By Rahaf Al-Mawed | Staff Writer

Spoiler Alert: 1984, Never Let Me Go, We, Brave New World, The Hunger Games.

Dystopian literature is definitely a captivating literary genre, mainly because of the insight it gives and the realism it depicts, which often resonates with our realities, albeit an extreme version of them.

But why are happy endings rare in dystopian novels? What is the purpose? Does it serve as a good or a bad thing? Or rather, does it serve any purpose at all?

Take 1984 by George Orwell as an example, where the novel sets off first with an independent thinking individual, fighting a totalitarian regime. The protagonist has pretty much been a firm believer and a rebel throughout the entirety of the chapters, until the novel ends with his untimely and unexpected submission to the Party and ‘Big Brother’. ‘Never Let Me Go’, by Kazuo Ishiguro, is another example. The characters, who are clones designed to live for the purpose of eventually donating their organs to real humans, have never rebelled against the system or ran away, but instead remained rather docile and accepted the inevitability of their deaths. But why? Why does D-503 in ‘We’ by Yevgeni Zamyatin end up submitting to the state and confiding in it? And why didn’t John from ‘Brave New World’ by Aldous Huxley not fight more when he caught himself perpetuating the dictatorial cycle within the tyrannical World State, but instead chose to hang himself? So many questions.

The thing about dystopian literature is the harsh realism behind it all. Such a genre is so popular because of how thought-provoking it is to the readers. Again, the question asks itself: Why? Isn’t real life tough enough? Well, it is because of that exactly that we seek refuge in such stories. There is a kind of embracement and self-reflection in every told dystopian story, and the ending is almost always never fun. Look at it this way: A dystopian society, corruption, mass brainwashing – all of which are already present in the different ways we live. What else is needed? Characters that are relatable. We often seek meaning and resemblance with the characters we read about, especially the protagonists. And consequently, them having complex human emotions does not stop them from making mistakes or committing the tragedy of giving up. Because whether we like it or not, humans tend to do that. Dystopian novels are said to be set in an exaggerated form of oppression, but that is not always the case, which is why the author chooses to end the book in such a devastating, heart-wrenching loss of cause and submission, a realistic response to the oppression that we may often see in our own lives.

Other than that, it is quite notable that sometimes dystopian stories are written just for the purpose of showcasing a miserable ending, such as in the previously mentioned ‘Never Let Me Go’. In the novel, a big part of what shapes the story is the ending and how the characters have chosen to react upon learning their fate. That is what makes the story so devastating. It is beyond the characters’ capabilities, both mentally and physically, to change their destiny. They lack perspective and have accepted it. Had they tried to fight the system; it would’ve been a completely different story with a different end goal. One might try to argue: Isn’t that realistic? That they have accepted the fact that they were alive solely for the purpose of donating their organs and then dying? I find it so similar to human nature, in a way. We do carry on with our lives, knowing that death will one day knock on our doors and take us away, and there is a lot of dissatisfaction that comes with living in societies like ours. We are aware that death is a constant, but how often do we pause and start working on things we truly want to achieve and long for? How often do we question our surroundings and voice our disapproval? It always feels like there are a couple of strings holding us back from doing so. In one way or another, there is a tie between ourselves and the behavior of the characters, which is why it is vital for such endings to occur. It feels more real and raw.

We’ve talked about why it is so pivotal, but why is it also cruel? It’s cruel because such endings are often rooted in indirect cynicism and mockery. It is all pre-determined from the start. How could one person possibly change an entire belief system? 1984’s last words, “He loved Big Brother ” comes across as both haunting and mocking. Haunting because there is no actual mockery, he really learnt to love Big Brother and has betrayed his lover in the process, and mocking because that was George Orwell’s intent from the beginning. Didn’t he make us believe the whole time that Winston and Julia are, not only going to stay together, but also going to dismantle the oppressive system they’ve opposed? The ending felt like an act of personal betrayal because the beginning and the end are both interrelated: If Winston wasn’t such a free-thinker, the ending would not have been that heavy- but he was, which makes it cruel. There is an immense loss of hope the reader feels after reading the last few lines, but it is even more sorrowful realizing and remembering that Winston once was critical and how he ended up losing his fight and cause. Moreover, such endings are absolutely disheartening because as readers, we often escape real life by reading and engaging in this hypothetical world that we do not really view as hypothetical when our eyes meet the words. We get inspiration, hope, and desire from stories – especially when there is a possibility of an act of heroism that could change all and everything. So, if the novel does not meet this standard, it is not an easy thing to digest. It can be triggering, disturbing, and cause a lot of anguish to the mind of the reader. To put it simply, it is cruel.

And there is always an existent hope when we read something because we want it to end in a comforting way, but that is not always possible. Even in the dystopian novels that have ended in a so-called ‘happy ending’, the word ‘happy’ is far from its dictionary meaning. Hope does shine, in the end, such as in Suzanne Collin’s ‘The Hunger Games’. The main reason Katniss joined The Hunger Games was to protect her sister, only for her sister to die at the end of the third book. Katniss survives, sure, and she is said to be raising her kids in a much better world than what she was brought into, but at what cost? She is traumatized for life. So, the concept of realism is almost always present in dystopian settings, even if the protagonist did not give up midway or eventually. The element of darkness still prevails. 

Interestingly enough, such endings lie in the fact that they are crucial because they are cruel, and they are cruel because they are crucial.