Sunday, February 25, 2018

T.C. Boyle (on behalf of presenting group)

T.C. “Straight White Baby Boomer” Boyle was born in Peekskill, New York. At the State University of New York, he began as a music student but switched to English and history. He earned his M.F.A. from the University of Iowa Writers’ Workshop, and while there, he studied with John Cheever and John Irving. The one and only story he submitted as a portfolio for entrance to this workshop was “The OD and Hepatitis Railroad or Bust.” 
While there, he studied many canonical literary works, but his favorites included “dark comedy” writers John Barth and Robert Coover. His first novel, Water Music, was published in 1982. His first short story collection was called the Descent of Man which dealt with just that, issues of humanity told in absurdist/fabulist/magical realist fashion. In 1988, his novel, World’s End, won the PEN/ Faulner Award in Fiction. 
As a teacher, he encourages his students to not “write what they know,” instead they should “write what they don’t know and discover something.” When writing he has been said to listen to gloom, rain, and suicidal cello conciertos in order to help him get in the modd to write the kind of fiction he writes. 
In his home, he found that it was built by Frank Lloyd Wright and decided to write a novel called The Women which is about Wright’s many mistresses as told through a Japanese “intern” that was used as a sort of slave labour. Lorrie Moore, author of “How to Become a Writer,” when talking about T.C. Boyle’s writing, describes it as a failure of satire, that it is “cut off from the oxygen of morality.” His most recent novel to be published is an eco-humanist work called The Terranauts.
In the last paragraph of the story, T.C. Boyle writes this:
“The girl—the genius—looks confused for a moment. ‘But, but,’ she stammers, ‘how can that be? You don’t mean you—?’
But before Allison can answer, a crowparrot sweeps out of the nearest tree, winging low to screech ‘Fuck you!’ in our faces, and the smallest miracle occurs. Tiger, as casual in his own skin as anything there is or ever was, erupts from the ground in a rocketing whirl of fur to catch the thing in his jaws. As quick as that, it’s over, and the feathers, the prettiest feathers you’ll ever see, lift and dance and float away on the breeze.”
How does T.C. Boyle view the future for humans? Do you agree or disagree?
 
What two animals would you have the CRISPR combine and why?

12 comments:

  1. It's very interesting, the way the story revolves around slightly futuristic things while also staying true to many things in the present. T.C. Boyle isn't trying all that hard to make some far-fetched story about the future, with flying cars or robot housekeepers. Things are largely the same, with the only differences being reflected in mammals. Dogs of strange colors, dogs combined with cats, humans whose characteristics are chosen by the parents with a "menu." And in a way, it's not too far off. Things are bred strangely all the time, like grapples (grape apples) and square watermelons. Why not animals? Also, humans choose mates based on their characteristics that they'd want to see in a child (even if not consciously--it's more of a biological, primitive thing), so choosing a child's characteristics before conception isn't a totally insane concept, it's just not something we fully have yet. So I agree with Boyle's view, and it could be a possibility someday. Also--cursing birds? Amazing. I would love that way too much.

    If I could have the CRISPR combine two animals, it would be a bear and a prairie dog. A prairie bear, if you will. I feel like it would be about the size of a small cub or a dog, and it would burrow into giant holes in the ground, and probably terrorize most of middle America. But they'd be so fun!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. It seems like T.C. Boyle is saying that no matter how smart humans get, we're still going to make dumb mistakes. It's evident in the girl who keeps letting her Cherry Pit escape, and also in the decision of the neighbor not to opt for a genetically modified child. The way this story ended was so...odd. It felt like something was important about the ending, and yet, it was as mundane as anything, it just happened, and it was over. I really enjoyed reading it, but I'm still not sure exactly what it was about. Was it about genetic engineering, or was it about people? Probably both, I suppose.
    If I could use the CRISPR, I'd combine a dog with a bird. Imagine, flying puppies! Soaring around, blessing passersby with sweet puppy kisses, playing fetch flawlessly as they flap their ridiculously over-sized wings. Bird puppies.

    ReplyDelete
  3. No matter how strange things get, at the end of the day, were all animals. That is the message that I got from reading this story. Technology will evolve, but human nature stays the same. I believe that is why all of those shows and movies about futuristic societies and fantasy because it doesn't reflect how the real world will develop, which is what "Are We Not Men" does.

    As far as CRISPR goes, it would be a snake and a zebra. My two favorite animals.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This story ends in a very interesting way that I still don't know how to take. I get a weird vibe reading this, like the narrator is fascinated with the genetic manipulation of everything from grass to babies yet he doesn't actually enjoy any of it. And the narrator, although he never voiced his opinion to his wife, seemed to disagree philosophically about using GenLab instead of creating a baby the old fashion way. I don't really agree or disagree with the story because I still don't know how to feel about it. I compared parts of it to Atwood's Oryx & Crake, except I liked Atwood's writing much more.

    If I had to combine two animals, without a doubt it'd be a camel and a hawk...because who wouldn't want to see a flying camel with giant claws

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. a flying camel with giant *talons

      Delete
    2. Ryan, I’m so glad you mentioned Oryx and Crake! I had the same exact response and feeling. I also got a George Saunders feeling (although again, I think Saunders does a better job at what he does) and a tiny bit of “The School” by Barthelme.

      Delete
  5. T.C. Boyle paints a subtly unsettling future where every man and woman is God and science reaches a ridiculously frivolous height. Genetic engineering is rampant in Boyle's world, and though everything about it is painted to be lightheartedly pleasant and positive for humanity, it all still strikes me as grotesque and upsetting, in the most mundane yet interesting of ways. The ultimate message about humanity I got from this story is that, as much as humans try (and succeed) to play God and force evolution (though I'm all for science, "play God" is just the most convenient expression to use here), there will always still be something raw and resistant in human nature that cannot be bred out, and there will always be a small bit of us rooted firmly in the fast.

    I can't think of any animal combination that wouldn't be terrifying to me, honestly.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The phrase “grotesque and upsetting, in the most mundane yet interesting of ways” is just perfect.

      Delete
  6. T.C. Boyle seems to have written his story with the mindset of-- the more things change, the more things stay the same. The world in "Are We Not Men" has humans playing at God and messing with the DNA makeup of everything, from plants to animals to people, but its all expressed and handled normally; a part of how they go about their day. And the people haven't changed much either; kids (even genius, tall kids who speak french fluently) lose control of their dogs, people gossip about their neighbor's romantic history, couples fail to communicate and cheat on each other, and everyone just struggles along. It was disturbing, but in a casual sort of way.

    As for animal mixing I'm pretty sure that's kind of a horrible idea, but for conversation's sake I'd want a platypus and okapi. If we're theoretically playing god, might as well pick some of the weirdest creatures and see what happens, right?

    ReplyDelete
  7. T.C. Boyle seems to view humans as moving further and further from nature, except for small pockets like Allison. This migration away from nature, also leads them away from their humanity. This is clearly portrayed in the way the story has written. In the beginning of the story, it seems benign. There are a few references to grass crossbred with algae that makes the reader think that maybe there's something there. The first clear hint at genetic modification is in the labeling of the Dog as a Cherry Pit. From there on, we see more and more evidence of the genetic modification, with Connie making an appointment to have a baby, and the crow parrots. It's no mistake that the end of the story has the long history lesson about how human genetic modification is the newest major thing, and that it juxtaposes Allison's 'natural' baby with Connie's perfectly designed one and the living altered child. The story reads more and more dystopic as it progresses.


    Regarding the animal combination, I don't think T.C. Boyle would want humanity to advance to the point where they can combine different animals with no consequences, so I will abstain from answering the animal combination question.

    ReplyDelete
  8. T.C. Boyle seems to view the future as a world full of strange things that everyone treats as if they're completely normal. I think that’s reflective of a lot of real technological advancements. In his world, genetically modified dogcats and super babies are considered normal; in our world, robot vacuum cleaners and Amazon are considered normal. Nobody really pays any mind to these things because they’re gradually accustomed to them, and any “dystopian” developments are just seamlessly integrated into daily life. He also seems to believe that humans will ultimately evolve into some new species through genetic modification.
    I wouldn’t combine two animals, I would just create domesticated bears the size of house cats. Can you imagine how cute that would be?

    ReplyDelete
  9. The story filled me with that kind of visceral anger you get at first when someone you don't like has an opinion you don't agree with. It was sparked by at first the young girl, and then I realized that she was simply a reflection of the society she lived in, a victim, and I was abruptly very anger at my own world. it was incredibly reminiscent of the place where I grew up in Falmouth Maine, little kids acted in a similarly entitled way when confronted with their wrongdoing. Boyle masterfully pulls the emotion out of the piece, using the setting. She gives the narrator's monologue spice with the birds, and also makes it known why the narrator seems to lack inflection and excitement, with things such as the fancy plant under the stairs to the house, and the way it truly takes him awhile to punch the dog, which I think any other normal person would have done right away. This is a story that works at all of the exciting pieces in an oblique way, so as to share them slowly and on our terms.

    ReplyDelete