I Won't Attend the Dystopian Revolution
CLICK THE LINK ABOVE TO HEAR THE ARTICLE ON SOUNDCLOUD
They're all the rage nowadays, dystopians. Whether the word "dystopia" had entered your vocabulary after the movie release of The Hunger Games, or if you're one of the few people I know who've actually read Gulliver's Travels by Jonathon Swift, there is no doubt you've encountered a dystopian within the past three or four years -- maybe you remember reading The Giver or The Road in grade school. Love 'em or hate 'em, dystopians are here to stay, at least for a little while. Personally, I fit into the "love 'em" category, but my affections are not without provisos. As with any genre, writing a worthwhile dystopian is hard work. This article doesn't have all the answers, but here are some red flags in dystopian lit:
DYSTOPIANS: THE TRENDIEST STOMPING GROUNDS FOR TEENS AND PRE-TEENS
Hunger Games has done a fantastic job of bringing the dystopian genre to the literary vanguard. While I could rattle on about the parallels between Battle Royale, I want to point out the positives. There are two reasons as to why I want to shake Susan Collins's hand:
1) To thank her for popularizing, and thus gearing a crowd of indies toward writing additional, dystopian books.
2) To congratulate her on her massive success. Irrespective of the heights or troughs one may reach, I think every author deserves a sincere "good job" every now and again.
But, for whatever reason, for every one quality dystopian, nine more are objectively abhorrent. This happens not because dystopian literature is inherently faulty, but because many of the authors writing dystopians are inexperienced or ill-read. The same can be applied to any genre, really, but something about dystopian lit is intriguing to a younger audience, making it more accessible to a broader demographic. Dystopians grab readers' attention, keeping them enthralled about a society that is mysterious, as well as terrifying for its potential to come to fruition.
Now, let's take those entertaining concepts and saturate them with everything that's wrong with popularized YA: obligatory, farfetched romances and petty, "strictly platonic" relationships that aren't fooling anyone. That should make for a good read, right? I'm looking at you, teen whose favorite pastimes include gossiping, fawning over multiple guys, and saving the world. Let's get something straight here, reader: if your protag is living in a society where a fascist, autocratic government can wipe out your entire family for jaywalking, he/she won't exactly have the time to act like a horny, privileged suburbanite. In a believable scenario, survival skills should be at the forefront of your mind, not love. What ever happened to the acquisition of skills or the lessons learned along the way? Why is everything so blatantly tactless and revolving around sex?
1) To thank her for popularizing, and thus gearing a crowd of indies toward writing additional, dystopian books.
2) To congratulate her on her massive success. Irrespective of the heights or troughs one may reach, I think every author deserves a sincere "good job" every now and again.
But, for whatever reason, for every one quality dystopian, nine more are objectively abhorrent. This happens not because dystopian literature is inherently faulty, but because many of the authors writing dystopians are inexperienced or ill-read. The same can be applied to any genre, really, but something about dystopian lit is intriguing to a younger audience, making it more accessible to a broader demographic. Dystopians grab readers' attention, keeping them enthralled about a society that is mysterious, as well as terrifying for its potential to come to fruition.
Now, let's take those entertaining concepts and saturate them with everything that's wrong with popularized YA: obligatory, farfetched romances and petty, "strictly platonic" relationships that aren't fooling anyone. That should make for a good read, right? I'm looking at you, teen whose favorite pastimes include gossiping, fawning over multiple guys, and saving the world. Let's get something straight here, reader: if your protag is living in a society where a fascist, autocratic government can wipe out your entire family for jaywalking, he/she won't exactly have the time to act like a horny, privileged suburbanite. In a believable scenario, survival skills should be at the forefront of your mind, not love. What ever happened to the acquisition of skills or the lessons learned along the way? Why is everything so blatantly tactless and revolving around sex?
"Robert, I know we're soulmates. I've known it since the first time I saw you hacking off a stranger's head from his shoulders. I completely, unconditionally love you... *cough* and James... *cough*"
"THE WORLD IS IN SHAMBLES, REBECCA, WHO CARES IF JAMES LOVES YOU? LEARN HOW TO MAKE A FIRE!"
"THE WORLD IS IN SHAMBLES, REBECCA, WHO CARES IF JAMES LOVES YOU? LEARN HOW TO MAKE A FIRE!"
LITTLE TO NO INSPIRATION
Every author I've had the pleasure of speaking with has admitted to writing for the same reason: fulfillment. "It gives me purpose." There are stark contrasts between writers and, say, accountants, and it's observed not just in their bank accounts, but in the way they both carry themselves. The common writer is often penniless, struggling to ascend through the pool of millions of other writers, but, somehow, irrevocably joyous. The accountant--not always--is the opposite: financially well-off, but missing something in life. Why? Now is a better time for a baseless conjecture than any: writing has an intrinsic purpose -- a soul. It connects others through the magic of art. Cheesy, I know. I'm not trying to downplay the importance of accountants in society -- somebody has to crunch those numbers; I myself am just now starting to dive into the financial industry in pursuit of mine and my future family's wealth. However, if I could survive on writing, even on the meagerest terms, I would choose to toil with a pen and pad over driving to an office any day.
There is a controversial story, and follow-up quote, supposedly attributed to the late Winston Churchill; you may have seen it floating around the internet recently. The quote pertains to the arts, and exactly why they matter in everyone's lives. Whether it was said by Churchill or not is none of my concern at this point, but it is relevant nonetheless; when asked about the revocation of arts funding to aid Britain's war efforts during WWII, Churchill [allegedly] responded: "Then what are we fighting for?" How can a one-liner drip with so much passion?
So what does any of this matter with respects to dystopian writing? Well, books are the same way (bear with me, because this analogy is a bit of a stretch). The aforementioned connections within the arts, I believe, are part of a non-direct, non-tangible network of entertaining reads and feasible concepts (or references). When someone enjoys The Giver, they recommend another dystopian. "Oh, if you liked that book, then you must read 1984. It's so true to today." Ever heard something like that? After reading 1984, authors could then go on to read more of Orwell's works, then branch off to other notable dystopian writers. Popularized authors, at least in my opinion, do a poor job of spreading the news of others writing within the same category -- they are considered in competition with one another, right? (Please detect the sarcasm). So what happens when Susan Collins or Veronica Roth are the only dystopian writers the youth identify? Are they to be the be-all, end-all source of inspiration for future generations of writers? Is there much hope of their 'branching out' to Orwell? To McCarthy? Huxley? Bradbury? You don't necessarily need to know those authors, but boy does it help. How can you flesh out a decent dystopian society without understanding the civil strifes discussed in P.D. James's Children of Men? The point is this: a shallow base of source material makes for shallow writing. Therefore, I implore all writers to spend many, many hours researching a garden variety of authors/topics/concepts, even if they don't apply directly to your genre of choice.
Maybe I'm just getting old, or maybe I've spoken with too many writers who have no idea why Fahrenheit 451 is so applicable to yesteryears, today, and, if we're not careful, tomorrow.
There is a controversial story, and follow-up quote, supposedly attributed to the late Winston Churchill; you may have seen it floating around the internet recently. The quote pertains to the arts, and exactly why they matter in everyone's lives. Whether it was said by Churchill or not is none of my concern at this point, but it is relevant nonetheless; when asked about the revocation of arts funding to aid Britain's war efforts during WWII, Churchill [allegedly] responded: "Then what are we fighting for?" How can a one-liner drip with so much passion?
So what does any of this matter with respects to dystopian writing? Well, books are the same way (bear with me, because this analogy is a bit of a stretch). The aforementioned connections within the arts, I believe, are part of a non-direct, non-tangible network of entertaining reads and feasible concepts (or references). When someone enjoys The Giver, they recommend another dystopian. "Oh, if you liked that book, then you must read 1984. It's so true to today." Ever heard something like that? After reading 1984, authors could then go on to read more of Orwell's works, then branch off to other notable dystopian writers. Popularized authors, at least in my opinion, do a poor job of spreading the news of others writing within the same category -- they are considered in competition with one another, right? (Please detect the sarcasm). So what happens when Susan Collins or Veronica Roth are the only dystopian writers the youth identify? Are they to be the be-all, end-all source of inspiration for future generations of writers? Is there much hope of their 'branching out' to Orwell? To McCarthy? Huxley? Bradbury? You don't necessarily need to know those authors, but boy does it help. How can you flesh out a decent dystopian society without understanding the civil strifes discussed in P.D. James's Children of Men? The point is this: a shallow base of source material makes for shallow writing. Therefore, I implore all writers to spend many, many hours researching a garden variety of authors/topics/concepts, even if they don't apply directly to your genre of choice.
Maybe I'm just getting old, or maybe I've spoken with too many writers who have no idea why Fahrenheit 451 is so applicable to yesteryears, today, and, if we're not careful, tomorrow.
If you don't know this man, you're part of the problem. *Cue the oncoming, snobbish polemic, courtesy of yours truly*
WHAT DOES THIS MATTER? NONE OF THIS MATTERS
Why did you click on this article? Was it the title? The hopes of learning something new and furthering your own work? Why did you read the past five books you'd read? Are any of these questions even a concern? They damn well should be. The classics provided an answer to why anyone should bother reading that particular book. Inside were messages, even if they were subtle. The Hunger Games has a message, and so does Divergent... I suppose. But what of the gobs of other titles? The protagonist, usually a teenage, socially-awkward girl, runs from point A to point B, falls in love with a couple guys, joins a revolution, saves the world by destroying the government and installing a socialist uptopia; the end. How many books are out there which follow this exact formula? Thousands. I've read and reviewed way too many. Does it seem familiar to yours?
Ask yourself the following questions before considering your book complete:
1) Why should anyone give a damn about reading my work? What value does it add to their lives?
2) Even if it's not a grand statement, what am I trying to say?
Simply answering those two questions puts you way ahead of 90% of dystopian writers. If it's a good enough answer in the opinion of at least three, objective people, please finish writing that book.
Ask yourself the following questions before considering your book complete:
1) Why should anyone give a damn about reading my work? What value does it add to their lives?
2) Even if it's not a grand statement, what am I trying to say?
Simply answering those two questions puts you way ahead of 90% of dystopian writers. If it's a good enough answer in the opinion of at least three, objective people, please finish writing that book.
The caption in the picture is sufficient.
I apologize if I've offended you along the way, that was not my intention. At the forefront of any scathing sentence is a good heart; I want you to learn, to grow. If you're going to add another dystopian novel to the mountain of others, maybe you should consider the points listed above.
Thanks for reading. As always, I wish you all the best. Happy reading and writing.
Talk to you soon!
-V.C. Remus
Thanks for reading. As always, I wish you all the best. Happy reading and writing.
Talk to you soon!
-V.C. Remus
IF YOU LIKED WHAT YOU READ, CHECK OUT SOME OF MY BOOKS!
(AUTOGRAPHED COPIES ARE AVAILABLE FOR $20 [PAYPAL] UPON EMAIL REQUEST AND INCLUDE A PERSONALIZED, HANDWRITTEN MESSAGE W/ V.C. REMUS WAX SEAL)
(AUTOGRAPHED COPIES ARE AVAILABLE FOR $20 [PAYPAL] UPON EMAIL REQUEST AND INCLUDE A PERSONALIZED, HANDWRITTEN MESSAGE W/ V.C. REMUS WAX SEAL)
Come, listen to the tale of a young boy’s struggles in the Victorian nation of Thorton. After witnessing the wrongful execution of his parents, Alistair Métis seeks his king for answers to a never-ending list of questions. However, a lowborn child cannot escape the shackles of poverty to scour cobbled streets while on the run from the law. Alistair, too, was sentenced to die for his father’s crimes. The young boy’s journey spans the unforgiving West. His tale brims with airships, cutthroats, war, mischief and wonder.
|
Centuries before steam technology, a powerful empire ruled the lands of Falone. The uncontested tour de force was ruled by a prominent family. That is, before everything crumbled.
Good kings controlled their lands not with swords, but with their eyes. When the plague came to blind every man, woman, and child, desperation arrived, breeding a revolution none could escape. Alexander Cady fled his disease-ridden hamlet in search of a cure, but what he discovered along the way changed his life forever. |