Lillith's Brood

Tentacle people….hmm...well at least they’re not trying to kill us?

Dawn, the first installment in a trilogy written by Octavia E. Butler, follows the story of Lilith Iyapo as she wakes up in the hands of the Oankali, an uncanny alien species, following the destruction of the Earth. At first, Lilith, like the reader, believes the Oankali are malicious in some way. After all, she was locked away in solitary confinement for two years. She would learn, however, that there’s more to it than that.

The Oankali call themselves “traders,” that is, they trade their own genetic material. Thus, in an attempt to restore Earth alongside the human race after their near extinction, they use this ability preemptively to both prevent future catastrophes and to improve the humans. It is an act of goodwill as they see it. But what designates an improvement? Considering most of this genetic changing occurred without the humans consent, one might argue their actions are wrong in any case. Nonetheless, when it's done in the name of life, it muddies the waters a bit. Would it have better, then, to let the humans suffer and die rather than alter their genetic material slightly? This reflects an increasingly relevant dilemma we humans face in our modern day with the prospect of genetic engineering. Most would agree that it is morally acceptable to modify our genes in order to prevent disease and other harm, but when it comes to appearances we still don’t know. On one level, it may reduce variation among the population, as the majority of people would likely vie for select traits such as intelligence and beauty. However, when it comes to modifying those genes to become more like the Oankali, this only serves to expand the gene pool. Thus, the question becomes how many modifications is too many and at what point are we no longer distinctly human?

This is the question Lilith faces as she is offered more and more improvements to her life, this time with consent. The ability to remember everything clearly, for example, is an objective advantage, yet she still clings to what she considers her humanity. This touches on much bigger themes than I am able to answer here, such as what defines our humanity, particularly when compared to other intelligent life forms. Perhaps it’s our empathy or our intelligence and hierarchical nature as Jdahya believes. In any case, humans, like all life forms, are constantly evolving. Therefore, with or without the Oankali, we are bound to change. Does it really matter, then, if that change comes from the Oankali or nature itself? And are the Oankali not representative of nature itself considering they were likely created by nature as well?

In the end, I can’t truly accuse the Oankali of doing anything purely evil. At the very least, they had good intentions based on their own moral standards, which I can’t exactly say is evil by any definition of the word. Nonetheless, their act of taking important actions on behalf of the humans without their consensus mirrors how we often treat minority groups. Because they often have little to no representation, the majority often makes all the decision for them, good or bad. When it comes to monumental problems like the survival of the human race, one would think you’d stop to ask the humans what they think, but this is rarely the case. How often do we ask the people we are attacking, be it African Americans, immigrants, those of different sexual orientations, or others, how they feel and what they desire? I’ll tell you, it isn’t common. Too often, the majority group in power, sometimes another entity altogether, make decisions for everyone else, despite knowing little of their values. It hardly seems fair. But then again, what is?