Do Dystopias require Cataclysms? (Ch. 20-23)

 This isn't really related to what's in these chapters, but it's what we've been talking about in class: can you have dystopian literature that isn't post-apocalyptic? In my opinion, cataclysmic events aren't necessary for historical or nonfiction dystopias, but they are vital when the dystopia is set in the future and is meant to represent a society that we're familiar with. Simply put, this is because we don't live in a dystopia. Our world is actually doing pretty well, especially when contrasted with the societies of Sower, Brave New World, and 1984. When dystopian books are trying to represent our society in some twisted future, they need to include some reason as to why our institutions have dissolved and the world has descended into chaos. Thus, a cataclysmic event is required for a dystopian society like we've read about this semester to take hold. And isn't that the whole point of dystopian literature? All three books that we've read this year see themselves as a warning about what could happen in society if we let technology rule our moods, if we let technology rule our lives, or if we let climate change continue to destroy. I think powerful dystopian literature has to be centered around our own society, or else readers won't be particularly moved - and because our society isn't currently a dystopian hellscape, these books need a cataclysmic event to explain how it becomes one.