It’s intentional to weave a dialogue type of writing into the prose to give the tone of a character telling you the story. It’s similar to screen-writing in the sense that it allows the reader to experience a piece of writing which comes across as much more visual. The structure of The Hunger Games is also similar to how plays and film is written for that dramatic fast-paced, cliff-hanger effect that some people find much easier to read – probably more visually inclined people.

“We’re on a flat, open stretch of ground. A plain of hard-packed dirt. Behind the tributes across from me, I can see nothing, indicating either a steep downward slope or even a cliff. To my right lies a lake. To my left and back, sparse piney woods. This is where Haymitch would want me to go. Immediately.”

This is Katniss TALKING TO THE READER.

It requires much more work from the author to make sure the writing is comprehensive enough that we see and know everything we need to but at the same time get a sense that a person is telling us what they’re seeing, not an author over-articulating what they observed characters doing.

I think it’s only a good thing that this type of writing and other types of writing exists for differet types of readers. It’s not about being dumb. And Suzanne Collins is a very talented and knowledgeable woman who’s crafted a very elaborate plot with The Hunger Games. There’s a lot that happens in the novels yet she’s managed to do it in a way that’s clear, accurate, detailed and most importantly entertaining which is what stories should be.

We should be grateful that authors like Suzanne Collins exist today if they’re helping to make sure that large numbers of younger people are still reading and not relying on TV alone for their entertainment.

I wish we could leave the “spectacle” behind and enjoy a good story for being a good story, not because “OMG, BLOOD! EXPLOSIONS! WOO!”