Earth Abides (1949)

Isherwood Williams is doing ecological research in the Sierra Nevada Mountains when he is bitten by a rattlesnake. He makes it to his isolated cabin where he treats the wound with a snakebite kit. There is no phone, and he is in no shape to drive, so he waits out the effects of snakebite alone. A strange and unrelated illness also comes over him, but after two weeks he recovers quickly from both. Driving to the nearest town he finds the roads and streets strangely empty. Businesses are vacant, their doors unlocked. He finds a dead body in the street. On the radio there is nothing but static. Locating a newsstand he finds a paper’s thin, final edition describing the unknown global epidemic which is well on its way to wiping out virtually the entire human population.

Earth Abides was written and takes place in the late 1940s, but except for a few minor and inconsequential details it could be set in today’s world and be no less authentic and convincing. “Ish,” as he is called, concludes that the rattlesnake venom probably kept him from dying from the mysterious plague. He returns home to the San Francisco Bay area and, after days of searching, finds a few isolated survivors here and there. (The city isn’t named, but it is obviously Berkeley, the author’s home.) Most of them have been deranged by the experience or, unable to face the uncertain future, are slowly drinking themselves to death. Others are armed and hostile. Ish begins to despair himself, but as a professional geographer he finds a purpose in life: he will observe and document the evolution of the landscape, its flora and fauna, now that the hand of man has been removed. Ish eventually finds other survivors, male and female, who have found their own way of pulling through the emotional crisis. They form a small community which Ish hopes will be the nucleus of a reborn civilization.

There are several themes to this novel of ideas. One is biological. In the unstable environment, Ish observes successive explosions and massive die-offs of populations such as dogs, ants, rats, cattle, and mountain lions. These are operating by the same natural laws which led, over a much longer time scale, to humanity’s population explosion and collapse.

Another issue is sustainability. The survivors, much to Ish’s despair, continue to scavenge canned food rather than learning to grow crops or raise livestock. They also show no concern about the day when the last match has been used, when the last rifle cartridge has been fired, or when water ceases to flow into the still-functioning taps from the reservoir. The parallel is subtly made between these concerns and pre-pandemic civilization’s dependence upon fossil fuels and metal ores which must inevitably run out. (Yes, writing in the 1940s!)

As Ish’s tribe of survivors settles in and begins to raise families, some basic questions arise: Who makes decisions and on what basis? How can decisions be enforced? Do the forms and traditions of the civilization that has collapsed still apply? What should the next generation be taught? The theories of Plato, More, Rousseau and others suddenly become matters of vital immediacy for the group’s survival and cohesion.

As part of that philosophical discussion, Ish ponders the role of the intellectual in society. What is his responsibility towards those who cannot see the future as clearly as he can? He knows things need to be done, but he is neither strong enough to do them on his own nor persuasive enough to convince others to give up their leisure on his behalf. He compares his frustrating situation to that of other academics turned leaders such as Woodrow Wilson.

Finally there is the issue of civilization itself. Was it something Man created out of his dreams and ambitions, or was it something forced upon him by the pressures of a growing population and scarce resources? Is it desirable? Is the university professor better off in any meaningful way than the caveman? From this we must turn to the future and ask if civilization can be molded, steered, or—once destroyed—rebuilt by deliberate effort? Or are we just as much destined to let natural law take its course as lemmings or grasshoppers?

George R. Stewart was an historian, professor of English, and a man of many interests. He is credited, for example, with the idea of naming tropical storms after women. His book Ordeal by Hunger: The Story of the Donner Party was required reading when I was in high school. Earth Abides wouldn’t be a bad choice for required reading as well, and would be a fantastic choice for reading groups. Readers expecting action-packed escapism will be disappointed, for this is a novel that engages the reader in some of the vital issues of our time as well as the fundamental questions that have occupied humanity for millennia. Yet it is populated with believable, likable characters and never ceases to be entertaining. It is a brilliant, well-written novel that, if anything, is more relevant now than when it was written. ( )

I have to go back and write a little something about this one because I find myself still thinking about it. That's kind of a surprise, as I wasn't completely blown away by it when I read it, but I did enjoy it.
The book comes across as a pretty simple "end of the world" story but I'm finding that it has really stuck with me. I really felt the emotional changes the main character goes through as he adapts to the new world and grows old. I read "Alas Babylon" at almost the same time, and while it was entertaining it didn't have the impact this did for me.

On a side note; Several reviewers have mentioned that they had trouble with it because things in the story were dated. I can't comprehend this line of thinking. Let me try and help;

1. The book was written in the past.
2. The story takes place in the past. (fictional, everyone on earth didn't really die in the 50's, see definition of "fiction")
3. We are not in the past, we are in the present.
4. Some things are different now (the present) than they were then (the past).
5. Some books were written in the past, yet are somehow still pretty good, even though the writers couldn't see into the future to make the setting more comfortable for you, so it doesn't hurt your brain and all.

Do these people only read books set in the now? How old is too old, is a year OK? How about in other countries? Some books actually have time periods and settings that are TOTALLY MADE UP! WTF?!? Yes, they were stupid for writing about old, boring stuff instead of cool, shiny stuff we have now. I mean, how can you read Dickens when no one in the stories even has a iPhone? How did they text? Who could read a book with a setting that's different from their own life, how weird would that be?

I'm gonna stop now before I say something mean.



edit; I wrote this review on Goodreads in response to several reviews criticizing the book for being dated. I was feeling cranky. I don’t know if it even makes sense out of context, but I’m sticking by it anyway. ( )

http://www.sfsite.com/11a/ea92.htm ( )

Absolutely wonderful.

In the intro, Connie Willis points out that this is the first true "disaster novel," i.e. that is the first book that spends as much time on the details of the disaster as it does the characters living through it.

The earth does certainly play a staring role in this book. Ish manages to observe as the world and civilisation crumble and change around him. Each species or topic gets its own spotlight in fast forward, so we can see how it will turn out centuries down the road as well as what is happening just then. And all throughout, Stewart always returns to the idea of how little humans matter to the earth itself.

And he also questions how much civilisation is even necessary when there are very few people to participate in it.

It's an oddity in the post-apocalyptic genre. It has little action, and no real plot. Any time there is action, the book just drifts through it with no real sense of urgency - more observation than participation. This is part of why I loved it, though I know others will hate it for the exact same reason. ( )

A true classic. While it is in the genre of "science fiction" and is based in a post-apocalyptic society, this book transcends those categories to become something much bigger. It is a philosophical story that closely examines the role of humans/society as they relate to earth. Additionally, it is told in an entertaining, relatable way.

Highly recommended, even if you tend to avoid "science fiction." This book will change the way you think.

***SPOILER****

Some people have criticized this book because the main character does not teach his offspring to read. Such a criticism is completely unfounded and makes me think that those people did not understand this book at all. Ish spends about 3/4 of this book struggling with that exact dilemma. He wants to educate them. However, the MAIN point of the book is his internal conflict with that personal desire versus the reality that it is unnecessary. The beauty of this book is how Stewart is able to convince the reader that ultimate choice is the right one (for him). You may not agree, but the process that he takes to get there is what makes this book a classic. ( )