Daily Archives: November 2, 2014

Reflections

Adam’s Oryx and Crake Provocation

3 Comments

Wow, the word that in my opinion best sums up my reaction to this last segment of Oryx and Crake. One thing that really resonated with me while reading about Crake’s enterprises is how much he reminded me of a Bond villain,specifically that of the Bond villain in the film Moonraker, in the sense that in Crake’s mind his mission is a extremely noble one and that he is ultimately in the right. I would assume that most people who read Oryx and Crake associate Crake as the antagonist in the story, but to Crake he feels that the extreme measures he takes to correct the human condition are necessary in order to make the world a better place. Crake’s perspective is best summed up in the following quote:

“The BlyssPluss Pill would also act as a sure-fire one-time-does-it-all birth-control pill, for male and female alike, thus automatically lowering the population level…Such a pill, he said, would confer large-scale benefits, not only on individual users – although it had to appeal to these or it would be a failure in the marketplace – but on society as a whole; and not only on society, but on the planet.”(471)

Excerpt From: Margaret Atwood. “Oryx and Crake.” iBooks. https://itun.es/us/f5Qiz.l

In the context of the “BlyssPluss Pill” Crake rationalizes his covering up of the fourth effect of the pill, the fourth effect being that of a “one-time-does-it-all birth-control pill, for male and female alike,” because although people will be upset by the fact that they can no longer reproduce and have kids, thus  the pill would effectively “lower the population level”. By lowering the population Crake attests that this will allow for “large-scale benefits,” such as the benefit of using less resources, therefore sustaining and protecting them for future generations to come. The cruel twist to this result though is that when Crake references future generations he is referring to his creations, the Crakers. In his mind they’re perfect in the sense that they have been genetically engineered to not have any of the negative attributes associated with the human condition. The villain in Moonraker justifies killing off all of Earths population in order to repopulate it with genetically perfect humans. Crake is practically the same as he justifies tne genocide of the entire human population as necessary due to the “large-scale benefits… not only on society, but on the planet”(471). Thus, Crake concludes that humans are destroying the Earth and in order to prevent its destruction humans must be done away with. Ultimately, just like the concept in Moonraker, Crakers—genetically perfects individuals— would repopulate the Earth. I think that the anti-hero parallel between the villain in Moonraker and Crake is uncanny. In both cases, some ideas they have and opinion on things are hard not to agree with. For instance, protecting the planet is a very noble and righteous belief and stance, but some people take these noble objectives the extreme, eco-terrorists for example, thats actions do more harm than good.

Therefore, my question to the class is do you see Crake as a villain for destroying human civilization or as a hero because his actions ultimately protected the Earth from further anthropological harm?

My follow up question is do you think that extreme measures must be taken in order to solve extreme problems or conflicts such as the ones that the society in Oryx and Crake are consumed by?

Reflections

Scarlett’s Oryx and Crake Provocation: What Makes a Life Worth Saving?

3 Comments

Something that interested me most about Oryx and Crake by Margaret Atwood was looking at the value that the characters in the novel put on individual lives. Oryx and Crake asks it’s reader to really consider what makes a life worth saving and as I read it I found myself struggling with my own morals in regards to living things.

It all starts with the pigoons. Early on the in the novel Jimmy is taken to OrganInc and is introduced to the pigoons. Pigoons look like pigs but contain human organs, scientists then harvest these organs and use them for transplants. On the surface it seems that the scientists at OrganInc value the Pigoons lives more than the life of a normal pig; “it was claimed that none of the defunct pigeons ended up as bacon and sausages: no one would want to eat an animal whose cells might be identical with at least some of their own.” (24). However we soon find out that the value placed on the Pigoons lives is far more to do with individual morals than overall consensus. Jimmy is upset when he finds out that Pigoon meat may be being slipped into the cafeteria food and this is one of the first things that marks Jimmy out as being potentially more morally good than some of the other characters in the novel. In direct contrast to his feelings about the pigoons Jimmy’s aversion to eating the ChickieNob’s comes from them being too far removed from a normal living being. “He couldn’t see eating a ChickieNob. It would be like eating a large wart.” (203).

Atwood continues to look at the value that the characters put on individual lives in a much more dramatic way when Crake decides to destroy almost the entire human population. Destroying every human on Earth certainly seems like a large jump from eating a few pigoons and the question of why Crake did what he did is one that looms over the entire novel. I think that Crake’s decision comes fundamentally from a place of pain. He has discovered the drug companies plans to make people ill in order to sell them drugs and he also suspects them of killing his father. It’s an extreme decision to make but by blurring the lines of morality in regards to other creatures throughout the novel, Atwood makes us slightly more sympathetic to Crake. His hatred of his species has grown so large that to him it makes complete sense to wipe them out and replace them with another.

The novel ends on a cliffhanger but one that also concerns the way that different species regard each other. The Crakers are the species in the novel closest to humans however it is unclear at first whether their lives are valued or not, and it is eventually Oryx who convinces Jimmy that their lives are worth saving;

“If Crake isn’t here, if he goes away somewhere, and if I’m not here either, I want you to take care of the Crakers.” (said Oryx).

(…)

“They are like children, they need someone. You have to be kind with them.”

(322).

After this Jimmy treats the Crakers like children, making sure they are fed and looked after. However when Jimmy discovers that there are other humans alive the question of how the Crakers and the humans will interact becomes key and Jimmy worries that the humans will not see the Crakers as lives similar to their own; “Maybe all will be well, maybe this trio of strangers is good-hearted, sane, well-intentioned; maybe he’ll succeed in presenting the Crakers to them in the proper light. On the other hand, these new arrivals could easily see the Children of Crake as freakish, or savage, or non-human and a threat.” (366).

Okay so after that very long point I do finally have some questions:

Do you think that Atwood is making an argument that all living creatures should be valued or do you think she is saying that none should be?

Do you think she is using the blurred moral lines regarding life throughout the novel to highlight our societies confused conscience when it comes to what animals we are okay with destroying and what animals we place extreme value on?

Another large theme in the novel is extinct animals. Do you think Atwood is making us look at the way we kill entire races of animals by showing us Crake’s decision to destroy the entire human race?

Uncategorized

Oryx and Crake Provocation

4 Comments

Disclaimer: I  know that this definitely isn’t the most provocative idea from this last reading, as the ending and killings are rather intense and questionable. I also know that we have previously touched on this, but I thought I would come back to it as this is what really stuck out to me while I was reading.

I think one of the most interesting, as well as one of the strangest, parts about Oryx and Crake is the relationship between Jimmy and Crake. Earlier in the novel, they begin to lose touch and Jimmy claims that he is beginning to think of Crake as a person of his past. As much as Jimmy is trying to let go of Crake, it is near impossible because Crake keeps contacting him. As the novel has progressed, it has taken a turn from Jimmy being fascinated by Crake to Crake being fascinated by Jimmy.

Crake’s obsession with Jimmy stands out the most right after Crake offers Jimmy the job at ReJoovenEsense. The fact that Crake individually contacted each of Jimmy’s ex-lovers to tell them exactly what he is up to is borderline creepy since before recently Crake wasn’t exactly playing a huge role in Jimmy’s life.

My question is why can’t Crake let go? At this point in Jimmy’s life Jimmy was completely content with his relationship with Crake (near nonexistent) yet every time the relationship nears a stop, Crake makes sure to start over. I can’t tell if Crake enjoys the superiority he has over Jimmy or if he actually puts value into their relationship. Or is Crake fascinated by Jimmy’s romantic encounters, as he has not (as far as we know) had any himself? I can’t help but think there might be jealousy rooted in his obsession. I know this is a more general question, but I’m curious to hear what you guys think about why Crake refuses to lose touch with Jimmy?