Sunday, June 3, 2012

Oryx and Crake

What brings about apocalypse? In Margaret Atwood's novel Oryx and Crake it is difficult to say. The novel does not lend itself to an easy interpretation or state clearly and openly the events. However, It does show the perspective of one man through the events and gives us clues as to how to interpret the events. These clues point to a greed and desire for power which is most often one of, if not the, main cause of humankind's downfall at its own hands. Oryx and Crake follows Snowman/Jimmy through his life and through the end to a post-apocalypse. Throughout the novel we see glimpses of scientists and businesses fighting for power among themselves and the ability to control and mold Nature herself into their own image. Humans are on the path attempting to become Gods and it is their desire for control and power that leads to their downfall.

The first time we see glimpses of this path is when Jimmy is a young boy. His father works for a company splicing animal genes together and trying to make pigs that can grow multiple organs for transplants into human bodies. The power comes not only in the obvious way over nature but also in trying to make money and exploit other humans by growing multiples of an organ in a single animal that an regrow those same organs after they have been removed. They are attempting to cash in on other people and earn money which equals power in the world. These pigoons are not the only animals to be created. Human scientists mix so many different animals and genes together that they no longer even resemble the original. It grows worse and worse throughout the novel from pigoons that are pigs spliced with human genes to grow replacment human parts to rakunks, racoons and skunks, to ChickieNobs which are lumps of chicken that are alive but have no head or beak and grow only chicken breasts or drumsticks to be gathered and harvested as fruit from a tree. At one point Crake, who's final acts are what brings about the total collapse, says that if you think of any trait you want, chances are that somewhere nature has already developed it. The scientists are attempting to recreate the world in their own image, to morph it into something else, something better. This world gave rise to Crake.

Crake is often described as being a genius. His genius allows him to see aspects of the world, patterns and such that just reenforce the idea that he is better than the rest of the world and that the world needs to be destroyed. Crake takes pleasure in playing games of power like creating and destroying ancient civilizations and that is praised. It is little wonder that he grows up seeing the wolrd as a playground that he can crush. He wants power as the rest of the scientists and his intelligence allows him to think strategically and to achieve his aims. His quest for power and control and a Godlike prestige are what ultimately lead to him releasing the Red Plaque that destroys most of the world and leaves his own creation, his Crakers, humans made in his image, to live in the ruins.

3 comments:

  1. I find two really provocative ideas in your blog posting: the pleasure that Crake (and by extension humans in general) takes in power games and the problem of the apocalypse (any apocalypse?) being described and understood by a singular character. Even for a catastrophic event, there seems to be no objective view, only a human interpretation of what the event is and what it means.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MC, I am drawn to the power struggles evident in the book that I have focused on those causes in particular. They fascinate me as I have very rarely held power of my own in any significant social sense as the characters in the books do. I have noticed in the two books done so far a pattern of human beings taking part in power games. One person has power and others are trying to take it from them. I equate the power struggles as being tied with possessions and and so with the concept of inheritance and hence family as well. We even speak in terms of a good family or a bad family a higher class family or a lower class family as determining how much power one wields in the world. I bring this because that was one of the things that Crake took out of the Crakers, no possessions and so no inheritance and no loyalty to a specific family over the community as a whole. The same issue of family power and possessions was hinted at in Children of Men with Theo and Xan. Xan was from a higher class family and so had more power. It was his connection with Xan as his cousin that gave him even a semblance of power in the country. The ring of England is just a symbol of the power struggle that has been going on for centuries, of hierarchy, and will continue to be a factor if Theo's reluctance to remove the ring is any indication.

      As to the events being understood by a subjective single character, that is how real life is seen. The fact that it is being used in literature where there is the freedom to explore many different characters POV's is interesting. It is purely speculation but I believe that may be due to the author's attempts so show a level of depth into the psychology of the character that by switching to a different character there would be less of a connection created with the individuals involved and the impact of the novel would diminish. Again purely speculation but I would be interested to know what others think.

      Delete
  2. Yes, I too experience "real life" as an interpretation of events as much as the events themselves. Even detailed factual events, no matter how carefully documented, are given their "reality" through our interpretive experience of them, and that's a matter of multiple subjective perspectives.
    Concerning the power struggles, I think you are right that possessions, especially possession of property, has a strong effect on the human sense of who should be listened to socially, politically, religiously, etc. Sad, isn't it?

    ReplyDelete