This is Gerard's friend Charlie here, and I thought I'd break the ice on this one. I have to say that it took me a while to really get a hang on what was happening in this piece. The prose was very detailed and evoked a nice scene for me, but the back story (the world) is very important in science fiction, and it took me most of my time reading to really get a sense for what was going on.
As I still think I might be mistaken, let me throw my thoughts out there. Effectively, the main character is mortgaging his own life by stepping into this game. As in, if he loses, he'll be one of the people that they use to incubate this miracle cure (like the guy who is taken into the back room). Is that what everyone else got?
Since it took me almost my entire time reading to piece this all together, I guess the poker scene lacked a bit of the urgency that it acquired once I gained more of an understanding of the situation. Maybe that is intentional (I'd have to say it is, given the way the piece is structured). As it stood while reading, I thought it was a very accurate account of a high-stake poker game, which was fun to read. I just wonder if some of the tension in the piece is buried in the initial obscurity of the world's backstory, because we don't realize what's at stake until the hand has been played.
Anyway, I'm interested to hear what everyone else thought, and thanks for letting me participate in these discussions.
Wow - I have to be perfectly honest and say that I did not get this story at all when I first read it but after Charlie's review and a second reading I REALLY enjoyed this piece. Thank you so much Christie! (I think my original cluelessness might have had to do with a super late night, alcohol accompanied reading).
ReplyDeleteCharlie, I think you're dead on with that write-up, especially with the phrase "mortgaging his own life". Which brings me to what seems to be the central theme of this story, how important is life itself and how far would you go (or how far would you descend) to maintain it? Not even quality of life, but merely being not dead. The whole atmosphere of this "world" is incredibly grungy and distasteful but to the characters it seems infinitely more desirable than leaving it. Does the author take it for granted that life itself is more important than anything else or is that the question we're supposed to ask ourselves as the audience to this drama? I found myself feeling for the main character but at the same time somewhat repulsed by his inability to accept inevitability with grace.
(Also, on a side note from someone who doesn't play, does the "tone" of the story mimic to the tension of an actual poker game? Perhaps that's too individualistic a feeling to realate but the thought just struck me...)
-Seth
Yeah, don't know how to edit... that was supposed to be "relate" not "realate" which isn't a word at all...
Delete-Seth
When considering the poker scene and Seth's questions on the value of life, I noticed a nice metaphor I missed the first time through: the character's poker hand (and gambling experience) is basically analogous to his life.
DeleteBoth start out (presumably) fine... he's living his life, and his poker hand is promising. Then, all of a sudden, he gets his diagnosis, and things are grim (and his promising hand is now effectively worthless).
With his poor luck, he can now only get ahead if someone else falls behind. In the poker game, this comes about via his opponent having a worse hand and losing. In his life, some unknown person has already given his or her life as a vector for this miracle cure.
What's the author's message here, then? I don't really know. Life is a zero-sum game, maybe, and someone has to lose for someone to win. Interested to see what others think of all of this.
The zero-sum game comment brings to mind the whole illegal organ trade thing, which strikes me as an exaggeration of the ethical dilemmas surrounding not-illegal organ transplants. Or more broadly, the question of medical accessibility in general, w/r/t having the dough to make it happen or not.
Deleteumm.. what does w/r/t mean??
Delete".with regard to"
DeleteHe's already lost some fingers in his run of bad luck. I liked this story! Still figuring out what to say, though. I love medical dystopias; this one (like Repo! The Genetic Opera) is actually enjoyable for me in part because it's just a little too stylized to be *too* creepy. It's the motif of the poker game, in this case, that gives me just enough distance from the scenario to keep me from feeling sick to my stomach (though the details in that framework are vivid & grisly enough).
ReplyDeleteOnce I got past the confusing first few paragraphs, I started off reading this story as if the poker game was a parallel-running metaphor for the terminal cancer diagnosis. It wasn't until the very end that I got that they were actually playing for human flesh. At which moment I shared some of the experiences mentioned in above comments. The hanging onto life at all possible costs seemed incredibly sad to me. A testament to the strength--and amorality--of final, desperate hope, perhaps.
ReplyDeleteAtwood did well at portraying the cancer experience, though, I think. I've got a friend working through breast cancer right now (good prognosis with treatment, but still), and the physical/emotional responses and the "It's like being let into a club" section rang true alongside the experiences she reports, as well as being quite evocative on their own.
The line "Mary's father gave his leg for his wife" struck me. I don't know if it's meant this way, but the act of self-giving made a powerful contrast to the grisly competition the protagonist and companions are submitting to.
I noticed that too, Jenna, it really was a beautiful contrast. I wonder how much Atwood is trying to remind us of that contrast, giving the brief image of selfless love against the desperate, staying-alive-at-any-cost extistence of the characters. I think it's less Life-as-zero-sum game (though to be honest I'm not 100% sure what that means) and more that a life absorbed in staying alive, a life without love, is a grisly thing - damaging to 'winners' and loosers alike.
ReplyDeleteWas anyone else struck by a society that uses human parts as currency?
ReplyDeleteI was! It also seemed sadly all-too-believeable :(
ReplyDeleteSo I think I read the story as critical more of a particular circumstance than of anyone's attitude toward that circumstance, if that makes sense. (Sorry; I just got back from a very long drive); it's probably better if I finish this comment after sleeping, but wanted to check in anyway. Hi, everyone).
ReplyDeleteInteresting story. I don't think I read it as a whole society using body parts as currency. I read it as a black market 'cure'. I think I read it this way because it's described secretly-- I mean, the poker game is in an enclosed area behind a panel, the corridor is dim and not well lit, and he mentions he heard about the 'game' from stories, not from the doctor.
ReplyDeleteI liked the play on body parts-- we don't get to hear anyone's name, we just get physical descriptions-- baldy, fatso, ect. And! We have another story that has Shakespeare Inferences! Bradbury used Macbeth and Atwood is using Merchant of Venice-- A pound of flesh.
I could flesh out these ideas ( no pun intended but as I write this, yes, yes definitely intended) but my body is severely lacking in the coffee department. So I must fly!
hi laura.
hi everybody.
Loretta