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.

This was four stars until the ending, because what the hell, ending.

Kind of generic post-apocalyptic dystopian last-man-on-earth etcetera... but well-written and very readable. Wanting to find out what happened and how all the pieces fit together made for a compelling read.

But. None of the three characters seemed especially like multidimensional people with real personalities. It was like...

CRAKE: The immoral scientist who doesn't really have or understand human emotions, and thus thinks it's a good idea to destroy civilization and create a new, "better" species to replace humans on the planet.
ORYX: The remarkably beautiful, compassionate, perfect woman who teaches the Children of Crake about empathy and stuff, and whom both of the other characters idolize and love.
SNOWMAN: The ordinary guy who just happened to end up in the middle of events.

Crake, meh, I'm sick of the "scientists just don't understand ART or EMOTIONS or WHAT MAKES HUMANS HUMAN and therefore they are going to destroy the world" trope. I don't buy it, it's an unrealistic strawman -- a projection of people's fear of technology. And anyway Vonnegut already did it, so can we just move on?

Oryx, cringe. She was a symbol, not a person. Presumably because that's what she was to Snowman and Crake, but ugh. She'd been through all sorts of shit but her fucked up past basically only affected Snowman, she didn't really seem bothered by any of it. She was sort of canonically ineffable and mysterious and blah blah women they are such strange creatures, like goddesses, so full of wisdom but you can never understand them, and then of course she gets put in charge of the realm of emotional stuff for the Children of Crake. She spends the whole book being a symbol and providing oblique, pseudo-deep non-answers to questions, and then gets killed without even being conscious for it, so that's cool I guess. I don't have enough suspension of disbelief for Oryx.

Snowman/Jimmy, he's just this guy, you know? He makes a bunch of stupid mistakes throughout the book which I assume is supposed to show that he's JUST AN AVERAGE GUY and not really that bright or anything. I get that he's supposed to be pathetic, I just spent the book not really caring what happened to him and not being able to identify with him at all. Oh, he's also really passive and basically just lets stuff happen to him for the entire book.

Then in the end you finally find out what led up to the destruction of civilization, but Crake's behavior isn't explained, and Oryx's true feelings are never revealed, and then the first really exciting thing happens in the present day and Snowman is hesitating, trying to decide what to do about it AND THEN THE BOOK JUST ENDS.

Literally almost threw this one across the room when I got to the end.

Actually, the more I think about the plot, the more I suspect it of being somewhat moralistic... e.g. Oryx and Jimmy, by their actions, convinced Crake that he was right about humanity (or just made him jealous), therefore them sleeping together indirectly brought about the fall of civilization. Which means it's just another book where an honest conversation or two (and maybe some open relationships) would have solved all problems, but NOPE, BETTER JUST DESTROY CIVILIZATION.

Second edit: It's possible I'm just sick of dystopian stories about how basically human nature is going to inevitably lead to the apocalypse. It's even in the story that humanity destroys more than it creates (in the Blood and Roses game, where artistic and cultural achievements are weighed against acts of violence). I read this book right after [b:Cloud Atlas|49628|Cloud Atlas|David Mitchell|http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1344305390s/49628.jpg|1871423], and feel like Cloud Atlas tackled that message better and in a way that makes more sense to me. Or at least made me feel less like not getting out of bed for a week.

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