: Is no religion a bad thing? (I believe I've asked about a half dozen questions pertaining to this post-apocalyptic novel, including my "is this story too diverse" question. This sort of pertains

Vote Up Vote Down

Here's my thing about your series of questions that always bothers me: I don't care about these people. I'm bi. I'm in a homosexual relationship. I'm religious. I like superhero stories. I check a lot of boxes you're asking about and I couldn't give a rat's ass about these people. You're not telling me about them or why I should care. You're telling me about boxes they check on their census forms.

Here's the thing. There's no "right answer" to this question. Religion of your characters might help because at the end, it's the ideas your character represents that matters more than the minority that you include. Some of my favorite characters in works of fiction, I share no common characteristics with, but I admire them for their ideas. Hell, one of my favorite superhero films is Wonder Woman and I have nothing in common with the titular hero on the surface level. One of my favorite Disney Villains is Frollo from Disney's "Hunchback of Notre Dame" and I share a religion and specific sect of that faith with him. But that commonality does not make me support his side, I just have a better understanding of his very nuanced nature and an appreciation of his villainy because I understand where exactly he went wrong. But I don't have to be Catholic to understand this position and I'm not alone, he's a pretty top of the list mention for Disney Villians, normally ranking in the top 5 if not the top 3.

My problem with your question is that everytime you mention your characters, you fail the "Plinkett Test" as I like to call it. If you're not aware of the concept, the test was devised in the "Mr. Plinkett Reviews" series from youtube, specifically the most famous episode, a seven part review of Star Wars Episode One (The Phantom Menace) that goes into humorous but important characteristics of writing and one of his early complaints is about the characters in the film. To illustrate what his problem was, he had several fans take the following challenge: "With out describing any physical attributes or the character's role in the story, describe the following characters:" He then proceeded to list Star Wars characters, one from the original trilogy, followed by one from the Phantom Menace and have the group of friends react. His point was that you could do this with his original trilogy list of main characters, but that you couldn't do this with any of the Phantom menace characters he listed (and they were not the side characters, but people like Queen Amidalla and Annikan Skywalker who are critically important to the film. One person even balks with a "that's impossible and you know it" when asked to describe the former.).

If you're doing this to tick a box and include religious people, don't. I'll tell you right now that the people who care about it will likely not read and the people who don't care about it, well, your not changing their minds. But it's important that characters believe in something... it doesn't have to be God(s). It doesn't have to be about politics either. And it's okay to have your characters question their beliefs... hell... I'd even suggest have heroes that don't agree with you (so long as you write them in a way where the people who do agree with them think you do)... but unless this is a straight up romance, what genitles your character has, which ones they want to have, and which ones they want their romantic partners to have still doesn't telly me a use full thing about them or why I should care about them. As a writer of fiction, your first duty is to answer "Why should I care about these individuals?" If you can't answer that, then the reader will stop your story quicker then you want them too. And they won't pick it up again.

And I speak as someone who wrote two rough draft novels that both featured exactly one straight white male in the core cast by coincidence... You'd never know if I didn't tell you. And there are some characters I wrote that I'll straight up admit I don't know all their secrets yet, including their sexual preferences as a matter of course. There are a lot of authors who will say they didn't create the character, they met them and learned about them as if they were a real person who you met on the train one afternoon.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

In my opinion, in a post apocalyptic world, you MUST have religions. Not one religion, but MANY religions. Every 3rd or 4th settlement should be some kind of a religious cult. Cults tend to be good at surviving. Efficient, order driven, mistrusting of outsiders, etc...

And they should all believe in some messed up/twisted/extreme version of some pre-apocalypse religion.

The more desperate people become, the more likely they will trust in an invisible force.

That's just human nature.

You can have so much fun with it and yet not offend your religious reader.

It is only natural for survivors to believe war, disease, famine, natural disasters, zombie outbreaks, etc. are divine punishment for mankind's transgressions!

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

people aren't exactly focused on praying or worshipping, they're
consumed with the daily task of surviving in a barren world

Well, in the reality your point is wrong because it's exactly the opposite - the harsher the reality, the more religious are the people. Guess where there are the most fasting days - in Ethiopia. It's the societies of surplus that are the most godless.

But it's your story and your world, it doesn't have to follow real world's logic. If you wish no religion in your story, you shouldn't feel bad about this.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

I wanted to add an answer that discusses the merits of adding religion in the story as well as the possible danger in omitting it. Other answers have suggested not to "shoehorn" religion in if it doesn't drive the story. Only adding what's necessary and serves the story is definitely a good thing to strive for but there are other concerns as well, such as making the story believable. In the case of a post-apocalyptic society I would find it extremely unbelievable for the characters not to at least briefly discuss why they think the world went to hell, society collapsed, etc. And such discussions would almost certainly feature religious explanations.
Example:

"Is God punishing us for our sins then?" asked Mark, half-joking.
"That's what those crazy MarDaens on the other side of the mountains seem to think, answered Jacob.
"There's no God. Just us horrible humans. We destroyed this world all on our own" said Sally over her shoulder, her voice surprisingly grim.

In short, the characters are going to need to assign meaning to the fact of the world's demise, even if that meaning is "it doesn't mean anything". This would hold true even if the world's end happened as far back as several generations ago.
Further things you should be aware of:

The word Apocalypse means revelation and literally comes from the Greek of the New Testament. It refers to the Apokalypse of John, i.e. the Revelation of John, (aka The Book of Revelations) which describes the end of days.
Besides the Apocalypse of John, the other most famous end-of-the world story is that of the Flood/Noah's Arc in the Old Testament.
Religion features heavily both plot-wise and thematically in almost any apocalypse/post-apocalypse story I can think of, including (to name a few): Cat's Cradle (Kurt Vonnegut), A Canticle for Leibowitz (Walter M. Miller Jr.), The Stand (Stephen King), Deus Irae (Phillip K. Dick and Roger Zelazny), The Book of the New Sun (Gene Wolfe), even The Elfstones of Shannara (Terry Brooks).
Religious discussions/themes can be a useful tool for character and plot development.

TL;DR: There's strong precedent for including religion in a post-apocalyptic tale and it very well might seem unrealistic if you don't include it. It can prove a useful tool as well. Also The word Apocalypse itself comes from the New Testament. The end-of-the world stories from the Old and New Testaments are almost certainly the most culturally relevant across all of Western society.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

A convincing story needs to acknowledge that human beings, since the origins of the species, have sought, individually and/or collectively, answers to fundamental questions about the origin of things (including themselves), the meaning of events ("why ...?"), the strength of nature vis-a-vis that of their own (volcanoes, earthquakes, etc), what's after death, and so on, which virtually all (I'm not aware of an exception) societies and group has addressed through different means.

In your case, you can either assume (or state) that individuals have already satisfactorily answered such fundamental concerns in a non-religious way (e.g. through atheism?), or that they retain some form of religious content (however primitive it might be) through which they do so, or that, perhaps more realist, they are still more or less seeking for it, as we could argue every human being (with different degrees of activeness) is.

The alternative is a human being who has no inherent tendency whatsoever to ask him/herself fundamental questions - perhaps not a true human being after all.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

I don't really think it's applicable, because these people aren't exactly focused on praying or worshipping, they're consumed with the daily task of surviving in a barren world.

These are exactly the conditions under which religion thrives. The top five that, combined, occupy 70% of the human population (to say nothing of the hundreds, or thousands, of religions that humanity has occupied itself with at one point or another) were invented in extremely deadly and primitive circumstances. Life expectancy was low, "law" as we think of it didn't exist, wars were fought over whims, people died from diseases that we've forgotten about, medicine was nonexistent, and backbreaking work (or outright slavery) was a permanent occupation for 90+% of the human population. Religions, have mostly emerged from the poor, downtrodden, ignorant and destitute who need some measure of hope in a world that offers them none. Sounds a lot like a post-apocalyptic wasteland, right?

Others have pointed out that you don't need a religion to tell a good story - and that's true; it depends on the story you're trying to tell. You may be telling a story with a different goal. It might be allegorical, or you might be making a heroes journey, or you might be asking a more sci-fi "what-if" philosophical question to see what happens, or any number of other story goals. You don't need a religion for every story.

But some stories merit it. If you're trying to establish a realistic and personal setting where the focus is on characters who act much like real people, and make their decisions with all the same flaws and biases that real humans do, excluding religion is pretty odd.

Your readers may not think about it, and you're not obligated to write anything you don't want to, but you might find in the future that adding a religion to one of your drafts (not necessarily for this story) can enrich it in ways you didn't expect.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

No religion is not a bad thing - it is just a matter of how some people think. For example, many people who do have a religion, could think that the people who don't have a religion should be part of their religion. I, for one, don't believe in any religion, and don't think that it is bad to not be part of a religion. It is all just what people were raised to believe.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

Everything in a story serves a purpose. Otherwise, why include it? That is why stories rarely tell how people went to the toilet. Yes, they do, but it doesn't serve a purpose in the story. It is included only when it does (that is why, by my subjective entirely unscientific estimate, 80% of all toilet scenes in movies are in comedies).

If religion doesn't add anything to your story, leave it out. You didn't notice its absence by yourself until now, so apparently it doesn't.

I'm an atheist, and religion plays no role in my daily life at all. If I pass by a church, it's just another building. If there's an online article about religion, I scroll past it. None of my friends discuss religion with me, for most of them I don't even know if they are religious or not. If you told my life story for a period of a few weeks or months, religion wouldn't be in it.

If your characters are the same, it won't be for them, either. If they are very religious, they would at least at certain points, turn to group prayer or such. Religion would matter to them and should at least be mentioned. Because then it serves the purpose of characterising them.

Don't include things just because they exist. We're telling stories, not creating a word-by-word simulation.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

I think it's unusual that there would be no religion post-apocalypse. Surely some people would become more religious given massive social upheaval.

I think it's fine if your main characters aren't those people, but the more characters you introduce the more it strains believability.

The more people you have, the less able you are to explain a group's absence by it just being a statistical fluke.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

Religion is barely mentioned or touched upon in much, arguably most, general fiction. I've even read books like this by authors I know to be highly religious. As a religious person myself, I occasionally find that a bit odd, but much preferable to uninformed, offensive, overly pushy or otherwise poor integrations of religion. It's a bit presumptuous, after all, to include God as a character, which is often what putting religion in your book amounts to. (Even in my own writing, I find it challenging to include religious themes in a way that is natural, not preachy, and integrated with the larger book.) So I do think it's fine to not include religion in your book, particularly if you are not religious yourself. As I've said often, realism is just a style. We accept little inaccuracies in fictional worlds all the time.

With that said, there is a middle road. You can include characters who are quietly religious. There are a lot of people who have a relationship with God (as they understand God) that is very personal and that they don't talk much about. You might know some, and not even realize it. In terms of your characters, one could wear a cross, another could pray quietly before a meal or at a time of stress. A character could mention being raised Catholic, or treasure a statue of Buddha, etcetera. You don't have to go into detail if it doesn't serve the book.

There are very many LGBTQ people of color who are religious, so knowing (from your other question) the makeup of your main cast doesn't argue against that in my mind. (It's an open secret, for example, that closeted gay men and women have long played key roles in otherwise conservative African-American churches.) In fact, I would describe people in that category as a truly under-represented group in fiction, and would personally welcome more depictions of people who exist at that intersection.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

For what it's worth, I'm a Fundamentalist Christian, so my answer is from that perspective.

I presume you mean, "Is it a bad thing to write a story where religion is never mentioned?", and not "Would it be a bad thing for a person to have no religion". :-)

I don't see any problem with a story never mentioning religion, if it is reasonable in the context of the story for the subject to never come up. Like if I'm reading a detective story, I expect the police to talk about suspects and evidence, not religion. Sure, religion MIGHT come up, like if the victim was Jewish and he was murdered by a Muslim extremist who hates all Jews or some such. But most of the time it wouldn't. Indeed it would be rather disconcerting if the detective said, "We found fingerprints on the door knob that we were able to match against the FBI database. And I believe that transubstantiation is the correct doctrine of the Eucharist." Okay, deliberately silly example, but that's my point.

On the other hand, if the story treads into a subject where, in real life, people would naturally talk about religion, it can sound distinctly strange, even contrived, if you avoid the subject. Just for example, I saw a movie once -- and I'm saying this from memory, excuse me if I get details wrong -- anyway, I saw a movie that I think was called "The Life Force Experiment", about a medical who discovers some previously unknown form of energy in living beings, and who theorizes that if he can find a way to transfer this "life force" from a dying person, who presumably doesn't need it anymore, to a sick person it could cure diseases. Spoiler alert if you happen to see this movie somewhere! The movie ends with the scientist discovering that this life force retains the person's personality after he dies, and the characters speculate if this means that people could potentially live forever in this disembodied state. Ok, fine, not a bad plot idea, except ... at no point does any character in the story mention the concept of the "immortal soul" or mention any religious implications. Even if everyone involved were atheists, surely they would have heard of the idea of the soul, and seen the obvious connection. I found it wildly implausible that absolutely no one mentioned religion or the soul in any way in this story.

On a different tack: Is it plausible for all the characters in your story to be atheists or uninterested in religion? Possibly. If your characters were supposed to be a random group of people from many different places and circumstances, it would be unlikely that they all would be atheists, as atheists are relatively uncommon. But if they're a group of friends, the idea that people would hang out with others who have similar beliefs is quite plausible.

As your characters all appear to be actively gay or bi, it seems unlikely that they would be devout Muslims or evangelical Christians, as those religions disapprove of homosexuality. (Originally I wrote "orthodox Christians" but I'm editing to change that to a term that has a more clear definition and more closely expresses what I was thinking when I wrote this.)

Tangential point, but I don't see why you say that the group of characters you describe is "diverse". They're all gay or bi. That seems pretty monolithic to me. But not the point of your question.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

There's two levels to consider here - setting/story and character.

Story

Some post-apocalyptic settings have introduced religious organisations in, either pre-apocalyptic holdouts or new cults (e.g. the Fallout games) but if your story doesn't need them then there's nothing wrong with them not being there. Your world, your rules.

Characters

If a character's religious affiliation (either to a real world one, to one you created, or indeed an explicit "none") would affect their behavior in the story then it can be worth including and it can be effective. Jim Butcher uses this in The Dresden Files series both with Harry himself and with others - because it's relevant. Gods and Angels and Demons are part of his world and the plot of the series. It would be odd for it not to come up. For a less fantastical setting Kathy Reichs does this with Temperance Brennan in her Bones novels - the main character is non-religious but had a Catholic upbringing and occasionally this drives some of her actions so it gets mentioned - but only as much as is required to let you understand her motivation in that scene. I've read many, many books where a character's religion is simply never mentioned because it has no bearing on what's happening and what they are doing, at that point mentioning it would just feel unnecessary.

has said "Oh my God" or the like

Assuming this is a post-apocalyptic version of our world then there's nothing to worry about there - the phrase is in the general vernacular of secular and religious people alike so it won't raise any particular attention to the religion question.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

I find it odd and unusual for a world to be inhabited by sentient beings where no one ever mentions or relates to religion. But it is completely fine for your characters to be atheists or just not care enough about religion to mention it.

Sometimes information about a world is so in the background that it's just in your head and not communicated to the reader. You need to know what role religion plays in your world, both currently and in the past. That's true for a whole lot of things you might not actually put in the book. Because it will change how you approach things and how your characters approach things, even if it never comes up. Maybe leaders blinded by religion caused the apocalypse in the first place. Maybe religion is all the survivors had at first to keep them going, but now it's not important.

Also, if the world used to be Earth, there will be markers of religion all over the place. Buildings formerly used as churches, synagogues, mosques, etc will still be there, either intact, as rubble, or somewhere in-between. There may be surviving statues. Some hills in places have giant crosses. Someone might go into an abandoned house and find crucifixes on the walls or a menorah covered in dust. Forest areas might still have intact but aging shrines.

There are multiple possibilities and the choice is up to you. As is the choice of whether or not to talk about it. And, if so, how. Religion will be part of any Earth world, and most other worlds, even if it is as historical relics or background. That is not the same as saying it is meaningful to your characters.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

You're looking at this from the wrong side. Your goal isn't to include or to represent. Your goal is to tell a story. The story should contain all the elements that it requires, and nothing but the elements it requires. "Including" anything that isn't useful to the story in any way is called 'shoehorning', and is not a good practice.

Is your story served in any way by some of the characters following some religion(s) to some extent? Does it add tension where tension is required, does it set up some theme you wish to explore, does it do anything? Then go ahead and include it. If it does nothing for the story, or if the absence of religion does something for the story, then don't have religion.

It's that simple.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

It will really depend on the story itself, the tone of it, how you present the story. The Lord of the Rings, for example, has a 'diverse' fantasy cast and no religion.

It depends on the contract you set up with the reader.

You may have readers asking if your characters believe in God. (I had readers that asked me that.) This is a normal thing to wonder about, as a reader. Clearly, since you have no religion mentioned in your story at the moment, it is an aspect of diversity that you aren't addressing with this book. At least, not yet. If readers aren't asking about religion, and if you feel your book has enough focus on the elements you wish to address without bringing in religion, then don't sweat it. But if readers are asking about it, then something in the book is causing them to wonder. In that case, you have a few choices, not limited to:

~ Set the contract so that you are making it clear religion isn't part of the story, at all. It will be completely absent. Have a character say something early on, about the world not caring about religion anymore, or something like this. If a character makes it clear for the reader to not expect religion, the reader is far more likely to accept those terms for the story.

~ If religion is still a part of the culture, but not within your story, you could nod to the reader with a simple few lines early on--Perhaps they are passing a mosque/temple/church/etc and one character off-handedly says 'I haven't gone in years.' I think that's enough to say to the reader, 'yeah, there's religion in the world but not in the story.'

~ Decide for yourself if your characters are religious, and if so how that shapes them as individuals. Maybe one is agnostic, and only prays in times of stress, for example, and maybe another is superstitious and maybe another is a militant atheist who becomes angry if the topic comes up. If you want to add religion as a sub-thread throughout your story, decide these things and in revision drafts, allow the religious beliefs to come through.

In my opinion, from what I have seen, most novice drafts (including my own, but not all) can benefit from more depth which means subplots or deeper characterization. It's up to you to decide where to go with this. But stories are not real life, and they don't chronicle real life. They are reflections of real life. We experience them within our minds, which are not the same as our external worlds. We want to understand our own lives, their messy complexity, but when we try to understand our lives we do it a couple pieces at a time. You are allowed to have whatever cast you like and whatever elements you like. (For example, have you included the diversity of dietary beliefs and behaviors among your characters? The diversity of wealth and opportunity? The diversity of educational opportunity and attainment? Political beliefs? Health issues? Ages? And so on.)

Although the readers' experience is of supreme importance, and you do need to pay attention to it, the important thing up front is to define the contract to the terms you are offering. And write a good story.

(0)