The literary category “eco-dystopian” technically doesn’t exist, so I’ll define it. An eco-dystopian novel explains that the sole cause for environmental destruction is human negligence, greed, or indifference. With traditional dystopias, the focus is primarily on a social-political collapse - take Orwell’s 1984 or Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451. Eco-dystopian highlights the natural world as the victim. An eco-dystopian novel ponders: What happens when we push nature past its breaking point? Have we already surpassed a breaking point? And ultimately showing that the natural world affects us all, not even the elite will benefit from the demise of our planet. 

Though 1984 and Fahrenheit 451 are indeed classic readings, both ignore the most vulnerable aspect of human recklessness: the destruction of the environment. Take 1984’s Oceania, the continual warfare is an assault on humanity for sure; however, none would be possible if it were not for Oceania controlling such vast, rich resources in which it can, with war, manipulate and exploit. A forever degradation of the natural world—whether through pollution, resource exploitation, or outright apathy. 

Martha not only highlights this, but also makes it clear, the environmental dystopia is already here. Our planet is in crisis, from climate change, mass extinction, deforestation, ocean acidification, and collapsing ecosystems. Yet, human society continues as if nothing is wrong. Martha presents these parallel realities very clearly: one where nature is unraveling, and one where business continues as usual. This disconnect is exemplified through casual conversations and the everyday scenery of a formerly protected national park being transformed into a commercialized attraction. A transformation, which raises few eyebrows and causes no outrage, paving a world where ecological collapse is normalized and thus enables a dystopian society.