I read a critical essay called Not So Weird Science from the book The Girl Who Was On Fire by Cara Lockwood. Genetic engineering is the science of deliberately cloning or modifying the DNA of an organism by taking away or adding genes to create a creature. It is very real, not only in sci-fi novels, but also in our world today. in fact, it has been around for some time now. In 1977, scientists reproduced the first genetically cloned sheep, which was called Polly. Polly was a duplication of a she eps embryo implanted into a different sheep and born like a normal sheep. The mother of Polly was actually genetically engineered with some human DNA. This was in the United Kingdoms, shortly before many countries had passed laws benign experiments with human DNA. Scientists all over the world have been experimenting with genetic engineering and continue to do so. Like, genetically engineered silk worms that create stronger silk, a jellyfish spliced with a moth to kill pink bullworm. Now do you have a better sense of the reality of genetic engineering? So you are wondering, why don't we already have "Jabberjays" "TrackerJackers" and other such "mutts" roaming around our back yards? Well, there is a lot of controversy over genetic engineering. Some people feel that it is morally wrong, while others fear for the survival of the human race. The amount of such experimenting that has been allowed has been very limited. Theoretically, you could be trying to create a bacteria that will solve a major issue, but in the process you could accidentally create a zombie-type-virus that causes an epidemic. You have to decide whether or not it is really worth the risk. Not to say that the people doing this have bad intentions, I am sure they mean to make our world a better place. I personally believe that strict laws about genetic engineering should be enforced, but I also strongly believe that such research should continue because of the possible benefits and the advancements and further understanding of science. Where would the world be today if we never took risks and made mistakes? No where.
In The Hunger Games trilogy, the Capitol often creates "mutts" as weapons that attack people both psychologically and physically. Some of these are really quite horrifying. Like ruthless, lethal "wasps" that cause you excruciating pain and cause you to hallucinate about the things you are scared of most, with venom that targets the part of your brain that controls fear. These creations sicken me. First I think about how terrible they are, then I wonder why anyone would create such at thing, then I think about the fact that something like this could be made to exist today. I would never support such a thing. The reality is though, people in the real world have done things that easily match the cruelty and awfulness of some of these things. Using poisonous gases, biological warfare, torture. These things all amount to the same thing, but the real problem is the killing, and the destruction of lives. How different are we really from the Capitol? Killing isn't justified by what you believe in. There is the exception of a few a few who, I wouldn't say deserve to die, but do not deserve to live. MLK jr. fought for the rights of all people and for all to be treated equally, and he did so nonviolently. He changed the world. The Hunger Games isn't just another sic-fi book, it really reflects on the cruelty and injustice of our world. Not in the future, but today. Things that need to change, and I think that Suzanne Collins has a very interesting way of bringing that to attention. Almost everything in this book boils down to the same matter. The cruelty and injustice of the Capitol.
It was really thought provoking and interesting to read a critical essay about a book I had recently read. Reading about the book from another person's perspective is quite a bit more interesting and fundamentally rewarding then writing about what you already know and think about a book. The essay talked about things I hadn't already thought about, triggering a new wave of ideas and opinions about things in the book. I feel like the essay I read had a clear opinion, but didn't try to persuade you that that was the right opinion. I liked this because this allowed the reader to establish their own informed opinion about what the essay talked about based on the ideas and information that the writer gave in her essay.
No comments:
Post a Comment