A Perspective on Perspective

Happy New Year.

I hope you all had a peaceful Christmas and a relaxing New Year and are now ready to face whatever 2014 has in store for you.

Since January is a month of new beginnings, I thought it might be a good idea to address a topic that transcends the realms of fiction and consider something that is fundamentally important for everyday life as well.

Perspective and Point of View

I'm sure that plenty of you have looked at the title and wondered what the heck I'm talking about.

Perspective is defined as, 'away of regarding situations, facts, etc, and judging their relative importance' while point of view is considered to be 'a mental viewpoint or attitude'. Basically, how does someone see a certain situation?

So let's use a brief example. You've been talking to a friend or a colleague and have made a comment that you consider to be a joke. Let's say it's a comment on how something is 'so gay' or how someone has 'done something blonde' (again, apologies for these examples). It's something that maybe doesn't mean anything to you but your colleague isn't reacting the way you thought. In fact, they've become angry with you and an argument has begun.

Many viewpoints but a rather limited understanding

It would be all too easy to blame your colleague for taking your comment the wrong way and to maintain your innocence. After all, you didn't mean anything by it and did not intend to start an argument. But that doesn't mean that you are in the clear.

What has happened is a clashing of perspectives. Someone has been hurt or angered by something that has been said because they see the comment in a different way from what was intended. It happens every day and can be the root of many arguments because everyone has a perspective which is as unique as they are. They can be shaped by past experiences, memories or even internal conflict, and they can sometimes clash.

For those of you who have read my blogs before, you will know that I addressed something similar when discussing character creation so some of this will no doubt sound familiar to you. But I'm certain that there's a few of you out there wondering why I appear to be rehashing something that I've already addressed or are wondering why I'm delving into something based more on psychology than character analysis (unless, of course, you have already become bored and have decided to watch videos on YouTube rather than continue this post). This isn't the first time I have done so, but my focus and examples will primarily come from books and films as usual, rather than academic knowledge.

What do you think?

Perspective or point of view can come in two guises; a perspective based on opinion and a perspective based on knowledge.

A perspective based on opinion is easy. After all, you're in the process of reading one. This entire blog is based on my opinions and I am fully aware that not everyone will agree with what I have to say. It is a biased perspective and can depend on my own thoughts or indeed the thoughts of others that I have absorbed along the way. Everyone has a unique perspective, but they are often created in very similar ways. We absorb opinions and constantly develop our own. We can change our minds based on new information or we can contradict what someone else says if we don't agree.

Perspectives have a tendency to colour everything we do and this is most obvious when reading something with a first-person narrative. The Hunger Games trilogy is a prime example of such a narrative. Katniss Everdeen guides us through her story every step of the way. We know that President Snow is someone to fear because she is afraid of him and makes an effort to project her feelings about him onto us. We are suspicious of Peeta and Finnick at first because she doesn't quite trust them and when she learns to let them in, we start to believe what they say.

But first-person narratives can also reveal some fundamental flaws with certain characters, including the narrator themselves. Critics and academics have spent years analysing the voice of Nick Carraway, the narrator of The Great Gatsby and have questioned his story because of this biased opinion. This is referred to as the 'Unreliable Narrator', and suspicions can grow regarding the reliability of certain statements or characters. After all, just because Nick sees Gatsby as an innocent, fun individual doesn't mean that he was, or that there wasn't a darker presence hidden behind a friendly façade.

Who is Gatsby?

This is one of the main reasons why adaptations of first-person narratives can be so difficult. The introspections and opinions of the character we are following can often be lost or can clutter the story that is being told. It's a different medium and adaptations can struggle to bring certain perspectives to life in the same way as they initially appeared.

But that is not to say it's impossible. The Hunger Games films added some extra scenes of President Snow so that we, as an audience, could develop the same uneasiness that Katniss feels towards him without her actively telling us 'You should be scared of him'. We can see that she is afraid, but that isn't enough. We have to experience it ourselves or a key element of the narrative is lost.

The first-person narrative isn't the only way that opinion based perspective can be portrayed. Many narratives use a close third-person perspective that focuses primarily on one or more characters. Their thoughts and opinions still come across and can often provide some very contradictory opinions of each other.

Let's use the Discworld series as another example. Not every story in this series is told using the same characters but they do enjoy crossing over into other narratives. One prime example comes from Commander Samuel Vimes, a member of the Watch of Ankh-Morpork (basically he's a policeman). During the course of these books we learn about his intelligence, his love of the job, his love of his family and the difficulties of ensuring that the law is upheld across the city regardless of position or class. But in a city like Ankh-Morpork, there are many other characters present and several books choose to centre on them instead. The Truth revolves around William De Worde's attempts to create a newspaper and the Watch keeps popping up. Suddenly, Vimes is not the brilliant character or the hero we've come to know and love. He is a problem, someone who seems to be making William's life difficult and preventing him from achieving his goals by not sharing information or generally preventing William from getting what he needs to stay in business. On the flipside, when William, or his staff, appears in a book centred on the Watch, they are seen as annoyances that enjoy getting in the way.

The same people. Different perspectives.

However, as I mentioned earlier, there is another kind of perspective; the kind that relies on knowledge and understanding.

What do you know?

Let's use your work colleague here again and claim that they are an acquaintance of yours. You haven't known them very long before you made the comment that angered them. Now if they were someone you knew well, you would probably have known to not say this because it's a sensitive topic or it's just something they don't like to hear. It's the difference between an innocent mistake and a deliberate attempt to antagonise. People react differently based on what they know about a situation or issue. It's why we are more likely to trust a professional over someone who is just learning themselves or why we might treat someone slightly differently if we discovered they were seriously ill.

This is something that is mainly seen in minor characters such as the pencil-pushing, glory-seeking superior or the love-struck colleague who cause problems for the protagonist by doing things that make life difficult. But we only catch glimpses of these people and it's rarely when they are in their element or doing their jobs, moments when they would have an opportunity to show their competence or skill. We see them as comic relief or obstacles because they are reacting to the protagonist. Our knowledge of them reflects how we see them.

A prime example comes from Lin Beifong from Legend of Korra, an officer of the law and metal-bender. During the course of the second season, Lin suddenly seemed less competent at her job for no apparent reason. She dismissed the claims of Mako, who was investigating a crime, and preferred to listen to two lazy colleagues who kept looking for an easy solution. It is easy to see why Mako was getting frustrated and ended up making a few reckless choices.

But let's look at the situation based on what Lin knew at the time. Mako was a rookie in the ranks, didn't appear to have solid evidence backing up his claims and kept bringing his suspicions to Lin at inappropriate moments. His own past wasn't exactly squeaky clean and there was plenty of room to doubt him. In contrast were the two detectives, people who had not only been on the force for a while, but had clearly been promoted. There is reference made to detective 'openings', much like any other job vacancy, so these two had clearly applied and been considered the best candidates for these positions.

Calculating or ignorant? Bad writing or a believable reaction?

Minor characters often get a tough break in the narrative because we simply aren't given enough time with them to form any sort of opinion. The more we learn, the more our perspectives on them can change and this can often be reflected in the understanding of the main character.

Let's look at Harry Potter for a moment, or rather the character of Dumbledore. One scene that has stayed with fans since the beginning was with the Mirror of Erised. Because our perspective is with Harry, we see what he sees. We know what he desires. But when Harry shares the Mirror with Ron and Dumbledore, both Harry and the reader experience a problem; we can't see what Ron and Dumbledore see reflected in the Mirror. We trust what they tell us because Harry trusts them, even if we feel that what Dumbledore sees is a bit odd. It is only much later, when we learn more about Dumbledore's life and past regrets, that we start to view that scene with new eyes. Harry's knowledge and our understanding is no longer what it used to be. We don't believe what he told us in the first book because our trust in him has changed.

Reflections

Perspective shapes everything, no matter what form it comes in. It is not just about how someone might approach a situation. It's about how someone might think, or how they view people and situations.

So the work colleague you angered? Maybe they found your comments hurtful, even if you didn't mean them to be, or it was the final straw of a very bad day. Not everyone is going to see things the way you do or know everything that you know. In the words of Atticus Finch, 'You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view…until you climb into his skin and walk around in it.'

It's the beginning of a new year. Let's make an effort to understand a different point of view.

Hunger or satisfaction?

Considering this blog was originally supposed to be dedicated to publishing, I thought it was about time I actually started talking about it in a way. Considering my job is off limits, perhaps the best way to do this should be through the review of books that I have read recently.

Yes, I know many people are doing something similar so I'm not going to be doing actual reviews per say. After all, there's only so many times you can listen to people picking apart the same things over and over again. Instead, I'm going to do something a little bit more in depth if I can and write about something that struck me because of one thing or another.

So, how is this going to work?

I will take a book (or series) and give you my own opinions regarding it. Simple enough? Yes, but I will be assuming that other people have read whatever I'm talking about and while I will try to keep things as spoiler-free as possible, I will issue warnings when this is about to take place.

And what better place to start than with the Hunger Games trilogy?

I'm a bit late to the party with these but with one thing or another, I didn't get the opportunity to read them until this summer. And I will admit, I read these AFTER watching the film so my opinion may be a bit skewed in contrast to most people's.

I assume most people know the story so I will keep this section brief. Katniss Everdeen lives in Panem, a futuristic world (possibly America) that has been ravaged by war and has been divided into 12 districts. Every year, two children between the ages of 12-18 are chosen at random from each district to be Tributes for the Hunger Games, a brutal reality show that has the participants fighting to the death until only one remains. When Katniss' sister is chosen, Katniss volunteers to take her place and must survive the Hunger Games and the anger of the Capitol.

Just a warning, some spoilers may exist for a while. If you want to avoid them, skip to the section after the picture of the note.

ABANDON BLOG!!!

The character of Katniss rather impressed me in a number of ways. One, she is a survivor, feeding her family and generally making sure that the people she cares about are looked after, following the trend of a lot of Young Adult books (growing up too soon, the ineffective parent etc). But it's not just that she is a physical survivor that struck me, it was her mental capabilities as well.

In most books, the protagonist is pulled into a battle or a cause and fights for it because they believe in it. They were not looking for the cause, but now it is there, and they are going to make things right. But Katniss REALLY is not looking for a cause. She does not want The Cause. The Cause can find someone else because all she wants is to see tomorrow and make sure the people she loves survive. And that makes her appear cold and uncaring. But I can see where she's coming from. You never know what the Capitol may make you do next so you have to guard your heart in case something happens to someone you care about. So she makes that circle as small as she can.

The issue that most people seem to have with her lies in her effectiveness with The Cause of the book...or rather her ineffectiveness.

In the climatic moment of The Hunger Games, Katniss manages to defeat the Capitol by making sure that she and Peeta both survive, instead of just one of them. She has let Peeta into her circle and she doesn't want to let him go, but her action causes ripples and the world becomes just a little more unstable because of this. She doesn't realise the full implications until someone explains it to her and even then, she doesn't know just how deep this goes until it is too late and she is in the middle of it.

For several people I've spoken to about the book, their problem is that Katniss goes from being this kick-ass survivor to a political puppet that doesn't really do anything except gripe, moan and have emotional breakdowns.

But like I've said before, Katniss was a survivor because she had to be. She had time to learn how to survive and to understand how the world worked. What she could get away with and what she couldn't. In the space of two books (about a year or two), what she knows changes drastically. People she trusts turn out to have ulterior motives, others assume she knows more than she does and her own motivations are questioned. She doesn't have time to breathe or understand this new world. She's just pushed into it. She has to be one thing or another to protect the people she cares about and honestly? She is rarely given a moment to just 'be'.

As for the people she's around, her perceptions are screwed with over and over again. People she trusts become people she has to be cautious around and vice versa. Take Gale. Her best friend in the whole world and one constant in a world of uncertainty. She has to deny that relationship to protect him but eventually, that constant becomes something she doesn't like and cannot deal with. And Peeta? Her rival in the Games to her rock during the aftermath, he is eventually taken from her and altered, leaving her floundering and trying to cope in a situation without someone that she can really trust or even trusts her to the extent she requires. She is being pushed, prodded, manipulated and shaped into a figurehead. A lovestruck teen, a beautiful rebel and an eloquent speaker. But she is none of those things. Her words are not her own. Her looks are not her own. Even her fighting abilities are not her own since her rebellion insist that she not be placed in any danger. Her very sense of self is being pushed aside and her identity is being taken away from her by people who want to use her for their own ends.

Can you honestly blame her for having several breakdowns when all of this is happening?

Even when she tries to take charge and be proactive, she isn't really allowed to. She's a figurehead, not a leader. It's not about what she does as it is about what she is supposed to represent. It doesn't matter that her actions were motivated by her own selfish desire to survive and not have to take out her friend. To everyone else, her actions were a rebellion against the system that was holding them back and gave them the courage to speak out and to stop accepting things as they were.

Let's look at another symbol of hope. Harry Potter is 'The Boy who Lived' who eventually was seen as the hope against darkness. The difference here is that his actions took place when he was a baby. It wasn't a conscious action on his part and people understood that. He was given support and opportunities to prove himself. He made proactive decisions because they were the right thing to do and he fought the darkness on his terms. When Katniss eventually does it? She loses some valuable people and nothing much comes from it. Seriously, things blow up before she can really do anything. The one proactive thing she does is ensure that the circle of dictatorship doesn't continue.

I think that is why so many people have a problem with her. Because she started as a girl and then became a symbol. A symbol she did not mean to become or was really given an opportunity to understand. Harry had about seven years to get his head around what he was and to choose to take a particular path, even when people he trusted were manipulating him to a certain extent. But where Dumbledore tried to find another way and struggled to accept what Harry would have to do, the people around Katniss are manipulating her actions based on the greater good at the expense of her own welfare.So much of what happens to her, happens in spite of her. She is defined by one moment, not a series of incidences, and unlike Harry, she is very aware that she doesn't want to be there and that someone else would be much better suited for the role.

But more importantly, the trilogy is about her. The Harry Potter series was about Harry finding his place in the wider social context because it kept finding him and drawing him into it, helping him to grow from a symbol to a leader. The Hunger Games is not about the Capitol, or the rebellion or even the Games. It's about Katniss and how she copes. It's about how she is being broken by the rebellion the same way that Peeta is broken by the Capitol. The only difference is that the Capitol used more obvious methods to get what they wanted. Yes there is a wider context but that is all background information rather than a central theme and that is an important distinction to make.  Unless you understand that, you are going to be disappointed.

It's safe now

On the spoiler-free side of things, I think the trilogy is something you should check out if you haven't already. I know many consider the last book to be the poorest of the trilogy but think of it as a study of psychology rather than judging the characters based on what you see. It's a fascinating exploration of the human mind and a sobering look at our current culture.