Personal Reflection

Probably the only “profound” lesson I learned from the novel itself was from Jimmy's philosophy of the “body” as a part of the self equally as significant as the mind and the soul. The passage "When did the body first set out on its own adventures? ... after having ditched its old travelling companions, the mind and the soul, for whom it had once been considered a mere corrupt vessel ... it had dumped culture along with them: music and painting and poetry and plays ... nothing but sublimation according to the body. Why not cut to the chase?" (Atwood 85) inspired me after reading it several times. I now think of the body as emotionally significant, containing the primitive chemical impulses of the reptilian brain that influence us more consistently and powerfully than most ideas or beliefs. Before reading “Oryx and Crake”, I understood my consciousness to revolve around only what I had reasoned to be true and what I had faith was true; I had failed to acknowledge the usefulness of intuition and instinct. Since reading the novel, I have tried to expand my “kinaesthetic” intelligence and be more attentive to my hunches.

Researching for the ISU was challenging because the requirements are so open-ended and I didn't know how much information to be satisfied with. Especially since Margaret Atwood is already a well-established Canadian author, the requirement of the ISU to “learn about the context of Canadian literature” was confusing. Ultimately I decided that since Atwood has already shaped Canada's literature, it would be best to focus on unique aspects of “Oryx and Crake” as they relate to the real world, and Canada specifically. Hopefully my Apologia is on the right track.

Actually writing the ISU, the Explication in particular, was fraught with a lack of confidence. I'm usually very analytical in my approach to “snapping questions” and look for a formulaic, fill-in-the-blanks type response, but for the Explication I was told only to find three elements within the book and fit them into the description of the dramatic situation I selected. It seemed impossible to write 700 words about that, until I relaxed my idea of the ideal response. Having read the book thoroughly multiple times, I knew I understood the themes and purpose, and clearly that was the part I was supposed to communicate through the Explication; suddenly a very challenging and confusing problem became a positive opportunity for creativity, and I just regurgitated my understanding through the model of explaining a dramatic situation. I feel especially successful with my Explication.

I avidly enjoy solving mathematical problems, and over time I've developed the ability to forget unhelpful assumptions caused by reading a problem the wrong way (usually these are caused by emotional connotations surrounding the specific words used to describe the problem). However, in doing so, I've developed the habit of treating all problems this way—this is an assumption in itself; completing the ISU, and, in fact, almost any project in English class, has taught me to forget my new “assumption”. I've learned to loosen my approach and not to expect all of the answers to be carved in stone, but instead to work hard, cite thoroughly and use my ability to draw logical conclusions constructively—then I can be satisfied once I've made all the points I can think of. This is a very useful skill which, I'm sure, will aid me in the future. Overall, I'm glad to have participated in the ISU.