The Hunger Games Reality Analysis

Title: “2+2=5”, The Ultimate Question to Reality

In our daily lives, we take the reality for granted. For us, reality is an objective state of affairs, not to be questioned. Dystopian literature breaks this assumption; it explores the subjective versions of reality under inhumane circumstances, to investigate our innate perception of reality at a fundamental level. In this essay, I will thoroughly investigate the theme of versions of reality and reveal the pathological nature of it.

In The Hunger Games, the Game itself skews the perception of reality; it is portrayed as an entertainment TV show, although it is a thinly disguised agony and a blatant violation of human rights. The deception also continues at the individual level. As the tributes were forced to play the Game in extreme conditions, they dissociated from the reality. They acclimated to the violence and became numb, slowly losing the sense of morality. Being conscious of the camera, they also disconnected from their true feelings and pretended to be fine when they were actually on the verge of nervous breakdown. This was the version of reality suitable to be broadcasted.

Still, George Orwell’s 1984 goes further; it asserts that objective reality does not exist when O’Brien, the inner party interrogator, explicitly states that the reality lies only in people’s minds.

This notion is absurd in our real world, but due to the systematic denial and reconstruction of reality, the dynamics of perception were vastly different in 1984. Since the party could forge any record and manipulate any literature, they only had to deceive the people’s mind to alter the past. In the same line of speech, O’Brien utters the famous quote of “2+2=5”, that even self-evident truths can be tampered to match the politically preferred version of reality by collective brainwashing. This is the ultimate question to reality; is two plus two still four when everybody firmly believes

“2+2=5”?
Having seen the depictions of versions of reality, it is high time to discuss about its implications on real individuals and societies. On the individual level, appealing to versions of reality is a psychological defense mechanism; it dissociates us from hostile surroundings so that we can avoid true but uncomfortable feelings of threat. It may even be beneficial in the short term since it helps us to operate “normally” under pressure. However, it is like a painkiller; it does not solve the problem at root, aggravating the condition in the long run. It is also insidious; we slowly lose our true selves by ignoring our genuine feelings of hurt.
On the societal level, it has more serious political repercussions; as well seen in Korean society, it polarizes the political terrain into the far left and the rightwing extremists. This is because the left and right each have a very “brittle” political frame-or biased version of reality-that prevents them to rethink about their own stance and see from other’s viewpoint. This version of reality hinders healthy communication about our society’s future e.g. policies on education, welfare and technological research, and only fires irreconcilable conflict between society members.
As we have seen, dystopian literatures pose a fundamental question to us; does objective reality exist? It is an elusive, philosophical question that avoids being answered. Still, a few things are clear; deceiving oneself to avoid psychological pain is pathological in the long run, and deliberately manipulating the past to suit a political ideology can never be justified. To leap closer to the ideal, we should reflect on our versions of reality, trying to go beyond the opaque dissociations and internalized manipulations we have.