The first book in the Divergent dystopian young adult series came out over 12 years ago in April 2011. I recently re-read the series and it's worse than I remember. Spoilers below.
Based on the beginning of the first Divergent book, I expected the dystopian series by Veronica Roth to be an Ayn Rand-inspired critique of selflessness. Instead, the book series features a main charcter who is special because she more "genetically pure," bloated action scenes, and anti-intellectualism.
Divergent's Dystopia
Divergent takes place in a post-apocalyptic Chicago that is fenced in, composed of 5 factions. Once a year, the 16 year-olds take a serum that shows which faction is the best fit. The next day, the teens make their choice. The 5 factions are: Dauntless (the brave), Amity (the kind), Erudite (the intelligent), Abnegation (the selfless), and Candor (the honest).
Each faction is cult-like, with extreme rules and initiation ceremonies. The main character, Tris, grows up in Abnegation, the faction based on selflessness.
Abnegation don't celebrate birthdays (that would be too self-indulgent), are only allowed a mirror for a haircut every three months (to protect against vanity), wear plain uniforms, and discourage curiosity.
Dauntless are constantly jumping from moving trains and value conquering their fears.
Erudite are the scientists, professors, and doctors of the world. They are rigid and cold. The Erudite, including the main character's brother, Caleb, love the pursuit of intelligence and superiority gained through such knowledge.
Amnity are the kind and are drugged through their bread to be docile.
Very little of Candor is discussed and those that don't make the cut of a faction are deemed "factionless" and are similar to the city's unhoused or migrant worker population.
Each faction was formed based on what the group believed was the ill that brought destruction to humankind. For Abnegation, they believed selfishness destroyed society, so we must commit to a selfless life. Dauntless blamed people not being in control of their fears. Erudite blamed ignorance and idiocy. Amity blamed violence. Candor blamed duplicitousness and deception.
Divergent's small world is compelling. It is an intoxicating idea that just one thing could be fixed and life would be perfect. As Thomas Rhett sings, wouldn't the world be better if every nightstand had a Bible? Ayn Rand argues for something equally simplistic in her novels - the world would be better if we valued selfishness and capitalism. Roth's answer is that the problem is intellectualism.
Divergent's Philosophy
The novel begins with Tris explaining she doesn't have an "instinct" for selflessness like her brother. For example, when she was on the bus, she didn't think to give up her seat to an elderly man while that thought occurs to people "naturally" in Abnegation. Yet, in a simulation she sacrifices herself to protect a young girl from a rabid dog. In her aptitude test, Tris scores for both selflessness and bravery.
Over the series, we learn that Chicago has been fenced off from the rest of the USA as a genetic experiment about genetic purity. Society collapsed when genetic engineering by scientists went wrong. Thus, the beginning of the book's mediation on whether selfishness or other reasons caused collapse are a smoke screen - the previous society was harmed by the Erudites who are now harming the current society of Divergent.
I thought that Tris's growth from feeling stifled in a society of selflessness to an environment where selfishness is praised would lead to an interesting philosophical debate around Ayn Rand's The Virtue of Selfishness. However, Tris doesn't meditate on the world she came from other than finding selfless people to be weak and unhappy. Additionally, Tris doesn't meditate on why the sorting process for the factions hurts those who are kicked out of a faction or aren't as powerful in their "divergent" abilities as Tris. There is essentially no criticism of the faction system in the book beyond "Erudite = bad."
Based on back-of-the book interviews, Roth wanted Tris to come from Abnegation to Dauntless as a tool to explore serum experiences that trigger fear. It does not appear Roth had any larger points about the factions, be it about selfinshness or identity, as she was focused on the intellectual class being evil and the fun aspect of the different serums / bioweapons of this futuristic world.
Genetic determinism undercuts any philosophical discussion on whether the different traits of bravery, honesty, kindness, or selflessness are good for the world. Here, all of the characters follow the choices based on their genetic predisposition, and those of Erudite are evil. Tris makes selfless and selfish choices, as predicted by her aptitude test. Tris contextualizes her brother's acts of selflessness as acts of manipulation because he's an Erudite who is smart enough to pretend to be selfless. There is no room in the story for people to break out of their genetic packaging. Since Caleb is Erudite, he cannot be also selfless. Only people with special genetics like Tris may contain multitudes. Genetic determinism could be an interesting exploration in the context of selfishness and selflessness as Ayn Rand did seem imply humans are genetically selfish. There could be an exploration of this concept, but Roth does not show any characters who act beyond their genetics.
Tris fights the Erudite with her genetic power, her being "special" comes from being born special, not the choices she makes in inspiring others. Tris uses her genetic pre-disposition traits of bravery and selflessness to fight the academics and scientists. Tris uses her genetic powers to resist the Erudite bioweapons (serum). In the movies, Tris's genetic power is taken a step further as only she can open a box needed by the good guys. It's nowhere near as moving as an average person making good choices and being shoved into the spotlight of resistance.
I think good dystopian literature speculates on realistic political issues. Genetic determinism is very removed from our current politics and understanding of medicine. It is hard to care about the male love interest's struggle when he finds out he does not contain multitudes in the same way as the special main character, as we exist in a world where people can be kind and brave. While discrimination based on genetics is a real fear, like Gattaca and Klara and the Sun, the theme of genetics in Divergent does not add to a philosophical discussion. All of the characters act based on their genetic dispositions to the factions, and the evil group is very black-and-white to be the intellectual group.
Divergent's Anti-Intellectualism
The Abnegation faction are the good politicians while the Erudite seek that power. The scientists are always evil, causing society collapse and are now causing the collapse of the “utopia” Tris was born into. The main character dies at the hand of a scientist.The villains are always the Erudite and are viewed throughtout the series as evil.
Many newer books in the dystopian genre try to "fix Omelas." The authors write a dystopia and then try to turned it into an utopia, instead of letting the dystopia exist while the character walks away (see older dystopian novels like Farenheit 451 or Those Who Walk Away from Omelas).
Veronica Roth's "fix" for the dystopia is for factions to end and everyone mixes together despite genetic disposition. Tris knows about genetic determinism, yet she argues utopia can be achieved by letting everyone mix together. In other words, the intellectuals need to be diluted by mixing with everyone. The ending is that the path to avoid destruction is to prevent the scientists and researchers from forming their own groups and limiting the pursuit of knowledge.
Lecturer Alice Curry argues that the faction system represents the evils of separating education and the Erudite represent the evils of academia. Roth confirms that the book is anti-academia. In a blog post, Roth states that when she was writing the book she had a poor relationship with many people who claimed to be intellectuals, including her graduate program at Northwestern for rejecting "commercial literature" in favor of more intellectual literature. In the Q&A at the back of the 10th anniversary of the series, Roth states "I try to keep my opinions about political systems out of the books." While Roth may try to avoid a comment on politics, her comment on the evils of intellectualism and science is pervasive throughout the trilogy.
If we look at Divergent as a society where society collapsed twice by science going too far when the academics were left to themselves, then it makes sense to have the ending be the limitation of academia and science. However, that's not the world we live in. Limiting science to the degree advocated in the Divergent series is bad and scary. Anti-science has disatrous consequences, including harm to the environment and worsening pandemics. Anti-intellectualism results in political illiteracy and social apathy, allowing facism to rise to the detriment of minority groups.
On top of the dangers of anti-intellectualism and anti-science, the genetic pre-disposition for violence by the Erudite is also harmful. There is no "serial killer gene." Just because someone is a scientist doesn't mean they lack emapthy. The message of the series is dangerous and gross. I think the begining had a lot of potential, exploring how a government sorting system of identity and a cult advocating pure selflessness can be dangerous. Instead, we got something that feels like Republican propoganda against universites that's pro-eugenics. Skip the Divergent series and just re-read The Hunger Games or 1984.
Comments