Category: Dystopia

The fictional short story “The Lottery” by Shirley Jackson, discusses the themes of unjustified crimes and nature of evil in humans. This fictional text depicts a community of villagers who hold as part of their tradition an annual lottery. In this essay I will discuss how the structure of the fictional world as a Dystopia helps the reader to understand the overall message behind by the implied author’s criticism of the text.

Dystopia is a term refers to a fictitious text the author depicts in the future. That has relevance to the actual world of the author. The author uses it to criticize a specific phenomenon in the society. Through this dystopia the author draws attention and warns the society about this phenomenon. just like “the lottery” where the criticism of old traditions in this text is noticed by the implied author.

Firstly, Jackson creates designs a peaceful setting in the beginning of the story which conveys sarcasm. the story starts with “The morning of June 27th was clear and sunny, with the fresh warmth of a full-summer day; the flowers were blossoming profusely and the grass was richly green.”(Jackson p.291). this scene describes a simple and regular day in this village. Later on, All the residents meet to practice the “lottery”. the purpose of the lottery was to make sure that they will get a good crop season. Old Man Warner one of the characters believes that it “Used to be a saying about ‘Lottery in June, corn be heavy soon.’ “(Jackson, p.297) In addition, the characters’ activities are normal. For example, Children “[tend]to gather together quietly for a while before they [break] into boisterous play.” (Jackson, p.291) and Men “[speak] of planting and rain” (p.291). However, this ritual which appears a positive happy event at the beginning, becomes deadly as the story escalates. And to the readers surprise the lottery causes a murder.

Society grow more attached to traditions which is obvious in the text when they refuse to replace the black box with a newer one and when “Mr. Summers spoke frequently to the villagers about making a new box…no one liked to upset even as much tradition as was represented by the black box.” (Jackson, p.292). The result of this actions is that society becomes blinded and the villagers cannot understand anymore whether they should continue with the lottery or not even when they realize later on that it’s unfair. Even the children do not question their parents about their traditions. They act without thinking of consequences and follow their parents lead. Not to mention that the color Black is connected to death. This leaves the reader a clue that something bad will happen. In addition, the stones used in this ritual is deliberate because it is an easy weapon to use by kids and adults Also, easy to collect them. As the children “[make] a great pile of stones in one corner of the square and [guard] it against the raids of the other boys.” (Jackson, p.291).

Although this is a fictional text, it is also a possible world. As discussed in class the fictional world can be possible, impossible or improbable world. Comparing the fictional world structure as a dystopian world is similar to the consensus reality of the implied author which makes it a possible world with an ordinary human characters and realistic scenery. but it is different from the values of this consensus reality. Consensus reality is the essential morals of the world. it’s the realism and facts that people agreed on in a specific period. And the implied author “refers to the author-image evoked by a work and constituted by the stylistic, ideological, and aesthetic properties for which indexical signs can be found in the text.” (Schmid, LHN) In other words the implied author is the impressions about the voice behind the text after reading the text. It is not the author himself but a voice that conveys norms and certain values. The implied author helps the reader to understand more about the text in addition it delivers a message to the implied reader which is the target audience that Jackson aims to deliver the message to.

according to the text the values of consensus reality of the implied author is that murder is not an acceptable thing. Society should not follow traditions without considering the situation.

But in the fictional world we notice the opposite, murder is acceptable, and people don’t question their ancestor’s lifestyle. Also, Elders cannot be opposed such as the Old Man Warner when being asked about the other villagers who gave up the lottery, he says ‘Pack of young fools.'(Jackson, p.297) And women have a minor rule in this society. When Mrs. Hutchinson shows late to the event because she washed the dishes and says “Wouldn’t have me leave m’dishes in the sink, now, would you. Joe?.’ (Jackson, p.295).

The construction of this fictional world as a possible fictional world makes it easier for the reader to imagine a possibility of this fictional world in the reality of the reader, so the message will become clearer that anyone can be the “winner” and die including men women or little children because they all make a draw. Moreover, anyone can participate in this terrible crime, as seen in the text when “Bobby Martin had already stuffed his pockets full of stones, and the other boys soon followed his example “(Jackson, p.291) and when “the villagers moved in on [Tessie]” (Jackson, p.301) we notice their lack of human sympathy. They ignorantly attack an innocent person from their society which proves the evil instinct in human nature that is shown when provoked. Another example when two women say, “Seems like we got through with the last one only last week.’ (Jackson, p.296) As if it is not considered a hideous crime.

The fictional world of the story shows the morals and viewpoints of the consensus reality of the implied author after World War II in three years. In this period Jackson was part of the Vermont community. The nature of the war left a violent and brutal society, and it may have affected the genre of the story white it is written. Jackson tries to educate and warn the society by composing a dystopian text that’s rich with all the elements previously discussed in this essay.

The message of ‘The Lottery’ asks us to think about the purpose of the traditions before we unthinkingly follow as members in society that may lead to hurt innocent people. Also, this text teaches how evil can exist in humans thus, stripping them from innocence and morals. Even when the family members act selfishly towards each other and search individual profits thus safety.

To conclude, this text presents the destructive result from blindly following traditions and the consequences of savagery in the society. The message is Implied by the criticism and structure of this fictional text represented in the implied author. Moreover, the implied author of this dystopian text supports a non-violent, non-conformist viewpoint.

Fahrenheit 451 was published in 1953. 1950 was the year that TV turned into a really mass-culture wonder in the United States. To certain individuals, it appeared to forecast the demise of humanized talk, proficiency, and independence, and this is plainly portrayed in the book Fahrenheit 451. At the time Bradbury was composing this book, the Russians had recently the earlier year detonated their first nuclear bomb, making genuine the atomic weapons contest that had just been fantasized previously. Though Bradbury depicts a society that has already weathered two atomic wars. The book was written after World War II and criticizes intellectually oppressive political climate of that period. This book also reveals a very real concern that America leaning in direction to become an oppressive, authoritarian society.

In contrast to dystopian novels like 1984 and We, Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 does not picture villainous dictators or corrupt philosopher-kings. The crucial difference is that Bradbury’s novel does not focus on a ruling elite nor does it portray a higher society, but rather, it portrays the means of oppression and regimentation through the life of an uneducated and complacent, though an ultimately honest and virtuous, working-class hero (Montag). Nonetheless, points of similarity exist between these works. All three imagine a technocratic social order maintained through oppression and regimentation and by the complete effacement of the individual. Not all dystopias are alike, but they have many elements in common. One element that almost all dystopias have is some kind of surveillance. In other words, people are being watched. In this case, they are spying on each other and they are being spied on by the mechanical hound. The hound that is depicted in the book is very, very good and hunting down, immobilizing, and killing its prey. It is a perfect example of a dystopian society’s killing machine. It’s neither alive nor not alive and designed to bring out fear as well as do its job. Overconsumption of entertainment is a major aspect of most dystopian societies. On the off chance that you keep individuals engaged, they won’t understand what is truly going on. The themes attributed to the novel are censorship in the 1950s, the book burning in Nazi Germany (1933), explosion of a nuclear weapon, individual vs. society, importance of literature, propaganda, paradoxes, hope, reformation of society, life and death, etc.

An important point to note is that it is explicitly not about government censorship. The firemen aren’t burning books on the orders of some shadowy bad administration. They’re doing it as the protagonist Guy Montag is told, because society as a whole turned away from the scary cacophony of knowledge, from the terror of differing opinions and the burden of having to choose between them, from deep and troubling thoughts. As far as the story goes the book is divided into 3 parts. The opening plunges us into a totally different world where the job of the fireman is the opposite of what we expect, they set fire instead of extinguishing them. The story centers on a man named Montag, who is a fireman, and his main responsibility is to burn books and the houses that hold them. All firefighters wear the outfits with number 451 in light of the fact that it alludes to the temperature in Fahrenheit at which books consume. One day as he walks home, Montag encounters a teenage girl named Clarrise standing alone. Montag finds Clarrise quite strange as he had a talk with her. She says that people rarely leave their houses, they don’t walk anywhere or notice everyday aspects of the natural world. No one seems to have deep meaningful conversations. Troubled by Clarrise‘s questions and her way of life, Montag then enters his room which is depicted to be a cold empty tomb with separate beds suggesting his married life with Mildred is dying. The main element of this dystopian society is ignorance. People do not acknowledge the fact that their life is nothing but a hollow sphere. They avoid acknowledging their unhappiness by indulging themselves in drugs and interactive 3D televisions. They suffocate their misery in a consistent media rush. They generally have radio headphones in their ears and they go through their day dazzled in TVs. In doing so, they conform utterly to the society around her. Through the use of TV, people don’t comprehend the significance of the past in their very own lives. They have been repeatedly given propaganda about the past, so they have no motivation to scrutinize its realness or worth. Also, because of the technology the characters are given, no one understands the value of books in direct relation to their own personal development. Television, for the majority of individuals in the book, does not create conflicting sentiments or cause people to think, so they don’t see change in a positive light. Seeing Clarrise’s independent view towards the world, Montag sends her to see the psychiatrist. The authorities try to control and silence independent people like Clarrise. The character of Clarrise is used to describe how mass media culture has affected the youth in this future American society. This generation doesn’t have any respect for their elders and doesn’t seem to value their own lives. They seek pleasure and instant gratification, they speed around in their cars and crash, they shoot each other and break things. Their education consists of learning answers without asking questions. They couldn’t care less about the war, have no associations with their family, couldn’t care less about raising the people to come, and their conclusions about legislative issues are shallow and ignorant. They don’t seem to have any real interests besides entertainment. This society equates happiness with not feeling offended and having easy access to instant gratification. To ensure that they attain this state of ‘happiness,’ society has empowered firemen, who don’t necessarily have any training in literature, or ethics, or law, to destroy books and knowledge.

After spending some amount of time with Clarrise, Montag thinks about the world beyond electronic entertainment and wonders about his life, his ideals, and his own happiness. Montag, at the fire station, asks about the history of firemen. In this future America, people are taught an alternate history that connects burning books to the patriotic acts of American independence. The first burned books were British-influenced books. But Montag’s questions are starting to make him stand out from the others who merely accept this history without questioning it. After he hears about the death of Clarrise and the old woman whose house he burnt, not before stealing a book that he is supposed to burn, Montag feels guilty and he questions his job as a fireman. Captain Beatty, the Fire Chief, begins to doubt Montag’s devotion to his job and realizes that he has changed sides. It is soon revealed that Montag has hidden plenty of books in the house and reads them. Beatty explains Montag about the real history of firemen. Beatty’s critical descriptions of ubiquitous entertainment and media distractions, dumbed-down news coverage, condensed literature, and shortened attention spans—all envisioned by Bradbury midway through the 20th century, look like fairly accurate predictions of early 21st-century society. Beatty describes how a society comes to value and impose conformity on itself out of an innocent desire to avoid offending anyone. But being a free individual among other free individuals requires a willingness to offend and be offended. Bradbury again predicts the future with remarkable accuracy, though the term ‘political correctness’ didn’t exist when Bradbury wrote this novel, modern critiques of political correctness as censorship often echo Beatty’s account. At the climax of the first part, Montag is, at last, voices his fears about his relationship with Mildred, as well as his curiosity and hope about the books he’s been hoarding without reading. He has a creeping suspicion that what the firemen stand for is wrong, while what Clarisse represents is right. He’s ready to try to engage intellectually with other people’s ideas and ways of looking at the world. He starts to read.

Part 2 starts with Montag and Mildred spending the afternoon flipping through books, reading passages, and trying to make sense of what they read. Montag seeks Faber’s help, a former English teacher he had met one time, to teach him so that he could understand what happened to society. Faber believes in books and knowledge, but as of now does not have the courage to stand up for them. Unlike Mildred, who conforms because she is addicted to distraction, Faber conforms out of fear. After hearing out what Montag has to say, Faber points out that it’s knowledge and deep thought that is important, not what contains the knowledge and thought. Faber’s mention of the parable of Hercules and Antaeus suggests that mass media has lost its connection to real-life by leaving out-thought and knowledge. In turn, it provides no strength to those who consume it. While Faber believes that any form of media can contain the type of information he prizes in books, he thinks that the effort required to read books makes them the best-suited type of media for disseminating rich and complicated ideas.

The 3rd part begins with Mildred turning in her husband for storing books in the house and slipping off in a taxi to start another life without a word of farewell. Beatty is aggressive up to the last moment. He taunts Montag, who has just lost his house, his wife, and his liberty, with lines from Shakespeare as though he was provoking him. Montag kills Beatty. Later, Montag realized that Beatty actually wanted to die. Beatty, who quotes so readily and fluently from the same books he destroys, is himself a tortured soul who regrets his decision to remain a book-destroying fireman. Montag then goes to Faber’s house to tell him to leave the city. Faber advises him to follow the river until he reaches the abandoned railroad tracks, and then to follow the tracks to meet the hoboes living along the tracks, many of them refugee intellectuals with Harvard degrees. The live coverage of the manhunt of Montag (since he killed Beatty after committing a crime of storing books), complete with helicopter footage and running commentary, is another of Bradbury’s predictions that came to pass in the United States before the end of the 20th century. It also shows the intoxicating power of television. We see that the authorities can use the TV and radio to mobilize the masses to look for Montag. Here Bradbury is showing how TV and radio can be used to turn individuals into a mob that can execute the will of a central authority. Media like TV and radio are much more powerful and potentially destructive than books because books alone cannot mobilize a populace. Unlike TV and radio, books can’t be controlled from a central source. While following the railroad tracks, Montag finds a deep joy in the natural world that he never found in the commotion and distractions of the city. He also feels more like himself. By engaging with the world, he finds himself. The men around the fire are similar to Faber, in that they are educated and thoughtful, but have chosen to live as fugitives outside of society. We also see that authorities use television to lie to the people. As they were unable to catch Montag police picked up a scapegoat so that the public won’t realize they have lost Montag. Then, Montag joins a group of educated, vagrant men who remember and preserved orally great novels until books are allowed and appreciated again. As they are walking away from the city, the war begins and a nuclear bomb destroys the place that was once Montag’s home. The men turn back to the completely collapsed city to help rebuild a society from scratch.

It is worth noting the ways in which our world differs from that of Fahrenheit 451. We have our big-screen TVs, some of them approaching wall size. TV seeing, though still consuming a huge amount of our leisure time, is really declining as individuals invest more energy playing computer games or utilizing the Web. The Internet is famously the best advancement that sci-fi neglected to envision, and it is unmistakably increasingly anarchic, individualized, and unregulated than the broad communications which preceded it and which shaped the nightmares of earlier dystopian writers. The ‘seashells’ that individuals insert in their ears today are earbuds through which individuals tune in to profoundly individualized playlists of tunes on their iPods.

Because the majority of this dystopian society is not able to express personal freedom, it is interesting that Clarisse and the unidentified old woman die early in the novel in order to display what has happened so far in this society to the people who exercise their personal freedom. Captain Beatty’s demise can be considered an act of personal freedom because Beatty provokes Montag into killing him instead of protecting himself and remaining alive. The battle of having personal freedom is essential in this book because Bradbury demonstrates what happens when man is not given the opportunity to express his thoughts or remember his past. Through Clarisse, the unidentified woman, and Beatty, you are shown the consequences of what happens when humans aren’t allowed to fully express their individuality and choice (they die). Through the characters of Montag, Faber, and Granger, you can see how one individual can make a difference in society if that one individual can fully realize the importance of his or her past, as well as be willing to fight for the opportunity to express himself or herself.

Utopia is a paradise, a heaven. Where everyone lives fairly, feels happy, free, give love for each other. Respecting others, listen to someone else’s words, moral, and good. On the other hand, dystopia is a gloomy, world with no dreams or hopes. In the book The Giver by Lois Lowry, has a different society from us. They can not see the colors, they do not even know how it feels to have sunburn, and They have a lot of rules to follow. Is this kind of world a Utopia? The society in the book The Giver is a dystopia because freedom and love are needed for utopia.

Having many laws and obeying them is not utopia, it is dystopia. Freedom and democracy are needed for utopia. Having specific laws can have a bad effect for people freedom. People need freedom in their lives because people has rights to have their own freedom, also if people has their own freedom to feel joy in living. Freedom is supposed to be free on the assumption that the people will be responsible for that freedom. For example, having a rule about flying over the community? People do not want to live in this kind of world where there is no freedom of where you want to go by your own plane. “it was against the rules for pilots to fly over the community. (Lowry,1)” therefore people will not want to live in The Giver society, also in this world if someone breaks the rules, they are released. Released means they die for a one mistake. Is it possible to make no mistake? Every people make mistake. It is wrong to kill them just because they made one mistake. In this world there are many specific rules and the citizens needs to obey them. The Father said “about the boy who did not obey the rules today. Do you think it is possible that he did not know about? (#8)” in this sentence the word ‘Obey’ do not seems to fit the word utopia. The word ‘Obey’ means commanding something to someone, directing, or request of a person, so it means that there is someone above the One’s station in life, making them to obey the rules. Utopia means everyone is equitable. Therefore, if there is someone above someone, it is not equitable also, it is not utopia.

To be a utopia a society needs love, emotion, and also family. If they do not have any of those than it is too dry to live on. Feeling is the one of the most important in living. Some people also think that we live to love and love to live. Like this, if there is no true love, emotion, and no real family, then it really does not mean utopia. In the book The Giver there is no real family, as the government chooses the family members. Therefor families do not talk often. “you know the rules. Two children-one male, one female-to each family unit. It was written very clearly in the rules. (#11)” This refers to that the real family doesn’t exist. Government choose which person to marry, and gives them a baby who are not their biological child. this can tell there is no true love in this world and no real family. “He and other Nurturers were responsible for all the physical and emotional needs of every newchild during its earliest life. It was a very important job-(#9)” this supports that families are not the real family by saying “newchild”. this means they have someone birthing a baby and giving it to a family.

Choosing one’s own job is one of a person’s freedom. In this world in the book The Giver, the government choose a perfect fitting job for people even if they don’t want that job. “I hope I get assigned to be a Birthmother. Mother spoke very sharply. Do not say that. There’s very little honor in that Assignment. (#27)” This means that they have to get assigned to be something (job). If people can not choose what they want to do, then this kind of world is not a utopia. People has their own right to choose their own job. “You’ve been honored, Your father and I are very proud. it’s the most important job in the community (#84)’’ As you can see, the Jonas got a job. But he didn’t get a job he wanted. He wanted to get important job in the community. Or even he does not know if he want this job, if he would fit in this job. He is not sure that if he want this job. Each person has different values, different personality, different growth process, different color, body size is different, so each job that fits one’s personality is different. Because if other people choose one’s jobs, they can feel less satisfied with their job. It is also easy to blow away opportunities for self-development that you can get from choosing your own job, and if you do not decide to set up a career, it will mean that it will be harder for you to choose another job, so if this is a national system, when the citizens feels unfair to not be able to choose their job, the state also has an obligation to answer this question. But I do not think it is believable because I feel that I am unlikely to be satisfied with the answer. Therefor they need a freedom to choose jobs to reduce the people who doesn’t want their own jobs.

Is this kind of society a utopia? They have no freedom, no love, and no emotion. Utopia is a place where everyone is free and happy, but in the book The Giver doesn’t seems free and happy. The citizen of the book The Giver does not know what is going on them, but if they knew it than they will feel that their world was dystopia. Therefor the society in The Giver is a dystopia.

What is an utopia? And a dystopia? The complexity of these two intertwined topics is enormous but it also is difficult the future questions they can lead us to. This abstract will give a brief and not clearly defined explanation about them and how they relate with each other. An utopia is a future and imagined project or place where everything is the way the creator wants it to be. A dystopia or anti-utopia is exactly what its last-mentioned name says, the antithesis of an utopia. It is a place where nothing is the way it is desired.

In this essay apart from explaining in a richer way the concepts mentioned before, a comparison between two authors will be explained. They are Eric Blair or also named George Orwell the writer of the novel “1984” which we have studied in Culture class and William Golding the author of the novel “Lord of the Flies”.

After developing an analysis of a book named “Lord of the Flies” to establish a better understanding of the matter, a conclusion about what is, in today’s culture, utopia and dystopia will be made and why the book is described as a dystopian novel. The biographies of these novelist have been focused on what seems to have been relevant to understand their works. What this document will specify into is the influences they had.

Eric Arthur Blair, commonly identified by his pen name George Orwell, was a novelist, journalist and critic who had full awareness of social injustice and was against totalitarianism. Blair was raised in a poor family, but he also claimed he was from a lower-upper-middle class. Eric Blair worked as a teacher for only two years in a private school for children of tradesman and in a college in Uxbridge.

His work goes from poetry to fiction novels. In fact, one of his most famous fiction novels is “1984” which explains a fictional future that could happen anytime. It shows us how dystopian a future can be. The novel won an amazing amount of fame due to the society we have developed throughout the years. Nowadays, in our society, there is a government who has gained full almost full control of our minds. They can decide whether anything is right or wrong, if it should be vanished or if we should worship it. And last, the matter that gives shivers when it seems to be true, is that the government is capable to track us down and able to look through our messages or calls without us noticing it. In conclusion, that the spying of the masses exists.

Through his life Blair was influenced by Shakespeare, Dickens and others. But the modern writer who is thought to be the one that influenced him the most was William Somerset Maugham for writing gospel truth without any frills. Other facts to consider are that he lived through the Second World War and The Spanish Civil War. He also was identified by himself as a communist and as type of atheist, a humanist.

William Gerald Golding was a novelist and poet. Known for his novel Lord of the Flies which made him won a Nobel Prize in Literature. He came from a wealthy family, married at the age of twenty-eight years old, became a schoolmaster and taught Philosophy and English for twenty-three years, was knighted in 1988 and died in 1993.

The authors that are said to be the ones that influenced William Golding are Herbert George Wells and Julio Verne. Apart from other authors he served in the military service of the Second World War and despite of having an atheist father his beliefs were the ones of a Christian. Sir Thomas More, an English lawyer, social philosopher, author and noted Renaissance humanist, was the author of a book named Utopia in which it defined, for the first time, the concept of the word. It is in the second part of the book that the Utopia, as a place, is described.

Utopia is a word coined from the Greek by Sir Thomas More trying to describe an imaginary place. It comes from U (οὐ) meaning “not” and Topia (τόπος) meaning “place” which, adding both into one word, means “no-place” describing a nonexistent place or civilization. There is another word, Eutopia using, instead of U (οὐ), uses Eu (εὖ) that means “good” or “well” creating the word “good place”. In English both words are considered as homophonous and both we fused into the word utopia, Utopia is an imagined, non-existing, community or society that possesses highly desirable or nearly perfect qualities for its citizens.

An example for an utopia is Sinapia. Is considered as the only Spanish utopia which follows the theories established by Thomas More. A dystopia, also from the Ancient Greek, means “bad place”. Using Dys (δυσ) instead of Eu. It has some alternative names such as cacotopia, kakotopia and anti-utopia. Dystopia is a community or society that is undesirable or frightening, is considered as the antonym of utopia. The novel analyzed in this essay is a dystopian fiction novel just as “1984”.

The genre used in both novels is the dystopian fiction. The utopia and dystopian fiction are two types of genres based on speculative fiction. Speculative fiction is one of the most realistic types of future because is based on the present and how, argued with true analysis, it will turn out in years or decades. The dystopian fiction is a novel in which everything completely disagrees with the ethics, principles and behaviors of the author.

Before the analysis of the novel there is a minor description about it. The book Lord of the Flies was the first and most known work of the author William Gerald Golding. Published in 1954, the book talks about the human nature. It is considered to be from the dystopian fictional genre and presents a situation in where a group of children, after an airplane accident, find themselves lost in a desert island in which they will have to seek for their own survival. Lord of the Flies takes place on an unnamed and uninhabited tropical island in the Pacific Ocean during an evacuation from fictional world war around the year 1950.

The characters of this novel are a group of kids who survived the plain downfall. Ralph, the novel’s protagonist, the boy who is elected leader of the group of boys on the island. Jack, the novel’s antagonist, one of the older boys stranded on the island. Simon, a shy and sensitive boy in the group. Piggy, who is Ralph’s second hand, a clumsy but intellectual boy. Roger, Jack’s second, a sadistic, cruel older boy. And at last, Sam and Eric, the pair of twins closely allied with Ralph.

A plane crashes into the sea, the kids try to look out for any other living humans of their plane. They found one adult, but he seems to be unlikely to wake up soon. Few hours later they realize nobody else is on the island and maybe they will not be rescued in a long time. After understanding the situation, they create a rule. The rule states that whoever wants to say something must use the seashell if they want the other members to listen. The days passed slowly and all of them were making a huge effort to build up a place for their survival and not to mentally break down. More days went through, fear was not capable to take them down completely because of the good connection the group had until what it seems to be a monster appears in front of one of them. In this point the group was getting divided into two sides, the ones who believed in the monster and the ones who did not. These two new groups, with their own new perspectives, try to act the best way they can think of. The believers (the pen name of the group who believe in the monster) grew bigger by getting new members from the unbelievers (the pen name of the group who does not believe). These believers also began to act as if they were more like a indigenous tribe: trying to hunt down their preys, taking what they want whenever they like and developing a feeling of hate towards the unbelievers. Another difference is that the unbelievers let anyone who wanted to leave their group while the other group was not willing to accept that from their own members. Weeks passed by until there were only two kids remaining in the unbeliever’s group: the clumsiest kid and the first leader of all of them. One of the most important resources was fire, only possible if using the glasses of the clumsy kid. The believer’s tribe accomplishes to steal them, trying also hurt the unbeliever’s group, on one night. After hunting down a big prey they begin to celebrate with a barbecue. A moment later a humanoid figure appears but the dark night does not let them see clearly what is that being. They begin to stick their spears into the being and after seeing there is no movement, they realized they just killed one of their colleagues, the one who was taking care of the only adult, which had escaped few days later after waking up. In a heated discussion they push a rock which falls into the head of one of the kids from the unbeliever’s group, killing him. The only one left is the past leader of all which begins to run into the forest to save his life. The critical point shows up when the forest begins to burn down as the savages try to hunt the last member but after running through the beach, he found out a man and a rescue team.

The author tries to create a reflection about the ways of expression, self-delusion and violence between children. Lord of the Flies exposes different kinds of themes: the need to adapt to unfavorable circumstances, civilization versus savagery, the loss of innocence, difficulties of creating and developing a society, the danger of the mind and last, war and the future of humanity.

He used the characters as concepts to express the acting of the human nature and the reason behind the behavior of humans. Ralph is representing order, leadership and the human instinct to create a society. Jack as the instinct of savagery and the desire for power inside human beings. Simon represents the natural goodness by opposing to Jack savagery and the imposed morality of society of Ralph and Piggy. Piggy represents the scientific, intellectual aspects of civilization and the rational side. At last, Roger represents brutality and bloodlust at their most extreme.

There are some objects that also represent abstract ideas. The conch shell became a symbol of community, order and freedom of speech. The glasses represent science’s power in society. The signal fire is the last connection between the boys and the civilization. The beast or imaginary beast, frightening everyone and making the group split in two, is the instinct of savagery existing in each human being also represented by Jack.

Looking forward to a better understanding of them this essay will make a comparison of both widely known novelists. These authors lived in the same period, Golding being clearly wealthier than Blair. Golding served in the Second World War and developing a belief in God, being his father, an atheist is quite interesting, and it will be explained why later. Blair, a less wealthy man who had seen two catastrophically wars and developed into an atheist. They are not that much different from each other looking from a bigger point of view.

The two of them wrote a fictional novel about dystopia. How, despite of having completely different beliefs, they have reached to this point in their career? The conclusion I have reached to with the research and this essay is that each one tries to highlight a point of view.

In Blair’s novel, 1984, tries to emphasize his atheist or humanist belief by showing the true power of humans. It might sound different from the comments written about it saying the book shows a realistic future of humans where there is nothing less but a dystopia in it. From what has been mentioned before, showing the true power of humans does not mean they are Gods or Goddesses. It shows how the future is only up to the decisions humanity will take themselves. Creating a relation between showing there is no destiny or control over humans in the novel and himself being identified as a humanist or atheist.

Golding, as I see it from my own point of view, tries to demonstrate how human children who have been educated properly and raised to be as the new leaders for the future that due to their fears, stress and anxiety can develop into completely wild beings who just seek for their own survival and will not hesitate if they have to kill someone from the same specie as theirs. It seems as if a Christian was trying to show humanity that without some kind of mentoring or God there is no place for civilization.

Surprisingly Blair, as an atheist, presents humans as terrifying beings with a superior ability to control others, giving them the right of deciding their own future. In the other hand, Golding, being a Christian, presents them as lost sheeps who need rules, mentors, leaders and a society to follow what it is considered to be the right path as if humanity needed sort of a God being.

In today’s culture the meaning of utopia and dystopia has not changed itself. What it has changed is the variety of utopias and dystopias that the human society can think of. Despite of thinking about the utopia and dystopia that most religions have always thought of like heaven and hell or reincarnations and not being able to reincarnate, new ones have appeared.

Dystopias due to some scientific facts like the problem with climatic change and how it will not be possible to stop it in the future making the ultraviolet rays directly hit us, destroying the natural habitats of wild animals and, destroying planet Earth. Another dystopia is how in the future industries are going to be monopolized and society will transform into slaves of a small part of human beings because they have the control over food, health care, water, properties, etc. The last one is that humanity will be controlled by AI, the initials of artificial intelligence or vulgarly expressed robots will rule over humans. It is said that there will be a critical point in which the AI will gain consciousness and while seeking for the solution of the problem caused by humans will understand that this solution is the full control or extermination of the human race.

The same way we have the utopia of having a fully developed technologically speaking society. With electric cars, no energetical problems, no use of non-renewable energies or resources, a fully efficient use of solar, hydraulic and wind energy. It will be able to travel to Mars, which will be fit to live in. Technology will be able to connect us with the cyberspace and genetical engineering will be utterly developed making possible the transformation of humanity into a new specie determining whether we want to create an evolutionary leap in the stairs of evolution.

What I have understood apart from the definitions is that utopias are what we think we need, and dystopias are what we think we do not need. It might seem it lacks ideas or concepts but after this research and knowing many different definitions of these two concepts I consider this the definition of utopia and dystopia by my own words and the one that fits more with what I think.

Bibliography

1. Golding, W. (1954). Lord of the Flies. Retrieved from: http://web.seducoahuila.gob.mx/biblioweb/upload/William%20Goldin%20-%20El%20Se%C3%B1or%20de%20las%20moscas.pdf
2. Word Reference (2019). Retrieved February 16, 2019, from http://www.wordreference.com/
3. George Orwell (2019). Retrieved February 16, 2019, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Orwell
4. William Golding (2019). Retrieved February 16, 2019, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Golding
5. Lord of the Flies Summary (2019). Retrieved February 17, 2019, from https://www.sparknotes.com/lit/flies/
6. Utopia (2019). Retrieved March 5, 2019, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopia
7. Dystopia (2019). Retrieved March 5, 2019, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dystopia
8. Utopian and dystopian fiction (2019). Retrieved March 5, 2019, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopian_and_dystopian_fiction
9. Thomas More (2019). Retrieved March 5, 2019, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More#Utopia
10. Reverso Diccionario (2019). Retrieved March 9, 2019, from https://diccionario.reverso.net/
11. Why do you think The Lord of the Flies was chosen to win the Nobel Peace Prize in literature? (2019). Retrieved March 9, 2019, from https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/why-do-you-think-lord-flies-was-chosen-win-nobel-133711
12. La utopía en la edad moderna hispánica: Concepto e historia de la utopía (2019). Retrieved from March 7, 2019, from https://blogs.ua.es/utopiasmodernas/category/concepto-e-historia-de-la-utopia/
13. La utopía en la edad moderna hispánica: Pensamiento utópico hispánico moderno (2019). Retrieved from March 7, 2019, from https://blogs.ua.es/utopiasmodernas/2010/11/30/%C2%ABsinapia%C2%BB-una-autentica-utopia-hispanica/
14. La utopía en la edad moderna hispánica: Utopías en el Nuevo Mundo (2019). Retrieved from March 7, 2019, from https://blogs.ua.es/utopiasmodernas/category/utopias-en-el-nuevo-mundo/

ORIGIN OF THE TERMS

The first of the two to appear was the term utopia. Utopia derives from the Greek prefix “ou-“, meaning “not”, and topos (τόπος), “place”, so a no-place, or place that does still not exist. The initial “u” can also be interpreted as the Greek prefix “ευ”, Ancient Greek for “good”, so the translation of utopia can also be the “good place”, but it’s only by combining both meanings that we truly get a wrap of what this term represents: the best place that could exist but that it does not. This last part is important since it can be, and it is, also interpreted as a place “too good to exist” or, in other words, that could not exist, normally due to its excess of idealism.

The term was first used by the English lawyer Thomas More in his narrative work: Libellus vere aureus, nec minus salutaris quam festivus, de optimo rei publicae statu deque nova insula Utopia (On the Best State of a Commonwealth and on the New Island of Utopia). Thomas More’s would be the first of an extense and rich new genre, the Utopian fictions, a genre that would flourish at its fully in the XXth century, first through books such as 19841, Fahrenheit 4512 and We3, the book which redefined the term and brought it back to the surface of the literary paradigm, and following this literary movement, utopias and, even more importantly, dystopias, started to spread through a variety of other art forms.

But what was and is the purpose of this unattainable proposals if, as it has already been established with the definition of utopia, they are over idealistic? Although the term was first used by More, as it has just been mentioned, the first example of what a utopia would become to mean was Plato’s Republic, published in 380BC. Plato’s proposal is a great example to explain what a Utopia is and to introduce its other side: the dystopia.

Plato’s Republic began as a mental experiment of what a perfect society would have to be like from a structural (or political) point of view. For this purpose, he created a written city that worked specifically as what he perceived as the closest to a paradise city and, for him, that was one in which everyone fulfilled an specific role, the role he was meant to fulfil. So in very brief lines, Plato’s Republic was organised by three main classes: the erudites, wise men who would rule the city4 having as the only interest the best for the people (it is important the specification of the word men for Plato wasn’t a revolutionary of his times in what genders refers to, so he could only think of erudites as males), the soldiers, defenders of city and what would be the current police and army forces, and lastly, the producers. For Plato this would have been the perfect organisation for society, but would it also be for everyone else?

Erudites are humans too and, as such, can be corrupted, soldiers may be more than just strong brutes and producers might be great artists, philosophers or scientists who also happen to like to craft or cultivate the land. Plato’s vision of humanity as pictured in his Utopia, was too unidimensional, it lacked the most interesting element of the human kind: its capacity for individuality, a bless, a course and the very reason for which creating the perfect organisational system it’s such a difficult matter. Taking this into account, is the Greek philosopher’s proposal really a perfect society? Or is it, on the other hand, the complete opposite, an anti-utopia, or, as it is also known, a Dystopia?

Plato lived in Ancient Greece were people lived in city-states called polis such as Athens. These questions tried to be answered, focusing also on the individuality element, in Veronica Roth’s trilogy: Divergent5. In Roth’s books she challenges that idea of each person fulfilling a specific role in society based only in what one has, supposedly, more affinity with. In the trilogy’s world, teenagers are made to choose only one faction out of five, in which they will spend the rest of their lives. Each faction performs a specific role in the city’s organisational system, just as in Plato’s Republic, only difference being the amount of divisions for Plato’s society, as previously exposed, was divided in three sections whereas Roth’s uses five. Be the differences as they may, the core concept stays the same and for that reason it is clear that Veronica Roth based her books on Plato’s Republic. And she isn’t the only one.

Exploring other sides of already pre-existing political systems, with the objective of challenging them and highlighting aspects of such systems that might have been over- looked, is also a characteristic of the utopian-dystopian genre. Examples of this would be 1984, Orwell’s take on communism plus the technological new tendencies of his time, The hunger games, again another take on Plato’s Republic, Blade Runner, capitalism plus, also, the alienating technological tendencies of the author’s time etc. This double edge that started to be perceived about Utopias, the inherent drive of people to question perfection, it’s what brought the term Dystopia, but its meaning has evolved a great deal since its first use back in the XIXth century, first known use by Jhon Stuart Mill6 in a Parliamentary Speech: ‘It is, perhaps, too complimentary to call them Utopians, they ought rather to be called dys-topians, or caco-topians7. What is commonly called Utopian is something too good to be practicable; but what they appear to favour is too bad to be practicable’ (1868)

In this quote, Mill uses the term as the addition of the Ancient Greek prefix “dys”(δυσ-) Ancient Greek for “bad”, to the already existing “utopia” although with a slight reinterpretation of the initial “u” as “eu” (ευ-), Ancient Greek prefix for ‘good’, instead of the original “ou”, Ancient Greek prefix for “not”. So, Mill reinterpreted Utopia as the Parliamentary Reform, synonym of dystopia. “good place” instead of the “no-place” and created a complementary term to express the complete opposite: the worst possible “bad place”, a Dystopia, in contrast to the best possible “good-place”, a Utopia.

Since then, Dystopias have become very popular and have taken many other meanings and forms. Besides representing the worst possible case scenario, as used by Mill, and showing twisted sides of what was initially thought to be a Utopia, as Veronica Roth does in Divergent with Plato’s Utopia, Dystopias have also explored other possibilities, for instance, the dystopian futures.

DYSTOPIAS AND SOCIAL CONTEXT

In the XXth century the world experimented the greatest and fastest changes of humanity in every field. The means of production had been experiencing exponential changes since the second industrial revolution and the colonial empires were running out of lands to conquer and exploit, the perfect climate for a war that would thrive to never before reached scales. The First World War began in the 1914 and would extend until the 1918, leaving a trail of deaths and a world that would never be the same.

After the WWI and the instauration of the Soviet Union the world had undergone a deep change. But the world scale events didn’t stop there, in 1941 another world war, this one even more brutal and destructive than the last one. Both wars marked a before and after the whole world’s history, both changed the balance of powers, the maps’ borders and the relation of powers between countries and, lastly, both were the most devastating events the world had seen up until then, for the second completely overpassed the first in every field. Having the world experienced such great consecutive wars and given the tension between the two leading powers that raised after the WWII, the EEUU and the URSS, it’s no wonder so many art works appeared trying to figure out how the future would be, thus the increase in dystopian fiction in the time.

Having lived two wars and two atomic bombs, it was only obvious to wonder what would happen if a third was to happen. For this reason, many films and books started to depict futures that developed after said third war would have taken place, these were dystopian futures, and they did not play a simply entertaining role, but also a social- awareness one. And with these we enter our next point: the dystopias social function.

SOCIAL FUNCTION

As it has been mentioned previously, utopias are mental, written or imagined proposals that try to display perfection, the best possible social scenario with the objective of then trying to achieve such ideal, because having it figure it out, the path to paradise already has a clear ending point. On the other hand, dystopias display the worst possible scenarios but, obviously, not for the reason of achieving them, then with which objective are as many authors and thinkers stuck with this? Why not think of more utopias so we can have a lead as to how should our world be improved? Because perfection, as it has previously been exposed with Plato and Roth, perfection is not the same for everyone.

But doesn’t then the same principle apply to dystopias? How do they then manage to successfully fulfil a social awareness raising role? Because as difficult as it may be agree on perfection, it is very easy to agree on what it is not, because there are endless possibilities, all social systems have flaws, at least the ones known, and tried, up until known, and there are many world problems that could become worse, and this existent flaws and problems that “could become worse” are what fuel dystopias.

Dystopian authors base their artworks on already existent problems or tendencies and explore the “what if it went wrong”, “what if it became extreme”, thus warning the reader of how things could develop. 1984 was composed in the times of the cold war and so, it warns against totalitarianism regimes and extreme government control, Blade Runner, by director Ridley Scott, dates from the 1982, a time were wonders of programming were starting to reach the common people and talks of how far pcs would go were becoming more and more frequent and so, the film explores a future in which on one hand, super consumerism has been taking to alarming alienating extremes and, the culmination of such alienation, IA androids so perfect that telling them apart from humans is one the film’s central plot. Regarding religion, we can turn, for instance, to Margaret Atwood’s novels, The Hand Maid’s Tale.

Atwood’s books base its dystopian future in two current issues: the increase in the infertility rates in the technologically developed countries and the decrease of the Catholic’s church power. In her proposed future, women’s fertility rates have decreased to such low levels that pregnant women are almost miracles. There are very children, and their numbers have kept on decreasing for some decades from when the book’s actions take place. In this alarming adult world, a radical movement with roots on the bible beliefs, but taken to the extreme, take over the country imposing a new social with the objective of ensuring and protecting childbearing. But a dystopia can be made of any socially controversial subject: the TV series Utopia8, deeps in into the overpopulation issue and the pharmaceutical companies overwhelming power in the current times, Altered Carbon9, another TV show, explores a future where technology has advanced so much as to allow the uploadment of the human consciousness into a chip, making human virtually immortal as long as one has money, also treating the inequality issue, The Clock Work Orange10 , a take on the individual against society on an over moral controlled world etc.

Therefore, dystopias not only pursue a fictional creation but also a social function, dystopias seek to make its consumer think and reflect about the issues they display. Nowadays the dystopian genre is very common since so many threads to the humanity’s existence, global warming, the continues fear of a third world war, the overpowerment of governments by the multinational companies, the imminent thread of running out the resources, etc. And so, the world’s future, if any, has never been of such popular interest and, since dystopia explore all this possible future, its success, and impact is only natural considering the current world state.

CONCLUSION

Regarding the initial question on which Is the purpose of utopian and dystopian works, the answer must be divided into two, for the purpose of each concept it is different. First, utopias are meant to be exercises to review what a perfect society would have to be like to try, in my opinion, to improve our own society. Trying to think about how things should really work without the restrains of how they work in realty, frees the mind and it allows a more creative thinking since in the plane of the imagination everything is permitted, no tradition nor logic nor moral act against the free world of the mind so, in this way, good utopian works allow the reader, or consumer in general, for not only written utopian works exist for instance the work of Frank Lloyd Wright and his Broadacre city.

On the other hand, dystopias’ purpose, even though their creations process are very similar, both work on the limitless imagination field but, contrary to the utopias very root, dystopias use the conditions given in the current world and exaggerate some of them with the objective of analysing better these specific conditions (or issues). By doing these, dystopias have the power to explore what the world could “end up being”, and the result of this process shows the consumer the dangers of possible futures that follow the tendencies of the times in which each work was created. This can be very enriching for a society since, disguised as with the tag of “fiction”, it raises awareness on issues that are actually very real, specially between the masses since many dystopian works, such as films and tv shows, are very accessible mediums that don’t require special effort so it’s one of the best methods to raise awareness about a social topic as divulgative media.

REFERENCES

1. Roth Veronica (2011), Divergent, NY, EEUU, Katherine Tegen Books
2. Orwell George (1948), 1984, UK
3. Bradbury Ray (1953), Fahrenheit 451, EEUU
4. Zamyatin Yevgeny (1921), We, Soviet Union
5. Burgess Anthony (1962), A Clockwork Orange, EEUU
6. Morgan K Richard (2002), Altered Carbon, EEUU
7. Kelly Dennis (2013), Utopia, TV show, UK
8. Scott Ridley (1982), Blade Runner, EEUU
9. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on Ethics and Politics in The Republic
10. The Cambridge companion to utopian literature (2010), edited by Gregory Claeys, Cambridge University Press, UK

Over the last ten years, technology has transformed almost every aspect of our lives before we have had time to stop and question it. In every home, on every desk, in every palm, a black mirror of our 21st Century exist: a plasma screen, a monitor, a smartphone. First of all, the aim of this essay is to analyse and criticize how advanced technologies affect our life through some episodes of the television series Black Mirror. It is a known science fiction television series, whose critics say that it is perfect for fans of dystopian fiction. It adopts the anthology format to tell separate narratives with different cast for each episode. Brooker, its creator, has described the show as ‘the way we might be living in 10 minutes’. Along this essay I am going to focus in three concrete episodes: White bear, Nosedive and Arkangel; going in depth with each one, looking for those details which show us how dystopian can be our today’s culture. After that, clear conclusions will be extracted to get to the point. The main reason why I have chosen this television series is because I have watch it and I find it really interesting. I have seen the opportunity of going further with the topic about ‘utopia and dystopia’ through something familiar to me, so that is why I decided to go ahead with it. [The Cambridge Companion to Utopian Literature, edited by Gregory Claeys. Cambridge 2010]

The concept of Utopia [page 3]. The study of the concept utopia can certainly not be reduced to the history of the word coined by Thomas More in 1516 to baptize the island described in his book. In that time, the word utopia was a neologism. Utopia, as a neologism, is an interesting case: it began its life as a lexical neologism, but over the centuries, after the process of deneologization, its meaning changed many times, and it has been adopted by authors and researchers from different fields of study. The word utopia has itself often been used as the root for the formation of new words. These include words such as eutopia, dystopia, anti-utopia, alotopia, euchronia, heteropia, ecotopia and hyperutopia. Before coining the word utopia, more used another one to name his imaginary island: Nusquama. Nusquam is the Latin word for ‘nowhere’, ‘is no place’, ‘on no occasion’. The concept of utopia is no doubt an attribute of modern thought and one of its most visible consequences. Historically, the concept of utopia has been defined with regard to one of four characteristics: (1) the content of the imagined society, (2) the literary form into which utopian imagination has been crystallized, (3) the function of utopia, (4) the desire for a better life, caused by a feeling of discontentment towards the society one lives in. This latter characteristic is no doubt the most important one.

The origins of dystopia: Wells, Huxley and Orwell [page 107]. Dystopias are often described as ‘conservative’, though they may in fact be sharply critical of the societies they reflect. Dystopia is often used interchangeably with ‘anti-utopia’ or ‘negative utopia’, to describe a fictional portrayal of a society which evil, or negative social and political developments, have the upper hand, or as a satire of utopian aspirations which attempts to show up their fallacies, or which demonstrate in B. F. Skinner’s words, ‘way of life we must be sure to avoid’. The term dystopia enters common currency only in the 20th Century, though it appears intermittently beforehand. The dystopian ideal has also been linked both historically and logically proclamations of the ‘end of utopia’, and sometimes also been wedded to the now-debunked hypothesis of the ‘end of history’.

After contextualizing the contents, the basis of the essay and looking for valid and interesting information, let’s focus on the television series chosen, Black Mirror. To begin with, Black Mirror is a science fiction television series created by Charlie Brooker. It examines modern society, particularly with regard to the unanticipated consequences of new technologies. Episodes are standalone, usually set in an alternative present or the near future, with a totally different cast and plots, whose only common point is the power of new technologies to move the world. In the beginning, the television series was inspired by The Twilight Zone, an older anthology series, which were able to deal with controversial topics without fear of censorship. The series premiered for two seasons on a British television channel, Channel 4, in 2011 and in 2013. After its addition to the catalogue in December 2014, the company which purchased the television series was Netflix. It has received many awards and nominations, garnering positive reception from critics.

The science fiction show makes an analysis of the new technologies in an advanced and futuristic way that in occasions threats the integrity of people. A path characterized for danger, obsessions, morals, loneliness and feelings involved in different worlds controlled by technological things, with an end, mostly catastrophic, but other times satisfactory. Following, three episodes are going to be explained and analysed: White Bear, Nosedive and Arkangel.

White bear is the second episode of the second season. A women awakes to a violent world that ends up being an elaborate play by a justice system to punish her. She notices that people on the street who is recording her also ignore her when she tries to say something to them. They also erase her memory every night so she awakes to a hellish Groundhog’s Day every morning. She is told that she has been found guilty for ger part in the brutal killing of a young girl, so she has been sentenced to undergo this psychological torture daily in the With Bear Justice Park, where visitors are allowed to record her daily suffering.

The reflection extracted here is that even in justice aspects, as we can see here, technology has an influenceable paper. This woman has committed a crime and a way of suffering those consequences is through this White Bear Justice Park. The aim of the show of this park is not about violence neither revenge. Through technological techniques they achieve the punisher’s suffering, a mental and psychological suffering. Thanks to the roll-playing of visitors with their phones, recording every movement done by the women, seeming that they are hypnotic. The protagonist gets annoyed easily when she realizes that even in a dangerous or critical situation, people do not react and just keep recording what is happening. Therefore, we can appreciate the cruelty of technology.

Nosedive takes part of the third season, being the first episode of it. Mainly, it is a Community where people rate each other through a phone app. Centered around one social climbing woman who seeks to better her status by attending an old friend’s wedding. The more she seeks to go up, the more she spirals out of control. This system cultivates insincere relationships, as a person’s rating significantly affects their socioeconomic status. Laice is the protagonist, currently rated at 4.2 and hoping to achieve 4.5 to be maid-of-honour at the upcoming wedding of her old friend. She looses most of the rating on the way to the wedding due to a series of mishaps. Finally, she arrives to the wedding even though her rating is so low. Feeling liberated, she gives her speech. Everybody rate her negatively, even more.

In this episode, a clear technological dystopia can be seen and there is a similarity with today’s culture. It is making a critique of how we perceive each other, by rating others out of five. Here we can see the dystopian possibilities of an app that grades you as a person without your consent. Furthermore, the episode aims at the anxiety stoked by a modern obsessions with quantification. Nowadays, people give more importance to the Likes and Comments of Social Networks than ever. This is an exaggeration of reality, as the meaning of the word dystopia says, but we are not so far. People are always engrossed in these services, whether it be tweeting their friends, updating their Facebook status, or posting pictures of their daily meals on Instagram. Lot of people worry about what others think about them. If someone loses followers or gets no likes on their photo, it can really put a dent in their self-esteem, which just shows our developed dependency to the internet and addiction to social media. Lacie, the protagonist, is a representation of the modern population. Arkangel is the second chapter of the fourth season. Marie briefly loses track of her daughter Sara, and decides to have her implanted with the Arkangel system, allowing her to use a tablet to track her, monitoring her health and emotional state and censoring sights she does not want Sara to see, such as blood. As Sara grows up, Marie recognises that Arkangel is hampering Sara’s growth so she disables the tablet. After some rebellious acts of Sara, Marie reactivates Arkangel, discovering her to be taking drugs and so on. It ends when Sara realizes that her mother reactivated Arkangel, she beats her with the tablet, unaware of how much harm she has done due to the censoring filter.

This episode takes parental surveillance to its darkest, most obvious extreme. It makes a living nightmare out of parental controls. Here, technology is represented with an advanced chip inserted into a child’s brain and thanks to that, parents can monitor everything their child is feeling, and even put parental controls on what she is seeing, with a casual swipe on their designated tablet. This fact is controversial; is it necessary to control every child’s movement, to know how is she feeling in every moment?

Shielding children or whoever from the truth is nothing else that temporal. It is amazing how technologies can deform our life, and how people depend on them. From my point of view, no one desires a dystopian society, inspired in the total control of technologies. Nevertheless, we are all demanding to mechanize everything, to make our life easier. Thus, we find ourselves in a constant debate, between what we want and what we need. In terms of advanced technology, most of the people desire the latest version of everything, the best smartphone, the biggest television, the loudest headphones, the most expensive device. But, is it the best way of living, having as much as we can have, without being aware of what we really need, what others less lucky have or need? People are becoming more and more egocentric, blinding themselves with a screen in front of their faces.

The world is getting out of hand, technology is driving us crazy, making us to do things we never could imagined. Think about those episodes explained before, we are closer to this situations and facts than we think. In the case of Nosedive, many people is suffering all this pressure coming from the opinion of others, probably unknown for her. The term of ‘technological dystopia’ already exists, and its meaning is ‘an association between technology and catastrophic changes and a contaminated humanness that compromises social intercourse’. We are beginning to see all this technological dystopia shaping the world around us. Black Mirror shows us a technological dystopia and it does not go so wrong. Technology is having such a dramatic impact on our lives, and it is not yet clear where this technological progress will lead society. That means that technological dystopias are a useful way to explore the implications of technological progress and help us to guide ourselves away from danger which it presents. No one knows what is going to happen but in my opinion, everything should be done from the heart, feeling it, and leaving apart technologies, in a background.

Science Fiction usually is focused on imagined future advances in science and engineering or major social and environmental modifications, frequently showing space and time travel or life on other world or earth. The short stories “Harrison Bergeron” by Kurt Vonnegut and “The Pedestrian” by Ray Bradbury are good examples of how technology with excessive government control. . Science fiction often discusses the potential consequences of science and other developments. Common themes include the downfalls of man’s world; hence, technology destroys the environment. Both stories include what it would be like to give too much power to the government in the future.

The short story ‘The Pedestrian’ by Ray Bradbury is a compelling plot that takes place in the future. The story suggests that if the planet continues to make advances as it is now, the population would become nothing more than human beings who do nothing in our lives. Ray Bradbury uses the setting to represent the empty and lonely world in a powerful way to show how isolated and abandoned towns will be when technology dominates the human population. The residents have nothing to do but watch TV because all the jobs are done by technology. The author is trying to send out the warning and show the world what will happen if there is an advancement in technological power. Despite government control and innovation, this story explores what the future could look like. Bradbury’s short story suggests that an individual can be separated from nature and the environment by too much technology. In this story a character by the name Mr. Mead’s who doesn’t always do the same thing as everyone else. He enjoys being out side and breathing fresh air. Mr. Mead takes long night walks waiting to see no one because they’re all watching television in their dark homes. “The street was silent and long and empty, with only his shadow moving like the shadow of a hawk in midcountry. If he closed his eyes and stood very still, frozen, he could imagine himself upon the center of a plain, a wintry, windless Arizona desert with no house in a thousand miles, and only dry riverbeds, the streets, for company”. He is then stopped by a cop, Mr. Mead got into the car and realized that inside there’s no one, it’s automatic. In the story, we learn that Mr. Mead was taken in the police car to a psychiatric research center on regressive trends. It’s ironic that technology, which is supposed to give someone more freedom and opportunities, can take all rights away and have almost complete control over a person. The people have lost their rights and must now be viewing tv by eight o’clock inside the house. The meaningless T.V. shows are brainwashing the citizens. Technology is forced to take up and complete human jobs. It shows how people can disconnect from others and stop taking care of others. Bradbury predicts what could happen if this technology got into the wrong hands. Technology can evolve and inevitably force people to have no purpose in life.

‘Harrison Bergeron,’ published by Kurt Vonnegut, describes reasons why equality is not what everyone believes it to be equality is a dangerous goal to achieve . The government in Vonnegut’s story tortures its people in an effort to achieve physical and mental equality among all Citizens. Just like in “The Pedestrian” by Ray Bradbury television is a big part of both stories. Television is an immensely powerful power that sedates, controls and terrorizes the characters of ‘Harrison Bergeron.’ To stress the role of television to civilization, Vonnegut makes it a persistent feature in his novel: the whole story takes place as George and Hazel sit in front of the screen. Television is a very powerful power that sedates, controls and terrorizes the characters of ‘Harrison Bergeron.’ Television is used by the government as a way to enforce the regulations. “Even as I stand here’ he bellowed, ‘crippled, hobbled, sickened-I am a greater ruler than any man who ever lived! Now watch me become what I can become!’ Harrison tore the straps of his handicap harness like wet tissue paper, tore straps guaranteed to support five thousand pounds”. Of instance, the government publishes information about people with the of more capacity because they can’t be fully controlled and need the use of handicap harness. People like Harrison are on the “loose”. Handicap ear piece is put in their ears acting like a shock mechanism to keep them controlled. This gives us with a clear demonstration of the limitations placed on those who do not inhibit their ability. Therefore, television becomes a way of terrorizing the people as Harrison is killed Handicapper General. Live execution is an efficient way to show us what’s going to happen to those who would disobey the law.

Both of these stories “The Pedestrian” by Ray Bradbury and “Harrison Bergeron” by Kurt Vonnegut describe the way of life that the future might be like if too much power is given to the government through technology. It shows us that we should have limits on what the government should be able to do. Harrison Bergeron was an extreme example of advanced technology. It was believed in his culture that no one should be more educated, smarter, and richer than anyone else. The Handicapper General made sure that anyone with any ability was granted a handicap to obstruct and cover their skill in order to lower everyone’s ability and actions. In “The Pedestrian” discusses society’s reliance on innovation and what it will become slowly but surely. People have become dependent on television and technology to give up all their emotional and physical control. All of these restrictions apply equally to predictions of non-fiction, as our hopes and fears for real-world technology are equally limited by our ties to the present.

In the post-war period, dystopian elements become more visible in literature. The Drowned Giant by Ballard and At the Auction of the Ruby Slippers by Rushdie are examples of post-war literature where dystopian elements play an important role. As the works of Rushdie and Ballard center their plots on dystopia theme some similarities can be found between these two short stories. In this essay, I will be exploring the similarities while taking into account their distinct differences. I will also be referring to the importance of similarities to the dystopia theme and its use for stories. After this examination, I will focus on investigating the reasons why dystopias become a common sight in post-war literature as seen Rushdie’s and Ballard’s works.

The Drowned Giant and At the Auction of the Ruby Slippers show numerous similarities as both stories try to depict a dystopia. Rushdie’s story follows an auction. In this auction, a pair of ‘magical’ slippers are being sold. However, the narrator lacks the knowledge of what the slippers are capable of: “We don’t know the limits of their powers” (88). It is clear that society is not sure about slippers’ properties. A similar situation can also be found on The Drowned Giant. In the story when the giant is disembodied and people try to remember it; they do not recall that it had humanistic features: “…even those who first saw him cast up on the shore after the storm, now remember the giant, if at all, as a large sea beast” (243). It is certain that society is not able to identify and remember what they have seen. This can be tied with the situation on Rushdie’s story as in both stories society fails to acknowledge the reality of the fictional thing they perceived. This failure can be seen as a part of the dystopia theme and it functions as a tool to criticize the society.

Failure to acknowledge properties paves the way for the other similarity concerning fictional things: the interest of people towards them. In both stories, people show great interest to fictional things. In Rushdie’s story, the narrator becomes obsessed with the slippers. In addition to the narrator, all parts of the society attend to auction for slippers. It is stated that the excitement over the slippers could lead to unexpected births and deaths (87). This situation proves that there was a huge public interest. Similarly, in Ballard’s story, many people become interested in the giant: “…there were a thousand people present on the beach, at least two hundred of them standing or sitting on the giant” (236). This crowd justifies that people had an immense interest in the giant. The interest of society to a fictional thing that can be seen in both works can be considered as an important aspect for dystopia theme as it criticizes societies’ interests towards the popular.

The loss of interest in both fictional elements can again be seen in both stories. In Rushdie’s story, the narrator loses his interest in slippers through a fictional transition (102). Similarly, the society in Ballard’s story loses its interest in the giant as they become accustomed to it. The narrator explains this situation as: “…there were fewer than fifty or sixty people sitting on the shingle” (238). This transition from thousands to less than hundred clearly shows that society lost its interest towards the giant. As both societies get very interested in the fictional object then they lose their interest quickly it is possible to argue that in both stories the societies are depicted as societies of spectacles. This depiction can be understood in the concept of dystopia as it allows writers to become critic of socities of spectacles.

Another important similarity can be identified as the integration of fictional elements in their respective stories. In both stories, fictional things are integrated into reality. In Rushdie’s story, it is accepted by society for fictional characters to come to life and magical things to be found (95). Similarly, in Ballard’s story, many do not see the magnificent presence of the giant except for the narrator (239). Thus, the acceptance of fiction is common in both stories. However, even if the acceptance is common, the fictional entities still force people to get out of closed spaces they usually dwell. In Rushdie’s story, it is argued that the slippers could “tempt us from our bunkers” (87). Even if many fictional things are accepted, a new fictional entity could still cause excitement. Similarly, in Ballard’s story, the existence of the giant tempts people out. This situation can be understood early on the story as the narrator argues that: “the library was deserted” (235). The excitement the giant created leads to a similar effect that can be seen in Rushdie’s story. It is clear that in both stories even if fictional entities are accepted, they still create enough excitement to attract people. The presence of fictional elements can be understood within the framework of the dystopia theme as it transfers the idea that the future can bring unexpected changes.

Another important aspect that is similar in both stories can be identified as the power of money. In Rushdie’s story, it is stated that: “Everything is for sale…” (98). In the story, auctioneers sell everything from important wonders of the world to state secrets and even demons (98). It is clear that the money is the leading factor in the story as all of these auctions are done for pragmatic desires. Similarly, in Ballard’s story, the giant is disembodied by fertilizer companies (240). It is not hard to imagine that the desire for money played the most important role in this action. Thus, it is easy to claim that in both dystopias money is crucial. The extreme importance of money is a way to conduct the fears of losing moral for material needs in the future within the concept of dystopia theme.

As similarities can be found between two stories some differences can be found as well. In Rushdie’s story, it is stated that: “… running feet, sirens, screams. Such things have become commonplace” (101). Rushdie also argues that “…freelance commandos bearing battlefield nuclear weapons” can be found (96). These two instances differ from Ballard’s world. Anarchy was prominent in Rushdie’s dystopia yet in Ballard’s story no such thing can be found. Rushdie argues that violence was accepted: “…rage, which gives us, in our opinion, the moral high ground… From this high ground, we can shoot down at our enemies and inflict heavy fatalities.” (89-90). Chaos and anarchy can be understood with a lack of governing force. However, in Ballard’s story, a government exists even if they are not very willing to conduct their jobs (236). These minor difference in dystopias creates a great split between two stories. In Rushdie’s story the chaos reigns and only money rules. In Ballard’s story, things appear to be relatively normal. Yet it is important to acknowledge that in both instances society appears to be corrupt as they follow the mass and fail to understand the reality of things while accepting fictional elements.

Considering the similarities and differences between the two stories written in the post-war era, it is possible to find some reasonings for why dystopia become a prominent theme. Developments seen in science along with war technologies lead to the idea that fiction can and will penetrate the real life. In wartime, the society witnessed horrors they could never imagine, thus, in a sense fiction became real. People remembered the existence of weapons of mass destruction and nations declaring war to each other. Due to this, fictional and negative elements penetrated to literature. The integration of these two elements could only be made with dystopias, thus, the theme of dystopia gained popularity in the post-war world. Wars also showed that people had a tendency to forget and were inclined to make mistakes while defining important qualities. For example, many people in wartime failed to understand the reality behind the wars and they even ignored regular bombings. Society became more indifferent. To integrate this aspect and to criticize the state of society dystopias were choosen. In addition to all these aspects; not trusting governments, increased weapon production, and chaos also became standard in wartime. To criticize these and to voice their concerns about the future writes choose dystopias. Finally, due to capitalism money gained importance in wartime. To argue against this situation writers of the post-war era chose dystopias. All these aspects can be seen in the two stories I have investigated. Overall it is possible to say that the negative understandings of post-war period penetrated into literature via dystopias and they were used to criticize the state of the society. For these reasons, dystopias become prominent in this era.

I have examined The Drowned Giant and At the Auction of the Ruby Slippers in this essay. I examined their similarities in the aspects of societies’ failure to understand the reality of events, integration of fictional elements, the interest of society towards fiction, and the importance given to money. I have argued that these elements were used to convey the fears towards future and criticize the negative sides of society within the framework of the dystopia theme. Afterward, I have discussed some differences between the two stories while mainly focusing on the state of order. Finally, I have concluded that the reason for dystopias to become prominent in the post-war period was the need to integrate the negative understanding of the period and to criticize society.

Works Cited

1. Ballard, J. G. “The Drowned Giant.” The Best Short Stories of J.G Ballard. pp. 233–243. Print.
2. Rushdie, Salman. “At The Auction of the Ruby Slippers”. East, West. pp.87-103. Print.

Kurt Vonnegut’s short story, Harrison Bergeron, features the dangers of government control combined with individuals’ obliviousness. Vonnegut proceeds to foresee the aftereffects of such a move. The most striking topic is that of absence of opportunity in American culture. Vonnegut likewise explains how loss of social equality is getting with Americans. What is the consequence of all these? There is a high likelihood that America will wind up in an oppressed world. In outline, Vonnegut discusses how loss of opportunity and social liberties would prompt America’s oppressed world.

As previously mentioned, Americans love opportunity and this is confirmed by Harrison’s activities; he escapes from jail, proceeds to expel his debilitations, and lastly attempts to impact everyone around him. ‘Why don’t you stretch out on the sofa, so that you can rest your handicap bag…?” (Vonnegut, P. 216).

The administration affixed this impairment sack around George’s neck; in any case, Harrison is advising George to ‘rest’ it, as an indication of resistance and push for opportunity. All things considered, in Harrison’s reality, this opportunity is no more, and individuals can’t settle on decisions since they are better than expected in all things and thus, they are crippled. For example, the individuals are masked to guarantee that “nobody would feel like something the cat drug in” (Vonnegut, P. 216).

Everybody is equivalent due to “the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution…the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General” (Vonnegut, P. 218). The ‘Handicapper General’ guarantees everybody is equivalent and the individual has no privilege including right to life. George says, “Two years in prison and two thousand dollars fine for every ball I took out” (Vonnegut, P. 216).

George here discusses the outcomes of removing the ‘handicap’ that the legislature has put around his neck, proof of loss of social liberties. George even watches a girl on television, and he can’t focus on the television.

This goes well with “the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General” (Vonnegut, P. 216). Despite the fact that loss of opportunity in contemporary America isn’t as terrible as in Harrison’s general public, American specialists are gradually removing opportunity.

For example, smoking guidelines put open spots is a move of its sort. To this one may say some things about living still aren’t quite right.

In conclusion, Vonnegut attempts to feature how government control would gradually change over America into an oppressed world country. Notwithstanding the affection that Americans have for opportunity, Vonnegut is worried about the possibility that this is being removed and individuals will have, “a little mental handicap radio in their ears tuned to a government transmitter” (Vonnegut, p. 218). This would remove opportunity and social liberties would languish a similar destiny over the individuals who go against the set mandates.

Shirley Jackson uses “The Lottery” as an allegory for the dystopic inclinations in society, as well as utilising features of the horror genre to emphasise the harsh depictions of violence displayed. Publishing this story close to the Holocaust was retrospective and reflected on highlighted the unbridled nature of justifying an act of brutality. Furthermore, “The Lottery” commentates on the violence of tradition and justifying acts of barbaric violence due to their position of being a traditional part of culture. Jackson also underlines the common theme of harmony and violence which inextricably run together despite their juxtaposing nature, one often being masked as the other to justify their means. Encompassing this is the overarching theme of dystopia which sets a precedent on their survival.

Jackson uses the theme of tradition as a commanding force for maintaining dystopia in society. The townspeople talk of “planting and rain, tractors and taxes” (Jackson 412) whilst awaiting their fate of life or death. The dull litany displayed here whilst waiting suggests the lottery is yet another thing which belongs on this list. The mundane nature of their talk and the upcoming lottery fare no difference to them, as reinforced by Patrick J. Shields, “The group experience then lowers the level of consciousness. Therefore, the base actions exhibited in groups…people classify their heinous act simply as “ritual” .(Shields 415)

Furthermore, throughout the story, a third person narrative is maintained, with little insight into the village population’s thoughts apart from body language and dialogue. Without this insight, there is little evidence of their resistance against conformity to the lottery, adding to the horror element of a seeming sense of normalcy to the event. Furthermore, a traditional plot structure is maintained, jarring with the gruesome murder about to be committed.

Tradition is encouraged, taking shape even in childhood, evidenced by “Bobby Martin had already stuffed his pockets full of stones, and the other boys soon followed his example” (Jackson 2) The sibilance of “stuffed” and “stones” emphasises his appetite for this, Shields reinforcing, “..Guilty of accepting custom and tradition.. Many of us are socialized into this process from such a young age that it goes without examination”. (Shields 418)

Furthermore, the imagery evoked by a past recollection of their “perfunctory, tuneless chant” (Jackson 3) evokes a jarring, haunted atmosphere which highlights the foreboding terror of the tale.

Furthermore, the proceedings in “The Lottery” evoke real life incidents, which emphasises the cruelty of humanity often explored in horror, both on and off the page. “The Lottery’s” publication date of 1948 provides a reflection of its dystopic aspects of the story onto recent events, notably the Holocaust. This highlights its poignancy especially when observed in a contextual manner. By publishing close to the conclusion of the Holocaust, three years after the surrender of Germany to the Western Allies (Robinson 36) it posed as a key critique against the dystopian extermination of citizens, justified by parliamentary members of the nation. The nature of the Holocaust, which utilised barbaric techniques to use discriminatory practices against those of a particular religion, rings familiarity in “The Lottery”, posed as a method of necessary extermination to retain order in society.

Furthermore, Tessie’s cries for help evoke a horror element, with the climax of violence at the conclusion of the story, at the “center of a cleared space by now, and she held her hands out desperately as the villagers moved in on her.” (Jackson 8) Her implied death adds a foreboding conclusion, and Robinson expounds on this, “horror builds in the tension between this unadorned style and the high drama of Tessie’s fruitless efforts to save herself in the face of her neighbours’ disregard for her life and their complicity in the process.”(Robinson 36)

Jackson uses collusion to display the prevalence of violence being masked as peace in society. The structure of the story compliments this, following a violent twist to a seemingly peaceful but slowly masochistic tale. Despite this, the tension rife throughout the story alludes us to darker forbearing. Though the narration does not glean us into the village peoples thoughts, if they can justify their violent actions which is reflected by their thoughts, we are “presented with a moral and ethical scene and sit as judge and jury” (Shields 416)

Furthermore, Jackson also executes this by subverting genre conventions, providing an ironic twist to the title “The Lottery”, an event usually associated with good fortune and deeds. In the opposite vein, she aims to fool the reader and shroud expectations of the story to later trick. With the playfulness found at the beginning of the short story among the children playing, acts of childlike behaviour are later found to be those of rash violence. As they “eventually made a great pile of stones in one corner of the square” (Jackson 2) children gravitated to, “selecting the smoothest and roundest stones”(Jackson 2). This delicate imagery takes a caring, for elaborate care of the specific shape and size of the stones. This childlike attentiveness contrasts with the eventual weaponizing of the objects. Furthermore, this has a typical horror element of suspense, the fate of these stones delegated to simple child’s play or a grander part of the story.

Later these same stones are used as objects of destruction, furthermore using these same children to participate in adult behaviour, a contrast from the seemingly juvenile behaviour exhibited earlier. Children are now encouraged to be complicit in the violence, “Someone gave little Davey Hutchinson a few pebbles”. This is reinforced by Bailey, highlighting “an element of perpetuating the lottery for future generations…now there is no way he can later back out of the tradition and claim that others had killed his mother, for he too had joined in.” (Bailey 37) The encouraged participation ensures the repetitive nature of tradition.

Additionally, a note of tension is running throughout, one we later realise is that of nervousness and quiet terror rather than that of hopeful anticipation and excitement.

Ultimately “The Lottery” poses as a criticism of methods of dystopia inflicted on society, as evidenced by its jarring familiarity to the Holocaust especially when compared to its date of publication, the use of contrasting elements of peace and violence Using tactics commonly used when writing horror, such as suspense, a foreboding tone, and brutality, it reinforces the violence in not only their actions, but their minds too.