In the Hunger Games , when Cato was overpowered by the mutts, it took hours before Katniss shot him. However, if she didn't do that, then will the mutts eventually kill him or spare him?

  • Not necessarily opinion based; canon may reveal what the mutts would do in a similar situation. – SQB Aug 21 '16 at 6:21
  • Yeah, I've changed my mind. It may not be a great question, but it's not opinion-based at all: the narrative pretty clearly implies that if Katniss had not shot him, the muttants would have torn him apart. – Adamant Aug 21 '16 at 6:58
  • As in would they lose interest if he stopped responding - fell into a coma or something? – user68762 Aug 24 '16 at 21:13

Probably not directly, but he would eventually die of his wounds.

After spending an entire night on top of the cornucopia while Cato is being mauled by the mutts, we see this exchange:

"Why don't they just kill him?" I ask Peeta.

"You know why," he says, and pulls me closer to him.

Hunger Games, p. 339

Clearly, the gamemakers are trying to draw this out as long as possible, probably hoping to get Katniss to kill both Cato and Peeta. However, they will also not send in medical help except to the Victor, so while the Mutts will definitely not go in for the kill and finish him, Cato would eventually die, probably as a direct result of wounds from the Mutts.


Yes, they would have killed him. Katniss shows him mercy.

  • 5
    Your answer would be more useful if you explain why this is so. Quotes from the books, or references to scenes from the movies would be good ways of doing that. – Blackwood Aug 24 '16 at 14:17

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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