I love how the general consensus on Plutarch is āI canāt really form an opinion on himā - babes, your ālackā of opinion is, in itself, an opinion that Suzanne Collins wants you to experience.
Plutarch isnāt painted in jarringly simple shades of black and white, he isnāt a representative of ultimate good or quintessential evil, heās neither blindingly pure nor irredeemably corrupt - his morality is questionable, the trappings of his colours grey.
Plutarch is a delicious example of a morally ambiguous character in an age where such a thing can barely exist.
Heās a tireless rebel, mastermind of an underground organisation that risks everything for a seemingly unachievable goal yet he buys his time with the blood of innocent children. Heās an invaluable key to the success of the rebellion yet he airs the gruesome bombings live, severing the putrid cord of war at once. And next to his name, Panemās history books will bear no mention of the countless souls that were killed, unwittingly or otherwise, by his hand or his word, for the cause of the rebellion or the order of the Capitol.
If thereās one character Suzanne Collinsā done consistently right, itās Plutarch. And I thank her for it because arenāt we all fickle, stupid beings with poor memories and a great gift for self-destruction
