That about sums it up for me. All others on this theme (with the honourable exception of John Wyndham's "The Day of the Triffids") are just cheap imitations. Earth Abides is the real thing

Civilisation, and some 99.99% of the human race, is gone. The few survivors, all traumatised by what has happened to them (some more obviously than others, but they all are) either just commit suicide, drink themselves to death, live out their lonely lives in some familiar spot, or, as with Ish and his companions, get together into little "tribes".

Having already read a few reviews, I get the impression that there are few neutrals on this one. You either love it (the majority, including me) or hate it. For me, Earth Abides' big virtue is precisely what some people seem to dislike about it. Its characters are just dead ordinary. Even Ish, the nearest thing to a brain among them, is too passive and contemplative to be more than a titular head. There are no survivalists who have long been waiting for the day; no jacks of all trades, conveniently endowed with all the needed skills, and above all no "natural leaders" (aka bullies and control freaks) out to remake the world in their own image. (Perhaps Charlie had some ambitions that way, but fortunately he is bumped off before the question can arise). They are in fact just a bunch of very average or even below-average people, trying to make a life for themselves amidst the ruins of the world. That, I suspect, is pretty much how such an aftermath would really be.

Indeed, on considering the matter, I feel Stewart did a really good job of making his characters internally consistent. They are, essentially, the ones who come through the end of the world - and just react with a shrug. "The human race is almost entirely wiped out, civilisation's gone and we're all back in the Dark Ages. Now what do I do about breakfast?" Well, to be fair, Ish does throw up in the sink when it finally "sinks" in that his parents won't ever be coming home, but that's where it ends. If he ever considers the matter again, we aren't told about it. The other characters take a largely similar attitude. Em apparently had a family pre-Disaster, but never talks about them, while Ezra and the others have even less to say. They just write off their losses and "move on".

Well, fair enough. That is probably exactly how they need to be in the situation. This attitude is probably what allows them to come through without being driven into insanity and/or suicide. But of course it has consequences. First off, it implies a decided lack of empathy toward fellow beings. Unlike some reviewers, I'm not particularly disturbed at their willingness to hang Charlie, and to at least consider "mercy killing" of the retarded Evie. Given such personalities, this is exactly how they would be. Indeed, it says much for their basic decency that they agonise as much as they do over the first decision, and never take the second one at all. Stewart has made his characters act "in character", as an author should.

Secondly, however helpful this attitude was in seeing them through the immediate aftermath, it is far less so when it's time to think of rebuilding. Having taken the Disaster itself almost in their stride, they are likewise accepting of its aftermath, and generally take only such action as is forced on them by circumstances. The "Lewis and Clark" expedition in Year 22 is distinctly exceptional. And Ish's basically solitary disposition stultifies his attempt to educate the children. The only one he can "reach" is an academic loner exactly like himself, after whose death he essentially gives up. Stewart has wonderfully portrayed how the virtues which were such a help at the start of the book have now turned into vices.

Looking back on it (I first read the book at age ten) I have some minor gripes. In particular, the Great Disaster itself seems more than a little "sanitised", with mankind dying and all the bodies neatly tidied away, during Ish's two-week absence. Somehow, that does not quite carry conviction. Apart from that, however, my only real complaint is that Stewart was content with a single book, when the theme deserved a trilogy at least.