I realized a lot of popular stories over the past decade have been dystopian. Is this indicative of where we are heading as a society? Would popularizing utopian fiction improve our relationships and our trajectory?
I’d wager that a majority of entertainment is meant to be enjoyed as pure escapism and doesn’t have an overall affect on humanity’s path forward either way. But there are stories that resonate with people on a greater level and inspire change in the world. Are there any stories that have inspired you recently? What future world do you envision can be created by sharing these stories? I can’t wait to hear your thoughts ~ WM
Jun 27, 2022·edited Jun 27, 2022Liked by Winston Malone
I think the best a story can do is give food for thought. Unfortunately a lot of modern trends in fiction seem to be more about the optics than any thought provoling activity. They read like films designed to give thrills and spills and then be forgotten about.
I'm not a fan of where fantasy has gone I'll be honest. I never read a lot of sci-fi so can't comment there. But fantasy seems to be enamoured of a very cyberpunk style where it's all about magical feats in urban settings and has lost it's folklore roots. Those roots were important because they spoke about social values and cultural links to the modern day. When a legend is taken from it's home and tossed into a modern setting with no context, what's offered up is a surface level understanding of a cultural memory. Werewolves, vampires, old gods, existing purely for it's aesthetics. It's ability to make us introspect and access deep understanding is lost entirely.
I'm not convinced it matters whether the context of the story is naive (utopian) or cynical (dystopian), what's more important [to me] is that introspection about our plight, our point of view and human nature is triggered. Then, a story has the power to inspire change.
sorry in advance for the long comment! my (probably unpopular) take on dystopian vs utopian fiction (as someone not especially versed in either of these genres) is that they are not designed to CREATE the worlds they describe, but to critique them. by that i mean, a dystopian novel is an exaggerated version of all the ills of a society, taken to their extreme for whatever purpose they are meant to serve in the story. generally to shock the conscience of the reader. but the real purpose, to my mind, is to create a medium from which the authors (and characters) can build some kind of new beginning. out of the ashes of an impossibly corrupt world, the seeds of hope and a new beginning can germinate. whatever that looks like...
however, utopian fiction (the etymology of 'utopia' is 'no-place' after all--a figment of the imagination) is more about the human desire to create impossible ideals, deny nature, and shield ourselves from pain, discomfort, and hardship. if fiction teaches us anything, it's that life is about conflict, struggle, survival. we enjoy the game, even if it is just imaginary. this is where we are genetically programmed to find satisfaction. utopias are about denial and negation of this impulse. a utopia is about suppressing and masking our most innate nature, leaving its citizens with a sense of emptiness and purposelessness. without purpose, we wither. also, when i think about the utopian societies envisioned in literature, they always have a (sometimes unwitting) dark side to them (which is maybe why so many of them are satires). look at plato's republic--one man's utopia is another's hellscape. and there was a fun british tv show, midsommer murders, about a seemingly idyllic town in the english countryside, but the whole premise of the show was that, underlying that utopian perfection seethed the dark underbelly of human nature. people were constantly murdering each other in this charming, friendly little town...
so, i think part of the reason so much literature and film is dystopian—or intended utopias turn dystopian--is that one man's utopia is another's dystopia. that's certainly true today. there is a lot of anxiety about the direction our society is heading, and rightly so. technology, politics, climate, culture, etc. are accelerating beyond our reach, much of it feels deeply dehumanizing, and we sense we won't be able to rein it in before something catastrophic happens. I think there is the desire to 1) mentally rehearse some anticipated fall and resurrection through dystopian fiction—prepare for the worst case scenario, or 2) lose oneself in a utopian solution, like the desire to be benevolent deities for a day. to imagine what we could do if we had the power to impose our vision of the perfect world--until we realize the rest of humanity still has free will... fiction lets us do that without the tyranny.
for me, the value of either of these is in the sociological thought experiment they can provide. whether dys/utopian, it’s always interesting to see what visions for society writers come up with and how they play out. we get to try these ideas on, even walk around a little in them, without having to commit to them or suffer their consequences. that’s pretty cool.
I've found myself quite bored with dystopian fiction over the last few years. None of the takes are all that original and they are generally pretty basic in that they are extrapolating the days trending topic, e.g. "social media is bad so I'll write a world where social media has taken over every aspect of our lives."
Not that dystopian or different from the world we live in but it also ignores every other aspect of humanity to ensure that their social media commentary is heard, not seen.
It also doesn't lend itself to creating dialogue and intropection because a majority of the people reading it could have just as easily extrapolated the same eventuality. And likewise I think doing the opposite extreme creates a basic story that doesn't engage readers well either.
The reality is that dialogue and conversation is more driven through nuance and moderation because that is a reality that is harder to imagine and more realistic to view. And that is what actually scares and motivates us.
I think the best a story can do is give food for thought. Unfortunately a lot of modern trends in fiction seem to be more about the optics than any thought provoling activity. They read like films designed to give thrills and spills and then be forgotten about.
I'm not a fan of where fantasy has gone I'll be honest. I never read a lot of sci-fi so can't comment there. But fantasy seems to be enamoured of a very cyberpunk style where it's all about magical feats in urban settings and has lost it's folklore roots. Those roots were important because they spoke about social values and cultural links to the modern day. When a legend is taken from it's home and tossed into a modern setting with no context, what's offered up is a surface level understanding of a cultural memory. Werewolves, vampires, old gods, existing purely for it's aesthetics. It's ability to make us introspect and access deep understanding is lost entirely.
I'm not convinced it matters whether the context of the story is naive (utopian) or cynical (dystopian), what's more important [to me] is that introspection about our plight, our point of view and human nature is triggered. Then, a story has the power to inspire change.
sorry in advance for the long comment! my (probably unpopular) take on dystopian vs utopian fiction (as someone not especially versed in either of these genres) is that they are not designed to CREATE the worlds they describe, but to critique them. by that i mean, a dystopian novel is an exaggerated version of all the ills of a society, taken to their extreme for whatever purpose they are meant to serve in the story. generally to shock the conscience of the reader. but the real purpose, to my mind, is to create a medium from which the authors (and characters) can build some kind of new beginning. out of the ashes of an impossibly corrupt world, the seeds of hope and a new beginning can germinate. whatever that looks like...
however, utopian fiction (the etymology of 'utopia' is 'no-place' after all--a figment of the imagination) is more about the human desire to create impossible ideals, deny nature, and shield ourselves from pain, discomfort, and hardship. if fiction teaches us anything, it's that life is about conflict, struggle, survival. we enjoy the game, even if it is just imaginary. this is where we are genetically programmed to find satisfaction. utopias are about denial and negation of this impulse. a utopia is about suppressing and masking our most innate nature, leaving its citizens with a sense of emptiness and purposelessness. without purpose, we wither. also, when i think about the utopian societies envisioned in literature, they always have a (sometimes unwitting) dark side to them (which is maybe why so many of them are satires). look at plato's republic--one man's utopia is another's hellscape. and there was a fun british tv show, midsommer murders, about a seemingly idyllic town in the english countryside, but the whole premise of the show was that, underlying that utopian perfection seethed the dark underbelly of human nature. people were constantly murdering each other in this charming, friendly little town...
so, i think part of the reason so much literature and film is dystopian—or intended utopias turn dystopian--is that one man's utopia is another's dystopia. that's certainly true today. there is a lot of anxiety about the direction our society is heading, and rightly so. technology, politics, climate, culture, etc. are accelerating beyond our reach, much of it feels deeply dehumanizing, and we sense we won't be able to rein it in before something catastrophic happens. I think there is the desire to 1) mentally rehearse some anticipated fall and resurrection through dystopian fiction—prepare for the worst case scenario, or 2) lose oneself in a utopian solution, like the desire to be benevolent deities for a day. to imagine what we could do if we had the power to impose our vision of the perfect world--until we realize the rest of humanity still has free will... fiction lets us do that without the tyranny.
for me, the value of either of these is in the sociological thought experiment they can provide. whether dys/utopian, it’s always interesting to see what visions for society writers come up with and how they play out. we get to try these ideas on, even walk around a little in them, without having to commit to them or suffer their consequences. that’s pretty cool.
hope you're enjoying your vacation!
I've found myself quite bored with dystopian fiction over the last few years. None of the takes are all that original and they are generally pretty basic in that they are extrapolating the days trending topic, e.g. "social media is bad so I'll write a world where social media has taken over every aspect of our lives."
Not that dystopian or different from the world we live in but it also ignores every other aspect of humanity to ensure that their social media commentary is heard, not seen.
It also doesn't lend itself to creating dialogue and intropection because a majority of the people reading it could have just as easily extrapolated the same eventuality. And likewise I think doing the opposite extreme creates a basic story that doesn't engage readers well either.
The reality is that dialogue and conversation is more driven through nuance and moderation because that is a reality that is harder to imagine and more realistic to view. And that is what actually scares and motivates us.