It’s a new year, my friends! So far, I’ve been busy contemplating what 2012 might bring me, as well as struggling to remember to write ’12 rather than ’11 whenever I have to put a date on something. And like many of you, I’ve decided to jump on the proverbial bandwagon and make a resolution or two, one of them being to read a total of 50 books this year. Mind you, that’s about a book a week, and most of the books that are patiently waiting for me on my “To-Read” shelf are…well, let’s just say they’re more like doorstops than pamphlets. But I’m off to a good start, and I’m still coasting on the momentum of my excitement at the prospect of so much reading, so maybe there’s hope for me yet.
The first book on my list this year was Divergent by Veronica Roth, which was deemed one of the best books of 2011, with good reason. As you can see, I’m still on the dystopian kick that I’ve been on since I wrote about dystopian YA in my first post. And I have to say, I absolutely adored this book. I found it refreshingly original, which is saying something for a book that’s part of such a saturated market. Beyond that, it had so many strong and wonderful characters to love, and even a few that I loved to hate.
But though Divergent is original in some ways, there was something very interesting in it that reminded me of other books I’ve read and loved. In Tris’s Chicago, society is divided into five groups, called factions (Abnegation, Candor, Amity, Erudite, and Dauntless), each with its own coordinating quality that defines them. When the members of each faction turn 16, they must decide whether they want to stay in the faction they were born into, or if they want to transfer to a new faction with which they feel they identify better. One of the main themes of the story is the choice Tris makes about which faction to belong to and the irrevocable changes that it causes in her life.
Besides inspiring some interesting thoughts about the consequences of such a simplified and rigid societal system, these groups made me think of something I’ve noticed in the past. Wonderful books like Harry Potter and The Hunger Games (I do read more besides kids’ books; I swear) also have a set of groups that make up their society. Heck, even The Lord of the Rings gets in on the clique action with its various races.
These groups, in my opinion, are a significant part of why such books are so well-loved. Of course, much of their popularity is due to the fact that they are skillfully written, or at the very least, entertainingly written. But whether or not the authors realized it at the time, they were cooking up a pretty compelling recipe for success. And here’s why–when a reader reads this kind of book, they invariably ask themselves this question: “If I were one of the characters in this book, where would I fit?”
We’ve all done it. We’ve wondered which characters would be likeliest to accept us into their ranks, and which groups we’d most like to join up with, even if the two don’t necessarily coincide. Some of us are fans of so many things that we’ve started to consider ourselves Hufflepuff Amity Hobbits from District 4. We won’t name any names, of course.
In any event, there’s a few important things that this question does for readers. It causes them to be honest with themselves about which group their personal qualities line up with the most, and they must wrestle with themselves as they learn the difference between the qualities they want to have versus those they truly possess. They learn more about which attributes they consider desirable, and they become inspired to work toward attaining them. They are reminded of the need to belong that they’ve had since they were young enough to know what the concept meant. They are made to ponder the importance of having a group of friends they can trust, as well as why they need to be thoughtful when it comes to choosing just which friends those will be. They see that, while it seems like there are countless things that make us different, the reality is that all of us want the same thing–somewhere to belong.
I love reading these stories because of the way they make me think, and sometimes I wish there were more books like them. They represent humanity and its common societal needs with a starkness and honesty that few other methods afford. They strip such needs down to their bare bones and allow us to think about why they’re so important and what their consequences are with regards to our view of ourselves and our interactions with others. And in my opinion, those are excellent things for a book to do.
Let’s hear what you’re thinking–do you like books with groups, like the ones I talked about, or do you think the concept is overly simplistic and cliched? Do you think such books are important, or are they just gimmicky? What have books like these taught you about yourself or others? How have they made you think? I’m sure I’ve just scratched the surface here, so I hope you’ll share your thoughts!
That book cover looks cool!
Excellent post! I personally feel that there’s nothing better than a good cliche
For me it depends on the groups in the book. If they feel contrived, like the author needed x amount of groups before continuing to write, then it’s just not worth it. But, like in Harry Potter for instance, if the groups are well done, wonderfully fleshed out, and compelling, then you just can’t help but pick a clique. (Hufflepuff for me too, btw.)
I think these kinds of books mirror the way our society has stratified and allow people to perhaps find a better home than they’ve found out in the real world (though that has problems of its own). I like to say that I don’t like cliques, but the fact of the matter is that without them, the majority of us wouldn’t know what to do and how to interact with other people. These books give us a little different angle on social interaction, due to their different stratification, and I think that can help us to imagine and view our world a little differently. So, in that respect, I like cliques.
In re groups, it depends on the book. Some of the best stories I’ve read don’t rely on groups to make their point, but focus on individual human relationships. I actually would say Lord of the Rings shows its characters transcending their various races and coming together for the sake of something greater. And in the Hunger Games, the end result was sort of the same (though I think Collins executed that rather clumsily) with the people of the various districts eventually working together, though grudgingly in some cases, to pursue something greater. I think that finding and determining where you belong is definitely a part of human nature, but I like it when books try to transcend that, as I think it’s a rather petty aspect of people. But identifying with one group over another is really normal, I think. It helps you look at that group more closely and hopefully gives you a different lens with which to look at other things as well.
That’s a great point! I think that when the groups in a book come together for a common goal, that’s when such stories are at their best. It shows how so many of the differences we think are so huge just don’t matter when it comes down to it.
I agree with your distinction in fiction between finding a place in society and coming together for the common good. The former seems to be a predecessor to the latter, though. And I think as far as YA novels go, finding your specific place in society is a much more pressing issue than social coordination, if only because the majority of teenagers are in the same situation as one another, and social coordination is virtually unnecessary. Teenagers hardly have to cooperate with anyone to achieve success going to school, participating, doing homework, and repeating. No one needs to drastically reform society, like Katniss did, or defeat certain evil, like Harry Potter. That’s why modern YA novels start out with classification (SO appealing), then follow the hero in their quest for the common good.
Not gonna lie, I’m totally a Hufflepuff Amity Hobbit from District 4 (er, or 3, rather…).
(And I love that you identified that a classification.)
Yay! I’m not alone! I’m glad you liked that
Even when a book is about a group, there is always one character that stands out, the central figure that the story revolves around. At Hogwarts it is, of course, Harry Potter, and he relies on the friendship and support of his friends, with the main theme of the story resulting from how they help him deal with the actions of his enemies. How about something like Brighton Rock, where the gang leader falls out with his clique, Pinkie becomes increasingly alienated by his actions, surrounded finally only by enemies. Setting a novel in a ‘group’ is a great way to develop story through relationships between characters.
Pingback: A Case of L-O-V-E | Book Blob