<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Keeping the Door &#187; oryx and crake</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.keepingthedoor.com/tag/oryx-and-crake/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.keepingthedoor.com</link>
	<description>All you can eat sci-fi and fantasy books</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 04 Jul 2010 13:25:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Is Margaret Atwood a science fiction writer?</title>
		<link>http://www.keepingthedoor.com/2009/08/29/is-atwoods-the-year-of-the-flood-science-fiction/</link>
		<comments>http://www.keepingthedoor.com/2009/08/29/is-atwoods-the-year-of-the-flood-science-fiction/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Aug 2009 11:26:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Renai LeMay</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[margaret atwood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[oryx and crake]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the year of the flood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ursula k. le guin]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.keepingthedoor.com/?p=451</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes, says Ursula K. Le Guin.


Related posts:<ol><li><a href='http://www.keepingthedoor.com/2009/10/18/guy-gavriel-kay-mocks-booker-judges-idiocy/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Guy Gavriel Kay mocks Booker judge&#8217;s &#8216;idiocy&#8217;'>Guy Gavriel Kay mocks Booker judge&#8217;s &#8216;idiocy&#8217;</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.keepingthedoor.com/2009/08/10/are-science-fictionfantasy-writers-insane/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Are science fiction/fantasy writers insane?'>Are science fiction/fantasy writers insane?</a></li>
<li><a href='http://www.keepingthedoor.com/2009/08/05/vampire-fiction-wave-almost-over-gaiman/' rel='bookmark' title='Permanent Link: Vampire fiction wave almost over: Gaiman'>Vampire fiction wave almost over: Gaiman</a></li>
</ol>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.keepingthedoor.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/theflood.jpg"><img src="http://www.keepingthedoor.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/theflood.jpg" alt="theflood" title="theflood" width="250" height="379" class="alignright size-full wp-image-454"  style="border-style: none"/></a></p>
<p>In a review of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Atwood">Margaret Atwood</a>&#8216;s new book <em>The Year of the Flood</em>, sci-fi and fantasy master Ursula K. Le Guin has criticised the Canadian author&#8217;s stance that her work is not to be classified as science fiction.</p>
<p>The book, released this year, is a dystopian vision focused on the God&#8217;s Gardener&#8217;s group, a small collective of environmentalists who survived the disaster Atwood created in her 2003 novel <em>Oryx and Crake</em>. It contains a wide variety of themes found in the science fiction genre: a post-apocalyptic landscape and society, including mutated species, and more.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/aug/29/margaret-atwood-year-of-flood">Writes Le Guin in UK newspaper <em>The Guardian</em></a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>
&#8220;To my mind, The Handmaid&#8217;s Tale, Oryx and Crake and now The Year of the Flood all exemplify one of the things science fiction does, which is to extrapolate imaginatively from current trends and events to a near-future that&#8217;s half prediction, half satire.</p>
<p>But Margaret Atwood doesn&#8217;t want any of her books to be called science fiction &#8230; she says that everything that happens in her novels is possible and may even have already happened, so they can&#8217;t be science fiction, which is &#8220;fiction in which things happen that are not possible today&#8221;. This arbitrarily restrictive definition seems designed to protect her novels from being relegated to a genre still shunned by hidebound readers, reviewers and prize-awarders.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p><strong>Commentary</strong><br />
There is no doubt that much of Atwood&#8217;s work is science fiction. As Le Guin notes, you can&#8217;t postulate a human species whose individual members turn blue when they want to have sex, without describing such a work of fiction as sci-fi. We simply don&#8217;t have the technology to create such a race of humans in current day 2009.</p>
<p>Hence, any work describing such a race is by definition postulating a world where scientific concepts are extended to their logical conclusions in the future; the very definition of science fiction.</p>
<p>Atwood&#8217;s desire to escape such a label is likely sourced from the desire to avoid her work being classified in the much-aligned and misunderstood genre. It&#8217;s a problem that also extends to the world of fantasy literature, <a href="http://www.keepingthedoor.com/2009/08/23/fantasy-genre-misunderstood-janny-wurts/">as Janny Wurts has recently complained</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.keepingthedoor.com/2009/08/29/is-atwoods-the-year-of-the-flood-science-fiction/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
