The Dead Lands by Benjamin Percy

Amidst the now dead United States—humanity and other forms of life nearly wiped out 150 years ago by a deadly pandemic and nuclear fallout—sits a small town, the Sanctuary, located in what was formerly known as St. Louis. From this desolate wasteland, a lone female rider appears from the land beyond its walls, land which, up to this point, has been described as holding nothing but death.  The people of the Sanctuary have been ruled by fear, under the thumb of the corrupt leader, Thomas Lancer.  With the appearance of this rider, Gawea, comes her promise of a better world, a promise that Thomas tries to silence in order to maintain his power, forcing Lewis Meriweather and Mina Clark, among others, to save her and find salvation for their town on their own, outside the walls, crossing 2000 miles/3200 kilometres by horse and foot.  With the possibility of water, of a way to save the people of the Sanctuary from the drought and famine, they have no choice but to follow this mysterious girl to Oregon.  And after all that time and radiation, both from the fallout and UV exposure due to the vanished ozone…things have changed.

I can honestly say that when I first picked up this book, I didn’t know what to expect from it. It seemed like it had promise, the title of The Dead Lands alone caught my interest, though that is definitely more a personal interest than anything else.  When I saw that it had a quote from Stephen King's review that was definitely not a negative factor in its favour, but I can’t say it swayed my decision too much [so…good job for the editor and publishing company there].  However, I have to say I’m very glad I picked it up.  The book started out leaving me slightly unsure, a little bit confused as to how it would go, but interested nonetheless.  It’s also a story told from numerous perspectives and, while it wasn’t something I’d expected, anything told from at least three viewpoints, three well-written viewpoints, always wins points in my book.  This is your atypically typical dystopian fiction story.  When I read the brief description of the book I was expecting a much different kind of dystopian fiction novel.  I won’t get into how it differed, because I don’t want to ruin the surprise that I received when I read it.  What I can say is that it was enjoyable, it was fresh, and that the slight difference from typical dystopian fiction novels kept me highly interested.

There are several key characters in this story, resulting in several points of view that the reader is able to see from, and I would have trouble determining who I thought the best one was.  Each had minor flaws (not personality flaws, but flaws in how they were constructed), some of the slightly less important ones bordering stereotypical and boring at points, but the very least I can say is that none of the characters were bad (morally, yes, but not in the way they were written).  They were nicely crafted, had their share of character flaws, and felt more real than placeholders.  I should probably address the fact that the two most central main character were named Lewis and Clark.  Yes, this is essentially a retelling of their exploration.  At the same time, I’m fairly certain nothing would’ve been lost by given them different names (among other details of the story that closely tied into the real life Lewis and Clark).  I mean, it’s definitely a fun detail, to say the least, but at the same time I can’t tell if it seems a bit too forced.  A bit too on the nose.

BEWARE, SOME SPOILERS BELOW BUT THESE ARE SOME POINTS I’D LIKE TO ADDRESS.  I’LL MAKE IT EASY TO SKIP PAST IF YOU DON’T WANT TO SEE.
*
*
*
*
*
*
Magic and Wizardry.  Essentially, this book combines dystopian fiction and, what I saw as, Arthurian fantasy.  So for anyone out there, anyone out there who has wondered at the possibility of human kind being able to develop magical abilities, this book, by means of using a hundred and fifty years, radiation, a mysterious illness, evolution, or some bizarre combination of these things, has allowed for that world to be created.  The world has ended, society has collapsed, pockets of humanity have managed to come together and stay alive, preventing the eradication of the human race, and in that time wizards are born.  Two of the main protagonists, Lewis and Gawea have what can only be described as magic powers, and they’re not the only ones.  They’re explained as effects of evolution/mutation, so maybe that’d be a bit more accurate way to describe their abilities, but I’m sticking with magic.

Alright, that might be a bit of a stretch, but it was my first reaction to the story. 

While there’s the obvious Lewis and Clark retelling in this story (Re-imaginings of Lewis, Clark, Sacagawea, Thomas Jefferson, Aaron Burr, John Colter. I also looked at what could have been some overlay with the King Arthur lore, this being one of many great quests.  Thomas as Uther Pendragon, Lewis as Arthur, Aran Burr as Merlin, Gawea as Morgana, the Sanctuary as Camelot, something like that.  There were some other connections that I saw between the stories, but I only have a precursory knowledge of Arthurian lore.  I’d love to have someone highly knowledgeable in it read and analyze The Dead Lands to see what, if any, connections could be made.
*
*
*
*
*
*
OKAY, IT’S SAFE TO READ AGAIN, THE EVIL SPOILERS ARE HIDDEN AWAY AND CAN’T HURT YOU ANYMORE, I PROMISE.

As for the special twist in this dystopian fiction that makes it different from many others, I can honestly say I had no clue that would lead me to expect what happened.  When I read a dystopian fiction, I expect to see a very close to life, a very similar world, to the one I currently live in.  While this story does have that, it also has something more, and that thing that it has, that little something more, makes this book something that is unique.  It’s not bursting with uniqueness, but it has a spark and, whether or not you enjoy the genre(s) that this book falls into, to find uniqueness in literature is fairly rare.  I think, for that fact alone, this books is special.  But that specialness, that examination of the book based solely on its uniqueness, only really applies to those with no particular interest in this genre.  For those who actually have an interest in the dystopian fiction, science fiction, fantasy novel world, this book is damned amazing.

Overall, the story is, in the most general analysis of it, fairly standard.  With increasing saturation of the dystopian fiction, The Dead Lands tells a common story of life on Earth after society as we know it crumbles.  There’re a group of people who band together and, while dealing with numerous hardships, strive to complete their goal of surviving/saving other people.  While they try and do this thing, there is a bad guy who is doing something counter to what they wish to achieve.  I’m doing a lot of generalizing, but that’s the story.  Let’s be honest, that’s most of these stories, different bodies on the same skeletal structure.  However, while this story arc is fairly common, the twist that Benjamin Percy puts onto this story is highly enjoyable, and livens up this dystopian fiction.

While I love the story, there are parts of the writing that rubbed me the wrong way at point.  Mainly the progression of events in Lewis, Clark, and company’s journey.  Several months (passing a year potentially) pass over the course of this story, as the group is traveling 2000 miles/3200 kilometres by horse and foot across an irradiate wasteland.  That being the case, I understand how, when the viewpoint changes from that of one in the group to that of one still in the Sanctuary, and back again, the group has moved forward in time days, weeks, months.  Since they do, obviously things will have changed both within the individual and within the interworkings of the group, yet some additional explanation could be used, rather than the “well this is obviously how things would change” moments that are there.

The cast of good guys is lengthy and fairly diverse.  I could go off, listing each by name and talking about them but I’d rather talk about the bad guys, and this is already turning into a long review.  So, for the good guys, I’ll say that they’re all pretty interesting, mostly well-written, and I enjoyed them.  Same for the ‘neutral’ characters, or ones who shifted from one side to the other.  Now onto the bad guys.  Without getting spoiler-y, I’ll stick to the two main ones, Thomas and Slade.  While I, at first, enjoyed Thomas’ immature and youthful brand of bad-guy-ness, it quickly grew old and unbelievable.  When someone acts the way he does, you would expect that he would have the power to ensure that he can continue doing what he wants to do, no matter how foul.  Yet, he has almost no real power.  Slade, another crazy, listens and largely obeys him, but he’s one man in a city of thousands and Thomas has virtually no other allies among the citizens, the guards, the council, or…other places that I don’t want to mention for fear of spoiling more than I already may have.  The point is, he stays in power merely for the point of being an antagonistic force despite having very little believable and rational explanation for his continued success. 

As for Slade, he’s a well-written, if stereotypical, crazy bad guy.  He’s the head of the police force with a good amount of respect/obedience to stay in his position of power, though he comes off as a cut-and-paste Buffalo Bill.  He also likes the position he’s in, which is the only reason I can think for him to listen to Thomas, the man who allows him to do what he wants.  His misdeeds and grievances are rational (to him) and the string of reasoning he uses is evident to the reader so, while they may not sympathize with him, they can understand why and how he rationalizes doing what he does.  Taken together, they provide the drama back in the Sanctuary but, while that drama is entertaining and nicely breaks up the story of the journey, it seems insincere and too unbelievable.  Unfortunately, since this story makes up half of the world the reader experiences, that’s a major blow to the overall book

The story ends on a good moral note, in that it presents you with differing moral standpoints and, though Percy clearly chooses what the perceived correct one is by way of story progression, the opposing or “wrong” morals still make you stop and think about it.  Most of all, I was stuck wondering if I would have made the same choice that Lewis made and, if so, what would my reasoning have been.  Yet, even with that good quality, after everything that I’d been through, the ending felt rushed.  After carefully thinking about it, what I had initially thought was just a dislike for how The Dead Lands ended turned out to be a dislike for the comparative lack of substance that the ending possessed.  Not the epilogue, mind you, which I thought had a fun cliffhanger (though one that I think should be left alone, keeping this a stand-alone novel), but the end of the journey that took several months and a couple hundred pages.

I would be remiss if I didn’t recommend this story to anyone who is interested in dystopian fiction, fiction, fantasy, science fiction, manifest destiny, survival stories, and the list goes on.  Percy’s The Dead Lands is a book that I highly enjoyed and the time I spent reading it I don’t lament in the least.  It was time spent its existence for a good purpose.  Lacking any sense of elegancy, the best way, I feel, to describe this book is as follows:  it was really, REALLY cool.

Rating: 4/5