Trent's Podcast

Hey guys, Trent introduces his podcast discussing Gregor the Overlander by Suzanne Collins, focusing on fantasy, war, and growing up. Gregor falls into the Underland, embarking on a quest amidst conflict between rats and humans, while seeking his missing father. The story delves into themes of conflict and prejudice, showing how war shapes attitudes and reinforces biases. Collins challenges the us-versus-them mentality through Gregor's perspective and highlights the lasting effects of war on individuals and families. Hey guys, Trent here, and welcome to my first podcast episode. Today, we'll be looking at Gregor the Overlander by Suzanne Collins, which explores fantasy, war, and growing up into adulthood. I chose this book to look deeper into because of my love for it when I read it in my formative years, and because it felt right just to go back to a book I love with my current knowledge about fantasy tells a contemporary story, and to just deeper analyze those themes. So, if you're interested in Gregor's quest into the Underland full of prophecy, war, and most interestingly, rats, then I invite you to stick around as we dive deeper into themes of conflict and how the story connects to other works of fantasy. Our journey into the Underland begins with introducing our 11-year-old hero, Gregor, a boy from New York City attempting to take up the role of the man of the house since his father's disappearance two years prior. He is defined by his responsibilities, focused on getting through the day-to-day without ever really thinking about what Gregor wants. That shifts immediately as Gregor falls through a chute in his laundry room, landing in a world unfamiliar to his own. As he begins his day in Regalia, the human portion of the Underland, he is pulled into a prophetic system that has plans for him. As he begins his quest, he is put directly into the center of conflict between the rats and the humans. At the same time, Gregor's personal goal to find his father remains central. This draws Gregor deeper into the Underland and its tensions. Along the way, he forms alliances, faces challenges, and begins to take on his own identity through his choices and actions. By the end of the novel, Gregor finds his father, but also realizes that the conflict has just begun. He now doesn't only have to live through the trauma of fighting the war himself, but must also help his father navigate the same space. Because of this, the plot becomes more than just completing a quest to fulfill your prophecy. It's about how being placed in a conflict-driven environment forces Gregor to confront ideas he previously avoided. A direct quote from the book reads, Gregor never allowed himself to think about the future at all, symbolizing how maturity comes through understanding, which feels like Collins' main idea, but I want to go deeper and analyze how the world Gregor enters is shaped by conflict. It's this constant state that reveals one of Collins' more embedded arguments, that war doesn't simply just reflect existing prejudice, but reinforces and produces it. At first, it might seem that the conflict in the Underland is driven by simple things, like long-standing differences between groups, especially the humans and the rats. But Collins complicates that assumption by presenting how the conditions of war intensify and reshape attitudes, rather than being the root cause of the conflict itself. This argument connects directly to a study conducted by political scientists called, What Role Does Prejudice Play in Ethnic Conflict? They argue that prejudice and war are often studied separately, but they are deeply interconnected. Prejudice is emphasized through mechanisms of war, such as fear and group pressure, which drives conflict in both our world and the Underland. War creates an environment where fear becomes a more viable survival tool than moral thought. Groups are constantly trying to identify threats, which pushes them to rely on simple assumptions. Over time, those assumptions are remedied and snowball into increased conflicts, rather than peace. You can see this in how the outsider, Gregor, and the humans of the Underland differ in the way they view the creatures that inhabit the space. Specifically, when two of our main characters' parents were killed in wars involving rats, and those characters frame their parents' deaths as murders, and Gregor frames them as tragic deaths inherently related to the consequences of war. To the Underlanders, their justification for seeing the rats as the enemy justifies offensive actions, reinforces stout loyalty, and makes ongoing hostility seem necessary. The work I mentioned earlier further emphasizes that large-scale conflicts rely on micro-level processes, especially persuasion and reinforcement. This shapes how individuals view other groups as a whole. This is partially seen when Gregor is convinced to go forth with the quest to save his father, persuasion, but really represented in the way that the Underlanders frame rats as evil murderers, reinforcement. Bound to see the eradication of all beings besides themselves through the means of chaos. When constantly faced with this reinforcement, we see how easy it becomes to view the other as always the enemy. This idea becomes more significant when considering the historical context of 2003 of which the book was written. The United States was in the thick of the war on terror, which was stabilized by a general hatred of the enemy. This is shown in Layla Nadia Sadat's work, Do All Arabs Really Look Alike? Prejudice, the U.S., and the War on Terror. In her work, she represents how war, specifically the war on terror, creates an environment where prejudice flourishes. It's a specific type of environment that propagates an us-versus-them mentality. She states, ethnic and religious minorities are like canaries in a coal mine. When they begin to suffer, it is not long before society as a whole becomes repressive and less free. This is her warning that always seeing the enemy as such ultimately harms everyone. That context directly ties into Collins' depiction of conflict in The Underland. Just as real-world conflict is encouraged in an us-versus-them mentality, the war in the novel pushes entire groups into rigid categories that leave little room for nuance. However, because Collins understands this context, she also makes it clear how wrong that idea is through certain literary decisions, the most important of which is perspective. The story is told through the experiences of Gregor, which means we experience The Underland from an inherently outside perspective. Gregor doesn't enter the conflict already convinced of certain groups simply being the enemy. He knows that some rats are holding his father captive, but doesn't make any generalizations, so when he encounters the beliefs of fellow Underlanders, they stand out as learned behavior rather than natural. Gregor's hesitation to conform to those beliefs represents to the young people reading the story that there is always another pair of eyes to view the world out of, especially with the addition of Rip Rat, a rat, to the quest. As a rat, he belongs to the very group that has been construed as a primary threat, and yet he doesn't fit into that role at all when he joins the group. This creates an instant tension between what you've been told versus what you're being shown. This tension is crucial as it ties directly back to prejudice not being based in truth, but in generalized assumptions reinforced by war. If rat is a stand-in for enemy, then Rip Rat's presence immediately destabilizes that definition. Collins uses this to show how fragile these categories are and how important it is to think morally through perspective building rather than through assumptions. This is the real danger that Collins is trying to argue, not that we or the other are inherently prejudiced based on evidence that occurs through something naturally, but that it is propagated through a lack of understanding and a fear of where that understanding might lead you. Moving away from how war reshapes societies, Collins also makes a more individualistic argument, one that centers around how war impacts those who are victims of conflict, specifically Gregor's father in navigating expectation versus reality. At first, Gregor's father's disappearance creates instability in their familiar lives. But when Gregor finally finds his father, the significance in that moment is not simply that his father has survived, but that he has been fundamentally changed by his experience. In the book, it reads on page 253, then the creature lifted his head and he realized it was what was left of his father. Gregor's father is physically and mentally weakened, only a semblance of the man he used to be. This isn't framed as something that is, This isn't framed as something that is simply temporary, but as a deep transformation, one that reflects the nature of the lasting psychological effects of prolonged exposure to conflict. People never leave conflict with the same being that they once were. War is scarred, both mentally and physically, which Collins brings to life through this dynamic between Gregor and his father. This idea also closely connects to research on military families, particularly the study, This study suggests that the impact of war doesn't just change the individual, it directly extends into the family. Specifically, the research shows that the challenges these kids face doesn't just lie in their absence, but in how emotional barriers are created by PTSD. Symptoms like avoidance, shown in Gregor's father by his father's family, can be a sign of the impact of war. In the book, Gregor's father is physically and mentally weakened, but as a deep transformation, one that reflects the nature of the lasting psychological effects of conflict. Symptoms like avoidance, shown in Gregor's father by his father stating, just want to sleep after being found, represent how difficult it is to connect with a father coming back from conflict. This becomes more significant when, again, analyzing the time it was wrote in. During this time, many fathers were either being deployed or coming back from war, causing families to confront what that reality might look like and who they will meet if that individual walks through the door ever again. This reflects the shift in expectations and points towards reality. PTSD can restore stability in all that has been broken, but it forces Gregor to confront a reality that his father is no longer the same. Coming home or a soldier reuniting with his family after deployment does not mean that the individual will have the same role, such identity. It means negotiating with a new reality shaped by what's been experienced. This is something that many 11-year-olds would be experiencing at the time the book was written. It's also important to see how Gregor's father's reunion shapes the dynamic of the entire family and how they now see his father, but also the changes that now exist as a result. By the time the father returned, the family he imagined returning to was no longer in the same form. This brings us all the way back to the beginning of the book where Gregor is attempting to take on his father's role. He helps care for his baby sister, born right after their father's disappearance, and he functions as a stabilizing presence in an unstable home. Essentially, Gregor is trying to fill an asteroid-sized crater with an 11-year-old's hands. Now, looking at an article by Reuben Hill titled The Returning Father and His Family, we see how Gregor's experiences connect with those in the real world whose fathers left for war. Hill argues that during prolonged absences, families adapt. A quote from the text reads, The years of maturing in different worlds at different rates have introduced obstacles which may take months to clear away. So through Gregor's father, Collins uses that idea to show how war is a force that fractures fundamental continuity. It interrupts family roles, accelerates maturity, and makes reunion emotionally complicated. Throughout the book, Gregor wants to save his father, bring him back so he can be the guy he once was, but that's just not realistic. Hill states, he, the father, Hill states, he, the father, comes home and his children are new and strange to him. This is showed in the book on page 255 when Gregor states, He states, dad, it's me. And his father responds, it's the fever. I'm just seeing things again. Representing how hard it is for fathers to return and accept that the children they love aren't the same kids they once were. Further showing the audience how hard it is for a child to reconnect, but also how difficult it is for the father to navigate the same space. Ultimately, what Collins suggests is that war disrupts individuals, as well as relationships previously shaped by the individuals. Gregor's father is no longer a missing piece waiting to be recovered, but evidence of what war does over time, reinforcing an even broader idea. The consequences of war are not continued onto the battlefield. They extend into homes, into families, and into the lives of those connected. While the themes I focus on pertain to social and individual impacts of war, I want to shift focus a little bit to point out some connections to other works of fantasy. Specifically, connections to Tolkien's The Hobbit and Kafka's The Metamorphosis. Starting with The Hobbit, the similarities between Gandalf and Vicus are, frankly, pretty interesting. Both characters act as guides, introducing our hero to a world bigger than they've ever known. Both characters leave at critical times when our hero seems to need them the most. Although their differences tell us a lot more about why this connection is significant, Gandalf represents a godlike figure that seems to know what's going to come next. Vicus is dark and broody. His leadership is influenced way more heavily by survival and political pressure, rather than someone trying to teach a lesson. This difference represents how authority is viewed in contemporary culture versus its previous counterpart. Guidance isn't clear and reliable as it once was when Gandalf was leading the group. Collins presents it as something shaped more by circumstance and constraint. What happens when the word of your guide is coming from a human rather than a wizard? In Gandalf's case, guidance can be trusted because it comes from a position beyond the chaos of the world. In Vicus's case, guidance can always be interpreted, questioned, and weighed against the fact that it itself is the product of that chaos. This shift is crucial to a more central argument I'm pointing at. In a world shaped by conflict, even guidance becomes uncertain. And this is because it is produced within the same conditions it is trying to navigate. There is no longer a figure that is only questioned by a lack of understanding, but one formed inside the system itself. Just as war shapes how groups perceive each other, it also shapes how authority is understood. We see something similar when we connect Gregor Samsa to Gregor the Overlander. Both characters begin in a state of disconnection. One is a bug, unwilling to see that he doesn't actually care about what he represents, and one is a boy, disconnected from the ideas that make up a person's identity in their formative years. One at the end of metamorphosis and one in the beginning. Samsa has been completely stripped of his identity, agency, and his personality because of social materialism. What remains is not a transformation into something new, but complete separation from what makes him human, metamorphosis. Collins-Gregor begins in a structurally similar position, but at the starting point. He is not yet defined by his identity, which Samsa fails to promote. Instead, he is shaped by external obligation and survival as a whole. In this sense, he occupies the space before transformation, where a change can still be significant that's not changing into a bug. This difference is crucial towards understanding the broader argument being made as well. The same conditions that produce fragmentation and identity for Samsa, pressure, obligation, and lack of definable self, are clearly present in the Collins' novel, but they function differently in regards to ongoing conflict. War and Gregor's quest don't allow him to remain passive or undefined. It forces the character to position himself in situations where identity is construed through action, where Samsa lacked that defining, personal driving action that kept him from realizing he's becoming a bug. Kafka shows what happens when identity collapses under isolation and societal expectation. Collins shows how society doesn't have to be an influence towards self-erasure, but it can act as something that creates self through real choices made through personal ideology. Wrapping up here, overall, I believe the book is most effective when looking at it as more than just a fantasy adventure for the purpose of fulfilling a quest. What stands out the most for me is how Collins is able to weave so many themes together that reflect multitudes of circumstances. Rather than offering clear moral examples, it focuses on giving the reader an outlet to think deeper, because meaning isn't given, it is derived from personal understanding. This is why I love this book. It's dark, and it doesn't offer simple takeaways. Collins is less interested in giving answers and more interested in how those answers are shaped by the conditions people are placed in. You could have hated the rats, or you could have loved the rats. Collins doesn't care. The only thing that matters is how you, the individual, feel about the rats, and how many questions you're willing to ask to figure out why you feel that way. Gregor the Overlander is effective not because it simplifies war on identity, but because it shows how nuanced they really are and how easy both can be shaped by the systems that we live in. If you can't tell, I'm in love with this book, and I recommend it to anyone who finds fantasy literature interesting, especially young adults trying to navigate the world for themselves. With that, I hope you all enjoyed listening as much as I enjoyed going back to my favorite book. Thank you all again for being here, and I guess I'll maybe see you the next time at Trent's Podcast. Peace!