I'll suggest 2 post-apocalyptic books which take place in the distant future. "Riddley Walker" takes place almost 2400 years in the future of southeast England after a thermonuclear war in 1997 (the book was written in the mid '70s) and it is written in the English dialect of that distant time. The "expanded version" has a glossary which is helpful the first time you read it. This is a masterpiece by Russell Hoban
The second book is "Engine Summer" which takes place somewhere in North America at an undetermined future date, but probably two or three thousand years in the future. To say anymore would involve spoilers. It is by John Crowley.
I've read "Riddley Walker" -- a very odd book, to be sure! At some point I am sure I will have something about it on here, and its particular linguistic choices. "Engine Summer" is new to me!
In to note here that Yout, as John Christopher, also penned the highly-influential post-apocalyptic YA series, THE TRIPODS, depicting humanity reduced to serfdom and agronomy after the conquest of Earth by aliens known as "The Masters".
Thanks! I can't tell if I'd really want to sit through the film or not. The interest for me would be to mostly compare how a 1950s story would translate into a 1970s film, in this case. But it sounds pretty depressing, to be sure.
In reference to cannibalism/decay of moral code, I'm kind of surprised you referenced Hurricane Katrina rather than Uruguayan Air Force Flight 571... Which as an on the point example of the issues you raise as I think you're going to find.
What is interesting to me about the Katrina issue is that of timing — and the fact that it involved active killing. Eating of the already-dead, while definitely distasteful, seems like less of a moral "jump" for me. (If I were dead, and someone needed to resort to eating me to survive, I would certainly not hold it against them. As long as they didn't kill me, first!)
As an aside, the students and I did have a long discussion of the ethics of cannibalism in one of the classes. What was amusing to me is that they were very unwilling to oppose it on purely moral grounds. So when I pressed them as to reasons that one might NOT want to commit cannibalism (again, framed as just "eating the dead for purely survival purposes," not murder), the best they could come up with was that human flesh is high in sodium and fat. I thought that was pretty funny...!
I'd forgotten about the euthanasia incident. That's certainly on point.
But i'd recalled Katrina while reading this post for another reason: the friendly neighbours who were shooting at people walking down the expressway in an attempt to leave the city. This was a shocking act but I wasn't much surprised. There is a cohort of rural gun-owners in the US who are only too ready to murder (ahem, defend their property) all of those nasty city-dwellers, come the Big One.
I can't think of any literature suggestions that haven't already been mentioned. But have you seen Michael Haneke's film, Le Temps du loup? It's brilliantly understated, and shocking at all the right moments. Like all of his work.
For books outside the Anglosphere, but translated into English, I can remember three:
- "Apocalypse Z", by Manel Loureiro: typical zombie novel, but in Spain; the moral decay is there, but a different society means different ways to go down.The second part is readable, but I found the third too packed with tropes (also, the action takes place in the USA).
- "Typescript of the Second Origin", sci-fi book in Catalan. I read it a long time ago, and was not thrilled, but a lot of people says it´s good.
- "Blindness", by Nobel prize José Saramago. He doesn´t name the country it is set in, but hints it is Portugal. Really bleak, not for the faint of heart. Also, somewhat strange way of writing, deliberately obscuring who is saying what, but it is good reading.
Fascinating, thank you! And Spanish is a language I would not mind having untranslated references (it is one of the languages I have spent time with, and am actively trying to improve).
The original titles for those books are "Apocalipsis Z" (the second book is "Apocalipsis Z - Los días oscuros", the third "La ira de los justos"), "Mecanoscrito del Segundo Origen" by Manuel de Pedrolo (title in Spanish; originally "Mecaniscrit del Segon Origen" in Catalan; I have just learned there was a TV series in that language, and it´s free on Youtube)"; and "Ensayo sobre la ceguera", original title in Portuguese "Ensaio sobre a cegueira". They should be easy to find.
Off topic, there is a book that may be worth reading, "El secreto de la bomba atómica española" by Francisco Gámez Balcázar", only in Spanish, ISBN 9788418578403, on the Spanish nuclear weapons project. I haven´t read it, but people who did say there is good data there... and some wild speculation too.
I loved John Christopher as a kid but I haven’t read this so I will get on it, thank you. That graphic you chose is one messed up “Fellowship of the Ring” silhouette.
Oddly, the timeline to moral reorientation, so to speak, seems kind of ancillary to most post-apocalypse stories, other than Mad Max (original) as you mentioned. Only other one I can think of where that journey is taken and where consequences specifically related to the speedy loss of morals (maybe more the loss of hope, though they may be related) are shown is the adaptation of The Mist.
Also, not sure if you thought of it already, but a more future-focused tale of food shortage/famine that may work for your students is Interstellar. Its sci-fi aspects overshadow the more pragmatic search for a planet where we can grow wheat and corn again, but that's understandable, Love being the Fourth Dimension and all.
I thought about using "Soylent Green" as the film for the "famine" unit but ultimately found it just too silly. And if I find it too silly, the students are going to find it even sillier...
(In the end, I didn't use a specific film for famine — the three films I used were The Fog of War, Contagion, and Children of Men.)
I'd recommend The Last Canadian by William Heine published back in 1974. The author was Canadian, the setting is Canadian (Montreal and Northern Quebec), and the protagonist is even named after a Canadian town, Arnprior. The plot in one line, "There's a plague and everything goes off the rails." In Canada it was one of those high school reading list books.
The moral decay is an interesting facet, and while I haven't read the book, I can't help but imagine that it is arguing for the existence of a sort of prisoners dilemma situation, albeit in a way deliberately designed to shock.
The foundation of the argument I think, is that to a certain degree, the social norms and behaviors that are best suited to survive and thrive in modern society, become a liability when modern society is stripped away, and people are left in the anarchic period before a new society arises. I don't necessarily agree with the foundation, but it is a very prevalent trope, and even if a lot of media doesn't have the protagonist engage in this reasoning, the antagonists very much do.
I think the author seeks to shock the reader a bit with the protagonist characters swapping from no murder to yes murder at the drop of a hat. Because here is the prisoners dilemma reasoning. If you accept the premise that behavior under society is a liability in the apocalypse, then whoever drops their societal hangups the fastest is most likely to survive and thrive, oppressing those who still adhere to social norms and killing them and taking their stuff. That all makes you the most well equipped to survive, from a pure numbers and resources perspective.
On the other hand, those lack of social norms are just as great a liability in civilized society. Consider if they found a cure to save the grass, the British government stabilized, and got it's shit together, how exactly they are going to be handling the murderers, rapists, and cannibals who didn't even end up needing to do all that. So most people, would probably try to hedge their bets, and not cast off societal norms so quickly, trusting in the power and momentum of the state to resurge and get their shit together, saving them from the threat of social persecution at the expense of a few uncomfortable weeks. Or put another way, imagine if during Covid-19 people expected the collapse of the government, and decided to start looting and pillaging stores and committing crimes, under the assumption that the first ones to break taboo are the most likely to survive in the long run. Imagine their shock and dismay when the US does not fall, and Uncle Sam casts a baleful eye upon them.
The issue also pops up even if the government fully falls and anarchy descends. Because humans are fundamentally social creatures, and the state is the most tried and true mechanism for violence we have. So even if the government falls in the apocalypse, and we get anarchy for a year, if somebody pulls together enough people to start a new community, say 3000 people, well 3000 people are going to decisively wipe out a group of 20 murderous cannibal looters, and probably crucify them for their trouble.
To be more succinct, it seems the argument that underlies a lot of these tropes is thus. Societal norms are a liability in anarchy(not the political system). Those who cast them off first in anarchy are best equipped to survive, those who adhere to them are worst equipped. But, our sense of morality formed by society dissuades us from casting them off too quickly. And even worse, those who have cast off societal norms are ill-equipped for the end of anarchy and will likely be punished.
So even if we take morality out of the equation and go with cold amoral logic, the best option is to hedge one's bets and wait as long as you can for anarchy to dissipate, and then left with no choice but to preserve one's life, get to the stealing and cannibalism, which conveniently has the least impact on one's moral fiber. Of course, if you expect anarchy to reign forever, that the disease is incurable, the crops unsalvageable, the world irrecoverably irradiated, then perhaps jumping into moral depravity is the most logical option. But it does rather make some assumptions about the future.
I feel the need to clarify that I personally don't agree with the foundation of the argument in the first place, just want to muse about the trope.
Fantastic article, your best so far I think. I don't know if I'd like to read Death of Grass, it seems like it could be somehow more depressing than The Road. I think nobody wants to think how awful they would become should the world go to shit.
It seems the characters in the story descended in to immoral behavior out a fear of death. That fear was strong enough that any alternative seemed justified and acceptable. Perhaps they took it to be an obvious given and assumed without questioning that life is better than death, as so many of us do.
It seems interesting to observe, especially on a science related blog, that there is actually no proof that life is better than death. And yet, like the characters in the story told above, we so often so strongly believe we know.
As readers are likely aware there are some fascinating reports offered by some who have been declared clinically dead for a period of time, and then were revived. I came across such a report today and found it quite compelling.
It seems impossible to come to any firm conclusion about near death experiences, but if they contain any truth that puts a whole new spin on apocalyptic stories. Imagine we have a global nuclear war and billions of people die, and then go on to have the kinds of experiences described in the video above. Are nuclear weapons an express lane to heaven?
If you buy the claim that the characters in the tale above are acting from a fear of death, then our relationship with death seems a very relevant aspect to apocalyptic stories. Just yesterday discovered a very well done Substack which address this topic head on.
On Coming Home a pair of brothers are creating a growing collection of quality videos of their interviews with people who have had near death experiences. Make of these reports what you will, but they do seem relevant to the subject of apocalyptic outcomes.
I'd be really interested to see what you think of Fantasticland by Mike Bockoven after reading this. I find the "these people descend into lawlessness which allows the psychopaths take over" to be kind of a cop argument and I'm not surprised it's in this novel too.
I'll suggest 2 post-apocalyptic books which take place in the distant future. "Riddley Walker" takes place almost 2400 years in the future of southeast England after a thermonuclear war in 1997 (the book was written in the mid '70s) and it is written in the English dialect of that distant time. The "expanded version" has a glossary which is helpful the first time you read it. This is a masterpiece by Russell Hoban
The second book is "Engine Summer" which takes place somewhere in North America at an undetermined future date, but probably two or three thousand years in the future. To say anymore would involve spoilers. It is by John Crowley.
I've read "Riddley Walker" -- a very odd book, to be sure! At some point I am sure I will have something about it on here, and its particular linguistic choices. "Engine Summer" is new to me!
In to note here that Yout, as John Christopher, also penned the highly-influential post-apocalyptic YA series, THE TRIPODS, depicting humanity reduced to serfdom and agronomy after the conquest of Earth by aliens known as "The Masters".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tripods
(I'm convinced that L. Ron Hubbard ripped this series off and used the milieu and some other details for his own post-apoc, BATTLEFIELD EARTH.)
The last canadian by William Heine is a non US non UK post pandemic apocalypse about a lone wolf survivor
The movie No Blade of Grass follows the plot outline of the novel very closely. Very cheesy 1970s cine effects. Protagonist is difficult to root for.
Thanks! I can't tell if I'd really want to sit through the film or not. The interest for me would be to mostly compare how a 1950s story would translate into a 1970s film, in this case. But it sounds pretty depressing, to be sure.
In reference to cannibalism/decay of moral code, I'm kind of surprised you referenced Hurricane Katrina rather than Uruguayan Air Force Flight 571... Which as an on the point example of the issues you raise as I think you're going to find.
What is interesting to me about the Katrina issue is that of timing — and the fact that it involved active killing. Eating of the already-dead, while definitely distasteful, seems like less of a moral "jump" for me. (If I were dead, and someone needed to resort to eating me to survive, I would certainly not hold it against them. As long as they didn't kill me, first!)
As an aside, the students and I did have a long discussion of the ethics of cannibalism in one of the classes. What was amusing to me is that they were very unwilling to oppose it on purely moral grounds. So when I pressed them as to reasons that one might NOT want to commit cannibalism (again, framed as just "eating the dead for purely survival purposes," not murder), the best they could come up with was that human flesh is high in sodium and fat. I thought that was pretty funny...!
I'd forgotten about the euthanasia incident. That's certainly on point.
But i'd recalled Katrina while reading this post for another reason: the friendly neighbours who were shooting at people walking down the expressway in an attempt to leave the city. This was a shocking act but I wasn't much surprised. There is a cohort of rural gun-owners in the US who are only too ready to murder (ahem, defend their property) all of those nasty city-dwellers, come the Big One.
I can't think of any literature suggestions that haven't already been mentioned. But have you seen Michael Haneke's film, Le Temps du loup? It's brilliantly understated, and shocking at all the right moments. Like all of his work.
For books outside the Anglosphere, but translated into English, I can remember three:
- "Apocalypse Z", by Manel Loureiro: typical zombie novel, but in Spain; the moral decay is there, but a different society means different ways to go down.The second part is readable, but I found the third too packed with tropes (also, the action takes place in the USA).
- "Typescript of the Second Origin", sci-fi book in Catalan. I read it a long time ago, and was not thrilled, but a lot of people says it´s good.
- "Blindness", by Nobel prize José Saramago. He doesn´t name the country it is set in, but hints it is Portugal. Really bleak, not for the faint of heart. Also, somewhat strange way of writing, deliberately obscuring who is saying what, but it is good reading.
Fascinating, thank you! And Spanish is a language I would not mind having untranslated references (it is one of the languages I have spent time with, and am actively trying to improve).
The original titles for those books are "Apocalipsis Z" (the second book is "Apocalipsis Z - Los días oscuros", the third "La ira de los justos"), "Mecanoscrito del Segundo Origen" by Manuel de Pedrolo (title in Spanish; originally "Mecaniscrit del Segon Origen" in Catalan; I have just learned there was a TV series in that language, and it´s free on Youtube)"; and "Ensayo sobre la ceguera", original title in Portuguese "Ensaio sobre a cegueira". They should be easy to find.
Off topic, there is a book that may be worth reading, "El secreto de la bomba atómica española" by Francisco Gámez Balcázar", only in Spanish, ISBN 9788418578403, on the Spanish nuclear weapons project. I haven´t read it, but people who did say there is good data there... and some wild speculation too.
I loved John Christopher as a kid but I haven’t read this so I will get on it, thank you. That graphic you chose is one messed up “Fellowship of the Ring” silhouette.
For whatever reason, the idea of cannibalistic hobbits frying up second breakfast just came to mind…
Best post I've read today, and I've read several. Nicely done, makes me want to find this book and read it! Cheers!
Oddly, the timeline to moral reorientation, so to speak, seems kind of ancillary to most post-apocalypse stories, other than Mad Max (original) as you mentioned. Only other one I can think of where that journey is taken and where consequences specifically related to the speedy loss of morals (maybe more the loss of hope, though they may be related) are shown is the adaptation of The Mist.
Also, not sure if you thought of it already, but a more future-focused tale of food shortage/famine that may work for your students is Interstellar. Its sci-fi aspects overshadow the more pragmatic search for a planet where we can grow wheat and corn again, but that's understandable, Love being the Fourth Dimension and all.
Great post!
Another famine novel is Make Room Make Room aka Soylent Green
I thought about using "Soylent Green" as the film for the "famine" unit but ultimately found it just too silly. And if I find it too silly, the students are going to find it even sillier...
(In the end, I didn't use a specific film for famine — the three films I used were The Fog of War, Contagion, and Children of Men.)
I'd recommend The Last Canadian by William Heine published back in 1974. The author was Canadian, the setting is Canadian (Montreal and Northern Quebec), and the protagonist is even named after a Canadian town, Arnprior. The plot in one line, "There's a plague and everything goes off the rails." In Canada it was one of those high school reading list books.
The moral decay is an interesting facet, and while I haven't read the book, I can't help but imagine that it is arguing for the existence of a sort of prisoners dilemma situation, albeit in a way deliberately designed to shock.
The foundation of the argument I think, is that to a certain degree, the social norms and behaviors that are best suited to survive and thrive in modern society, become a liability when modern society is stripped away, and people are left in the anarchic period before a new society arises. I don't necessarily agree with the foundation, but it is a very prevalent trope, and even if a lot of media doesn't have the protagonist engage in this reasoning, the antagonists very much do.
I think the author seeks to shock the reader a bit with the protagonist characters swapping from no murder to yes murder at the drop of a hat. Because here is the prisoners dilemma reasoning. If you accept the premise that behavior under society is a liability in the apocalypse, then whoever drops their societal hangups the fastest is most likely to survive and thrive, oppressing those who still adhere to social norms and killing them and taking their stuff. That all makes you the most well equipped to survive, from a pure numbers and resources perspective.
On the other hand, those lack of social norms are just as great a liability in civilized society. Consider if they found a cure to save the grass, the British government stabilized, and got it's shit together, how exactly they are going to be handling the murderers, rapists, and cannibals who didn't even end up needing to do all that. So most people, would probably try to hedge their bets, and not cast off societal norms so quickly, trusting in the power and momentum of the state to resurge and get their shit together, saving them from the threat of social persecution at the expense of a few uncomfortable weeks. Or put another way, imagine if during Covid-19 people expected the collapse of the government, and decided to start looting and pillaging stores and committing crimes, under the assumption that the first ones to break taboo are the most likely to survive in the long run. Imagine their shock and dismay when the US does not fall, and Uncle Sam casts a baleful eye upon them.
The issue also pops up even if the government fully falls and anarchy descends. Because humans are fundamentally social creatures, and the state is the most tried and true mechanism for violence we have. So even if the government falls in the apocalypse, and we get anarchy for a year, if somebody pulls together enough people to start a new community, say 3000 people, well 3000 people are going to decisively wipe out a group of 20 murderous cannibal looters, and probably crucify them for their trouble.
To be more succinct, it seems the argument that underlies a lot of these tropes is thus. Societal norms are a liability in anarchy(not the political system). Those who cast them off first in anarchy are best equipped to survive, those who adhere to them are worst equipped. But, our sense of morality formed by society dissuades us from casting them off too quickly. And even worse, those who have cast off societal norms are ill-equipped for the end of anarchy and will likely be punished.
So even if we take morality out of the equation and go with cold amoral logic, the best option is to hedge one's bets and wait as long as you can for anarchy to dissipate, and then left with no choice but to preserve one's life, get to the stealing and cannibalism, which conveniently has the least impact on one's moral fiber. Of course, if you expect anarchy to reign forever, that the disease is incurable, the crops unsalvageable, the world irrecoverably irradiated, then perhaps jumping into moral depravity is the most logical option. But it does rather make some assumptions about the future.
I feel the need to clarify that I personally don't agree with the foundation of the argument in the first place, just want to muse about the trope.
Fantastic article, your best so far I think. I don't know if I'd like to read Death of Grass, it seems like it could be somehow more depressing than The Road. I think nobody wants to think how awful they would become should the world go to shit.
It seems the characters in the story descended in to immoral behavior out a fear of death. That fear was strong enough that any alternative seemed justified and acceptable. Perhaps they took it to be an obvious given and assumed without questioning that life is better than death, as so many of us do.
It seems interesting to observe, especially on a science related blog, that there is actually no proof that life is better than death. And yet, like the characters in the story told above, we so often so strongly believe we know.
As readers are likely aware there are some fascinating reports offered by some who have been declared clinically dead for a period of time, and then were revived. I came across such a report today and found it quite compelling.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmnQDUEn7fI
It seems impossible to come to any firm conclusion about near death experiences, but if they contain any truth that puts a whole new spin on apocalyptic stories. Imagine we have a global nuclear war and billions of people die, and then go on to have the kinds of experiences described in the video above. Are nuclear weapons an express lane to heaven?
If you buy the claim that the characters in the tale above are acting from a fear of death, then our relationship with death seems a very relevant aspect to apocalyptic stories. Just yesterday discovered a very well done Substack which address this topic head on.
https://cominghomechannel.substack.com/
On Coming Home a pair of brothers are creating a growing collection of quality videos of their interviews with people who have had near death experiences. Make of these reports what you will, but they do seem relevant to the subject of apocalyptic outcomes.
I'd be really interested to see what you think of Fantasticland by Mike Bockoven after reading this. I find the "these people descend into lawlessness which allows the psychopaths take over" to be kind of a cop argument and I'm not surprised it's in this novel too.
I'll add it to the list!