Oryx and Crake

This is a post-apocalyptic science fiction novel. You learn early on that the protagonist (pretty much the only-agonist) is the last person (or almost) left alive after a biological catastrophe.

I have seen writers take several approaches to outlining how the world ended. I have noticed two ares in which these approaches vary:

(a) how much information about the cause of the world's end is given in total (in [b:Oryx and Crake|15973770|Oryx and Crake|Jesse Russell|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1355145594s/15973770.jpg|21725418] you are told everything; in [b:The Road|6288|The Road|Cormac McCarthy|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1320606344s/6288.jpg|3355573] you are told almost nothing), and

(b) the time arrow (which can be crooked or straight, can be interspersed with the main narrative as flashbacks (as in [b:Oryx and Crake|15973770|Oryx and Crake|Jesse Russell|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1355145594s/15973770.jpg|21725418]) or can be simultaneous with the time of the narrative (as in [b:The Stand|149267|The Stand|Stephen King|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1213131305s/149267.jpg|1742269]), or there can be other approaches.

In this book you are eventually given full detail on how it happened, and this is engineered as a series of flashbacks (which make up a bit more than half the story) to the protagonist's youth and his friendship with a brilliant future scientist who will play a role in what's to come.

Atwood does a very good job in the narrative: the book is gripping and there is a nice balance of how far to develop a current thread before switching to another one, and how long to wait before returning to the previous thread.

The character development is OK but limited. The narrative devices used to describe people, such as conversation blocks, are good and effective, and I see the characters as truly different, so that is all good, but I do not see a depiction that introduces me to someone I don't know yet at all.

Jimmy was a member of a scientific elite, living in isolation, suffering through bitter loneliness. Then an unnamed apocalypse came along, now he is known as Snowman and he may be one of the few survivors. This post-apocalyptic hermit resides near; what he refers to as Crakers—strange human-like creatures. In flashbacks the story develops, the Crakers, Wolvogs, Pigoons and Rakunks are assorted life forms that are the products of genetic engineering.

Oryx and Crake are the symbols of a fractured society, which Jimmy was once a part of. This is where trying to explain this novel can get complex. There are two different worlds within this book the post-apocalyptic world but then there are the flashbacks. The dystopian world was far more interesting for me. Much like Super Sad True Love Story. this is a dystopian world that I can see coming, corporation’s rule the world and pornography has become mainstream. It is normal to watch live executions and surgeries, nudie news (apparently watching the news when they are fully clothed is just weird), even child pornography.

I love novels that deal with the dangers of corporations having too much power; Super Sad True Love Story is a prime example of it (I should re-read that novel) and Oryx and Crake is another example of this (need more examples). Science and marketing techniques leave the public as powerless consumers and there is nothing to stop the unprecedented corporate greed.

Genetic engineering is a slippery slope; I seem to find myself attracted to novels that deal with science going too far. Oryx and Crake is a great example of this; Crake is a scientist working in the biotech project that created the Crakers. Genetic engineering progress continued to advance and eventually lead to a complex and sinister project called Paradice, but when that collapsed it caused this global devastation.

Oryx was a girl Jimmy and Crake found on a child pornography site that eventually was hired by Crake as a prostitute and to teach the Crakers. Oryx obviously had a difficult past, and Oryx and Crake attempts to deal with this issue as well. This is not an easy issue to deal with, the majority of the world would say they are against child pornography and yet it continues to happen and we see no signs of it ever being truly dealt with. Margaret Atwood doesn’t have a problem with trying to deal with difficult issues and this novel has plenty to say.

Moving away from the dystopian world and into the post-apocalyptic one, we have a whole new set of themes and issues. While this is a direct result of the corporate destruction, now we have to deal with survival. The Crakers are like little helpless children that Snowman tries to help; so now we have parental responsibilities as a major theme as well as our social responsibilities. He also has to protect them from the Wolvogs, Pigoons, Rakunks and whatever might disrupt their civilisation.

This is the second Margaret Atwood novel I’ve read and I’m starting to see a familiar theme coming through in her novels. I believe she wants the reader to have a look at civilisation and what we are doing that is beneficial or harmful. I’m sure the rest of the Maddadam trilogy will deal with this; I’m not sure if all her books have a similar theme but I suspect they might.

I love a novel that tells a great story but is also loaded with different themes and symbolism. I feel so fulfilled reading a book like Oryx and Crake and spending time digesting the words and examining what Atwood wants to tell us. I was meaning to read this novel for so long and now I’m left with intense desire to read the next two in the series. Thanks you Bloomsbury Australia for pressuring me into reading this book, I have no regrets.

This review originally appeared on my blog; literary-exploration.com/2013/09/09/book-review-oryx-and-crake/

After an apocalyptic disaster, Snowman is the sole caretaker of a group of Crakers--a simple-minded, genetically-engineered people. But his past haunts him, and he relives the events leading up to the world-altering disaster.

It's hard for me to write anything about this novel without comparing it to Atwood's brilliant "Blind Assassin". The structure is very similar: an important event happened in the past, and the narrator slowly reveals the past while continuing on their life in their present. It's a tactic that worked well in "The Blind Assassin" because the narrator is a grandmother that I'm sure every reader could relate to. However, in "Oryx and Crake", the narrator is a crusty, disgruntled, semi-isolated man who is about as unappealing and uninteresting as a character can get. With "The Blind Assassin", the past event is a death, and we are intrigued right from the beginning because of the human connection, and we automatically want to know what happened and why. With "Oryx and Crake", the past event is an apocalypse, and somehow the what and why seem like trivialities. Really, it could have been any number of disasters and it wouldn't have made one bit of difference to the story. Pick your disaster. There's no intrigue despite all the background story Atwood conjures up because the characters are only moderately interesting.

One of the few redeeming things about the novel is the social structure that Atwood creates. It's an interesting society we become in her story. It's not too far off from our current model, and as such, offers a nice commentary on where we may be heading. In addition to this, it also offers a discussion about men playing God--in both senses of the concept. One, by creating and destroying the lives of others as if they are wise and all-knowing. Second, in the sense of creating mythology and doctrine for people to follow.

If you're a fan of the genre, then give it a try--just keep your expectations low. If you're a fan of good writing and characters, perhaps "The Blind Assassin" is the way to go as it seems to me with this novel Atwood was too caught up in her creation of the Crakers that she thought she was writing a story for them as well. I expected better.

Here's a spoiler and a major problem that wasn't addressed in the story: Why didn't Jimmy just duplicate the vaccine that Crake had been secretly giving him when he visited the Pleeblands? Surely the technology existed to do it quite easily.

It started with growing human organs inside pigs - pigoons they call them - but scientists were intent on solving all of humankind's problems with genetic engineering and the big businesses just wanted to make more money. In the future, a man now known as Snowman lives alone in a tree. He must watch over the Children of Crake, with their green eyes, UV resistant skin and childlike thoughts and try not to dwell on his memories, especially not the whisperings of his lost love, Oryx.

The story of what happened is told through Snowman's flashbacks, from when he was known as Jimmy. Even when he was a young boy, he was living in a somewhat dystopian world, his parents working within a research facility with no contact from the outside world other than dubious internet access. The world that Snowman lives in is considerably different and the information is revealed at a perfect pace to piece together the events.

Jimmy doesn't have an aptitude for science or numbers but he is good with words. He clings to them as if they are under threat of extinction, like the fate of so many animals have before them. His childhood friend, Crake, was always the genius of the two but perhaps lacking in empathy.

Whilst I understood Oryx's role in the events, the whole passages about her childhood didn't seem necessary. Her parents were poor and starving and sold her to a man for nefarious purposes that they chose to be ignorant of. Jimmy pries into her experiences and she tells him quite a lot but she has a flippant attitude to the whole thing. I can only think that Atwood is trying to highlight the things wrong in the world and this is why something needed to be done. However Crake's logic works without being spoon-fed this information, we all know the challenges of the world and it could have been woven into the story in a more elegant fashion.

Atwood makes some interesting observations about the evolution of mythologies and religion. It's easier for Snowman to invent stories to explain the world than to try and explain reality. Without science, humans need to believe in something and curiosity can't be hard-coded out. All it takes is a seed to germinate and transform to become dogma further down the line.

The ending was a real disappointment. Not that of the past, I thought that was wrapped up nicely, but the ending of the “present day” (both past and present are in the future in this case) left me checking that I wasn't missing a few extra pages. The Year of the Flood is not a sequel but a book set in the same world whose plot runs alongside Oryx and Crake from what I can tell. I think there may be answers in it but I don't think that excuses the ending here.

Other than my gripes about Oryx and the ending, it was an excellent read. There's an especially good bit about trying to explain toast to someone who has no concept of bread. If you've enjoyed Margaret Atwood's other work you will know what to expect but I think it is also an example of good dystopian fiction with sensible scientific theories backing it up. It may go a bit far in this fictional scenario, but people are trying to grow human organs in pigs already...

Wow. Oryx and Crake is a masterpiece of literature. I almost didn't read it because of my disappointment in [b:The Blind Assassin|78433|The Blind Assassin|Margaret Atwood|http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/416HQRCQjnL.SL75.jpg|3246409], which I mention not to further disparage but rather because I'm the third person I've spoken to who feels similarly, and I would hate for anyone else to miss out.

Oryx and Crake is phenomenal. Yes, it hits on the major tropes of our time: commercialization, corporate ownership (of ideas, culture, people), isolation via computers and instant gratification and, of course, genetic engineering. And in all of those areas, Atwood draws apt, occasionally chill-worthy parallels. Even without agreeing with all of her conclusions, the skill is evident. But nearly all of those points have been made by roughly a trillion other dystopic fantasy novels and reading it yet another time, even if superlatively done, would not be worth it in and of itself.

Rather, where Atwood shines is the novel's treatment of existential questions: how easy it is to exterminate a species, a language, a culture, an idea. How irrevocable extinguishing something can be. And yet, underneath that, the converse: how honed the survival mechanism is. How a single organism still carrying a philosophy can seed it universally until it is impossible to extricate. These ideas are so fascinating that I spent probably hours with Oryx and Crake propped on my lap thinking about the implications.

The other existential theme is what the nature of humanity really is and what can be sanitized to make a better world versus what are the qualities that are necessary to call a being actually human. Atwood's handling of these themes is unapproached by any other modern novel, making Oryx and Crake a must-read for everyone.

Rant Alert

Overall, this was a very good book. I personally have little or no faith in the writing abilities of Margret Atwood, as I had read many of her short stories and poems in school. This book, however, was strongly suggested to me, and loving books as much as I do, I decided to give it a chance. For the most part I was surprised. I greatly enjoyed it, once I got into it (as it has a slightly slow start).

In the end, though, I feel greatly betrayed: I read nearly 400 pages, and even started to change my mind about Atwood's writing abilities, only to come to the final page to find... nothing. THere is no ending! The book does not end! This might appeal to some people... some people might not MIND inferring the ending of a 400 page story that they took time out of their lives to read... However, I like to be able to finish a book, without having to SPECULATE about the ending. I don't mind discussing a book, or a book's ending, but I would like there to be an ending to DISCUSS!

That is why I gave this book a 3/5 instead of a 4. One more page, 5 more minutes of writing and this story could have earned itself a 4/5 or even a 5/5 if I was feeling generous. But as it is I am unimpressed and Atwood has failed to redeem herself.

rant over