Take the 2-minute tour ×
Science Fiction & Fantasy Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for science fiction and fantasy enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

It is possible that the remaining last two tributes might get killed at the same time, for example, by a land mine explosion, and in that case the games will end with no victor standing.

Is there a reference in the original books as to what happens if nobody emerges victor in the Hunger Games?

share|improve this question
    
possible duplicate of Are there any official rules for the Hunger Games? –  Richard Feb 24 at 19:31
8  
I don't see how it's a duplicate. Neither the question nor any of the answers discusses that scenario, and it may not be an actual official regulation. –  phantom42 Feb 24 at 19:55
    
@phantom42 - If it's a rule, it should have been discussed in the "rules" question –  Richard Feb 24 at 19:57
1  
I'd be willing to bet money that there was no rule stating that the gamesmaker had to eat poison berries if there were two victors. There may not be a rule, but there may be some sort of mention of what might happen if there were no survivors. The rules question is definitely related, but not a dupe. –  phantom42 Feb 24 at 20:02
2  
Nope, not a dupe –  SSumner Feb 24 at 20:08

3 Answers 3

up vote 22 down vote accepted

There's nothing in the three books that explicitly states what would happen in the event that there was no victor. However, I think we can make some educated guesses about what might happen.

First off, it's extremely unlikely that the final two Tributes are going to die. The Capitol is going to make sure of that. The arenas seem to be completely under the control of the Gamesmakers, under the guidance of the Head Gamesmaker, so they aren't going to die from "natural" disasters, or even from things like mine explosions, as they'd no doubt disable those the moment it came down to the final two - unless they were necessary to force the two of them together.

Of course, it's not an entirely impossible situation. Katniss and Peeta could have very well gone through with the threat of eating the berries, and the Capitol would have been without their victor. And they need their victor. It's part of how they maintain their power. The Victory Tour - strategically placed halfway between each Games - is intended to remind the Districts that they're powerless. They take the victor, the strongest of the previous lot of Tributes, and drag them around Panem, putting them on display, and the Tribute has no say in the matter.

Let's assume that there was no surviving Tribute. What would the Capitol do?

First off, try to revive the victor. They have access to advanced medical techniques and equipment; depending on the severity of the injuries and exact cause of death it may be possible for them to revive them. They're not going to give up until they absolutely have to.

If that doesn't work, depending on the exact cause of death, they may very well lie. The 75th Hunger Games, the third Quarter Quell, demonstrated the Capitol's ability to manufacture recordings using an individuals voice. There's also the option of surgery to make somebody look like the winning tribute. If the tribute died from injuries, or blood loss, or exposure to the elements, dehydration or starvation, this may well be a viable option.

If they were, for example, blown to pieces then this would be impossible to sell; you can't fool an entire country who saw the explosion happen on television into believing that you managed to save them.

share|improve this answer
1  
+1 for mentioning the possibility of substituting somebody in place of the deceased victor. That's exactly what I think the Capitol would do in that situation. –  The Giant of Lannister Feb 25 at 7:46
3  
Good answer. It's also possible that the Capitol would re-stage the games with a fresh set of Tributes in a bid to send out a clear message to the Districts that the onus of survival rests solely on the Tributes and if their follies result in the Capitol not having their Victor, another Reaping would be held and the games would be re-staged. Doing so would effectively discourage the surviving Tribute(s) from committing a suicide in protest, like Katnis and Peeta decided to do. –  Elzee Feb 25 at 12:31

No, there's no such reference. I obviously can't give you a link or a quotation to prove a negative, but it's the kind of thing I would have picked up when reading the books, if it existed.

share|improve this answer

There is no canon explanation as far as I know. However, it would not be a good thing. In the first book, when Seneca Crane changed the rules back to only allow for one victor, Katniss and Peeta had decided they would commit a double-suicide, so that the Capitol would not win again.

Crane stopped them before they could complete their plan, and crowned them both as victors, but all that can be said about having no victor is pure speculation. Ultimately, each year the Capitol is the victor, because the games keep each district from rebelling the way District 13 had. When Katniss volunteered was the first year that the Capitol lost the Hunger Games, and you could count that as there being no victor, because even though Katniss and Peeta won the games, the had still had to kill all those other tributes, and no one can consider that a victory for someone so young.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.