The Instigator
booklover
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
raya36
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

City of Bones vs. Hunger games

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
raya36
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/3/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 879 times Debate No: 39890
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

booklover

Pro

City of Bones is a better book because one it surrounds the reader in a world of endless possibilities while the Hunger Games sends your favorite characters into a battle to the death which we all know they aren't going to return.

City of Bones let's the reader learn more about the shadow hunters and where they come from while leaving the reader wondering about whether it is possible for such beings to exist. One because supposedly we can't see them. I also found it way more entertaining to read because the author describes the details perfectly so the reader can crate the images in theoir heads while leaving come up to them.
raya36

Con

The hunger games is full of surprises and unexpected turns. It as well as city of bones allows you to look deeply into the story and makes you wonder if the future could ever become this. You also said it send characters into a world where they won't come back. Someone will though. That's the charm of the book. These two books are pretty much incomparable. One is a fantasy and the other is actually possible.
Debate Round No. 1
booklover

Pro

Yes it is possible for that to happen but that is what may scare some readers. Yes it is a very entertaining book and has captured the attention of many but when you think about this there is this slim chance that the world is declining so rapidly as to fall into that sort of state.

That is also the beauty of City of Bones if this is happening we would never know and continue on (quoting the book) living our Mundane lives. Free from any harm caused by theses things. I believe that yes theses books are hard to compare but it is possible. One must take into account the authors success rate and how they have planned and executed the book/series. I think Cassandra Clare has done an amazing job at this with to extremely successful series and extra books in the making plus a movie. (Yes I know there will be a hunger games set trilogy of movies.).
raya36

Con

Regardless as of weather or not the hunger games is possible in the future, city of bones is even more impossible. The hunger games is a message giving in a gentle way. City of bones is just for entertainment.
Debate Round No. 2
booklover

Pro

Yes It may be purely for entertainment but I ask you one thing. Would you rather be out int the woods miserable, wet, cold and inevitably waiting to die? Or sitting at home in your nice warm bed eating/drinking your favorite thing while reading a book falling for the dashing hero and being entertained?

In my opinion it is simple. I would rather be entertained by fantastical ways than dead.
raya36

Con

What you would rather do isn't important. Sure I don't want to be starving outside awaiting death but that doesn't mean it can't happen. Besides you were comparing being in the hunger games to reading city of bones. Shouldn't you be comparing it to being in city of bones. So really you would rather be in a world made for survival then being constantly chased by demons downworlders and valentine.

The hunger games is more entertaining because of it's realism compared to city of bones.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Mockery 3 years ago
Mockery
bookloverraya36Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: No sources were used and while it was a simple debate, I agree more with con.
Vote Placed by funwiththoughts 3 years ago
funwiththoughts
bookloverraya36Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: I can't comment on which is better as I have not read City of Bones, but I was actually leaning towards Pro until the final round, where it seems that out of desperation Pro just out of nowhere claimed that reading The Hunger Games would kill you. Pro's saying that "we all know they aren't going to return" even though the main characters do survive to the end showed how little he knew about the Hunger Games. Con also stayed consistent throughout the debate, while Pro discarded his argument and started a new one at the start of each round.