“Mother of the People”: Biology as Destiny in the Dystopias of Jane Rogers, P.D. James, and Margaret Atwood

Imagine a world where the human race can no longer reproduce itself due to a virus, a likely product of bioterrorism, that attacks a woman’s brain at the moment of conception, killing her within days. This is the premise of Jane Rogers’s recent novel The Testament of Jesse Lamb. In P.D. James’s The Children of Men (1992), an equally mysterious virus renders all sperm on Earth, frozen and otherwise, sterile. In The Handmaid’s Tale (1985) by Margaret Atwood, humanity’s reproductive ability has been so compromised by nuclear disasters, chemical warfare, industrial toxins, and contaminated food supplies that the few women left with the potential to breed are forced by the state to devote themselves entirely to producing offspring.

The desolation of a world without children, gruesomely depicted in these novels, would arise not so much from the absence of the children themselves, though surely this would have its downsides, but to the acute, ever-present awareness that life is distinctly pointless when all human prospects are nullified. Of course, a “big picture” thinker might agree with the statistical paleontologist in James’s novel that “of the four billion life forms which have existed on this planet, three billion, nine hundred and sixty million are now extinct… in the light of these mass extinctions it really does seem unreasonable to suppose that Homo sapiens should be exempt.” Still, for most of us, the idea that we’re all contributing some small measure, good or bad, to the planet’s future is a psychological boon to existence.

Patrimony — the etymology of the word is particularly apt — lies at the heart of these novels.

Read on at www.bookslut.com

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

One Reply to ““Mother of the People”: Biology as Destiny in the Dystopias of Jane Rogers, P.D. James, and Margaret Atwood”

  1. Very interesting! Echoes Elizabeth I being “married to England,” and, of course!, adoption and the issue of why non-biological ties were discouraged and seen as threatening in Europe for so long (still true?) = women separated from biology and childbearing role…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s