Dystopian Society discussion
General
>
Dystopian Conventions & Obligatory Scenes
date
newest »
newest »
Interesting question, Mikhaeyla. Of course, much that goes under the heading of dystopian today, a combination of sci-fi and thriller elements, might not have been recognized as such a few decades ago. That being said, an average person with unrealized special abilities, which makes him/her either a danger to the state or much desired by the state (eg. for his DNA, or as an object of study, or as a marketing tool) is pretty much de rigueur today.I think most dystopian fiction, both modern and classic, also presents the masses as either disaffected or so much under the thrall of the state that they would never consider revolting. Unless the above-mentioned savior shakes up the established order.
Interesting Gabriel - you've got me thinking...There does seem to be a delineation between modern and classical dystopias - with modern being typically YA and involving the thriller and hero protagonist - where the protag always breaks down the oppressive state regime. I see classical being more adult and focused on an antihero (1984, Brave New World, even Fahreneheit 451) where the narrative is more philosophical and the ending just as likely to be a tragedy (where the protagonist loses their fight). I think the other thing to distinguish between contemporary YA dystopian and classical is the scope of the protagonist's problem (and therefore action). In the books I mentioned above, the rebellions are slight (but significant), with the focus more at a personal/domestic level, whereas contemporary seems to focus on the individual vs the state. What do you think?
Hi again. Good point. The individual vs. the state is perhaps a bit of an ideal that appeals to younger, more rebellious readers, thus the popularity of the genre in YA mode. Maybe older readers, jaded by the knowledge of how futile it is to battle against big government, are more interested in smaller battles. Whether it's Winston Smith's ultimate betrayal of Julia in 1984, or Guy Montag's search for a place where he's allowed to read books in Fahrenheit 451, there is little chance that either one of them will overturn the governing system. In these books, while those rebels are seen as potentially dangerous to the state if their desire for independence were to spread, there is little real danger of that. Their only hope is for victory on a personal level, eg. regaining part of their lost humanity.
Fascinating thread...There must be some connection to when something is written; world-views change and what's frightening changes. It would be interesting to know what the different cultures around the world today are writing and reading as the dystopian fiction of their choice - does it differ from one to another? And I wonder if the indie author dystopian novels have a different focus to the mainstream published dystopian novels.
Stephen wrote: "Fascinating thread...There must be some connection to when something is written; world-views change and what's frightening changes. It would be interesting to know what the different cultures aro..."
I find that many indie authors are trying to write the next Divergent or Hunger Games, which is not surprising since there are so many books being published that it's hard to stand out in a crowded market place, so writers try to copy what has already proven to be successful. I don't know if this works for them, but there is certainly something to be said for sticking with tried and true formulas (just look at how many movies are sequels and remakes).
On the other hand, and without blowing my own horn in anyway, my book Face/Mask is an attempt to go back to the more classic, serious style of dystopian novel. I didn't do this with any kind of marketing strategy in mind, but merely because the idea of writing a YA thriller didn't interest me.
Now, when I'm asked what genre my book is I say "dystopian drama," hoping that potential readers understand that it is not a thriller, but a story about average people with personal conflicts, with little in the way of action; it just happens to take place in an ugly future where the world has gone bad. I also regularly specify that it is "NOT YA." My biggest fear is that someone expecting a YA dystopian novel would be quickly turned off by my book and give it a scathing review, but I can tell you that it's hard to promote a book while downplaying the features that many modern readers want.
So, is there a market for a more serious dystopian novel? I'll let you know if I find it.
I'm also more interested in understanding / identifying the classical dystopian conventions. What are the common tropes (for lack of a better term) that identify books such as 1984, Fahrenheit 451, Brave New World, Handmaid's Tale, etc as "Classical Dystopian"?... ie if a new book was to describe itself as classical dystopian, what would we expect to find (at minimum) for that description to be accurate? A dissatisfied protagonist, a generalised compliance by the rest of society, apathy?
Gabriel wrote: "Stephen wrote: "Fascinating thread...There must be some connection to when something is written; world-views change and what's frightening changes. It would be interesting to know what the differ..."
The reason I was so interested in the thread is that my next novel - Fluence - is much more akin to 1984 and Brave New World and although the professional structural editor was very positive they did give a word of caution about it being out of step with the trend. It's been called satirical social science fiction as well as dystopian - not sure if that helps with setting this type of novel apart from the YA trend.
Also, sorry if this took the thread a little off track; I'm also very interested in knowing the conventions of classical dystopian novels and what readers expect from that description.
I think classical dystopian tends to be more literary in nature - which will always limit the audience. Unlike the multitude of contemporary YA offerings, which get snapped up by their loyal, target audience, the number of successful classical dystopians is somewhat restricted to the greats (Orwell, Atwood, Bradbury...). Its a high bar that is set and a hard one to achieve...
Thinking of 1984 and Never Let Me Go in particular there's something bleak and darkly beautiful with a sense of powerlessness that pervades even though there are strong characters. There's very little sense in either that the 'rulers' will be overthrown but identifying with their day to day struggle is where the magic lies.
I like Stephen's description about the characters' feeling of powerlessness, although I think of it more as hopelessness: not just the inability to effect real change, but the knowledge that there is nobody else out there who will effect such a change. (A couple of readers criticized me for writing a book where the pervading feeling was one of hopelessness. Hey; we can't always write shiny, happy stories.) I understand what Stephen's editor meant about being out of step with trends, but that means we just have to work harder to find readers who are looking for something different from the majority.
As for classical dystopian being more literary in nature, I would only agree if you feel that literary works are the only ones that can deal with a genre through serious drama. On the other hand I think that something like Hunger Games is deadly serious, even if it's an action/adventure approach. So, I probably just contradicted myself, proving how hard it might be to answer Mikhaeyla's original question.
Nice quote for this thread that I 100% agree with:"The current trend in dystopian fiction (mostly young adult), involves a teen who leads a rebellion against an improbably monolithic government which is usually cartoonishly evil and very simply drawn."
Excerpted from an article with Sandra Newman, whose new book is getting tons of buzz http://www.wsj.com/articles/sandra-ne...
D.L. wrote: "Quote quote for this thread that I 100% agree with:"The current trend in dystopian fiction (mostly young adult), involves a teen who leads a rebellion against an improbably monolithic government ..."
And that pretty much says it all. Kind of sucks for those of us who are trying to avoid that trend.
I imagine this is a group that wants more than that, which is one of the reasons I joined...
Hello everyone... just a follow-on: did any of you come up with the Obligatory Scenes being discussed (like Shawn Coyne does for Thriller genre)... I am currently reading Coyne's book (highly recommend it) but as I have never approached reading from a strictly analysis point of view... the thousands of Sci/Fi books I have read have NOT resulted in my carrying around an understanding of what is NEEDED to make the fiction work... I'd be interested in your insights.
What conventions and obligatory scenes do you think all/most/good dystopian fictions have in common?
I'll post my ideas to kick the discussion off - (feel free to debate - I'm not sure if these are right...)
* Protagonist realising the failings of the governing structure
* Governing structure constructed as "the Other"
What others?