How to use this Page

of course, Chris!

“2015 was a year of some upheaval in the comics industry as millennial readers become the primary audience for the medium, and boomer/Bronze Age icons faded.”

This was the year Marvel and DC realized they had to reach beyond the same bunch of middle-aged male fans they’ve had for decades. I’m one of those middle-aged guys and I won’t be reading many of the new youth- and female-targeted comics. But I’m glad they’re being published. It’s something the Big Two should have been doing for decades.

I’m voting for Dinesh Shamdasani who, in my opinion, has done more the benefit the industry this year than most people realize.

My vote is for Dinesh Shamdasani. He not only runs Valiant but he is also a fan like us. Valiant is the only super hero universe where one can, reasonably, follow the entire line. And the books Valiant publishes are top notch, with many of their titles being consistently among my favorites month to month.

I am voting for Dinesh Shamdasani. He has given those who crave truly great art and stories something to hang our collective hats on.

My vote is for Dinesh Shamdasani for bring back the Valiant Universe and expanding it.

Dinesh Shamdasani deserves this for sure. Not just overseeing, but orchestrating the greatest shared universe in comics, maintaining consistent quality in every title, and focusing on the fans with a personal touch puts him head and shoulders above anyone else considered for this award.

It’s very sad to see just how one-sided your editorial is on whom should be the comics person of the year. Write in for Dinesh Shamdasani

Dinesh Shamdasani. How many people can rebuild an comic empire in less than a decade that wins Publisher of the Year?

“Dinesh Shamdasani. How many people can rebuild an comic empire in less than a decade that wins Publisher of the Year?”

You nailed it on the head, DBS!

Dinesh is as big a Valiant fan as ANY of us, but through (continued) hard work and dedication brought back those characters and then some for ALL of us.

There has got to be a way to recognize D for standing not only on, but ABOVE his peers. He’s definitely got my vote!

-BloodShot @ VF.com

Dinesh for sure. He is my pick. Really enjoy your website.

Dinesh Shamdasani Gets my write in vote. What he has done with Valiant comics has been amazing and awesome! If any upstart Indy comic publisher needs a mold to go off of… It would be this man. Heck the big two could take notes from him also.

Sorta weird that ‘premise/story’ is other – the idea that someone buys a book because concept sounds interesting

For the most important factor, for me, it’s the writer. But I still have to like the art. I won’t buy a comic just for the art, but I won’t buy a comic if I don’t like the art. Unless it’s about one of my favorite characters, of which there are but a few where I’ll put up with art I don’t like.

“Only 25 shops participated, so this is just a small cross section of the industry in total. ”

Doesn’t seem like a growing mindset when such a small handful of people were asked., if they had the reach of Diamond tapping stores for a survey, there would be different results.

i personally fall under ‘creative team’ as others have said

writer is important, but i’m past the period where i would buy anything blind from anyone: the art is a big deal.

It depends on the publisher, honestly. From the Big Two, the main draw is generally going to be the starring character; with a few exceptions, the creative team is either icing or a reason to stay away depending on what of theirs I’ve read before. For books coming from other publishers, it’ll usually be concept. I have a few writers/artists who have a dependable enough track record that I’ll check out anything that they do, but I’ll typically put down my $3 for a new idea (or at least a fresh twist on an old one) over proven comfort food.

For me, it’s the story. In a universe, it’s got to have a good hook (like “Bizarro”!)
But there are a few creators who get a free pass on anything they create, so “creators” helps.
Universe? I don’t care.
Price? I don’t buy much, thanks to review copies, and I rarely spend more than $20 on comics or graphic novels. So that’s not a concern. It might be a criteria for deciding whether to buy a book I’m hesitant about.

“And aside from the VERY rare Tamaki/Tamaki, Morrison/Quitely, Lee/Kirby teams, collaborative comics rarely offer that.”

I may be misreading it, but I find this statement odd in a world where we have tremendous, prolific collaborative creative teams producing consistently great work together. Gillen/McKelvie, Vaughan/Staples, Brubaker/Phillips, Bendis/Oeming, Rucka/Lark, Fraction/Moon/Ba, Layman/Guillory … just to name a few.

I wish there was a “Creative Team” option, so I voted Other.

For me, a good writer with the right artist is the best thing, I don’t care that much for characters as much as talent, so I’m always following certain writers and artists. Add a seasoned colourist, maybe even a letterer with personality, and you have the perfect comic book.

Story, the complete package is the only reason. i have to read a good portion of the comic until i decide if i’m going to buy it or not.

Considering that Marvel and DC treat artists as an interchangeable element of comics, it’s no great surprise that retailers don’t rate artists highly when it comes to their ordering process. How often is the solicited artist actually the final artist when the book comes out? If I was a retailer, I don’t know if I’d be factoring in who the artist is either on most of my orders.

Story.

Headlines serve the same purpose as covers. Its how you sell your stuff. None should feel obligated to put anything on their advertising material. See you wont get Alex Ross doing whatever in your book and not credit him. That’s cause the name sells. Most artists names do not sell so theres no point on putting it on the cover or headline. Look at a movie poster. None think that photography is unimportant for a movie, its vital. Photographers names don’t sell though so their names don’t go in the cover. If its that important to some people to be credited constantly I suggest trying to make yourself a selling point. I say that as a comic book artist.

I say artist, but what I really mean is that I will stay with a story if the writer changes, but not if the artist changes. That happened with me on Jonah Hex, when Jordi Bernet mysteriously disappeared. It ain’t a simple question, because sometimes I just want a well told, well drawn story.

Comic artists are not the equivalent of movie poster art. Comic artists are the partly Director, Dir of Photography, Set Designer, Fight / Stunt Coordinator and on camera Actor. All of which collectively sell films. Unless one is a Sorkin level screenwriter I say the role of comic artist as equal to film poster is severely shortchanged in the above comparison.

I know I’m probably in the minority here but I’ve always followed either writers or the characters. As a kid I couldn’t even tell artist styles apart. When I was 7 and started reading comics I couldn’t tell if John Romita was drawing Spider-Man or Gil Kane was, I simply couldn’t recognize artist styles till I was older, but very early on I realized that Stan’s Spider-Man was different then Gerry Conway’s Spider-Man. As I got older I did start to recognize artist styles but I still mostly followed the characters, I didn’t stop reading the X-Men because John Byrne stopped drawing, I stopped when I got bored with the stories. In college I did buy some books for the art because that was the “thing” to do, but I quickly found I was wasting money. I loved the artist but if I had no invested in the story it felt like a waste. Nowadays I follow mostly writers. I’ll buy anything written by Mark Waid or Peter David or Kurt Busiek or James Robinson and I may be late to the game but I really find I like Dan Slot’s stuff. Some of Slott’s Spider-Man stories have god-awful artwork in them but the stories are a hell of a lot of fun. For the first time since I was in high school I want to know what happens to Peter Parker next. Off and on over the years Spider-Man had some truly great artist but since the late 80’s I never read the book regularly because it didn’t seem to be the Spider-man I know (or in some cases even wanted to know), now the artwork seems hit and miss but darn if I ain’t enjoying it.

Ideally a comic should have a great story and great art, but if I have to choose how to spend my entertainment dollars I go for the story every time. If I don’t like the story I just end up looking at the pics and going, “oh isn’t that pretty” and frankly I could do that browsing the book in the store without paying any money for it.

yeah, comparing a comic artist to a movie poster artist is not… a particularly effective argument. unless the comic artist is doing their job completely wrong.

Another statistic that would be interesting to see is how much revenue is coming from each demographic group. I’m not sure how stores would get us that information, aside from going into their subscription file records and doing breakdowns based on who’s buying what — and even that ratio would probably not be representative, if the demographics of the pull-and-hold customers and the casual customers are not identical. (We’d also want to know how much of retailers’ business is coming from the subscribers versus the casual customers in that case.)

Hey JJM, Fantom Comics did a fantastic breakdown of their year a couple months back, and they break down their revenue by gender. Not a full breakdown, but hey, it’s more than we had!

http://www.fantomcomics.com/blog/2015/05/05/comicbooksalestrends/

Thanks for that! Very interesting.

It’s Edmonton, AB.

what about the female comic readers who don’t give a flying shit about whatever is going on in the various “super-hero universes”?

i ask this as a male comic reader who doesn’t give a shit about the various “super-hero universes”.

the mini comic, art comic, hand made comic, “indie” comic, and really real mainstream publishers putting out comics have been nothing but welcoming to female creators and readers. why bother with the antiquated boys club that’s just a recycled version of a 70+ year old model?

Actually, from a sales standpoint, the comics you just mentioned liking are the ones that…as you put it..no one “gives a flying shit” about. Kind of ironic.

It’s too bad that this survey couldn’t have asked questions that were actually helpful instead of ridiculously unsubtle slanted multiple choicers where all the choices are idiotic except for the one choice they want picked. Questions like how many comics do you buy a month, what titles do you buy on a regular basis would have been helpful.

Instead we got nonsense like “do you like your heroes to be taciturn (spelled tactiturn in the survey)laid back or chaste. Right. Take that Levitz!

Anyone notice that the Nintendo DS has networking capabilities (802.11b)? And that they offer a “100 Books” cartridge? Nintendo does promote the “family affair” networking aspect of the DS, suggesting the household has more than one DS (quite possible, as the platform has existed for six years, selling 132 million units worldwide).

The PSP is also actively exploiting the market, with many comicbook apps available. (Not to mention the Sony Ereader…)

How many grade schools now offer laptops to children?

Might the theorem be better stated as “UR PWNED”?

See, I would’ve gone with calling it just a subset of the larger “Publishers Are Idiots Theorem”

Thanks for flagging this article… very interesting info.

Another aspect of all this is the capability of kids to use their devices to CREATE books as well as read them.

http://www.thisisbrandx.com/2010/03/cell-phone-books-a-hot-new-trend-meet-japans-phoney-novelist.html

I think this is just as important a factor in child literacy as reading. The idea of creating and sharing stories (and learning from the experience while having “fun”) is going to be a more important part of this next generation’s culture.

Re: Print – I predict we will see more and more print-on-demand models out there rather than the traditional ‘print run.’ I say this simply because our children are far more ecologically aware than we are and will embrace print as a unique item.

“When asked about the one device parents would like their child to stop using for a one- or two-week period, parents most often cite television, video game systems, and cell phones.”

…as opposed to what other devices? Dishwashers? Toilets? No kidding parents think entertainment devices are overused.

Kids are reading. That’s good enough for me.

Looks like I was in the majority on these questions. I really enjoyed the poll, girlfriends. Thanks for doing it and for posting the results. It would be fascinating to interview the author and ask why she did what she did. I'd love to hear her thoughts. You're right about one thing, though. It's always great when people are reading books and discussing them. Have a super day ladies:)

Interesting survey. I'm not surprised with the result. I was talking about the book with my middle grade daughter and her friend (a boy) and they had similar reactions.

I still think Suzanne Collins is an amazing writer. And this just shows that if you have a popular series, there are heavy reader expectations that you may or may not fulfill. She wrote another great series GREGOR THE OVERLANDER-more middle grade--that people might want to check out.

Interesting pole ladies. I love to see the reactions of other readers, especially to a series that is so in demand.

I think you summed it up. As a reader, I was more disappointed and almost bored with Katniss' character by the end. I didn't care who she ended up with but she had no choice in her ending. And we hear all the time that we have a responsibility to our reader...Great poll!

Other than spending her days in sector 12 (and that was her punishment, in a way), I think Katniss did have a choice. She turned her back on Gale because of what happened. That was her choice. And it wasn't like she rushed into Peeta's arms when he showed up in sector 12. I had predicted she wouldn't make a choice at the end, and I was right. She had to fall into love with Peeta. Until the ending, I didn't feel like she really loved either of the guys. Maybe that's why I was sitting on the fence which one she should pick (though I was leaning more toward Gale until part way into Mockingjay). In the end, Katniss and Peeta were perfect together. They were both broken. They needed each other to heal. Gale couldn't have done that for her. Like I said. She had choices. She didn't have to turn to Peeta. But she did.

Thanks for posting the survey. It was interesting reading. :D

Great pole! This has been very interesting to discuss and very satisfying to talk about. I do think that there is a margin of responsibility to the reader, and that Suzanne Collins is lucky that her writing itself is so strong because people love her books even when they hate them. A writer not as strong, nor as already successful would likely have bombed after this sort of ending to a trilogy.

I think, in retrospective (I LOVE that I just keeping thinking and reevaluating things after reading Mockingjay) that at least part of my issues with Mockingjay are due to the fact that I've been querying a Dystopian YA (written before Hunger Games was released) and although all the agents have passed on it, they've done so while saying my writing is very good. Their problem seems to be that my MC is not 'sympathetic enough to the public' even though she's realistic. I can understand this, she isn't likeable at all sometimes. But in lieu of those sorts of responses to MY character, I was abhorred that a beloved, strong character like Katniss was thrown under the bus while millions read on. There was definitely a feeling of betrayal (besides the one pertaining to Katniss herself) from the standpoint of 'I can't write an unlikeabe/unmarketable character because I'm not yet successful, but it's okay for someone like Suzanne because she's so established.' That's an oversimplified way of putting it but it's something I feel. Sometimes I think that it's almost too easy for established authors to 'do what they will' without considering how the public might react. Not that they must tailor their writing for public comsumption, but it would be nice to think that they thought of the people who eagerly stand in line at 12 am to buy their books. I'm certainly not accusing Suzanne Collins of being ungrateful. She's an amazing writer. I'd just love to know, like many others I'm sure, how she made the choices in writing Mockingjay that she did.

I agree with you and Melissa, I just knew any minute she was going to stop passing out and waking up drugged in the hospital and pull something magnificent out and be the hero again, but was disappointed. I loved the book but after the first 2, I just expected more from her.

I wanted to come back (after thinking even more on things) and touch on the 'Gale going to the dark side' subject. It seems that quite a lot of people feel as though Gale chose a different side than Katniss.

I never really thought of Gale as 'choosing sides' so much as simply choosing to be an active part of what was going on. At one point I did question his actions, but in the end, I believe that he just chose to DO something, rather than have things happen to him.

As for the way he and Katniss came apart, I don't think they were ever really viable as a couple. There was potential, but no substance. Not on Katniss' part. I felt like, throughout ALL the books, Katniss never loved Gale 'that way' until she couldn't get to him/thought she'd lost him forever. But each time she was face-to-face with him, and given the chance to act, she just stood there. I feel as though Gale came to see that Katniss was never going to love him, and we were allowed to see that understanding. Then he just waited for her to prove him wrong. And Katniss never did. She just let things go. And worse, she let herself think it was everyone around her pulling away from her rather than her withdrawing. Even within that final bit between her and Gale where he throws it down, that she's going to blame him regardless, there's a chance for Katniss to relent. But she does nothing. She agrees that she's going to hold him accountable for Prim's death whether or not he actually is. Meanwhile, she never gives any thought to the fact that SHE CHOSE TO COMMENCE WITH THE PUSH. That final push to the president's house was Katniss' choice, one of the only ones she makes in the entire book. And people die because of it. But she never sees that. She never owns it.

I felt as though Gale saw Katniss as a partner in life, potentially in love. An equal. While Peeta (I did love Peeta even though I rooted for Gale) saw Katniss as the thing he loved unconditionally and eternally, regardless of how she felt about him.

Anyone who thinks of Gale as 'going to the dark side' feel free to explain. I'd love to know why you feel this way.

This is so interesting to me. I was especially disappointed by the deaths of Finnick and Prim. I think I could live with the rest, but their deaths felt unnecessary. The big push to the capital ending with her waking up burned in a bed was disappointing - as though the whole purpose of the push was so she could kill Prim.

I would still recommend the book and still consider this to be one of my favorite series.

I think people turn to books for heroes and heroines, to get inspiration on how to solve problems and overcome overwhelming obstacles. Don't we do that for our characters? We throw an arsenal of conflict and stumbling blocks in their paths, and show how they make it through.

True, not all books end triumphantly. It's just inherent in my own personality to do so in all my novels. I love victory! (But perhaps because I don't do heavier themes of devastation and war, and those themes may indicate different endings.) I tend to think that if people want examples of negativity and giving up, they can look to real life instead. Writers have the opportunity to show people how to rise above the disappointments and horror of real life.

Katniss was never a likable person. She was heroic as all get-out, but if she had not stepped in to take Prim's place, no one would have wanted to hear her story.

Also, as a person who meant so much to Katniss, we wanted Prim's death to be important and larger story event. As a character, Prim never developed much and was a very minor player, so she didn't command the screen time for a bigger death.

Suzanne wrote the book she always intended to write. From the very first words of Hunger Games, the story was always about surviving. Not thriving, not living happily, but living to see another day. Suzanne stayed true to that. If she had suddenly given us a neat, happy ending, it would have been a betrayal to the narrative she created.

My take on Katniss agreeing to the final Hunger Games is that her agreement was a lie, part of a trick. Especially when Haymitch follows up by saying something like, "Whatever she said." I agree with some of the commenters who said that Prim's death could have been more powerful. It seemed more like a symbol than anything else. But I thought that Katniss did make choices, did choose between the two boys, and that the tone, readability, and pacing of Mockingjay was very similar to the preceding books. Overall, I was very happy with the series conclusion. I think it's very realistic that characters who have been through such traumatic events would always be marked by it and could not have a hearts-and-flowers romance.

*scrolls down quickly*

Just stopping by to say hi, but I haven't read it yet so I'm leaving...quickly!

Fascinating survey! I agree that I was at first shocked that Katniss would agree to the Final Hunger Games, but quickly realized it was some sort of duplicity on her part (whether she even really realized it, in her state, I'm not sure).

Overall, I really couldn't love the series more than I do, and I think the fact that everyone's dissecting it is AWESOME. :)

I was SO GLAD to see this post. I read all three books in the last week and I've been dying to dissect them with others.

First, let me say I think Suzanne Collins is a very courageous writer. She did not step away from making difficult choices and "killing her darlings."

Also, I thought the love triangle ended perfectly and in a believable way. Gale was a part of Katniss' past, which is why she held on to him, but they were both inevitably, irrevocably changed by the events surrounding the hunger games. Peeta loved the Katniss that went into and came out of the arena. I personally felt she loved him all along and just finally let herself realize it and act on it in the end. I didn't look at it as she didn't make a choice. She chose to let Gale go, and she chose to let herself love Peeta.

That said, I WAS disappointed that Katniss was so passive in Mockingjay. I kept waiting for her to OWN the Mockingjay and not just the outfit, but she never did. She spent half the book lamenting all of the people that were losing their lives because of her instead of realizing that she had the chance to save so many if she would just get out of her head and into her own power.

Although I commend Collins for making tough choices and having the courage to be ruthless with her characters, I thought having Prim die was gratuitous and contrived. I was upset about Finnick, but I could live with that because I could see the parallel to the arena again and we need to see how war is blind when it comes to who gets killed. But the whole thing with Prim was just too much. I understood that Katniss would be damaged after the war, but not rendered mute and powerless. I just didn't think Prim's death was necessary to the plot beyond shock factor. Also, I do not believe Katniss would EVER approve another Hunger Games. Seemed so out of character for her. Then the whole subject just got dropped.

All that said, I loved the series and I do not believe the author "owes" anything to the readers. In the end, she wrote the story she wanted to tell - not necessarily the one we wanted to read.

It'll be interesting to see the responses to this. Even with the things I checked I was disappointed with, I still loved the series. And I'm glad to see how excited the kids, including my daughter, are about it. She's re-read the books a ton.

Interesting survey. Given the expectations people had for the last book, after reading the first two, I wonder if any ending would have been satisfying to readers.

I think there could always be a satisfying ending no matter what the expectations. There would def. be some naysayers but there could be plenty of people saying, it was sad but good. My problem was not that it was too violent or not a happy ending. Now with a couple weeks since reading it, I was most unhappy with the fact that Katniss because so insane. I thought that was exagerrated to make a point. It pulled her out of the story all together. And wasn't fully believable to me.

Great survey!

*Spoiler alert*
I've read Mockingjay twice. The first time I just wanted to read, the second time I wanted to ponder.

I was satisfied with the ending even if it seemed a little rushed. I was happy that Katniss was given a life and a family. I wasn't happy with Prim's storyline which I thought was used for emotional impact, and I was equally unhappy with Finnick's.

Katniss had been through a lot which, I suppose, counted for her withdrawal, depression (I thought she sounded depressed) and tiredness. The only real problem I had was her agreeing to another Hunger Games – there’s no way she would ever agree to this – again, this makes me think she was emotionally unstable.

Overall it was a great, great book and in my
mind Katniss’ story has been told.

Natalie and Andrea, it's interesting to see that the results are coming in all over the map, but that there is (so far) a common denominator in lack of believability on some elements. I wonder how that contributes to the overall satisfaction. It's still a wonderful book, but I think that for a writer, it is going to prove invaluable. It seems to me, Collins took some risks you don't normally see in a commercial work.

Laura, I have spent a LOT of time thinking about this. My stepfather was a concentration camp survivor and experienced many horrible things. I've known war refugees, soldiers, bombing survivors... And withdrawal isn't common. Yet clearly, Collins anticipated this in the first book with her mother's withdrawal. I find it ironic that Katniss abhored in her mother what she herself became. Does that make the book better or worse for me? I have to say, that made it more horrible to read. (Not a lesser book, not a less well-written book, but a harder book filled with more horror.) If that was what she was going for, she succeeded brilliantly.

Martina

Janice,

I agree that she was depressed. The trouble I had with this is that we knew from her mother's situatin that depression was treatable in that world. Katniss herself knew this. Her mother certainly knew this. Wouldn't someone have helped her?

Martina

@Janice The only real problem I had was her agreeing to another Hunger Games – there’s no way she would ever agree to this – again, this makes me think she was emotionally unstable.

Ah, see, I see Katmiss' agreeing to another Games as a calculating move. We don't see her thought process, which I believe was deliberate, and she and Haymitch lock eyes for a moment. My take on it is that Katniss and Haymitch have both realised that Coin is as bad as Snow and that Katniss needs to go along with her plans to be in the right position--within shooting distance of both Snow and Coin.

Katniss taking Prim's place in the Games was what started everything off, and with prim's death I don't think Katniss would have agreed to another one unless she needed to avoid Coin's suspicions.

I haven't read yet. MUST NOT LOOK!

Martina - I agree, she became what she most loathed in her mother. No one seemed to care about or notice Katniss' depression.

Helen - let me take a quick peek at that bit again...ok read it...you might be right ;) I'll have to ponder a little more.

Prim had to die. I was disappointed in the ending, but I'm still wrapping my head around the reasons why. I felt really let down at the end of Mockingjay. Perhaps because I felt that Katniss was damaged instead of victorious.

Interesting thoughts and questions. I felt ending was too rushed. And I was sad for days after reading this. No way Katniss would have agreed to another hunger game. Where was her fire, her spirit? It was sad to see that go. It was like she was kicked one too many times and was just blah. Anyway....

I need to read it a second time to be sure of my reaction, but I don't think Katniss had any choice but to agree to another Games. I think it was calculated. Her spirit was still on fire when she turned her arrow on Coin. How many would be brave enough to do that? She was a victor, but it was the hollow kind of victory that comes with war.

I tend to like happily ever after endings. I know, life is NOT all Cinderella, but...in part, the happy endings are why I read! To find out how people become victorious, solve their problems, overcome amazing obstacles, beat the bad guy, and thwart evil. Sometimes a sadder ending works, but not if it feels contrived or unfair.

Great poll! Really interesting to see what others thought.

Like Helen, I thought her agreeing to the games was deliberate mis-direction. Pretending to go along with it.

I found the story a bit of a downer, but then war is a downer - it destroys people and Katniss was completely destroyed emotionally and physically. I thought the defense pods were a bit over the top, but what bothered me the most was Gale's switch to the dark side.

Thanks for the poll, that was fun.

Helen, Janice, SJG: If it was a calculated move, then doing what she did with Coin ran the risk of having the Hunger Games continue even after Coin's death. And she didn't seem to give it another thought. Nor was it discussed later in the book, was it? Did they occur? If it was a calculated move, I would have liked to see a follow-on to it. To me, the eye-contact between Katniss and Haymitch was a setup for a storyline that wasn't developed. I was looking for a follow-on, and it never happened. Not, I might add, that every storyline needs to be perfectly delineated, nor does Katniss have to be perfect in her thought processes. But it does seem like a hole in the plot--something that would be too important to Katniss for her to drop. I can't see her throwing kids away like that.

And, might I add one more thing--the fact that we are discussing what Katniss would have done or thought this clearly shows the brilliance of the first two books. Her thought processes were clear in those and she was so well portrayed. Does the stepping-back in the third book strike you as a calculated move on Collins' part, another method of showing the mental break-down?

Stephanie, why did you feel Prim had to die? Just curious?

SSG, was it clear to you that Gale switched to the dark side? Because to me, it wasn't clear at all, and it didn't seem clear to him either. Even Katniss didn't seem sure, but then she never investigated. Gale let it go very easily, but maybe in order for Katniss to stay depressed, he had to be out of the picture.

Buffy, I missed her fire, too. Still, I wonder if that might have been the point Collins was trying to make--that it was easy for Katniss to judge (for all of us to judge) someone else's reaction to the burden they bear, and what they will or won't do when faced with catastrophe and heartache. She decried her mother for her lack of spirit, and then ended up coasting through the rest of her life. A negative character arc is so rare in commercial YA that maybe I just wasn't prepared for it?

Carol, I prefer happy endings too. But I wonder if they are overdone. I don't think there was a completely happy ending possible in this trilogy. But I would have liked to have Katniss--and Peeta, frankly--end up with a little more than they got. Still, life isn't always fair. Maybe that was another point she was trying to make?

I assumed when Coin was killed the plan for a final Hunger Games was killed with her.

With the eye contact between Haymitch and Katniss, if it was calculated, perhaps Collins could have had them discuss it on the journey back to district 12? I’m still not sure if her agreement was calculated or not, but I know in my heart that the whirlwind that was Katniss would never have agreed to, or allowed another Hunger Games.

Did Gale go to the dark side? I don’t think he did – in fact where did the real Gale go? I know he got his fancy position in Sector 2, but is that what the Gale from The Hunger Games and Catching Fire would have wanted? Was it a convenient to wrap up his story?

Maybe two broken people, Katniss and Peeta, can/could make each other whole? Does that sound too cheesy? I do like a bit of cheese. ;)

I’m interested in the poll results. So far 58% of people wanted Katniss to keep fighting for something at the end – for what? As far as we know peace had been restored, the districts were being treated equally – what else could she fight for?

Wow, it surprises me how many people thought the trilogy would have a happier ending. I had absolutely no expectations of that. I figured it would be grim and possibly depressing. I would have also thought a happy ending to be unrealistic. After war, things aren't automatically sunshine and roses, especially for heavily involved people like Katniss. Maybe that's why I wasn't as disappointed with Mockingjay as others have been?

I have to say I didn't read any of the trilogy until this past weekend, when got all three books at once in the mail. The Hunger Games was unputdownable, Catching Fire was compelling but not as much, and Mockingjay even less so.

As the pages to be turned diminished, I kept hoping against hope something would happen to inject the overall story with some good. I wanted to be inspired at the end, to be sure.

I too had trouble with Katniss's motivation in the final book. When she said she'd agree to another HG, I was pulled out of the book like many others. If she was communicating with Haymitch, it did not come across, esp. since the whole book it is clear Katniss has no idea what's going on behind the curtain.

Someone brought up the point that Katniss's withdrawal mirrors that of her mom - which I didn't connect until now. That does justify the downer ending a bit more for me, because you don't always realize how much you have grown into the person who raised you. While this is a realistic take for the ending, I feel a more inspirational one would've had a bigger emotional payoff for readers. A traditional HEA would have been inappropriate but by not having an ending something with a bit more hope seems like a missed opportunity. But I do not know Collins's intentions in writing this series...and I'm sure she had a reason for writing it the way she did, regardless with how I wished the outcome differently.

Bottom line I thought Katniss was a strong female role model at the start. Although I questioned some of her actions/reactions in CatchingFire/Mockingjay, I held out hope for her kickassery to reemerge. To learn that she was only human with human limitations is disappointing. To me.

Wow it's really interesting to read everyone's opinions! I've been chewing on Mockingjay for a few days now since I finished reading it.

I love Suzanne Collins' writing, so that makes it easy for me to like the book even when I didn't like the book (although I did like Mickingjay on the whole). You know what I mean?

I found Katniss' withdrawal and depression a bit tedious and with too much drug use, and I agree that she became everything that she loathed in her mother. I also thought that her withdrawal was a bit foggy. I mean, there were innuendos about post traumatic stress and whatnot but usually that has to do with specific incidences. For example, someone kept confined in a small space would maybe have an episode whenever forced into an elevator. In Katniss' case, she ran and hid in closets and other tiny areas, and then hated being underground where she was confined and got claustrophobic. Her symptoms and presentation seemed to be at cross purposes.

I never expected a 'happily ever after' ending, and I'm happy to kill off characters in my own writing. But I did feel that the deaths of Finnick and Prim and even Boggs, were unnecessary and overboard. War is awful. People die. But the entire first 3/4 of the book was spent endearing us to Finnick and Prim (and alienating Katniss herself to some extent) only to slaughter our new character friends and leave Katniss alive, depressed, medicated - again - and drifting.

My largest issue, though, with Mockingjay, was the love triangle. It's not that I wanted Katniss to pick either boy (although I'm a Gale fan myself), frankly I half expected that she wouldn't choose Gale OR Peeta. And that's where the rub comes in. I felt as though a very great deal of Mockingjay was spent focusing on how Katniss was being used as a pawn, about how Katniss felt about being used as a pawn and about how unfair it was that she was being used as a pawn. And yet, Katniss never stands up and puts an end to being used. She never once takes control of her own destiny. She lets Gale walk away, and yet she doesn't run TO Peeta. She just lets whatever happens happen. For such a strong character, I feel gypped that Katniss didn't own herself, her actions or even her heart. She just stood and let the world move passed her.

I know the end/epilogue was supposed to 'wrap things up' but mostly what stuck with me was 'Peeta says they'll be fine' 'Greasy Sae says' 'Haymitch says' Everyone 'says' but Katniss never tells us 'This is what happened and why I feel like I do and where I think things are headed.' I wanted to know about KATNISS, annoyed as I was at her. I didn't want to know what 'so and so said' about what happened.

I LOVED this series, but I was disappointed at how rushed the ending was. I wish she would have explained more and made Katniss a more active hero in the end. There was so much that was disappointing because it wasn't explained enough, but otherwise, I really loved it and other than a few small gripes, I wouldn't change a thing.

I had a hard time answering the questions because some of them weren't the right questions, I thought. (Though I love the poll idea.)

I think SC is a good enough writer to do whatever she wants with characters and bring us along for the ride. What I disliked with this book was not the sad ending but that Katniss was absent through much of the book. People died and there was no emotional impact for the reader because there was no emotional impact for the POV character--she was either too busy or she was drugged and doing some kind of stream of consciousness stuff. Then the climax came and the POV character wasn't there for it.

What was Katniss' inner conflict and what was her outer conflict and what was the climax of the series? The climax for Katniss had to be her sitting in the chair for however long without ever changing her clothes (ugh) and then deciding to stand up and change her clothes, I guess. Or was the climax when she killed Coin? I don't remember any dark night of the soul, or conflict, or agonizing over a decision. I don't know, I'll have to go back and read it again, but at this point, if I can't remember any climax...it's pretty odd that the climax of a major trilogy like this was not apparent to me on the first read.

I love SC's work. loved Gregor. And love this trilogy. It's not the sad ending that bothers me but the lack of an active pov character.

I'll give SC this--any way she went she was bound to upset some. I appreciate that she didn't go the easy route and kill one boy so the other two could name their son after him and live happily ever after. She tried to do something very big and in my opinion she didn't quite pull it off, but it was not a horrid book and certainly not a one-star book. That's just silly to give it one-star.

Janice, I agree. If the intention was to suggest a complicity between Katniss and Haymitch about some possible future resistance, then I would have liked to see at least one small additional breadcrumb to help lead me along that path. If it was there, I missed it. Everything that Katniss had done up to that point was well-motivated and explained. This seemed a departure to me. There is no disputing that both Peeta and Katniss were broken, but I didn't see much from her to help heal Peeta or make it up to him. Even something as small as going out to help him when he was planting the primroses would have given me some hope. What could she fight for? Happiness? Peeta's happiness? Her community? There was a reference about her having a gift for healing. She could have tried that, despite her initial reluctance, in Prim's honor. She had a talent for singing. She could have used that to some end. She could have fought to find out what really happened when Prim was killed. She could have tried to ensure that everyone responsible was out of power. She could have fought to help rebuild her district. It wouldn't have mattered to me what she fought for. But I would have liked to see some sign that she was going to go back to fighting for something.

Claire, I agree that things aren't sunshine and roses after war, and I'm delighted that Collins didn't diminish the work by trying a HEA ending. But some hope would have been nice.

Bluestocking, that's what's so fascinating about this arc. She started off as human with human weaknesses. She ended as less, for me, because she seemed to give up.

A. Grey, I'm right there with you.

jasouders, I agree. If she had been more active, and if her motivation had been explained, the same outcome might have felt more satifying to me. I would have liked her to be more present in her own life after the war, and throughout this book. It was like reading about a different character than the one in the previous two books.

Sally, I agree. I still love the series, and I think Suzanne Collins could write about the adventures of toilet paper and make it fascinating, but I missed the amazing character that was Katniss in the previous novels. Collins took a huge risk, and I give her credit for that. For me, personally, it didn't quite pay off, but it doesn't diminish the fascination of the book. And the fact that we are discussing it in this kind of depth may mean it actually paid off far more than a more satisfying ending would have. Her sales figures certainly suggest that there's not much wrong. :D

But while I think one-star reviews are weird (I mean, come on. Shadowmancer is a one-star book. There is no way this book was as painful to read as Shadowmancer.) I think the starred reviews in PW, Booklist, and Kirkus are strange, too.

AiCP- re: Gale going to the dark side. I agree, it was all very vague.

I guess what sealed it for me was his reaction to Prim's death. He didn't blame himself, even though it was one of his traps that did it. He merely said to Katniss, "you're going to blame me for this, aren't you?" And then he leaves. That was so un-Gale to me. And I had been rooting for him in the first two books.

I've read Mockingjay three times now and I always wonder why I am so devastated at the end of it. One of the reasons I think, is the way the author broke Katniss and Peeta. I feel like Peeta was robbed of his potential when he was tortured by the Capitol. In the first two books, his future was so promising but Snow took that away from him and I think that was one of the cruelest things to do. I always saw that the Mockingjay symbol was really the combination of both their talents. Removing Peeta from the picture forced Katniss to move into that position of Mockingjay all on her own and the emotional withdrawal seemed inevitable as well as being a product of her age. She is only 17 after all, and so alone in her journey.
It was excruciating watching Finnick and then Prim die and I know in YA, there's a 'rule' that says when there's a helpful character, the writer should either incapacitate or kill them off. Still it was hard to read and I think it's what got Katniss to rock bottom, so she was able to kill Coin without caring for her own future.
As for Gale, I would have liked a bit more explanation. I think he was written off to easily. I could see even through all three books that the author was leaning towards Peeta and in the last book, it became more and more obvious that Gale and Katniss were working at cross purposes for the rebellion. But still, it would've been nice to have resolved in a little more detail.
One question I had through the books was whether the life in common that Gale and Katniss shared would be stronger than the trauma of the Games that Peeta and Katniss shared, and I think the author answered that in the last book.
Overall, I loved the series and it is always, to me, the author's perogative to write it the way she sees it and to be true to the heart of her vision. That's why it touches people and that's why I love it.

Thanks so much for posting this poll! I finished Mockingjay last night, remembered seeing the poll the other day, and came right over so I could vent some of my feelings about the fate of these characters. I agree with everyone who felt disappointed with the fate of Gale's character. He was one of my favorites, and he disappeared out of Katniss's life so quickly after being by her side until the very end. I feel he and Katniss became darker, colder, violent versions of their former selves by the end of the war, but only he seemed to be portrayed as unforgiveable. I was troubled by Katniss's decision to approve a new Hunger Games after she had just expressed her horror at watching the Capitol children dying. I'm guessing the new games didn't happen after Coin died, but that subject seemed to fizzle out in the aftermath, and we never learned if Katniss was relieved or disappointed that they didn't take place.

That being said, I highly commend Suzanne Collins for writing a trilogy that could be so hotly debated by young and old alike. There's no doubt she succeeded in showing readers the twisted nightmares of war and its devastating effect on the young.

Hi, visiting via My Friend Amy. Off to take your survey!

I took your survey!

thanks! I'll report back on this & what other things I think I should have asked.

Took the survey. I think I prefer the polls like the one David Warlick of 2 cents uses here (http://davidwarlick.com/2cents/?p=1800). This way you get to see the results in a tangible form. With your survey, all I got was a page asking if I wanted to create my own survey. I suppose it's a good idea if you want to keep the results private, but I rather enjoy seeing the results...hope that helps :). Love your blog, btw.

Liz, that is SO cool. Congratulations! I will make sure my librarian friends here get copies.

Yay, congratulations!!
What fun!

Congrats to you on your book! I did your survey, but didn't have much useful to add - sorry to say. Except to say that at least one large library system is pretty uninvolved with pop culture.

Liz,
I did fill out the survey so don't say I never did nothing for ya!

This is the best news I've heard all day (and I'm about to go to bed, so I don't expect anything to top it). Congratulations!

Good luck and congrats!

That is fantabulous, Liz (and Sophie)! Pop go my virtual champagne corks!

Congrats! This sounds great--I'll pass it on to a librarian friend who uses pop culture in her classes on library research.

Congratulations! I am SO happy for you! :)

Please remind me to post this at my blog later this week, sometime when I'm awake. :)

Can one respond to the survey if one used to work in a library but now works in a bookstore?

Thank you! I think it's fair for you to respond to the survey so long as you've had library experience. Go for it!

And please do post it to your blog. We have over 500 responses already, so I think we're going to close the survey after next week.

Done! I gave 'em what for.

Thanks for the link :) I just finished it hopefully they'll make use of the feedback.