanding task emphasizes just how dedicated she is to the rebel cause and the lengths to which she will go in order to help win the rebellion, thereby emphasizing her personal commitment to the rebellion.

Furthermore, as Panem awaits Snow’s public execution, Coin calls a meeting with the remaining victors. She explains that the dissent towards the Capitol has to be handled and proposes one final Hunger Games with children from the Capitol. When it is put to a vote, Katniss votes yes—a decision that is much more complicated than it initially seems. In this moment, Katniss begins to reflect on just how little has changed if all it takes is a meeting with a few people around a table to decide which lives are expendable and which are not. She carries this thought with her as she goes out to execute Snow, the man who has been the face of violence and cruelty throughout the series, and instead shoots her bow through Coin’s heart (370-72). Katniss executing Coin is the culmination of her involvement in the rebellion. With Coin as the leader of Panem, nothing would change—the Games and all its cruelties would continue, only in a different form. It was Coin, after all, who gave the okay to launch the parachutes which killed Prim (377). Thus, Katniss believed that the only way to truly create the better world she had been fighting for all along was to kill Coin, proving her to be an active-decision maker and therefore, a feminist heroine. (Fritz, 31). 

Katniss’ final act of killing Coin collapses all existing arguments about her lacking autonomy. To argue that she was forced in the rebellion has no validity when by murdering Coin she takes the entire fate of the future in her hands. In this moment, she acts decisively—deciding to release that bow was a decision Katniss made solely on her own because she understood that with Coin as the leader of Panem, the oppression they lived under would continue to rule; there would be no better future, which was what the rebellion was for all along. As such, by killing Coin, Katniss’ commitment to the rebellion is made explicitly clear because we as readers see that she was not willing to let what she fought for—a liberated Panem—be ruined. What’s more, Katniss believed that what would follow her after killing Coin was death by public execution and attempts to kill herself instead (373). Therefore, Katniss’ willingness to murder Coin, even in the face of her own demise, highlights her commitment to the spirit of the rebellion. 

Part 2: Katniss as Active in Her Romance

Intro

Romance in THG subverts how heterosexual relationships—particularly love triangles—are typically portrayed, with the woman being objectified as a prize to be won by the men. In THG trilogy, Katniss holds the power—it is not about Gale or Peeta choosing Katniss, but whether or not Katniss will choose them. Scholars concern themselves with assessing Katniss’ choices in regards to her romance—particularly in regards to her final choice of Peeta over Gale. Many scholars believe that Katniss’ final choice was not much of a choice at all. Katherine R. Broad, for example, claims that Katniss did not choose Peeta, but rather ended up with him because he is the one that sought her out (124). To her, this demonstrates that Katniss is a passive character that lacks agency. Broad also argues that Katniss’ romance with Peeta was thrust upon her without consent, thereby suggesting that their relationship was not something that she chose at all—that she did not want it. It is because of these claims that Broad feels the ending of the series, wherein Katniss and Peeta get married and have children, is a “cop-out ending,” that simply follows the “reproductive status quo” (121), essentially arguing that Katniss falls into the role prescribed to women rather than actively choosing her future. 

Within these arguments, there are some implicit assumptions. Firstly, Broad’s claims suggest that Katniss should have chosen Gale; choosing Gale would demonstrate her agency because their romance was not thrust upon her without consent. By suggesting that Gale would have been the better choice, Broad consequently implies that Katniss not choosing him means she ended up with a man she did not sincerely love. Likewise, by arguing that Katniss’ romance with Peeta was thrust upon her without consent, Broad emphasizes the belief that Katniss’ feelings for Peeta were insincere, suggesting that their entire relationship was a farce. This claim in itself leaves no room for Katniss to simply not choose either of the men, which problematically suggests that a woman must fall in love and be in a heterosexual relationship.  Because Broad reads the series in this way—critical of Katniss and Peeta’s relationship—her reading of the series’ epilogue is biased. These claims grossly gloss over several key moments in the series, which I will present in order to demonstrate the ways that Katniss’ relationship with Peeta asserts her autonomy as a result of the dissolving of her and Gale’s friendship, as well as her genuine feelings towards Peeta, establishing her as a feminist heroine. 

Firstly, throughout the series, it is demonstrated time and time again that Katniss would never have chosen Gale. As the series progresses, they grow apart as a result of differences in opinions and experiences, particularly regarding Gale’s rage towards the Capitol that leads him to inciting violence, and Katniss’ personality change following the Games. Similarly, Broad ignores the ways in which nearly every interaction Katniss has with Gale is tarnished by guilt. The guilt that Katniss feels regarding Gale is what initially prohibits her from being with Peeta—not genuine romantic love for Gale. Moreover, viewing the series as a whole permits one to see the ways in which Katniss and Peeta’s relationship grew over time. What once was a strategy to stay alive grew into genuine feelings, demonstrated multiple times throughout the course of the novels.  As such, when the series is viewed as a whole, it becomes clear that Katniss was not a victim to a romance thrust upon her without consent and that she did not merely choose the man who sought her out. Likewise, it becomes clear that the ending of the series was another example of Katniss asserting her agency. The events of the novel prove that Katniss’ decision to be with Peeta over Gale was an autonomous, active choice that presents her as a feminist heroine. 

Gale: Different Views and Growing Apart

Book 2: Returning Home From the Games and Gale’s Rage

In a moment that best exemplifies how much their relationship has changed, Gale displays his rage towards the Capitol and disdain for how Katniss has changed following the Games. One of the very first things Katniss notes at the beginning of CF is that her relationship with Gale has changed (5). Before entering the Games, she referred to Gale as the “only person with whom I can be myself” (Collins HG 6) and hinted at possible romantic feelings towards him (Collins HG 112, 280). However, their friendship begins to dissolve when she returns from the Games; this is particularly evident when Katniss shares with Gale her plans to run away. In this scene, Katniss explains to Gale that Snow has threatened her and her loved ones—meaning him and his family—and for that reason, they must run away. He agrees and even shows excitement at the opportunity, but his mood immediately sours once he finds out that Katniss plans to bring Haymitch and Peeta along (98). His distaste towards their inclusion in Katniss’ plans demonstrates that Gale refuses to accept the new Katniss—the Katniss who has grown to love and care for the people she met through the Games, the Katniss who no longer has eyes only for him. 

What’s more, after Katniss reveals that there has been an uprising in District 8, Gale becomes completely opposed to the idea of running away at all. He states that he would never run away if there is a chance at a true rebellion; his feelings are in complete opposition to Katniss’, who believes that running away is necessary to save themselves and their families (100). This is the first major disagreement that Katniss and Gale have, but it establishes what will eventually become their complete undoing: Gale’s rage towards the Capitol. There is a significant division being drawn here between Katniss and Gale. While they are both opposed to the cruelties of the Capitol, the way they go about expressing this/acting on it is completely different. As demonstrated in the section above, Katniss takes a while to fully immerse herself in the rebellion—but Gale is committed to it from the beginning. The problem with this, however, is that Gale’s version of rebellion is tainted by obsession in a way that Katniss’ is not. For Gale, nothing is more important than the rebellion—not even the safety of his family—and this is something Katniss cannot reconcile with, clear from her refusal to listen to him and stay as he wants. Conversely, for Gale, he cannot reconcile with Katniss’ refusal to join him, demonstrated by the way he looks at her with “disgust” (100). 

Book 3: Gale’s Rage Put to Action: The Point of No Return

Katniss and Gale’s relationship continues to fall apart as she comes face to face with just how violent Gale’s rage makes him, finally culminating in the disintegration of their relationship as a whole following his most violent act. Throughout the entirety of the series’ final novel, the pair continue to show the ways in which they are growing apart (53, 117), making Katniss feel as if she is losing Gale—as if what tied them together before no longer exists (127). Things worsen, however, when Katniss realizes just how violent Gale is willing to be in the name of the rebellion. When they arrive at District 2 to turn the district to their side of the war, Gale suggests blowing up the Nut, the main hub and mine of the district which is full of workers (203). To Katniss, this is horrifying. She believes that condemning these people to such a fate is something that President Snow would do, not something she herself feels capable of (204-205). Because she believes this to be such an evil thing to do, it is unavoidable that Katniss’ view of Gale becomes conflated with her disgust towards his plan—she cannot separate Gale from his actions or beliefs, meaning that he has become someone akin to President Snow when it comes to violence. Bearing this in mind, how could she ever have a romantic relationship with someone comparable to the man responsible not only for her personal misery, but for the misery of all 13 districts?

Finally, Gale’s violence reaches its peak, leading to the complete deterioration of his relationship with Katniss. In one of the series’ most emotional moments, Prim dies in a bomb attack launched against the Capitol. These bombs were launched in the very way Gale had designed and explained to Katniss before Prim’s death (185-86). Prim’s death leaves Katniss in a state of ruin and when Gale comes to see her for the first time since her sister’s passing, she conveys that any traces of their friendship have died along with Prim. This is clear through her statement that she is “searching for something to hang on to, some sign of the girl and boy who met by chance in the woods five years ago and became inseparable” (366). Katniss must search for who they used to be because they have grown into such different people that they do not fit together anymore. Though they have both been steadily growing apart for a while now, Katniss and Gale both know that Katniss will never be able to look at Gale without thinking of the bomb that killed Prim (366-67) and this is the point of no return—the point at which their friendship and the possibility of anything more disappears forever. This moment is so significant because it is the culmination of all the reasons why Katniss could have never chosen Gale. At the time when there was a chance of romance between the two, Gale was a different person. He was the person who kept Prim safe and fed when Katniss could not— but now he has become someone Katniss cannot separate from her little sister’s murder. This moment demonstrates that Gale and Katniss no longer have the same priorities, as Katniss’ has always been to keep her loved ones safe, which Gale can no longer provide (Baker and Schak 208). The circumstances they lived through turned the pair into someone the other could never love; for Katniss, this was the evolution of Gale’s rage. When his rage reached its boiling point, Katniss could no longer ignore this part of him she had grown to hate and was forced to confront the reality that Gale could never make her happy. As such, the arguments scholars make regarding Gale representing the “right” and “active” choice are inaccurate because they fail to acknowledge that at the series’ conclusion, Katniss’ view of Gale has completely shifted in a negative way. It is precisely in not choosing Gale that Katniss asserts her autonomy: Gale is no longer someone she wants because of his unrelenting tendency towards violence. 

Gale: Katniss’ Guilt

The possibility of a romance between Katniss and Gale is largely maintained as a result of Katniss attempting to protect Gale’s feelings. Katniss reveals why she feels so much guilt towards Gale after he is whipped. While waiting for him to recover, Katniss imagines how she would feel if it were Gale who went to the Games and paraded a strategized love act in front of everyone. She expresses that she feels hatred for both him and the “phantom girl…[because] Gale is mine. I am his” (Collins CF 117). This feeling of belonging to one another reveals the true root of Katniss’ guilt. For so long—long before Peeta came into the picture—Katniss and Gale only had each other; they were the only ones the other could depend on after suffering the traumatic loss of their fathers. The pair grew used to only depending on the other, on being the only person who mattered to them—it was something that they did without even needing to think, and now things have changed so drastically. As a result, Katniss feels as if she has betrayed Gale and what they have been through together. Her guilt and need to protect him is rooted in the years they spent as the other’s only confidant—a need to make up for betraying what they shared. 

Most importantly, Katniss makes it abundantly clear that it is out of loyalty to Gale—and her unwillingness to hurt him—that she has not done more in regards to her feelings for Peeta. While training for the Quell, Katniss shares a hug with Peeta and expresses that it feels so good that she does not want to let go; she continues, “And why should I? I have said good-bye to Gale. I’ll never see him again, that’s for certain. He won’t see it or he’ll think I am acting for the cameras. That, at least, is one weight off my shoulders” (194). By stating this, Katniss reveals that she has been withholding herself from Peeta for Gale’s sake, and now that he is out of the picture, she no longer has to do so. What’s more, she emphasizes that not needing to protect him anymore and being able to be free with Peeta feels good. This plainly indicates that Katniss’ actions towards Gale have been out of a sense of duty towards him rather than genuine romantic feelings, and being free of that duty/guilt is liberating.

In sum, the implicit claim that Gale would have been the right choice for Katniss is misguided as it does not take into consideration how Katniss’ guilt towards him impacted their relationship. This claim rests upon the belief that had Katniss decided to be with Gale, that would have been an active choice because their romance was not “forced.” Within this belief, there is again an assumption that Katniss had true feelings for Gale all along, but many of these instances that are believed to be romantic between the two were simply Katniss taking care of Gale’s feelings out of a sense of duty and guilt. As such, asserting that Katniss is a passive character because she chose Peeta is simply untrue; Katniss did not want Gale romantically and being able to make the choice to not be with him was an active one on her part. As such, Katniss exercises her autonomy as a feminist heroine. 

Peeta

Book 1

Before Peeta’s Public Love Confession

To begin, Katniss and Peeta’s connection began long before the Games, a fact that is often glossed over by those who argue that their romance was forced. Upon hearing Peeta’s name called at the reaping, Katniss immediately recalls Peeta’s direct involvement in one of the most important moments of her life. When she and her family were at the brink of death as a result of starvation, it was Peeta who saved their lives by deliberately burning bread from his parent’s bakery to give it to Katniss (30). This moment meant much more to Katniss than a single act of kindness—it gave her the hope to live after her father died and prompted her to begin hunting to keep her family from going hungry (32). Because of this moment, Katniss feels grateful and indebted to Peeta and is horrified at the thought of having to enter the arena with him; the thought of killing the boy with the bread is unthinkable. Hence, before the Games even begin, there is already a connection between the two of the saved and the savior, the hopeless and the beacon of hope, that cannot be overlooked.

Real Moments Inside the Arena

The connection between Katniss and Peeta grows as Katniss makes a distinction between romantic moments on and off-camera, emphasizing her regard for genuine off-camera moments. Inside of the arena, after the announcement is made that two tributes from the same district may be crowned victors, Katniss begins to follow the star-crossed lovers act in an attempt to save both her and Peeta’s lives. However, she soon reveals that the line between what was an act and what was real is blurred. When she first kisses Peeta, she does not feel anything at all because it was solely for the sake of exciting sponsors (260). On the other hand, when Peeta caresses her hair as she falls asleep, Katniss enjoys it because it feels natural (265). This distinction is so significant because it indicates that there are moments between them that are personal rather than solely for the public eye and that Katniss enjoys Peeta’s affection when she believes it is genuine.

Furthermore, because Katniss believes that Peeta is acting, she remains committed to the act. When Peeta tries to convince Katniss not to go to the Cornucopia to get the medication he needs to survive, she amps up the dramatics in an effort to please viewers. However, midway through, her words begin to reveal her true feelings: “...while I was talking, the idea of actually losing Peeta hit me again and I realized how much I don’t want him to die. And it’s not about the sponsors. And it’s not about what will happen back home. And it’s not just that I don’t want to be alone. It’s him. I do not want to lose the boy with the bread” (297). Here, it is revealed that Katniss herself has stopped playing the Games according to the romance plot that was set out before her. For her, her feelings for Peeta, confusing as they may be, have become real. What’s more, it is at this moment that Katniss and Peeta share their first sincere kiss without any intentions of looking good for sponsors or the general audience. During the kiss, Katniss states, “..I feel stirring inside my chest…This is the first kiss that makes me want another” (298). From this moment on, the pretext of the forced romance collapses. Something real has transpired between the pair and it cannot be taken back. It is this kiss and Katniss’ confession of how badly she fears losing Peeta that exposes just how serious things have become. This kiss leaves the promise of something more occurring—though it may be undefined and uncertain, it is undoubtedly something that will need to be addressed and serves as a pivotal moment to prove that Katniss’ feelings for Peeta were sincere, and therefore being a participant in their romance does not mark her as a passive character. 

Book 2

Real Moments: On and Off-Screen

The genuine moments which Katniss and Peeta share both on and off-screen demonstrate the sincerity of their love, proving that their relationship is more than a forced romance in which Katniss is a passive participant. In CF, the two make a conscious effort to get to know each other and form a friendship that is solely theirs, not in any way affected by the expectations of Panem; they do so through small moments, such as asking the other’s favorite color or Peeta taking Katniss to see his paintings (52). Even on the Victory Tour when they are in front of not only cameras, but thousands of watchful eyes of district citizens, Katniss continues to develop feelings for Peeta that are wholly hers, completely unrelated to their love strategy for the Games. One such moment occurs when Peeta, completely unscripted, offers up a part of their earnings as victors to the families of the fallen tributes of District 11. This act deeply moves Katniss because of her love for Rue. She thinks to herself, “At this moment, it’s impossible to imagine how I could do any better [than Peeta]. The gift…it is perfect. So when I rise up on tiptoe to kiss him, it doesn’t seem forced at all” (59). Here, her kiss is real because the feelings that emerge for Peeta in this moment are real. It is a pivotal moment in terms of the progression of their relationship because it indicates that when they are in front of the cameras, Katniss is no longer acting. The line between private moments and moments in front of an audience is getting thinner and thinner as Katniss falls harder for Peeta—meaning her feelings are sincere and she exercises autonomy within their relationship.

In an especially moving scene, Katniss once again demonstrates that she wishes to be with Peeta—to choose him. For scholars that argue that Katniss’ romance with Peeta was thrust upon her, there lies an implicit assumption that her romance with Gale was genuine and thus he would have been the “correct” choice—one that was autonomous. However, when given what Katniss believes is Peeta’s blessing to be with Gale—to let him die so that she can return home and have a future without him—Katniss rejects it (352). By rejecting Gale, Katniss directly disproves some scholars’ arguments regarding her purported genuine feelings for him. Additionally, within the claim of a forced romance, there is also an implicit assumption that Peeta is in the wrong for his part in the romance plot. However, by encouraging Katniss to be with Gale, it becomes clear that Peeta is in no way constraining Katniss to their relationship. Furthermore, at this moment, Katniss recognizes that Peeta, who has just confessed that nobody needs him, is not playing up his emotions in a display for the cameras, but rather that he is being sincere. Thus, she responds sincerely as well; she tells him that she needs him and then kisses him; this kiss makes her crave more and lights her up inside (353). Though this moment is not Katniss’ final choice, as there is still a whole novel worth of events to be carried out, Katniss all but officially chooses Peeta and gives up Gale in this moment. Her sincere confession that she needs him reveals that Katniss is not willing to be without Peeta, even if it meant her death. Because she is so distraught at the idea of being without him, there is no question as to the genuine nature of her feelings—Katniss loves Peeta. What’s more, the kiss serves to emphasize the intensity of emotion Katniss feels for Peeta—something absent from her kisses with Gale. Therefore, Katniss’ sincere feelings for Peeta indicate that their relationship was completely consensual, meaning that Katniss had full agency and made autonomous choices regarding their romance.  

Book 3

Moments That Show Their Love

The moments that Peeta and Katniss share at the height of the war and amidst so much strife demonstrate their genuine love for one another. Because Peeta has been hijacked, it is extremely difficult for the two to find a moment of peace throughout the course of the novel. However, while on the move to infiltrate the Capitol, the two share a tender moment. They are talking, Katniss helping Peeta to differentiate between what is real and not real, when she begins to brush his hair away from his face. Though he initially flinches at her touch, he allows her to continue. The moment becomes even more tender as she admits to him that they protect each other and she is protecting him even now (302). Here, we see an example not only of the affection which Katniss holds for Peeta, but of the way in which they are gradually growing back together. Peeta has been programmed to think Katniss is essentially evil and Katniss has resented him for losing his love for her, but they are able to move past this in an attempt to gain back the other’s trust and love. As such, this moment exemplifies the genuine nature of their relationship. 

Similarly, in a moment that may have resulted in her death, Katniss displays just how much she loves Peeta. In their trek towards the Capitol, Katniss and Peeta, along with the rest of their crew, are chased by mutts. Peeta begs to die as he feels himself slipping away from reality, but Katniss will not have this. She kisses him, despite the danger, and begs Peeta to stay with her and to not let Snow take him away from her (314). The way that Katniss phrases these statements reflect the desperation she feels concerning Peeta. She is not worried about what Peeta’s death will mean for the rebellion or for anyone else—she simply does not want to lose him personally. This establishes that Katniss feels as though Peeta and his love belong to her—that they belong to each other. It all but confirms that she has actively chosen him because she sincerely loves him.

The Final Choice and the Epilogue 

In an act motivated by her own free will and love for Peeta, Katniss makes her final choice. After Katniss has been banished to District 12 following the murder of President Coin, Peeta shows up at her house with several primroses, stating that he thought they could plant them together along the side of Katniss’ home (383). For those that argue that Katniss simply chose the one who sought her out, this is the moment they refer to—the moment in which Peeta seeks her out while Gale stays away. That reading of this moment suggests that Peeta came with the intention to gain back Katniss’ love—but he did not. He states himself that he came to plant primroses with Katniss in memory of Prim, nothing more. What’s more, Katniss herself does not take this moment to mean anything more. Rather, it is Peeta’s act of kindness that enables Katniss to independently take the first steps towards healing after her sister’s loss; it gets her to shower, to hunt, even begin a book to remember everyone she has lost (384-87).

Finally, as the novel comes to a close, Katniss reveals that she and Peeta are now together romantically, thereby confirming that Peeta is her final choice. She states, 

“Peeta and I grow back together….his arms are there to comfort me. And eventually his lips. On the night I feel that thing again, the hunger that overtook me on the beach, I know this would have happened anyway. That what I need to survive is not Gale’s fire, kindled with rage and hatred. I have plenty of fire myself. What I need is the dandelion in the spring. The bright yellow that means rebirth instead of destruction. The promise that life can go on, no matter how bad our losses. That it can be good again, And only Peeta can give me that” (388).

Within this passage, there are several moments that prove that choosing Peeta was an active choice on Katniss’ behalf. Firstly, she emphasizes that what occurred between her and Peeta post-war was gradual. She did not immediately choose to be with him when he showed up at her house with primroses, but rather they “grew back together,” meaning that their relationship progressed as they leaned on each other to heal. Additionally, she directly states that “this would have happened anyway,” meaning that she unofficially chose Peeta a long time ago. This confirms that Katniss had always loved Peeta and what transpired between them over the course of the series was much more than a romance thrust upon Katniss, thereby proving that the moments they shared together were sincere. Lastly, she directly rejects Gale and the possibility of anything ever occurring between them romantically. Katniss recognizes that Gale’s rage was not what she wanted, something that was visible throughout the series as they grew apart. Thus, for those who claim that Katniss only chose Peeta because he sought her out, implying that she would have chosen Gale given the opportunity, this message directly disproves this claim as Katniss makes abundantly clear that Gale would never be right for her. Instead, Katniss actively chose the man she genuinely loved.

After Katniss indicates that she has chosen Peeta, readers get one final look at the couple in the series’ highly contested epilogue. We see the couple in a field and it is implied that the pair are now married—and made explicitly clear that they have two young children. Katniss opens up the series by stating that she never wanted to have children (HG 9), making this moment one in which her autonomy is highly questioned, especially because of the historical connotations of motherhood. However, solely focusing on that initial statement causes one to miss the implicit messages Collins left throughout the texts. It is emphasized that the reason behind Katniss’ conviction is that she does not want her children to become victims to the Games (HG 9, CF 257 & 354, MJ 389). Thus, it is implied that Katniss does want children, but her fear for their safety supersedes her desire to be a mother—but should the Games end, Katniss could act on her desire. As such, when the corrupt government is overthrown and the Games are no longer a concern, the possibility for Katniss to become a mother is opened. When these factors are considered, it becomes clear that Katniss becoming a mother is much more than simply fulfilling a role that is expected of her as a woman—it is her accomplishing something that she wants. In this way, it emphasizes her autonomy, as she actively decided to become a mother once what previously restricted her was no longer a problem.

Section 2: Katniss’ Relationship to Collective Action vs Individualism

Section Introduction

 Collective action is crucial to feminists—and therefore necessary to be a feminist heroine—because they believe that it is required to end gender oppression/domination (Sweetman 217). Feminists emphasize that gender oppression thrives in situations where women are prohibited from engaging in community together because when women come together, they are able to avoid being restricted to “traditional” social networks, such as family, marriage, and the household (Sweetman 218). Essentially, community challenges the sense of isolation they may feel within these other networks because they are empowered by the women around them, thereby enabling them to become aware of the injustice they face and “raise hopes that gender relations can, and should, change” (Sweetman 218). To add on, another term used to refer to the general goal of collective action is feminist solidarity. Feminist solidarity can be broadly defined “as the principle of mutual support between individuals, groups, and organizations working on gender equality and women’s rights” (Sweetman 219). By referring to coming together as solidarity, the significance of working together is emphasized. Feminists find it crucial that women work together because, “Feminist solidarity strengthens the power of women to challenge gender-based violence, abuse, marginalization and poverty. Through taking action collectively, women can draw on their pooled skills, knowledge, and resources, enabling them to take courses of action which wouldn’t be available to individuals” (Sweetman 219). 

Sweetman highlights that such solidarity has been successful in the past by highlighting a study done by Malta Htun and Laurel Welson in which they demonstrate that the most important and consistent factor in achieving policy changes against violence against women was a strong national women’s movement (221). The mutual support found in these groups is necessary because in order to create real change in society, women must be working as a collective unit, as individuals are not enough to cause structural change.

Given that individuals do not have the power to yield such social change, feminism opposes individualism. Individualism poses a problem to feminism because “it serves to hide systematic domination” (Thompson 2). Seeing as feminists are trying to fight against such systematic domination, it follows that individualism is opposed to feminist goals. Individualism hides systematic domination because it emphasizes that societal issues are the results of individuals, erasing the importance of societal, systemic injustices (Thompson 4). Feminists particularly stress that when women are solely viewed as individuals, they are removed from social relations that affect all women, such as the patriarchy (Thompson 2). The promotion of individualism is of special concern to contemporary feminists because of the popularity of postfeminism. Postfeminism is so popular in the contemporary age because it is portrayed as a form of “girl power”—the belief that girls can do anything without fear of sexism or other forms of domination holding them back (Pomerantz and Raby 13). Postfeminism’s assertion of fierce individualism misleadingly emphasizes that as individuals, girls are in charge of their own success and their failures cannot be attributed to systemic issues (Pomerantz and Raby 13). 

Conversations regarding postfeminism are commonly held when discussing dystopian YA novels, as it is believed that novels within this genre often contain elements of neoliberal ideology (Connors 85). Neoliberalism is an ideology that emphasizes the importance of individuals (Connors 85). This focus on individualism leads to systemic issues such as racism being chalked up to individual issues (Connors 99). Consequently, neoliberalism promotes the idea that everyone has equal opportunities regardless of their race, class, or gender, which ignores that some people are privileged over others (Connors and Trites 2). Clearly, neoliberalism and postfeminism are intertwined because of the ways both ideologies privilege the individual over the collective and result in the promotion of a meritocratic worldview. We can see the close relationship between neoliberalism and postfeminism in the famous proclamation by Margaret Thatcher, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1979-1990, that “There is no such thing as society: there are individuals, men and women, and there are families." Thatcher, as both a neoliberal and a postfeminist, exemplifies the exact sort of ideology that feminists are opposed to. As the first woman to become Prime Minister, many people mistakenly view her as a feminist icon despite the fact that her values were actually opposed to those of feminism. This popular misconception, however, reveals how postfeminist/neoliberal ideology can so quickly become popularized—and that is the fear with dystopian YA novels.

As one of—if not the very most—popular dystopian YA series, it follows that scholars often discuss THG in terms of its relation to postfeminism. Scholars raise the question of whether Collins, through Katniss’ character, rejects individualism in favor of collective action, thereby moving away from postfeminist themes—or, alternatively, if she embodies a postfeminist idea of girl-power heroics. To answer this question, they assess her actions by focusing on her interactions with others and what these interactions reveal about the value she places on community. This scholarship understands that the events of THG series do not concern themselves with feminism, but rather, can be analyzed through a feminist lens; this distinction is important because it must be made clear that Katniss’ dedication to collective action is not to pursue the dismantling of systems of gender oppression, but rather the class inequality within Panem. By and large, the consensus held by many scholars is that Katniss promotes collective action, thereby rejecting individualism and its associated ideologies; her efforts to fight against class inequality and overall political oppression can be analyzed as feminist. Scholars point to Katniss’ relationship with her family, Peeta, and the community at large to demonstrate the ways in which Katniss defies individualistic ideals in favor of communal bonds. 

For instance, Brown highlights that while the series initially appears to appeal to a postfeminist audience, the series is actually infused with feminist principles (191). Throughout the series, Katniss defies the individualistic norms that the Capitol has set out, first by volunteering for Prim (Ruthven 51) and later by fostering community with various others, such as her alliance with Rue (Ruthven 51) or the mine workers in the Nut (Manter & Rigsby). Scholars emphasize that Katniss’ actions are largely motivated by care and that it is her capacity to care that leads her to fostering change (Ruthven 51), thereby exhibiting the goals of collective action. Because Katniss creates communal bonds with so many others throughout the series, she is able to form a community that is powerful enough to take down the oppressive government (Brown 179, Ruthven 58). As such, Katniss is highlighted as a character who makes choices that do not only benefit her, but rather the whole of Panem (Manter & Rigsby 409). In addition to how Katniss’ dedication to collective action reflects upon the fight to take down the Capitol, scholars also discuss how Katniss’ ability to form communal bonds aided her personally. Because Katniss came to care for a community that extended beyond the normative familial circle that is imposed onto women (Ruthven 58), she was able to use community as a tool to help her move forward following Prim’s death. It was through communal mourning—specifically sharing her grief with others who could relate and ensuring that the memory of those who had passed stayed alive— that Katniss found herself able to join society once more and properly grieve after all the trauma she faced (Manter & Rigsby 411-413).

While the majority of scholarship supports the claim that Katniss upholds collective action, one concern that is raised is that the series follows a common postfeminist trope in which older female characters are portrayed as villains that the protagonist must defeat. Specifically, Jeffery Brown points out that dystopian stories that are often claimed to be postfeminist stories (THG, Divergent, Snow White and the Huntsman) have a common thread in which there is a young revolutionary girl who faces a conflict with an older woman (193). These conflicts, often culminating in a final battle, are a metaphor; the older woman represents feminism, which is no longer needed, while the young girl represents postfeminism (Brown 193). This conflict arises as a result of a “generational fault line” (194), and postfeminist stories emphasize that this fault line is something which must be overcome by rejecting the villain and consigning them to the past (often through their literal or metaphorical death). In this way, this conflict between the characters perpetuates the postfeminist belief that feminism is no longer needed and is actually an unwelcome force. For THG, he suggests that this trope is present in the conflict between Katniss and President Coin, the older female leader of District 13 and the mind behind the rebellion. Coin is depicted as someone who is cruel and power-hungry, much like President Snow. When it comes time for Katniss to kill President Snow in a public execution, she instead shoots her arrow at Coin, preventing her from becoming the president of all of Panem—at least superficially a classic example of this postfeminist drama of generational supplantation.

To join this conversation, I plan on expanding the discussion that scholars have already had by highlighting other instances in the series where Katniss demonstrates a dedication to collective action/a rejection of individualism. I believe that providing more examples strengthens the integrity of the argument as the examples will act as further proof to support the claim that Katniss is dedicated to collective action. Moreover, when providing these examples, I will provide thorough explanations of how each example functions in relation to collective action so that their purpose is clear. I also intend to emphasize the role Katniss played in spreading the value of collective action to others in order to highlight how working together as a community was necessary to overthrow the corrupt Capitol. Additionally, I seek to address Brown’s concerns regarding Collins’ purported use of the postfeminist trope of the young revolutionary (Katniss) taking down the older female villain (Coin). In my view, the conflict between the two is not representative of a generational conflict between feminism and postfeminism, but rather a greater political battle in which Coin represents the oppressive forces the rebels seek to overthrow. In addition to disproving this argument, I will discuss the ways in which Katniss utilizes collective action through district unity, specifically by highlighting the ways in which she breaks down barriers enforced by the Capitol through her alliance with Rue—a relationship that results in the formation of a communal bond with District 11 and Katniss’ motivation to join the rebellion, the extension of a political network across all districts, and Katniss’ active role in generating unity across the districts, the most necessary factor towards banding together to fight against the Capitol. Overall, through Katniss’ character, Collins rejects individualism and promotes collective action, proving Katniss to be a feminist heroine. 

President Coin vs. Katniss: A Political Face-Off 

For some, the vilification of President Coin and Katniss’ act of killing her impedes Katniss’ ability to be a feminist heroine. As mentioned above, the use of the postfeminist trope where a conflict between feminism and postfeminism is depicted between an older (vilified) female character and the young revolutionary protagonist suggests that by killing Coin, Katniss exterminates feminism, making it out to be an unwelcome force that has no place in society. However, the conflict between these two does not follow this trope as they do not fit into the prescribed roles of feminist (Coin) and postfeminist (Katniss). Rather, the roles are flipped with President Coin exemplifying postfeminist behavior with her individualistic mindset and Katniss exemplifying feminist behavior through a prioritization of community. As such, Katniss killing Coin does not exterminate feminism or portray it as a force to be denounced. 

Moreover, the conflict between the two is political. Coin represents the state—what the rebels were fighting against. Despite being the mastermind behind the rebellion, Coin’s vision of a post-Snow future did not align with the true goals of the rebels. Much like Snow, she had little regard for human-life; this is demonstrated by calling for the attack on Capitol children and rebel medics that resulted in Prim’s death (MJ 361) and proposing to hold another Hunger Games with Capitol children (MJ 369). Because Coin sought to become president after the war was won, the oppression that the rebels had fought so hard to eliminate would continue under her rule. Katniss recognized this and killed her to safeguard their collective future (MJ 371-372). As such, killing Coin is an act of eliminating political oppression rather than an act of perpetuating postfeminist ideology. In fact, by killing Coin and eliminating a threat to the future prosperity and safety of the people of Panem, Katniss acts with the collective in mind. Her decision is one that takes into account what is best for everyone, thereby demonstrating that Katniss rejects postfeminism and its individualistic values in favor of collective action. 

Breaking Down Barriers: Collective Action Through District Unity

Rue

Katniss’ alliance with Rue, a display of collective action, works to undo the barriers the Capitol has set between the districts. It is established that the Capitol seeks to drive the districts apart—to keep them divided and unable to trust one another (HG 14). This is done via the Games, as they force the twelve districts to view each other as enemies. In such an environment, it is difficult to establish community with others, making collective action nearly impossible. However, Katniss actively resists this. Her first step towards breaking these barriers which the Capitol established is during her first Games when she allies herself with Rue, a tribute from District 11. By allying herself with Rue, Katniss engages in collective action because she breaks through the isolation which the Capitol has enforced upon them; she does not see Rue as an enemy, but rather as someone she wishes to protect (HG 211), thereby refusing to dehumanize her as the Capitol desires (Ruthven 51). Furthermore, the two share stories about their home districts, providing the other with information they otherwise would never be privy to (HG 203), thus working against the Capitol’s method of withholding knowledge of other districts. Their alliance and the information which they share is so significant because the connection between the pair extends much further than just them, but rather to the citizens of District 11, creating a political network (Ruthven 52). This emerging network is portrayed by the loaf of bread that the citizens of District 11 send to Katniss following Rue’s death as a sign of gratitude (HG 239). The act of sending bread is one that is completely out of the ordinary, not only because sending gifts to tributes is usually reserved for the rich sponsors in the Capitol, but because Katniss is not from their district. They are not meant to root for her—not when they still have one live tribute, Thresh—but they do, demonstrating that Katniss and Rue’s bond deeply moved them. Therefore, it becomes clear that Katniss has acted as the catalyst towards establishing unity between the districts, an act that is a direct display of collective action. Likewise, by establishing a relationship with Rue, Katniss demonstrates a rejection of postfeminist individualism. 

What’s more, it is Katniss’ relationship with Rue that serves as her motivation for entering the rebellion. After Rue’s passing, Katniss realizes that the true enemy—even inside the arena—is not her fellow tributes, but rather, the Capitol. Through this realization, she forms a desire to make the Capitol/Gamemakers see that the tributes are not just pawns in their game. Their bond serving as her motivation to enter the rebellion is so significant because it emphasizes the power of communal bonds. Moreover, it is at this moment in which Katniss begins to see that the Capitol’s cruelty extended far beyond her own individual strife and felt connected with others through this suffering. 

Other Tributes and District Citizens

The relationship which Katniss established with Rue—one in which she did not see her as a threat despite being in the arena together—extended towards the other tributes as well, thereby enabling the political network she initially established with Rue to extend further to other districts. For instance, as her first Games near their conclusion and the pool of tributes lessens, Katniss thinks to herself that she does not want anyone else to die, despite the threat they pose to her life (HG 293). She goes so far as to say that she wishes she could be friends with Thresh, demonstrating that she is continuing to break down the barriers that the Capitol had established. Her persistence in breaking down these barriers continues as the series progresses, thereby allowing the sense of unity between the districts to continue growing as well. To illustrate, while in District 11 during the Victory Tour, Katniss thanks the families of the fallen tributes and also thanks the general public for the bread they sent her. Her gratitude is met with the salute that is given in her district as a sign of respect. This moment between Katniss and the people of District 11 demonstrates the scope of what Katniss has set in motion as it becomes clear that the people of District 11 are not only standing with Katniss and her district, but all of the districts. They are united by their losses—the constant loss of their children in the Games—and they are able to express their suffering and desire for a life without such constant suffering when they come together as a community, thereby demonstrating that they are forming communal bounds, a vital step towards collective action and away from postfeminist hyper-individuality. 

These communal bonds that are being forged are vital to propelling the rebellion against the Capitol forward. When the districts come together, their stance against the Capitol becomes strengthened. One of the most powerful moments in the series reflects this reality: when the tributes all hold hands together at the interview held before the Quell, “[They] stand in one unbroken line in what must be the first public show of unity among the districts since the Dark Days” (CF 258). Katniss’ dedication to collective action is shown once more through this act because it was she who reached out towards the first tribute, Chaff, consequently prompting the others to hold hands. As such, she is the mastermind behind what is the first direct display of unity between all the districts. This act shows not only how much she values collective action, but the vital role she has played in getting others to value it as well. Fighting against the Capitol is not a feat that can be undertaken alone, and by spreading the values of collective action to others, Katniss begins to make the possibility of achieving social change attainable. We see this because immediately after this display of unity, the interview is cut from the air and the lights shut off in the live location (CF 258), thus proving that the Capitol is deterred by their unity. This highlights the power of collective action that feminists emphasize—the power of dismantling systems of oppression when people come together in solidarity. 

In the final novel, once the rebellion has truly taken off, Katniss continues to attempt to bring others into the community that is being forged. Her continuous attempts to break down barriers and simultaneously expand and strengthen their sense of community emphasize that she is a character committed to collective action. Perhaps what best illustrates the value she places on collective action is Katniss’ uncanny ability to relate to every district citizen. For instance, while in District 2, the most well-off district and the district with the most Capitol sympathizers, Katniss recognizes that despite what separates District 2 from the other districts—most of all, her home district, the poorest in Panem—they are both victims to the Capitol and are therefore on the same side of the war (194). When she comes face-to-face with a soldier who points a gun towards her, Katniss pleads with him to join the rebels; she attempts to appeal to him by stressing that they are not each other’s enemies, but that the real enemy—the one who seeks to pit them against one another—is the Capitol. She emphasizes that they must come together in order to put the Capitol down, stating “This is our chance to put an end to their power, but we need every district person to do it!” (216). This interaction is such a pivotal moment because we see that Katniss understands the true intent behind collective action—the power of coming together and the reality that social change can only be won by working together—and she tries to give this knowledge to others. Katniss recognizes that she and all the other district citizens are united by the injustices they have lived through, and by coming together, they can fight against it. Thus, Katniss is deeply committed to collective action and attempts to spread the method to her fellow district citizens. Her commitment to collective action establishes that she rejects individualistic ideologies and therefore is a feminist heroine. 

Conclusion

My research question—is Katniss a feminist heroine—fits into a much larger discussion: what is a feminist—or, more accurately, who can be a feminist? It seems that the answer to this question continues to grow more narrow as a list of requirements to be a feminist grows. Essentially, there is a series of boxes that a woman must fit herself into in order to be considered a feminist, making the title something that is becoming exclusive and restricting. The biggest idea being perpetuated by this trend is the belief that a feminist should not want to get married or have children. To put it simply, a woman who prioritizes a traditional family as one of her desires—especially a woman who wishes to be a stay-at-home-mom—is seen as the antithesis to feminism. Many feminists argue that women who seek that life are willingly putting themselves in a subservient position and as such, cannot be considered feminists. While a certain degree of apprehension to marriage and motherhood is understandable because of the historical connotations of these roles, it is completely unreasonable to suggest that desiring a family prevents one from being a feminist. It does not accomplish anything because one is not inherently feminist simply by not wanting a family, just in the same way that wanting a family does not make one inherently anti-feminist. Rather, being a feminist is about being committed to dismantling gender discrimination and oppression, especially by uplifting other women. A wife and/or a mother is just as capable of these things as a single childless woman. 

The promotion of this belief is gaining traction as social media trends continue to polarize women. For instance, the traditional wife ("tradwife") trend popularized by social media influencers such as Nara Smith has sparked significant debate. This trend involves women occupying traditional roles, such as homemakers and caretakers, filming their daily lives. Many argue that the trend romanticizes oppressive gender roles and is regressive. Others, however, believe the trend allows for stay-at-home mothers to gain well-needed visibility on social media, allowing them to remove the stigma associated with such a role. The polarizing opinions following this trend is only one example of the contentious state of modern feminism.

Examining contemporary attitudes towards feminism is vital as it provides insight into how feminism may be converting into an exclusionary ideology. If women are being excluded from feminism, being told that they must act a certain way in order to be considered a feminist, what becomes of feminism? Can it truly be said that the goal of feminism—to establish equality between all genders and to empower women—is still the same when certain women are being deemed not good enough for the cause? In fact, will that goal ever be achievable when the pool of women continues to lessen as restrictions prevent more women from aiding the feminist fight? 

This issue is especially concerning because it is relevant to young girls. For many impressionable young girls, their introduction to feminism will ultimately impact their future relation to the ideology. Should that introduction be one that suggests to them that they must reject romance, and thereby marriage and possibly motherhood, in order to be a feminist, they will be introduced to a stringent set of limitations. Essentially, a choice is being laid out before them:“ happily ever after,” or feminism. This choice is ostracizing because it presents feminism as something that requires grand sacrifice and in that way, may deter a lot of young girls from ever wanting to become feminists. What then becomes of feminism? Young girls are the future—the fight for equality and the continuation of feminism rests upon their shoulders, but if they are being told that they must fit into a particular mold in order to be a feminist, will they want to be one? Will they even think that feminism is an option for them? There is a high risk for the next generation of women to simply reject feminism because they feel that it has rejected them.

It is because of these concerns regarding the narrowing of who can be a feminist that I find it so important to name Katniss a feminist heroine. While my paper centers around the idea that a feminist heroine must have autonomy and a duty towards collective action, these are broad tenets of feminism that are non-restrictive and overall accomplish the main goal of feminism: equality. Katniss demonstrates that women do not need to fit inside a box to be considered a feminist. Many of the scholars who argue that she lacks autonomy (in relation to the rebellion) and can therefore not be a feminist heroine, seem to believe that because other people in her life—Cinna and Gale, for instance—had a lot of influence on her, she could not be autonomous. This is a restrictive idea because it suggests that a woman must be hyper-independent—that the only way in which a woman can be a feminist is if she depends on no one but herself. Though Katniss was not coerced into the rebellion, that does not negate the impact which others around her had in her life and her journey towards assuming a leadership position in the rebellion. Their influence does not inhibit her autonomy or prevent her from being a feminist; there is no need to be hyper-independent to be considered a feminist. 

Similarly, in terms of Katniss’ relation to autonomy and her romance, the very fact that romance is centered in the novel is a large issue to many. Asserting that the romance prevents the text from being feminist promotes an exclusive feminism; it promotes the idea that feminists do not “conform” to traditional roles by becoming mothers and wives—that feminists must reject that life. By proclaiming Katniss as an active agent in her romance, and thereby a feminist heroine, this argument collapses. Katniss exemplifies that women can have it both ways—a family life and an active dedication to a rebellious cause. Furthermore, claiming that Katniss is a feminist heroine when she gets what is considered a cliché happily ever after demonstrates that there is nothing wrong with a happily ever after—that a woman does not have to reject those desires to be considered a feminist.

Overall, hailing Katniss as a feminist heroine actively works against the notion that a feminist must fit into a particular mold; claiming her as a feminist broadens the definition of the word in a way that is more inclusive. Because THG is a series read by so many young girls, interpreting Katniss’ as a feminist heroine is of utmost importance. Young girls need to see that being a feminist is not restrictive, that they do not have to conform to a set of requirements—and that is what Katniss represents. By promoting Katniss as a feminist heroine, young girls who read the series will have an example that they can look up to when they consider their relationship to feminism. They will see a teenage girl who opposed the government that lorded over her and her country but believed that she could not do anything to change it—until suddenly she did. They will see a teenage girl who was wrought with fear and an immense desire to protect her loved ones at all cost, but who was able to power through these emotions to fight for a future that she believed in. They will see a teenage girl who struggled with loss and change, who experienced her first love, and who yearned to be loved. That very same teenage girl was the most vital piece to putting an end to the oppression that her country lived under—someone who everyone regarded as powerful—and that teenage girl grew to be an adult woman who chose to be a mother and a wife. Katniss is a character that has so many layers, and it is because of these layers that she is someone who so many readers can identify with. This process of identifying with a character is something that can be very intimate and powerful and for that reason, there is so much power in holding up Katniss as a feminist heroine. 

Works Cited

Baker, David, and Elena Schak. “The Hunger Games: Transmedia, Gender and Possibility.” Continuum, vol. 33, no. 2, 2019, pp. 201–215., https://doi.org/10.1080/10304312.2019.1569390.

Bedford, Nicole. “Feminism Remains Relevant in 2023.” Medium, An Injustice!, 8 Mar. 2023, aninjusticemag.com/feminism-remains-relevant-in-2023-2b8d14a415f7. 

Brendler, Beth M., and Laurel Tarulli. “Blurring Gender Lines in Readers’ Advisory for Young Adults.” Reference & User Services Quarterly, vol. 53, no. 3, 2014, pp. 221–24. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/refuseserq.53.3.221

Broad, Kathrine R. “The Dandelion in the Spring: Utopia as Romance in Suzanne Collins’s The Hunger Games Trilogy.” Contemporary Dystopian Fiction for Young Adults: Brave New Teenagers, Routledge, London, 2015, pp. 117-130

Brown, Jeffrey A. “GIRL REVOLUTIONARIES: Neoliberalist, Postfeminist, and Feminist Heroines.” Beyond Bombshells: The New Action Heroine in Popular Culture, University Press of Mississippi, 2015, pp. 167–96. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt17mvh6x.10.

Card, Claudia. “Against Marriage and Motherhood.” Hypatia, vol. 11, no. 3, 1996, pp. 1–23. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3810319. Accessed 6 Dec. 2023.

Collins, Suzanne. The Hunger Games. New York. Scholastic, 2008.

Collins, Suzanne. Catching Fire.  New York. Scholastic Press, 2009.

Collins, Suzanne. Mockingjay. New York. Scholastic Press, 2010.

Connors, Sean P. “Engaging High School Students in Interrogating Neoliberalism in Young Adult Dystopian Fiction.” The High School Journal, vol. 104, no. 2, 2021, pp. 84–103. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/27091713.

Connors, Sean P., and Trites, Roberta S. “ Neoliberalism: A Framework for Critiquing Representations of the ‘Superspecial’ Individual. .” Engaging with Multicultural Ya Literature in the Secondary Classroom: Critical Approaches for ... Critical Educators,  edited by Ricki Ginsberg and Wendy Glenn., Routledge, New York, NY, 2019, pp. 32–41. 

Coontz, Stephanie. Marriage, a History: From Obedience to Intimacy or How Love Conquered Marriage. Penguin , 2006. 

Diekman, Amanda B., and Sarah K. Murnen. “Learning to Be Little Women and Little Men: The Inequitable Gender Equality of Nonsexist Children's Literature.” Sex Roles, vol. 50, no. 5/6, 2004, pp. 373–385., https://doi.org/10.1023/b:sers.0000018892.26527.ea. 

Firestone, A. 2012. “Apples to Oranges: The Heroines in Twilight and The Hunger Games.” Of Bread, Blood and The Hunger Games: Critical Essays on the Suzanne Collins Trilogy, edited by M. F. Pharr and L. A. Clark, McFarland, Jefferson, NC, 209–218.

Jones, Caroline E. “Changing the World: Faces of Rebellion in Suzanne Collins’s Hunger Games Trilogy.” Journal of the Fantastic in the Arts, vol. 27, no. 2 (96), 2016, pp. 225–47. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/26321202.

Khader, Serene J. “The feminist case against Relational autonomy.” Journal of Moral Philosophy, vol. 17, no. 5, 2020, pp. 499–526, https://doi.org/10.1163/17455243-20203085. 

Montz, Amy L., and Sonya Sawyer Fritz. “Girl Power and Girl Activism in the Fiction of Suzanne Collins.” Female Rebellion in Young Adult Dystopian Fiction, edited by Sara K. Day and Miranda A. Green-Barteet, Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, London, 2016, pp. 17–31. 

Nash, Elizabeth, and Isabel Guarnieri. “Six Months Post-Roe, 24 US States Have Banned Abortion or Are Likely to Do so: A Roundup.” Guttmacher Institute, 5 Sept. 2023, www.guttmacher.org/2023/01/six-months-post-roe-24-us-states-have-banned-abortion-or-are-likely-do-so-roundup#:~:text=See%20our%20interactive%20map%20for,in%20Iowa%2C%20Utah%20and%20Wyomin

Rich, Adrienne. Of Woman Born: Motherhood as Experience and Institution. W. W. Norton and Company, 2021. 

Rigsby, Ellen M., and Lisa Manter. “To Kill a Mockingjay: Katniss’s Corrosive Queerness in the Hunger Games Trilogy.” Utopian Studies, vol. 30, no. 3, 2019, pp. 403–21. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.5325/utopianstudies.30.3.0403. 

Ruthven, Andrea. “The Contemporary Postfeminist Dystopia: Disruptions and Hopeful Gestures in Suzanne Collins’ ‘The Hunger Games.’” Feminist Review, no. 116, 2017, pp. 47–62. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/44987307. 

Stoijar, Natalie. “Autonomy and the feminist intuition.” Relational Autonomy, 2000, pp. 94–111, https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195123333.003.0005. 

Sweetman, Caroline. “Introduction, Feminist Solidarity and Collective Action.” Gender and Development, vol. 21, no. 2, 2013, pp. 217–29. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/24697244. Accessed 6 Dec. 2023.

Thompson, Denise. “Feminism and the Problem of Individualism.” UNSW Sydney, 1997, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.26190/unsworks/680 .