Saturday, January 12, 2019

An Analysis of Dystopian Fiction



[WARNING: This contains MAJOR spoilers]

Hello Friend, today’s post is going to revolve around dystopian fiction. As you probably know already, dystopian fiction is one of my favourite genres. I really like the way it explores and exposes the flaws of our society through a futuristic, gruesome setting; I believe that dystopian books are a great way to get your point across if there’s some issue, no matter how small, that you want to see resolved.  We are humans, and humans will be flawed. It’s in our nature, and this is what makes us what we are.  However, some authors tend to let their emotions carry them away, and they often forget that we can’t be goody-goody all the time—if your characters are humans, let them act like humans. Our strength is that though we may be weak and make mistakes, we learn real quick, and our mistakes enable us to stand on our two feet.  Authors usually keep this in mind while writing dystopian fiction.  When I was younger [around thirteen to fourteen years of age], I didn’t really like dystopian fiction much, mainly because it’s so blunt, dark and gritty, but now that I’m older, wiser and more experienced, I’ve realised that this is exactly why I love dystopian fiction.  Pretty sure I’ve stated this before, but I want to say it again: for a student of sociology, reading dystopian fiction is great practice, because analysing it is fun! And it’s useful, too. Besides, if you want a reliable sketch of human nature, pick up a dystopian book.

Of course, if one wants to create a dystopian world, the society and the entire setting has to be completely messed up and flawed—most authors use totalitarian governments. The population is almost always depicted as severely oppressed, and they’re searching for a reliable leader who can propel them out of the mess they’re in, and establish a democratic government. This is the gist of every dystopian book. Every author adds his or her own flair to it and uses several varying techniques to create a vast spectrum of literary effects. Really, I love every dystopian book I’ve read so far, but Battle Royale by Koushun Takami and Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro hold a very special place in my heart. I read Battle Royale purely out of curiosity [and a desire to explore dystopia thoroughly], but ended up analysing and evaluating it in an academic way [yup, that’s totally me.] Takami is a genius! No other book’s ever made me feel so many contrasting emotions at the same time—I was one with the characters, laughing with them, crying with them, and feeling the fear and pain [both physical and psychological] that they felt; they’re just a bunch of fourteen-year-olds, but they’ve been placed on an isolated island seemingly in the middle of nowhere, and instructed to fight each other to the death, gladiator style, until only one survives. Can you imagine it? Can you imagine the brutality of it all? Kids their age should be eating candy, studying hard so they can forge a path for themselves, socialising with their friends and clamouring for their parents’ attention. Instead, they’ve been given knives, ice-picks, guns and rifles of all kinds, bullet-proof vests, sickles etc., and are forced to turn on each other in order to survive. Battle Royale is an excellent representation of the uncertainty of life; it also depicts loss of innocence, as the children [well, a lot of them are more mature than their age, but they’re still just fourteen] are suddenly thrust into this killing “game”, dubbed the “Program”. [Urgh, I hate this government. I mean, who wouldn’t?] Only one is supposed to survive, but the two protagonists, Shuuya Nanahara and Noriko Nakagawa, both make it off the island in one piece [I don’t really like them much… I’m glad they’re alive, because every life is precious, but there were people who deserved to survive more than they did.] Anyway, I’m digressing here; let’s move on. Now do you see why I love this book so much? I’ve just given you a very brief summary here [I’ve written an entire post for Battle Royale before], but it’s really interesting, is it not? The author has used a multi-narrative style to allow the audience to experience the viewpoints of several different characters; I really do like this technique, but I’m a huge fan of first-person narration. The multi-narrative technique is trending now-a-days—I see it in so many books.

Never Let Me Go [I’ve written on this as well] is another piece of sheer genius [it sounds cheesy, I guess, but it’s true, heh heh]; I love it so much cause it employs first-person narration. That book is horrific in its subtlety—there are several ambiguous terms written there, like “completion” [it means death, but this isn’t revealed until much later]; “carer” [a nurse, basically—and this isn’t even “revealed”. It’s just implied]; “donor” [one of the terms that hit me the hardest.] Yes, you guessed it—the author is talking about organ donors. The book revolves around clones, and Kathy H., the thirty-six-year-old protagonist and narrator, is an extremely experienced “carer”—she has spent eleven years as one. She frequently breaks the fourth wall, talking to the readers directly; as she hails from Hailsham, a facility for clones where they were treated as humanely as possible, she is a little snobbish [just a little], and is often envied because she gets to choose the donors she will look after. Because of this, she assumes that the readers are also clones who will envy her due to her privileged status. She frequently makes statements like “I don’t know how it was where you were, but at Hailsham we had to have some form of medical every week” and “I don’t want to brag, but as I am an experienced carer and have developed a sort of ‘instinct’ around donors, I get to pick and choose the donors I want to look after. My colleagues think it’s because I’m from Hailsham, and they envy me.” Kathy’s narration adds to the darkness and horror of the book, as she has the ability to say the most awful things in the calmest, most nonchalant fashion.  Like, for example, she’ll say: “So-and-so just completed”—that’s so nonchalant, right? Completion means death.  But Kathy is a very mechanical person in general, which is why her narration is so interesting—it’s so methodical, misleading, and unreliable in the sense that her memory of some events is hazy, and she often second-guesses herself.  Her only friends, Ruth and Tommy, complete before her; she does express sadness, but the feeling passes quite fast. At the end, she is on her way to becoming a donor, too, and she has absolutely no regrets. She is serene, almost happy.  While the students were at Hailsham, Miss Emily, the head “guardian” [teacher] believed in giving the clones their childhood by not informing them of their bleak futures as organ donors; according to her, it would be best for them if they discovered it all on their own. She did not want to spoil their childhood. I understand this, of course, but I think Miss Lucy Wainwright’s approach was, in a way, better, though it seemed awfully brusque—she outright informed the children of their futures, and did not mince any words or beat around the bush. She tried to soften the blow in her own way, I suppose, but her message was very clear: the clones were meant to be only organ donors. They were not free to pursue their own dreams and aspirations. Dude, it’s a dystopian society which does not treat clones well at all, so don’t you think it’s better to let them know what lies in store for them beyond the protected walls of Hailsham? It’s kinder than thrusting them into the harsh world and letting them discover it for themselves. As it stands, the students, after the initial shock, accepted their fate with quiet resignation. Just like Battle Royale, this book causes a surge of inexplicable emotions within me; I’m sure the point that the author wanted to make was that clones can often be more human than supposedly “real” human beings [that’s what I think—this book is pretty much open to interpretation.]

There are so many great dystopian books—the Hunger Games trilogy, the Divergent trilogy, The Giver [this is a really old book, it was written in 1993]—I’m lucky to have read all of these, but Battle Royale and Never Let Me Go are books that I’ve really thought long and hard about, so I wrote about them.  I hope it was interesting and fun to read!

Thank you! I hope you liked my article!

No comments:

Post a Comment