So I'm wondering: for a book to be considered "post-apocalypse" does it have to be a result of one epic world-changing event (e.g. Lucifer's Hammer or The Stand), or can it be a slower, more gradual change that results in a world unlike our own (i.e. Into the Forest or The Handmaid's Tale) ?

I think all your examples count as apocalyptic stories.

Usually some event or circumstance has knocked society or civilization on its ear. Its not always fast.

I think the generally accepted definition of 'apocalypse' is "the end of the world." So, 'THE apocalypse' is either 'THE end of the world,' or more aptly, 'the event that will end the world.'

So, I take post-apocalyptic to be placed generally soon after an event that could've, or should've, ended the world (regardless of what the event was, how long it took, etc. only so long as it was largely successful.)

I say 'generally soon after' as it's assumed that, if people survived, and enough time has passed, things will revert to something akin to the pre-cataclysmic event status quo.

I generally link apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic to fall in the same bucket. The world has changed, now lets deal with it.

Im not sure if I agree completely with Jeff's definition.

I would say "the end of the world as you knew it", not necessarily the literal end of the world.

In the Bible, apocalypse means to reveal, as when a curtain or barrier has been lifted to reveal what has been hidden.

I think William's definition is right on.

The cause doesn't matter...it is the chaos, cleanup, or coping that makes it post-apocalyptic.

The defining part of the literature for me is this:

What we do with ourselves when we have access to our modern trappings (remaining technologies, knowledge, ect) when everything that exists in this modern world is just left to a just a handful of survivors without the hindrance of law.


A new dark ages with pistols and automobiles.

I like the dark side of Apocalypse. I take that to mean a change on a grand scale. I believe it is seen as a bad change to most, but a change is really all it means. As much as I enjoyed The Road by Cormac McCarthy, I kind of missed the explanation of what happened to cause the 'change'. The Judas Syndrome is my new novel which tells the story from the present through our post-apocalyptic future.

I have to agree with Michael, I like seeing the world before, during, and after the apocalyptic event. While reading The Road I kept wondering what and who caused "the end".

Im one of those people who really loved "The Road", as a great novel about the love of a father for his son. I dont think of it as apocalyptic novel at all. In most books the apocalypse is primary; in this book the apocalypse is peripheral and not the main focus at all.

In many ways it's more realistic than other books about the end of civilization. If the world as we know it, were to end suddenly......would the survivors know what caused it? Would we know there had been a nuclear exchange or that the Earth had been struck by a comet?

Manuel wrote: "If the world as we know it, were to end suddenly......would the survivors know what caused it? Would we know there had been a nuclear exchange or that the Earth had been struck by a comet?"

Yes. All those events have some amount of lead time. The missiles would take time to hit after they were launched, an asteroid would presumably be visible to astronomers before impact, news would leak of a virus, etc. Those are the kind of secrets that would get out, no matter how tightly they're guarded. The only way people (at least some people) would not know, would require something that was globally instantaneous with no visual proof and I think that's hard to come by.

I suppose in the event of nuclear war, there would probably be a period of tension before the missiles actually started flying. If we look at the Cuban Missile crisis as an example.....it was a series of escalations and counter moves that only lasted less than two weeks. In the era of CNN we have become used to instant news as it happens.
In my college days, it was thought the time from launch in the the Soviet Union to impact in the United States would be 30 minutes. We might even hear an air raid siren or view the exhaust trails of our own missiles as they took off on their trajectories.......of course it would depend on what time of day a launch or impact took place.

In the movie "The Day After" made in 1983. There is a scene where the survivors of Lawrence Kansas are listening to the Reaganesque president make his speech about the horrible blow we had just experienced.......as he bids everyone Godspeed.....One of the survivors looks up from the radio and exclaims.........."Is that it?!!!!"
"I want to know how this started, I want to know who fired the first shot!!!" His companion says.....
"I dont think we will ever find out"

Manuel wrote: "I want to know how this started, I want to know who fired the first shot!!!" His companion says.....
"I dont think we will ever find out" "

Great movie! That I'm sure is true. I think if it's man made people may well know how if not who.

Who will always be a tough question to answer. Did anyone follow the Jericho TV series? Part of the story was digging to find out who started it all. There is always the idea of the conspiracy lurking about. You may know which missile launched first or what lab the virus came from but was it mistake like The Stand or was it mastermind plan.
Depending on how devastated civilization is there may not be the resources to get to the bottom of WHO.

Dan wrote: Depending on how devastated civilization is there may not be the resources to get to the bottom of WHO. "

And in some ways I think it's realistic for characters not to care. I can see how someone would be desperate to know who to blame, but I can also believe a character that says it really doesn't matter, the only thing that matters now is survival.

However, as a reader I usually like some detail. If it's a virus, what were the symptoms? How was it passed? How did the world change after? Who was most affected? That kind of thing.

Out of curiosity, has anyone read Kim Stanley Robinson's global warming trilogy that starts with Forty Signs of Rain? Would you consider that apocalyptic?

Manuel wrote: "In the movie "The Day After" made in 1983. There is a scene where the survivors of Lawrence Kansas are listening to the Reaganesque president..."

Loved that movie! (I grew up in Lawrence and was there when they were filming it -- very cool!) The beginning where the Emergency Broadcasting System cuts into the middle of the kids watching cartoons was blood-chilling; to this day I get cold shivers whenever they do a test of that thing.