Both books do an excellent job of showing just how society could collapse in an apocalyptic scenario. World War Z takes a far more macro and global approach. Set after the great zombie war, in which the world has been overrun by the zombie disease, the book is composed of survivor interviews. From the beginning of the outbreak in China, to various nations' responses to the epidemic, from covering up outbreaks or closing off borders, to the issue of mass numbers of refugees from affected and infected countries, to the great die-off of the human population, and the subsequent fight and mobilization against the zombies, Brooks takes an expansive look at the world in the face of a major crisis. The scope of the book is impressive - he covers several years, and numerous countries, from the US to South Africa to Japan. His micro approach is just as impressive. Telling the story through various perspectives and showing the progression of the war, the people stories really hit home. The one that really stuck with me was the introverted, unskilled in fighting Japanese teenager trying to escape from his high-rise apartment as his city falls apart in disease and flames. Considering I was reading this while living in a major urban city in a high-rise, you can see why I suddenly decided I really needed a katana (which is what saved him in the end).
On the other hand, Dies the Fire keeps its action in a very small area - Oregon to be exact. After the failure of all modern devices, and the failure of modern physics (gunpowder no longer produces the same explosive reaction), there is also a great die-off. Pretty much all urban areas, and presumably countries that are mostly city, face starvation, disease (remember, modern sanitation no longer works either), and major crime from people who suddenly realize, they can do whatever the hell they want. Dies the Fire follows three major groups - two groups are comprised of survivors who are just trying to get somewhere where they can survive. Food is an issue. Fighting bandits, and more frighteningly, Eaters (those who have resorted to cannibalism and hunting down human prey), is a big issue. The third group is the Protectorate, led by a power-mad former medieval history professor who sees in this now backward world a chance for him to become a major power. He recruits gang members and thugs, drive out people from Portland to die so that they don't consume meager food supplies, and enslaves those who are too weak to oppose him. I think we've found our antagonist here.
Like World War Z, Dies the Fire does an incredible job depicting the hell in a handbasket world that could happen in the face of an apocalyptic event. Unlike World War Z, Dies the Fire confines itself to the Oregon area. However, in the second and third books of the Dies the Fire trilogy, The Protector's War and A Meeting at Corvallis, we find out, to a limited extent, what happened in Europe and the UK, and in some other countries.
But even so, we don't really see what happened in the rest of the US until the following series beginning with The Sunrise Lands, which takes place 20 years after the events of Dies the Fire and features the son of one of the major characters. Stirling is still in the process of writing this second series - so far there are three books out (The Sunrise Lands, The Scourge of God, and The Sword of the Lady) with a fourth, The High King of Montival, due to be released on September 7.
If you like semi-realistic post-apocalyptic books, and if you don't want to suspend your sense of disbelief too much, Dies the Fire is for you. However, if you really don't want to suspense your disbelief, I would recommend you stop with the Dies the Fire trilogy, and not go on to the The Sunrise Lands, as that series focuses less on survival and more on mysticism and religion.
Overall, despite the facially different topics, I think World War Z and Dies the Fire go well together as books asking, "What happens when the shit hits the fan?"
No comments:
Post a Comment