Why are Dystopian and Doomsday stories so popular?

[Jim]

You make a very good point, Holly.
Most books, regardless of genre, especially those from mainline publishers, may be considered fads in the sense that a mainline publisher is a business; and, like any other type of business, they want to make a profit. The only way to do that consistently is to determine what the majority of the public wants during any given time and phase in their lives; then give it to them and be able and prepared to change as the public's taste in entertainment changes.

[D.L.]

It is, of course, a matter of taste. I read the Hunger Games and hated it. On the other hand, I love Doctor Who and Star Trek because, although no less fictional, they are more hopeful. I suppose that's really the difference. I tend to see reality as a bit depressing, or at least disappointing, and I like my fiction to provide some relief from that.

[Leigh]

I do not believe dystopian fiction is a fad; YA distopian fiction is a fad. Check out Vonnegut's Cat's Cradle, Orwell's 1984, Levin's This Perfect Day, Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, or Harrison's Make Room! Make Room!. These books are timeless classics, written with purpose and depth, not fads.

[[deleted user]]

I mostly read modern fiction, not the classics so I was referring to modern distopian fiction as a fad. And, DL, I can understand those who do not like "Hunger Games" because there was no happy ending or even hopeful ending. I enjoyed the suspense and twists and turns presented in the book. It will be interesting to see how the film makers end the movie - will they give a happy ending or stay true to the book?

[D.L.]

My taste in fiction is admittedly outside the norm. I don't find dark, depressing stuff enjoyable. I'm not a big fan of "action" because I don't find violence entertaining. This has made it a bit difficult to find books I really like. I can appreciate cautionary tales like 1984 and Fahrenheit 451, but I can't honestly say I take much pleasure from them.

[L.G.]

Jim wrote: "You make a very good point, Holly.
Most books, regardless of genre, especially those from mainline publishers, may be considered fads in the sense that a mainline publisher is a business; and, like..."

I think this is a good way to think about it. I'd be curious to know how many of the dystopian tales coming out now will stand the test of time in the way the classics (e.g., 1984 and Brave New World) have? Not many, I suspect.

[Matthew]

Good question, and one that's been speculated about for quite some time. Some would say these kinds of stories appeal to our inner anarchist, the part of us that revels in destruction, chaos and drama. And of course, since we are removed from it, we can romanticize it without worry. There's also the historical context of it. Ever since the late industrial revolution, people have become aware of just how fragile modern, urban societies really are.

The 20th century added a push to this by introducing people to total war, totalitarianism, and the possibility of nuclear holocaust. I'm thinking disaster stories and apocalyptic tales help us work out our fears and angst about these things, allowing us to fantasize about what it would be like without ever having to experience it.

And of course, pandemics and biological warfare are a popular form of this too. Just look at the recent surge in zombie apocalypse literature and franchises. Tell me people don't love a good story about the s*** hitting the fan and being forced to get all amoral and survivalist!

[Humberto]

We live in dystopia. War, hunger and huge wealth inequality. Our stories just reflect reality.

[D.L.]

There is that, but we also have indoor plumbing, ample food in many parts of the world, relative freedom, an absence of slavery, and safety... compared to other times in history, at any rate. How you see things depends on what you focus on and what you take for granted.

[Mary]

How true. The very poorest people in America enjoy things -- like a life expectancy -- that would make kings and queens of a century or two stare in awe and envy.

[Humberto]

There is a lot of food. But not enough money. If that is not injustice I don't know anything.

We could live close to utopia. Greed and old habits are destroying us.

I find it ridiculous that there are more goods that money. In the pocket of people who need it.

And it is getting worse. Billionaires are improving at 10% per year. Middle class is stagnant.

And even a billionaire cannot eat more than one steak a day.

[Sandra]

There is a lot of plastic with taste to eat. Food is a different thing and it is outrageously expensive and hard to find.

Life expectancy is going down fast, almost as fast as health in the common population.

About living better than in the past, maybe in some places, not everywhere:

http://www.organiclives.org/_blog/Org...

[D.L.]

Yes, things could be much better. Income disparity is especially troubling, and I can find no rationale why the CEO of a company deserves more in pay than three or four hundred average workers. But, that said, progress has been made since feudal overlords ruled over their serfs and the inquisition burned people at the stake. We are progressing, although one might wish the pace was a bit faster.

[Matthew]

Humberto wrote: "There is a lot of food. But not enough money. If that is not injustice I don't know anything.

We could live close to utopia. Greed and old habits are destroying us.

I find it ridiculous that th..."

Where is that statistic from, sir? The one regarding how billionaires are improving? And consider the rate of growth for economies in India, China and Africa. I have those stats somewhere, I'll be sure to get them...

[Sandra]

Matthew wrote: "And consider the rate of growth for economies in India, China and Africa. I have those stats somewhere, I'll be sure to get them... "

Rates of growth and quality of life for the general population are two completely different animals, Matthew.

[Humberto]

Mathew. Obviously you are not a billionaire. If you were you would know that it is true.

New York Times. Wall Street Journal. Too many sources.

[Matthew]

Sandra wrote: "Matthew wrote: "And consider the rate of growth for economies in India, China and Africa. I have those stats somewhere, I'll be sure to get them... "

Rates of growth and quality of life for the ge..."

Actually, they are separate but related animals. In all cases, the economic growth is creating a burgeoning middle class of young professionals who are in turn creating a higher demand for services and products, which is in turn leading to job growth and in the general labor, construction and service sectors.

While economic growth can always be felt unevenly and wealth can be disproportionately distributed, the general trend is towards a higher standard of living all around. No one can ensure that wealth remains in just a few hands without keeping a nation in general poverty. And no one wants that, since it will ensure that the rich will never get richer.

[Matthew]

Humberto wrote: "Mathew. Obviously you are not a billionaire. If you were you would know that it is true.

New York Times. Wall Street Journal. Too many sources."

If I were a billionaire, I'd be celebrating that fact, Humberto. However, I was looking for a specific source since you quoted a figure of 10% and how its getting worse, not to mention a whole bunch of other general statements about how we live in dystopia, which is a pretty dramatic statement given how much worse off the world was half a century ago. I'm not challenging you, simply hoping you could show some sources to back this rather morose appraisal up.

[Leonie]

Sandra wrote: "There is a lot of plastic with taste to eat. Food is a different thing and it is outrageously expensive and hard to find.

Life expectancy is going down fast, almost as fast as health in the common..."

Not sure where you live Sandra, but where I live, life expectancy is actually improving, and has done so for many years. However, I do live in Australia.

http://www.aihw.gov.au/australian-tre...

[D.L.]

Leonie wrote: "Not sure where you live Sandra, but where I live, life expectancy is actually improving"

I wondered the same. I live in Florida, and fresh fruits and veggies are readily available and inexpensive here, and life expectancy overall has been rising, as far as I know. This may not be true in some places, though.

[Sandra]

Matthew wrote: "Actually, they are separate but related animals. In all cases, the economic growth is creating a burgeoning middle class of young professionals who are in turn creating a higher demand for services and products, which is in turn leading to job growth and in the general labor, construction and service sectors.

While economic growth can always be felt unevenly and wealth can be disproportionately distributed, the general trend is towards a higher standard of living all around. No one can ensure that wealth remains in just a few hands without keeping a nation in general poverty. And no one wants that, since it will ensure that the rich will never get richer. "

Alright then... (this is theory, reality is a tiny bit different, but never mind. :))

[Sandra]

Leonie wrote: "Not sure where you live Sandra, but where I live, life expectancy is actually improving, and has done so for many years. However, I do live in Australia.

http://www.aihw.gov.au/australian-tre... "

I was talking about US. I´m coming and going to my home country Argentina at this time, but I lived up there for 8 years.

Also note that stats are easily manipulated when it comes to rates (I used to be a physicist and did research in statistical mechanics, not exactly the same, but enough to be able to understand statistics).

The big improvements came with sanitation, from there everything started going downhill again due to the change from agriculture to agro-industry.

[Sandra]

D.L. wrote: "
I wondered the same. I live in Florida, and fresh fruits and veggies are readily available a..."

I live in Florida when I´m in US D.L. Food is not good, many can´t even tell the difference.

[Jim]

"There are three kinds of lies: Lies, damn lies, and statistics."

Lord Benjamin Disraeli (Prime Minister of England and Author) 1804 - 1881.

[Jim]

I believe that many distopian and post-apcalyptic novels may be the author's version of a wake-up call to remind the reader that sometimes there is no next time; no do-over; no instant replay.

Sometimes it really is now or never. We may not always be able to predict the future; but we can often steer it in the direction we wish it to head.

[Matthew]

Sandra wrote: "Matthew wrote: "Actually, they are separate but related animals. In all cases, the economic growth is creating a burgeoning middle class of young professionals who are in turn creating a higher dem..."

No, this IS reality, Sandra, and one which was demonstrated by history and is being demonstrated again as we speak. It's been shown time and time again that the kind of economic growth that involves the expansion of industry and infrastructure has an inevitable effect of raising the general standard's of living, regardless of whether or not it was intended. Any examination of the wealth of all nations of the world, GDP, and individual buying power - just in the past century - shows that things are getting better. To assume that they will always stay the same or are getting worse is to base our conclusions on cynicism and ignorance.

[D.L.]

I recently read a book about scientific discoveries of the 17th Century. The setting was largely England and Western Europe. It was a time of wars and plagues, fire, crime, brutality and superstition. The contrast of how these people lived and how they saw the world is, well, enlightening. I would not have wanted to live then, and chances are I would not have for long. I recommend it.

The point, though, is that our society has made considerable advances in quality of life over time. I'd like to believe we will continue to do so. We have problems and inequities, but people have overcome far worse things in the past, and this gives me hope for the future. Dystopian and other dark fiction can help point out and highlight current problems, but it can also dwell on them and suggest they are insurmountable, which I think is unduly negative given what humanity actually has accomplished over the last 200,000 years or so.

[Sandra]

Matthew wrote: "No, this IS reality, Sandra, and one which was demonstrated by history and is being demonstrated again as we speak. It's been shown time and time again that the kind of economic growth that involves the expansion of industry and infrastructure has an inevitable effect of raising the general standard's of living, regardless of whether or not it was intended. Any examination of the wealth of all nations of the world, GDP, and individual buying power - just in the past century - shows that things are getting better. To assume that they will always stay the same or are getting worse is to base our conclusions on cynicism and ignorance. "

Matthew, we have different definitions of "quality of life". So we have not ground to take this any further.

I lived in South America, Europe and US. The place were I saw people struggling the most to survive, the place were people were the most stressed out and unhappy was US. And I lived in Boca Raton, Florida, not South Central.

And yes, I loved my top of the line Toyota Avalon, and my 1400 square feet condo, and my dish washer.

But I had to pay out-of-my-budget prices for an apple that actually smelled to apple. No way I could find a rose that smelled to rose.

And if my husband got sick or had an accident, I would be under the bridge in under 3 months.

Maybe I´m too much of a simple person. But that is not quality of life for me.

And... looking around, the locals were not fairing much better. They just had no idea what was wrong.

[D.L.]

Our society could be better. But if we contrast it to how many people lived in the not-so-distant past, we're not doing bad. Most of us have a dry place to sleep at night. We have heat in the winter and AC in the summer. The amount of clothing one of has in our closet is probably more than an entire village owned a couple centuries ago. We have some semblance of education. We can read. We have access to food. We may read, think, and say what we want (legally, anyway). Most of our children are likely to survive infancy. We ourselves are likely to live past 40. We have access to (reasonably) clean water. We can get medical care that is likely to do more good than harm. Our city streets do not stink of refuse and manure. We accept these kinds of things almost as given, but they are not. We have them because our ancestors did not and took steps to correct the problems. If they could do it, I see no reason why we cannot. Obviously, our issues are different and largely of our own making, but we're a clever species and when we don't like something, we change it... eventually.

[Matthew]

Sandra wrote: "Matthew wrote: "No, this IS reality, Sandra, and one which was demonstrated by history and is being demonstrated again as we speak. It's been shown time and time again that the kind of economic gro..."

Yes of course, but know the I agree with you about much of what you've said. Standards are subjective, and the progress I've been talking about is general and doesn't reach all people. And even when it does, it's never quite evenly distributed. I just like to pass these things on because they give me hope, even if they don't allay my suspicions that any such good news is likely to be tainted by plenty of bad. And in truth, I didn't even realize Africa was experiencing an economic boom at all until I read about it the other day. It improved my mood about the state of the world measurably.

Please know that I meant no offence or to patronize. I swear my intentions are good :)

[Jim]

I was born and raised in poverty; however, I did not realize it at the time because everyone I knew was also poor.

I do not have a college education - My parents were too poor - My grades and athletic ability were insufficient to merit a scholarship - Besides, a war intervened; so, at 18 years of age, I put on a uniform.

When I became a civilian again in 1968, I got a job as a shipping clerk - annual compensation: $4,500.
I retired 33 years later at the age of 53 as the manager of one of the Company's facilities - annual compensation: $172,000.

I am not a genius - average intelligence at best. I had no more advantages than anyone else I have known and quite a few less than some.

However, I did have one major advantage: I was born in a land of opportunity in which a citizen may eventually succeed in becoming as independent and enjoy as comfortable a lifestyle as they wish.

Utopias do not just magically appear out of nothing; neither does distopia. Mankind creates one or the other; sometimes intentionally, sometimes inadvertently.

[Sandra]

Matthew wrote: "Please know that I meant no offence or to patronize. I swear my intentions are good :) "

I know, Matthew, no worries. :)

[[deleted user]]

Sandra wrote: "Matthew wrote: "No, this IS reality, Sandra, and one which was demonstrated by history and is being demonstrated again as we speak. It's been shown time and time again that the kind of economic gro..."

Maybe a little travel through time could convince you that we are not living as badly as you think. In 17th Century France, a period dubbed 'The Great Century' under King Louis XIV (the Sun King) in France's history, 90% of the population was living at near starvation levels and were subject to the depradations and crimes of passing armies and mercenary troups. There was no pension funds, no social assistance, no medicare and no emergency medical services. If one didn't have children or grand-children to take care of you in your old age, then you quickly died in absolute poverty, probably after having to beg for food in the streets. Drinking the local water often killed you or made you sick, while the local doctors' treatment was more likely to kill you than to heal you (and this after having to pay them out of pocket). Many young mothers died in childbirth due to complications and infections, while many children never had a chance to grow up before dying young from diseases or hardships. For those people, today's life would be like an impossible dream to them.

This is all to say that I believe that we do NOT live presently in a dystopia, despite how hard you find life now, Sandra. In truth, I believe that what has worsened is us: we are now in general softer, whimpier, complain more, refuse to take responsibilities for our failures or weaknesses and expect others to get us out of the problems we often create ourselves. In my opinion, most of today's people would fail miserably at simply surviving in the conditions our ancestors had to endure. Yet, those ancestors survived and ultimately improved progressively their world, eventually building what we live in today. I suspect that, once stripped of our technological gadgets and left to survive by our own, the present people in general would not impress much our ancestors. For our ancestors, this would be Utopia, not Dystopia!

[Sandra]

Michel wrote: "This is all to say that I believe that we do NOT live presently in a dystopia, despite how hard you find life now, Sandra. In truth, I believe that what has worsened is us: we are now in general softer, whimpier, complain more, refuse to take responsibilities for our failures or weaknesses and expect others to get us out of the problems we often create ourselves. In my opinion, most of today's people would fail miserably at simply surviving in the conditions our ancestors had to endure."

Michael, I did read history, from pre-history, going through ancient history, and the events you mention and beyond.

I also took my time to research longevity, and listen to people and their problems.

My life is pretty good, I have always been cared for, no matter the weird or stupid things I did--like when I climbed a mount alone following the paw-prints of a puma.

I was not talking about myself. And I have no intention of breaking others sense of order. Not in this forum at least. I´m here to escape a lil, and gather information about what others like to read.

So, yeah... things are wonderful. :D

[Matthew]

Michel wrote: "Sandra wrote: "Matthew wrote: "No, this IS reality, Sandra, and one which was demonstrated by history and is being demonstrated again as we speak. It's been shown time and time again that the kind ..."

I think the person you want to address this to is Umberto. Sandra has merely been reminding us that there is gap between how the rich and the poor live, and how developed and developing nations live. It's that guy who seems to think we live in dystopia right now, and has been droning on the subject quite cynically.

[[deleted user]]

Matthew wrote: "Michel wrote: "Sandra wrote: "Matthew wrote: "No, this IS reality, Sandra, and one which was demonstrated by history and is being demonstrated again as we speak. It's been shown time and time again..."

If that is the case, my humble apologies to Sandra. However, there will always be a gap between rich and poor and between developed and developing nations. My main point still stands, though: I believe that we presently live in what our ancestors would call a utopia in North America, Europe and parts of Asia. It is all a question of perspective.

[Calvin]

There's some interesting philosophical discussions happening here. My apologies for commenting on the initial question.

Neal wrote: "Dystopia flings a protagonist into conflict, which generates plot, which generates resolution. The reason most readers read fiction is to see how this conflict is resolve, to see how the protagonist weathers the storm. Dystopias lend themselves to this, while utopian tales usually don't (or are very difficult to pull off)."

I think Neal hit it right on the head. We need a setting that creates the conflict that takes our characters on their journey of discovery. Dystopian settings make for good tales. I find that those with Utopian settings usually have a subtle dark side, which forces the protagonist on their journey/development. A good example of this is The Shore of Women.

A good sci-fi book I read that I believe does not contain a Dystopian or Utopian backdrop is Contact.

[Matthew]

Michel wrote: "Matthew wrote: "Michel wrote: "Sandra wrote: "Matthew wrote: "No, this IS reality, Sandra, and one which was demonstrated by history and is being demonstrated again as we speak. It's been shown tim..."

Yes, perspective does count. But if your comparison is people living in the early Renaissance to people living today, of course we're going to think we live in utopia by merely looking at the physical arrangements. And if there's one thing I've been arguing to Sandra, it's that the gaps between rich and poor and developed and developing nations is not permanent, at least according to recent and long-term trends. Some call it dreaming, but there is a compelling case to be made.

[Sandra]

Matthew wrote: "Michel wrote: "Matthew wrote: "Michel wrote: "Sandra wrote: "Matthew wrote: "No, this IS reality, Sandra, and one which was demonstrated by history and is being demonstrated again as we speak. It's..."

I never talked about the gap between developed and underdeveloped countries.

The most unhappy people I ever met were in US.

My conversation was gathered toward the definition of progress, and quality of life.

I think that we should rethink that, and move from the macroeconomic definition to a micro-economic definition.

That is, define the the richness of a country by the percentage of the population with its needs covered. And by needs I mean: real nourishment, shelter, health, social insertion, spiritual development and sense of purpose.

From there, work the environment and regulations to maximize those numbers.

One thing that would change right away is the 9 to 6 workload. No time to be in the sun and get healthy doses of vitamin D.

Another thing that would change right away would be the industry, because it would definitely not ok to keep pouring poisons in the environment.

Still another would be the access to real food. They would have to plant food in the public spaces and parks, so everyone has access to organic food that is the only real one.

Ok... I better stop...

[Matthew]

Sandra wrote: "Matthew wrote: "Michel wrote: "Matthew wrote: "Michel wrote: "Sandra wrote: "Matthew wrote: "No, this IS reality, Sandra, and one which was demonstrated by history and is being demonstrated again a..."

Hey, woman, I was sticking up for you! What's with the third degree? ;)

[Mary]

Sandra wrote: "Still another would be the access to real food. They would have to plant food in the public spaces and parks, so everyone has access to organic food that is the only real one."

well, yes, silicon based food is unreal -- as in imaginary.

Since neither taste tests nor nutritional studies can find a smidgen of difference, calling the lack of it dystopian is extreme, especialy when "organic" food is entirely dependent on factory farming for its existence.

[Matthew]

I just went back and read the original post. It's funny, but I too did an article about dystopian literature awhile back, and it was ALSO in response to the fact that me and my colleagues were being called upon to write some examples of it. It's here in case anyone wants to read it. No pressure ;)

http://storiesbywilliams.com/2012/03/...

[Leigh]

Matthew wrote: "I just went back and read the original post. It's funny, but I too did an article about dystopian literature awhile back, and it was ALSO in response to the fact that me and my colleagues were being called upon to write some examples of it. It's here in case anyone wants to read it. No pressure"

Excellent analyses, Matthew. Perhaps you might be interested in reading a few short posts I wrote on the subject:

The 1984 Effect
Too Bad, So Sad
On the Divided Readership for World-Mart

[Calvin]

Interesting post on "The 1984 Effect" Leigh. I would argue that the reason people want to move away from dystopian books, particularly where good dies in the end, is precisely because they know that good guys don't always win in the end. Many see too much of this in the "real" world and look for an escape.

I think it may be a cycle. I know I was put off by a lot of the movies and books in the eighties and nineties, where it seemed that the literary fashion was to kill off the good guy at the end. Perhaps it has moved to the other end of the cycle, particularly with the popularity of the superhero movies coming out these days. Dystopian will become the fashion again.

By the way, if you notice my review of 1984, I didn't give it much of a rating. Yes it was well written but I was really put off by that particular dystopian atmosphere...and hated the ending.

What can I say: I like the good guys winning in the end.

[Jim]

Calvin wrote: "Interesting post on "The 1984 Effect" Leigh. I would argue that the reason people want to move away from dystopian books, particularly where good dies in the end, is precisely because they know tha..."

Excellent point, Calvin.
For reality, I read non-fiction books. There are plenty of great ones to choose from.

Although I am not fond of novels that stray so far from reality that they become ridiculous, I do enjoy the occasional brief respite from some of the harsher realities of life which they provide.

It is always difficult when one of the good guys die. Unfortunately, that is closer to reality; which is why nations lose many of their bravest and finest in time of war - the bad guys tend to shy away from things like duty and honor.

[Sandra]

Matthew wrote: "Hey, woman, I was sticking up for you! What's with the third degree? ;) "

I know... highly appreciated. :)

[Sandra]

Mary wrote: "well, yes, silicon based food is unreal -- as in imaginary.

Since neither taste tests nor nutritional studies can find a smidgen of difference, calling the lack of it dystopian is extreme, especialy when "organic" food is entirely dependent on factory farming for its existence."

I call plastic food to supermarket vegetables. It looks like food (a bit too perfect,maybe), but it does not smell like food, nor it really tastes like food, and definitely does not give you the nice feeling you get after eating real food.

The word organic has been manipulated, and what is marked as organic is not necessarily it. Maybe the word to use is permaculture.

There are interesting experiments done in Great Britain, with full towns transforming the public places in vegetable gardens, able to feed a good deal of the town needs.

Also in Russia, they gave land to everyone who wanted it. And 90% of the food come from personal gardens, and it is truly organic.

[Mary]

Sandra wrote: "I call plastic food to supermarket vegetables. It looks like food (a bit too perfect,maybe), but it does not smell like food, nor it really tastes like food, and definitely does not give you the nice feeling you get after eating real food."

This claim does not survive blind tests

[Sandra]

Mary wrote: "This claim does not survive blind tests"

It does survive my blind tests. But... I spent my childhood eating fruit right from the trees, so I can tell the difference.

[Matthew]

Leigh wrote: "Matthew wrote: "I just went back and read the original post. It's funny, but I too did an article about dystopian literature awhile back, and it was ALSO in response to the fact that me and my coll..."

Nice! I will certainly be sure to give them a gander :)