Hunger Games vs. Great Gatsby While seemingly quite different in terms of subject matter, the Hunger Games and Great Gatsby works are actually quite alike than they may seem. While a group of self-identified elites engaging in depravity and excess may not seem a lot like the life and death battles waged in the Hunger Games, there are a lot of parallels. The arc that most of those parallels follow is that there is a strict and gaping dichotomy between the rich and the poor in both stories. In both situations, there are a group of elites that are controlling the poor in one way or another and/or they otherwise have disdain and lack of regard for the same. However, the elites do not end up sailing off into the sunset in either story as things go awry for both sets of elites. While having power and riches may seem enticing to many, both the Great Gatsby and the Hunger Games prove that such an attitude, taken to whatever extreme one wants to go, is ethically and morally wrong and the outcomes for the rich might not be as rosy as they might seem.

Analysis

As noted in the introduction, there are dichotomies in both the Great Gatsby and Hunger Games when it comes to wealth, status, geography and so forth. The author of this report will look at the Great Gatsby first. A reading of the text makes it quite clear that Mr. Fitzgerald had a very misanthropic viewpoint about the people of the 1920's. He seemed to have felt that the ability of people to work hard and realize their dreams was increasingly hard to attain and retain given the conditions and outcomes that were happening at that time. This is depicted in a stark way when there is a description of what is known as the Valley of Ashes. There were three distinct areas in the Gatsby book. There was the West Egg, which was the realm of the newly rich. There was the area of New York City, which also represented higher status and prestige. In between, however, there was what was known as the aforementioned valley of ashes. It was a desolate stretch of land that was littered with industrial waste. Many hold this stretch of land to be a metaphor for the moral and ethical decay of the rich on both ends of the valley (GSU, 2015). Basically, the two groups of well-to-do people were off having their fun, engaging in depravity and so forth while the poor had to scrounge and suffer in an area that was laid to waste by the rich and their unethical practices and habits. To extend the just-mentioned metaphor a bit further, the so-called "American Dream" was slipping out of the grasp of many people while the rich of that era were completely indifferent and unsympathetic for the havoc they caused and the indifference they displayed. Gatsby himself had received his wealth through means that were less than noble or legal so he himself was a sterling example of someone who was living the high life despite blatantly breaking the law and otherwise being depraved in terms of how he attained his wealth and power (Collins, 2009; Fitzgerald, 2004).

Much the same chasm exists in Hunger Games. Just like Gatsby, there is a glaring dystopia/utopia dichotomy where some select few people live a very comfortable and insulted life while the people among the districts in the Panem are ruled in a brutal and overbearing fashion. Non-adherence to the edicts and rules the leadership makes is certain death. In some ways, this makes the conditions in Hunger Games a little more extreme but the same basic structure is obviously present. One element that is extremely present in both stories is that the well-to-do do not end up as well as one might think or believe. Indeed, Gatsby ends up being killed by Wilson, thus ending his run at the top. He clamored after and pursued Daisy. He saw it as a challenge because there was the talk about how many other people had tried to do precisely that and failed. In the end, he ultimately failed and his life came to an abrupt and violent end. In Hunger Games, the fight to the death tournament that is imposed by the leadership portrayed in Hunger Games is upended by the collusion of Katniss and Peta when they decide to mutually commit suicide rather than be pawns wielded and controlled...

Rather than allow their power to be usurped and their legitimacy questioned, the leadership puts the kibosh on that and this paves the way for what happens in the other books in the series (Collins, 2009; Fitzgerald, 2004).
Another strong similarity between the two books was consumption. Just as with the other elements being compared throughout this report, the way in which consumption exists is starkly different between the two texts. In the Valley of Ashes and the outlying districts of the Panem, people have to scrap and save just to survive. Tools and other items of daily life are very rudimentary and basic. On the other hand, the leadership and those among the elite do not really want for anything and they use items like food, water and so forth in a very wasteful and robust way. They are seemingly oblivious (or uncaring of) the people in the poor areas that have to struggle just to survive whereas the rich in both books are extremely wasteful and over the top in everything they do. The rich in both books would think nothing of waste or inefficiency because they have the power and money to get more whenever they want it (Collins, 2009; Fitzgerald, 2004).

To take the point a bit further, the wealthy in both books absolutely could have been more generous and giving of their excess resources, money and so forth. However, both groups made an active choice not to do so unless it suited their interests or proclivities. An example of this would be when the leadership in Hunger Games gave the participants in the battle to the death a fancy dinner and even a little training. Indeed, it was all part of the spectacle and the show and not because the leadership really cared about the participants. Indeed, had the games gone the way they "should" have, all but one of them would have died. In the end, it was only one less than that but the leadership could not care less. Anyhow, the point to be made here is that the leadership in both books made it a point to exclude resources from the "great unwashed" and instead decided to use people as puppets, keep things for themselves or both (Collins, 2009; Fitzgerald, 2004).

Another similarity is that the people in the poor areas do a ton of work and expend a lot of effort but they end up having little to show for it while the rich in both books reap all of the benefits. In the Gatsby book, the people in the Valley of Ashes are the working class of that book and what they end up working on and doing ends up benefiting the rich much more than it benefits the working class or the poor in general. The Hunger Games is much the same sort of situation. Each district of the Panem makes a different product and the vast majority of the proceeds go to the leadership and rich while the people in the Panem districts receive a mere pittance as compared to the larger whole that they break their backs to manufacture and make (Collins, 2009; Fitzgerald, 2004).

Another major similarity between the two books is the focus on moving up in class rather than being limited and relegated to being poor and struggling. Indeed, Gatsby changes his name and resorts to unethical means to get rich. He uses his new wealth to enter the new class. Hunger Games is similar in that the reward for winning the tournament is basically an extension of the opulence and feast that is bestowed to them before the tournament. Similarly, the fashion and the way in which the rich people carry themselves in both books is in very stark contrast to the working class people. In Gatsby, people in the Valley of Ashes do not stand out in terms of colors or how they carry themselves. They move among the clouds of ashes and very much blend in to the area by comparison. On the other hand, Gatsby is known for his very bright colored shirts and other parts to his outfit. Much the same chasm exists in the Hunger Games. Work in the districts of the Panem is about using what you can and wearing what you have to do. There is no concept of fashion or "looking good" or anything else like that. As can be seen in the verbiage of the Hunger Games text, the exact opposite is true for those…