The Testaments (sequel)

[Umbelina]

Originally these links were in the book thread, but there is so much fantastic information already out about the sequel to The Handmaid's Tale that I thought it would be great to have a place to openly discuss them.

The book will be published on Sept 10th, but excepts and synopsis's are already out.  This takes place 15 years after the book ends.

WOW.

Warning, as the tags indicate, this will contain spoilers, possibly to be used in the show, and also, this as yet is an unpublished book, so proceed only if you don't care about that.

The Washington Post is the most complete so far.  Narrators are mostly Lydia, and June's two daughters.  June is infamous, a wanted terrorist, and only makes a brief appearance.

"But Aunt Lydia is not the only narrator of “The Testaments.” Interlaced among her journal entries are the testimonies of two young women: one raised in Gilead, the other in Canada. Their mysterious identities fuel much of the story’s suspense — and electrify the novel with an extra dose of melodrama. Together, this trio of voices allows Atwood to include broader details about how other countries respond to the Republic of Gilead. Freed from the intense but narrow constraints of Offred’s point of view in “The Handmaid’s Tale,” “The Testaments” sketches out protest movements abroad, an underground railroad to ferry women north, the internecine conflicts rotting out the center of Gilead, and the Republic’s efforts to manipulate its image on the world stage."

NPR has part of a chapter up.

"At our school, pink was for spring and summer, plum was for fall and winter, white was for special days: Sundays and celebrations. Arms covered, hair covered, skirts down to the knee before you were five and no more than two inches above the ankle after that, because the urges of men were terrible things and those urges needed to be curbed. The man eyes that were always roaming here and there like the eyes of tigers, those searchlight eyes, needed to be shielded from the alluring and indeed blinding power of us — of our shapely or skinny or fat legs, of our graceful or knobbly or sausage arms, of our peachy or blotchy skins, of our entwining curls of shining hair or our coarse unruly pelts or our straw-like wispy braids, it did not matter. Whatever our shapes and features, we were snares and enticements despite ourselves, we were the innocent and blameless causes that through our very nature could make men drunk with lust, so that they'd stagger and lurch and topple over the verge — The verge of what? we wondered. Was it like a cliff? — and go plunging down in flames, like snowballs made of burning sulphur hurled by the angry hand of God. We were custodians of an invaluable treasure that existed, unseen, inside us; we were precious flowers that had to be kept safely inside glass houses, or else we would be ambushed and our petals would be torn off and our treasure would be stolen and we would be ripped apart and trampled by the ravenous men who might lurk around any corner, out there in the wide sharp-edged sin-ridden world."

Vanity Fair  has a review.  

June, aka Offred—played on the TV series by Elisabeth Moss—“makes only the briefest of appearances, speaking a scant three sentences. But she has attained almost mythic status in Gilead, where she’s been declared a terrorist and enemy of the state: The regime has already made at least two assassination attempts on her life.”

[Umbelina]

Links from @dleighg in the media thread.

NYT

"She has made Lydia (like Offred, Offred’s daughters and so many characters in the author’s earlier novels like “Surfacing” and “Cat’s Eye”) a survivor, someone who’s done what she thinks is necessary to avoid death or further loss. To save herself in the early days of Gilead, Lydia became a collaborator with the regime, and she rises within the leadership by playing coldblooded, hardball politics. Her involvement in a Mayday resistance plot to undermine Gilead has as much to do with deadly rivalries within the regime’s elite as it does with her own disillusionment over growing corruption and hypocrisy in the theocracy."

Another from The NYT

‘I’m Too Old to Be Scared by Much’: Margaret Atwood on Her ‘Handmaid’s Tale’ Sequel

The writer talks about her new book, effective yelling and the character who’s too good to kill."

[Umbelina]

From Slate with by far the most "spoilers" of any I've read so far, including this one about Lydia:

"Aunt Lydia, the overseer of the “women’s side” of Gilead, and an object of veneration and terror in every version of the story. A cipher in the first novel and a true believer driven to zealotry by sexual humiliation in the TV series, the Aunt Lydia of The Testaments is another beast entirely, a cunning political survivor with an extensive collection of other people’s secrets and no love for Gilead itself. This Lydia plays the long game, and one of the many pleasures of this enthralling novel comes from witnessing how her plans finally pay out. Recognizing that she is reaching the end of her vitality, Aunt Lydia has no illusions about her future should she weaken. She, like everyone else, must die, but she prefers to decide “when and how.” Oh, and also “who to take down with me. I have made my list.”

It also sounds like Nicole/Daisy has a pretty interesting past and future.

I just ordered the book.  Apparently Amazon shipped a ton of them early, so if you pre-ordered from Amazon, you may already have yours.

[Umbelina]

So, as far as the show?  I wonder what impact this book will have, or already had on The Handmaid's Tale on HULU?

It's hard for me to imagine the show deviating completely from the sequel, which would mean that Nicole/Holly is not returned to Gilead at all, instead is hidden away with a nondescript adoptive family for her safety.  Of course, that may come later, and Luke may still have her for a while.  ?

From the synopses, it almost seems that on some level Aunt Lydia is supporting Mayday, which frankly, would answer a lot of show questions about her erratic behavior, one minute kind, the next a monster, one minute having June followed, the next an ineffective stern warning, etc.

Even though we only get 3 sentences from June herself, in the book she is a wanted terrorist, subject of 2 assassination attempts.  ??  Where is she then?  With the rebels?  Escape to a different country, or perhaps to Alaska?  Will the show ignore all of that, while at the same time, seemingly have written June's story this year in anticipation of the sequel (terrorist, the smuggling kids out really did happen.) and the rest?

Meanwhile, poor Hannah (Agnes) is about to be married off in what seems to be a crumbling or at least beginning to crumble Gilead, while her 1/2 sister goes full out revolutionary, and even meets up with Lydia!

Holy crap!

ETA

Yay yay yay for the expanded world, and world protests against Gilead!

VOX giving a mixed review, generally favorable, but doubts it will achieve the acclaim and esteem of the first book.

Edited September 5, 2019 by Umbelina

[Eureka]

14 hours ago, Umbelina said:

So, as far as the show?  I wonder what impact this book will have, or already had on The Handmaid's Tale on HULU?

It's hard for me to imagine the show deviating completely from the sequel, which would mean that Nicole/Holly is not returned to Gilead at all, instead is hidden away with a nondescript adoptive family for her safety.  Of course, that may come later, and Luke may still have her for a while.  ?

From the synopses, it almost seems that on some level Aunt Lydia is supporting Mayday, which frankly, would answer a lot of show questions about her erratic behavior, one minute kind, the next a monster, one minute having June followed, the next an ineffective stern warning, etc.

Even though we only get 3 sentences from June herself, in the book she is a wanted terrorist, subject of 2 assassination attempts.  ??  Where is she then?  With the rebels?  Escape to a different country, or perhaps to Alaska?  Will the show ignore all of that, while at the same time, seemingly have written June's story this year in anticipation of the sequel (terrorist, the smuggling kids out really did happen.) and the rest?

Meanwhile, poor Hannah (Agnes) is about to be married off in what seems to be a crumbling or at least beginning to crumble Gilead, while her 1/2 sister goes full out revolutionary, and even meets up with Lydia!

Holy crap!

ETA

Yay yay yay for the expanded world, and world protests against Gilead!

VOX giving a mixed review, generally favorable, but doubts it will achieve the acclaim and esteem of the first book.

One of the articles I read, maybe the interview with Atwood, said that she and Miller talked to each other about what they were each doing, so he wouldn't kill off certain people etc. Reminds me of how Diana Gabaldon has said she's warned the showrunners about things they couldn't/shouldn't do in the early seasons of Outlander because it won't make sense with later books they hadn't gotten to yet.

I pre-ordered the book (hasn't arrived yet) but plan to re-read the first one again, to not cloud my vision with the show. I am accidentally spoiled about who the characters are and not sure if I am upset about that or not. I kind of feel like I would have liked the surprise when I started reading. I just want to like the book and too many times I have not liked a sequel as much as I've wanted to and it's so disappointing.

[Umbelina]

BBC

While parts were liked, and the tension praised in places, definitely not a rave review from the BBC.  More information about Lydia in this story, and something the other reviewers did not mention that honestly surprised me.  Dang, I really feel like spoiler tagging this one, even though this thread includes spoilers.  Maybe I'll just leave it out, but if someone else wants to mention it, feel free, it's the part about June's daughters.

"The horrors and repressions of Gilead, so shocking on first encounter, so convincingly realised, are here repeated. If you’ve seen one ululating birth, one man torn apart by Handmaids, you’ve seen them all. Atwood’s prose is as powerful as ever, tense and spare. She invests certain phrases with ironic fury: adulteress, precious flower, Certificate of Whiteness, fanatics, defiled. Her word games are ingenious. She forces you to think about language and how it can be made to lie. The plot is propulsive and I finished in six hours flat. But if The Handmaid’s Tale was Atwood’s mistresspiece, The Testaments is a misstep. The Handmaid’s Tale ended on a note of interrogation: “Are there any questions?” Those questions were better left unanswered."

Even if I don't like the answers, as this reviewer did not?  I'll still be very happy to have them.  Also, it's cool that obviously June is still alive after all, at least she's mentioned as alive in the reviews, doesn't mean she may not die in the later chapters though.

[Anela]

I've put the book on hold at the library. I don't think I can justify the cost of the book (I had been about to pre-order it - I love it when books just arrive, on the day they're released, but hardly ever get to do that). 

[Umbelina]

Another article from NPR

The other question that interested me, reading back through the history of totalitarian regimes was, how did the people who get into the higher positions in such regimes, how did they get there? What has motivated them? Are they true believers in whatever the totalitarianism is flogging? Are they opportunists who hope to profit by it? Or are they there out of fear, as people were a lot under Stalin — "If I don't rise in the organization and annihilate my rivals, they will annihilate me." So, what are the motivations of such people?

--

On how regimes like Gilead fall apart

Let us suppose there's a founder generation. And then other people get born, and they grow up within the regime, and let us suppose also that those who have won their violent regime change are now in charge of things. And they have power. And you know what they say about power. So of course they're going to create exceptions for themselves — which they already have done in The Handmaid's Tale. Rules are for other people. And then things start getting more and more corruptibly pear-shaped ... It's the Mensheviks versus the Bolsheviks. It's the "reform the church from inside" versus the "split off from it and form a different sect." So time and again we've seen these patterns happening — and why would they not happen in in Gilead?

---

 ... So it may not surprise you to know that I was pretty interested in double agents and people working from inside totalitarian regimes, against those regimes, when I was writing this book.

One interesting thing is that it looks like Gilead ends much sooner than the 100+ years people speculated about, which is kind of what I expected really, since the afterwords make it sound like ancient history in The Handmaid's Tale.  It's also interesting that Atwood seemed to intend June/Offred to be a revolutionary resister all along, as hinted by those found diaries, and confirmed in this book, where she does smuggle those children out and is considered both infamous and a traitor/revolutionary.

[Umbelina]

And another from NPR with even more details from the book!

What do the men of Gilead do all day?

We learn very little about it in The Testaments. We hear of one who mostly shuts himself in his study, away from his family, to work all day. We learn that a high-ranking government official serially kills off each of his teenage wives once they get too old for his tastes, then seeks out new targets. We learn that another respected man is a pedophile who gropes young girls.

---

It looks like we will get so much more information about Gilead, how it formed, inside details...cool.

This Gilead, 15 years later, introduces us to the Aunts' training program, the Pearl Girls — young female missionaries sent abroad (wearing pearls, yes, but fake) — unsettling wedding customs, and even how the Aunt program got started. Which means learning the backstory of brutal Handmaid villain Aunt Lydia.

----

 Testaments is more than 400 pages, but a fast and even thrilling more-than-400 pages. The joy of the book isn't in the plot twists but in seeing these women hammer away at the foundations of Gilead, and wondering how much it would take for the whole thing to crumble.

ETA

Herald-Review

More juicy details about the new book here.

In an interview with Time, Atwood, who turns 80 in November, said the sequel would also mark an end to “wheel spinning” on the Hulu series. “They have to move her along — and I’ve given them lots of ways of how that would happen.”

The TIME story referred to above here.

Edited September 7, 2019 by Umbelina
added new links

[alexvillage]

I haven't read the reviews, only some snippets posted here. I already pre-ordered the audiobook. I agree with the reviewer that said Margaret Atwood knows how to use words in an ingenious way. That on itself would make me read her books. That's the sole reason why I did read some, even if the stories didn't attract me so much.

Having said that, I am afraid she wrote a book in part to justify the terrible spin off the show creators invented, and that will be a huge disappointment. I was hoping that she was writing it to set clear the vision she had for her masterpiece. Two things mentioned here make me think that: the fact that she has written Holly/Nichole in, making the story about June alone (I always understood the tale to be one handmaid writing about the lives of all handmaids, not her own life), and the possibility that Gilead ended so soon, which is 100% the opposite of what she first wrote. 

I hope I am wrong. I would hate to think that she is somewhat colluding with the asshats of the show to keep that crap rolling for another 7 years.

[Umbelina]

3 hours ago, alexvillage said:

I haven't read the reviews, only some snippets posted here. I already pre-ordered the audiobook. I agree with the reviewer that said Margaret Atwood knows how to use words in an ingenious way. That on itself would make me read her books. That's the sole reason why I did read some, even if the stories didn't attract me so much.

Having said that, I am afraid she wrote a book in part to justify the terrible spin off the show creators invented, and that will be a huge disappointment. I was hoping that she was writing it to set clear the vision she had for her masterpiece. Two things mentioned here make me think that: the fact that she has written Holly/Nichole in, making the story about June alone (I always understood the tale to be one handmaid writing about the lives of all handmaids, not her own life), and the possibility that Gilead ended so soon, which is 100% the opposite of what she first wrote. 

I hope I am wrong. I would hate to think that she is somewhat colluding with the asshats of the show to keep that crap rolling for another 7 years.

From the TIME link in the media thread:

Atwood, who started writing The Testaments before the show premiered, has worked closely with Miller and his team on each season, advising on story plans, details about Gilead and aspects like character names. During a recent interview, Atwood recalled sharing some choice words with Miller when she learned Lydia was going to be stabbed by a vengeful handmaid: “You absolutely cannot kill Aunt Lydia, or I will have your head on a plate,” she remembers saying.

So, she started writing the 3 character POV book long before Offred even had Holly/Nicole on the show.

She also mentions in one of these articles that June was intended to be a revolutionary in the first book, or to have turned into one by the heavy clue of her tapes even being made, let alone being found in that Maine cabin.

It seems like she gave the showrunner clues about where in the new book June/Offred, and her daughters would go in Testaments, and the show writers followed that (at least some of it) since in the book, June does rescue all those kids, become infamous as a terrorist for doing that.

It may be a chicken/egg argument, but after reading all of that, while it's clear Atwood wasn't pleased with June stuck in the spin cycle without consequences over and over again?  Indeed she did want her "every-woman" in the original book to become what June has become by the end of last season.

She also says that she's giving the showrunners several options about logically what to do with June now (and I don't get the idea that any of those would be June remaining a handmaid in Gilead now.)    I'd guess, join the loyal to the USA "revolutionaries"  fighting the actual wars against Gilead is one of those options.  Another might be her hiding in Gilead, but still involved with Mayday.  Escape is obviously another idea.

Leaving June as a Gilead handmaid now, after all of this, and so many people knowing, including that Martha that ran away?  Would be ridiculous, and sadly, it is probably what the show will do.

Edited September 8, 2019 by Umbelina

[alexvillage]

Well, with that article my disappointment is sealed. She told a show creator who, as far as I know has proven himself to be completely oblivious to anything regarding women, things that she was still working on from the point of view of a women, at a time that, more than ever, women's voices should be amplified at every turn. 

It doesn't really matter then if she started writing the book before the show started. She gave away her best asset - her creativeness - to a low level writing team. That's a shame. It is mind boggling that she would do that and allow them to get ahead of her book, using her ideas, and destroying the genius part of it. I guess capitalism wins, and art loses (because I cannot see any other reason, other than money, for her to simply allow her book to be massacred by a - many times - mediocre TV show.) Really disappointing.

[Stiggs]

Just got back from a trip and my book is here - and I am afraid I may be up all night. :) Everything I’ve read here is exciting - can’t wait to dig in! Thanks for all the info!

[greekmom]

I finished it at 11 pm last night.  I loved it and am very confused.

Spoiler

I cannot believe Aunt Lydia would EVER work for Mayday even on the sly.  And assisted women in issues such as bringing down pedophiles and justice to men who didn't follow the rules? The same Aunt Lydia who mutilated Emily, beat the crap out of hundreds of Handmaids?   Very far fetched I say.  I am thinking maybe another high ranking Aunt was doing this behind the scenes and they used Aunt Lydia's name to hide the actual Aunt who assisted them? 

Hated Commander Judd.  Wished they would have made a passing reference about SJ & Fred.  Sad that Hannah had to grow up in Gilead.  Wish they told us what happened to Becca. Interesting that both Nick and Luke are part of Mayday and safe in Canada each with their daughter. 

That's all for now I guess. I will have more.

[Umbelina]

My book is supposed to be arriving tomorrow, from the reviews I've read, and also from the show?  I can believe Lydia is just keeping herself alive, part of Mayday, all of it.

It certainly explains why the show has her all sweetness and sloppy one minute, and horrifying and cruel the next.  It also explains why June gets away with stuff, at least the things that Lydia also wanted to happen.

I can't wait!

[meatball77]

I finished the book this afternoon.

Spoiler

As for Aunt Lydia

Lydia really enjoys the power.  She likes the power more than anything else.  Her role in Mayday is also about having power over others.  She loved being able to take down those she detested and that is why she was involved in mayday.  It's also why she kept such strong control of the aunts.  She wasn't as much a true believer as one who enjoys having power over others.  Even at the end, she takes the power over her own death.

Agatha's friend Becca was one of my favorite characters.  The discussion between the aunts of the girls having a fear of penises was hysterical.  Discussing if they needed to add something into the curriculum. 

I thought Daisy was pretty boring.  Needed in the story but I didn't love her sections.

The story of the concubine torn into several pieces.  Eek!

 

2

This book seemed less literary and more commercial than The Handmaid's Tale.  I loved The Handmaid's tale but I never could have torn through it in an afternoon like I did with this book.  It felt the same regarding everything mirroring things that have been done already in history.  I felt a lot of parallels to the FLDS and the Soviet Union.

[Stiggs]

16 hours ago, meatball77 said:

I finished the book this afternoon.

  Reveal spoiler

As for Aunt Lydia

Lydia really enjoys the power.  She likes the power more than anything else.  Her role in Mayday is also about having power over others.  She loved being able to take down those she detested and that is why she was involved in mayday.  It's also why she kept such strong control of the aunts.  She wasn't as much a true believer as one who enjoys having power over others.  Even at the end, she takes the power over her own death.

Agatha's friend Becca was one of my favorite characters.  The discussion between the aunts of the girls having a fear of penises was hysterical.  Discussing if they needed to add something into the curriculum. 

I thought Daisy was pretty boring.  Needed in the story but I didn't love her sections.

The story of the concubine torn into several pieces.  Eek!

 

2

This book seemed less literary and more commercial than The Handmaid's Tale.  I loved The Handmaid's tale but I never could have torn through it in an afternoon like I did with this book.  It felt the same regarding everything mirroring things that have been done already in history.  I felt a lot of parallels to the FLDS and the Soviet Union.

I'm halfway through it now, and it's interesting to me the different styles of the two books, and wonder how my writing style will be in 30 years - it's certainly different from what it was 20 years ago. I don't know if it's easier to read because I'm already familiar with Gilead, the Aunts, etc., or if Atwood is just breezier. Regardless, I am enjoying the crap out of it and can't wait to finish work and get back to it, lol. 

[buttercupia]

This was a disappointment. Atwood is great at voice switching for her protagonists-the original offred vs alias grace vs elaine in cat's eye etc etc. this book felt rushed and forced. 

most any other author I would give a pass but Atwood can do better.

[Umbelina]

Mine just arrived, I'm only up to chapter 6, but I'm loving this!  Lydia and Agnes viewpoints are so refreshing, and little "world" details are already cropping up.  In this book, it's obvious that Agnes has never met her mother, June, and doesn't even know (yet) the role of Handmaid's...she finds them scary, almost as scary as being married.

I'm just going to refer to her as Agnes here, since the book does.  It's Hannah.

Back to read more, but the child's eye view of things is fascinating to me, as is what I've glimpsed of Lydia so far.  I can't wait to meet Holly (Daisy!) in Canada.

ETA cool, more of Mayday coming now.  I'm really loving this so far.  

It's not the first person classic that is The Handmaid's Tale, but this take on how Gilead happened and how it begins to fall, and what happens in between is so wonderful, and is answering so many questions that Offred's first person account could not have possibly done.

As far as the show?  One more clue may be in Daisy's story.  This part could be directly show related so I'll go ahead and tag it, even though this thread is designed to be full of spoilers.

Holly Nicole (Daisy) as in excerpts above is raised in Canada, but the political situation left at the end of last season of the Hulu show is directly addressed as well in Testaments.  Canada,

Spoiler

not wanting to anger bigger and more armed Gilead hems and haws for awhile and then says they will do everything they can to give Nicole back, probably to avoid war or retaliation.  However, not clear exactly why yet in the book, a married couple who are also Mayday raises Holly (unsure as yet if Canada colluded with that) as Daisy.  On her 16th birthday her parents are killed by Gilead with a car bomb, and as I'm currently reading a bad-assed female Mayday woman has just grabbed Daisy (Holly Nicole) from school and is getting her away.

Back to the book.  I really enjoy hearing Lydia's recounting of the start of Gilead as well, a different perspective than Offred's and fascinating.  She too, delayed getting out for too long.

Edited September 12, 2019 by Umbelina

[chocolatine]

Just finished The Testaments. I didn't enjoy is as much as THT, and the ending was too "Hollywood", but I thought Aunt Lydia's backstory in The Testaments was a million times more compelling and in character than the one the show has concocted for her.

On 9/11/2019 at 6:15 AM, greekmom said:

  Hide contents

Wish they told us what happened to Becca.

Spoiler

They told us - per Aunt Lydia's POV - she was found dead in the cistern. She had climbed in to hide because she was supposed to be the Pearl Girl who left with Agnes, and to mess with the Ardua Hall water supply to create a diversion from Nicole going missing, and apparently she drowned. The statue described in the epilogue was dedicated to her.

[Umbelina]

I'm just happy to know that

Spoiler

June, Nicole, and Hannah are reunited and that the three of them, in their own ways played a hand in

the downfall of Gilead!  

Also, we have more of a timeline, the final stages of Gilead are coming much sooner than anyone thought  (well, truthfully, I never thought Gilead lasted THAT long, the hundred years others speculated) so...  Anyway, from this book, at about 20-25 years in or so, Gilead is in it's last stage before the collapse noted in the epilogue of The Handmaid's Tale.  So maybe 30-45 years at most?  Aunt Lydia's

Spoiler

secret files are released

and that fast forwards the collapse.

16 hours ago, chocolatine said:

Just finished The Testaments. I didn't enjoy is as much as THT, and the ending was too "Hollywood", but I thought Aunt Lydia's backstory in The Testaments was a million times more compelling and in character than the one the show has concocted for her.

  Hide contents

They told us - per Aunt Lydia's POV - she was found dead in the cistern. She had climbed in to hide because she was supposed to be the Pearl Girl who left with Agnes, and to mess with the Ardua Hall water supply to create a diversion from Nicole going missing, and apparently she drowned. The statue described in the epilogue was dedicated to her.

Yes, it was great.  The show didn't show Lydia when the USA fell though, just long before, so that could be coming, especially now that they have this to work with.  

I kind of hope they just blend The Testaments into the show now on Hulu, in many ways, they already have, June as Mayday for example, and Nicole's story so far.  

--

I loved reading about Texas, California, Utah, etc. and the resistance and Mayday forces...sad that Europe and Canada were fairly useless, too afraid of the massive weapons in the USA, but glad to hear that eventually the USA people take their country back (which we already knew from the first book, but of course, without details.)

It was certainly a page turner, but I've waited many decades for "the rest of the story" and I'm not disappointed.  I agree it's not the masterpiece of The Handmaid's Tale, but so what?  How many masterpieces does an author need?  This solved questions I've been wondering about for so long, and it was FAR more fun to read than I ever expected.  I hope Atwood had a good time writing this.

Hopefully the show sends June into hiding/resistance now, instead of trying the spin cycle in the washing machine again of narrow escapes, and if it does?  The show will improve a lot, the biggest issues for me are not this season, but last, with the whole baby birth escape peril, and then this season with the the stupid stupid episode at the school with June acting like an idiot.  I have no problem at all with Mayday June, just narrow escape June.  

I especially have no problem with it after reading this book.  Her revolutionary ways were hinted at and speculated about in the first book as well, and now we know for sure about Atwood's plans for her.

Edited September 13, 2019 by Umbelina
timeline stuff

[Anela]

I've just found out that this book is waiting for me at the library, and I can't find my card!! Damn it. 

[Sugarbeetle]

18 hours ago, chocolatine said:

Just finished The Testaments. I didn't enjoy is as much as THT, and the ending was too "Hollywood", but I thought Aunt Lydia's backstory in The Testaments was a million times more compelling and in character than the one the show has concocted for her.

  Reveal spoiler

They told us - per Aunt Lydia's POV - she was found dead in the cistern. She had climbed in to hide because she was supposed to be the Pearl Girl who left with Agnes, and to mess with the Ardua Hall water supply to create a diversion from Nicole going missing, and apparently she drowned. The statue described in the epilogue was dedicated to her.

Spoiler

They told us - per Aunt Lydia's POV - she was found dead in the cistern. She had climbed in to hide because she was supposed to be the Pearl Girl who left with Agnes, and to mess with the Ardua Hall water supply to create a diversion from Nicole going missing, and apparently she drowned. The statue described in the epilogue was dedicated to her.

I took it a different way.

Spoiler

Remember Aunt Lydia made a point of saying Becka folded her clothing at the entrance. There was also a line about her getting really quiet and going to her room. I think Becka took her life by suicide. It broke my heart. 

By the way, Hi All! I have been an on off member of the various iterations of these boards for years. I just finished the book and I've been itching to talk about it. So glad I found you all. 

[Stiggs]

20 hours ago, Umbelina said:

I'm just happy to know that

  Reveal spoiler

June, Nicole, and Hannah are reunited and that the three of them, in their own ways played a hand in

the downfall of Gilead!  

Also, we have more of a timeline, the final stages of Gilead are coming much sooner than anyone thought  (well, truthfully, I never thought Gilead lasted THAT long, the hundred years others speculated) so...  Anyway, from this book, at about 20-25 years in or so, Gilead is in it's last stage before the collapse noted in the epilogue of The Handmaid's Tale.  So maybe 30-45 years at most?  Aunt Lydia's

  Reveal spoiler

secret files are released

and that fast forwards the collapse.

Yes, it was great.  The show didn't show Lydia when the USA fell though, just long before, so that could be coming, especially now that they have this to work with.  

I kind of hope they just blend The Testaments into the show now on Hulu, in many ways, they already have, June as Mayday for example, and Nicole's story so far.  

--

I loved reading about Texas, California, Utah, etc. and the resistance and Mayday forces...sad that Europe and Canada were fairly useless, too afraid of the massive weapons in the USA, but glad to hear that eventually the USA people take their country back (which we already knew from the first book, but of course, without details.)

It was certainly a page turner, but I've waited many decades for "the rest of the story" and I'm not disappointed.  I agree it's not the masterpiece of The Handmaid's Tale, but so what?  How many masterpieces does an author need?  This solved questions I've been wondering about for so long, and it was FAR more fun to read than I ever expected.  I hope Atwood had a good time writing this.

Hopefully the show sends June into hiding/resistance now, instead of trying the spin cycle in the washing machine again of narrow escapes, and if it does?  The show will improve a lot, the biggest issues for me are not this season, but last, with the whole baby birth escape peril, and then this season with the the stupid stupid episode at the school with June acting like an idiot.  I have no problem at all with Mayday June, just narrow escape June.  

I especially have no problem with it after reading this book.  Her revolutionary ways were hinted at and speculated about in the first book as well, and now we know for sure about Atwood's plans for her.

As usual, I agree with your post. I love the part June played in this book without having to even be in it much.

 I feel like Atwood wrote this because she HAD to, heh. She had to finish the story. I just finished and I feel satisfied, like I ate a good steak with some hearty wine. 

If this is also going to be a Hulu show, Anne Dowd needs to send Atwood a muffin basket, lol. I have always been fascinated by Aunt Lydia, and now I am obsessed. Talk about a complex character. Atwood owns me. As does Dowd because like Tom Selleck IS Magnum, she is Aunt Lydia. Anyone else playing that character is just blasphemy, heh.

Even though I figured out the mysteries kind of early on, the payoff was satisfying, and Atwood’s voice is still as powerful and humorous as ever. 

My 19-year old self just sighed and said, finally, man. Also, because I am a greedy ho, I now want a book about life in Canada. 🙂 

[Umbelina]

18 minutes ago, Stiggs said:

My 19-year old self just sighed and said, finally, man. Also, because I am a greedy ho, I now want a book about life in Canada. 🙂 

Oh mine too, and the book felt to me as if Atwood's younger self did the same.  

Much too happy an end to be considered "great" since so many love the sad or inconclusive ends, but to me, it just felt triumphant.  For the characters, for the readers, but most of all for Atwood.  She ended this story the way SHE wanted too, and it was a note of hope and defiance injected at a bleak time.

I think the biggest concession she may have made is completely leaving race out of this story, but it didn't hurt the book that much, and aside from that, what was left to mention at that point perhaps?  Gilead had no POC of any kind left.

Her thank you to the writers and actors and everyone involved in the show in the afterword was quite nice too.

2 hours ago, Sugarbeetle said:

  Hide contents

They told us - per Aunt Lydia's POV - she was found dead in the cistern. She had climbed in to hide because she was supposed to be the Pearl Girl who left with Agnes, and to mess with the Ardua Hall water supply to create a diversion from Nicole going missing, and apparently she drowned. The statue described in the epilogue was dedicated to her.

I took it a different way.

  Hide contents

Remember Aunt Lydia made a point of saying Becka folded her clothing at the entrance. There was also a line about her getting really quiet and going to her room. I think Becka took her life by suicide. It broke my heart. 

By the way, Hi All! I have been an on off member of the various iterations of these boards for years. I just finished the book and I've been itching to talk about it. So glad I found you all. 

Welcome!

I don't know if I would call it suicide, because she didn't really take her own life, she gave her own life to something important enough to die for.  It made me sad, and I loved her appearing later as well.

--

Speaking of that, I absolutely loved the handling of sex and marriage from the POV of the 13 and 14 year old children about to face that, whilst raised under Gilead's teachings.  I found it very powerful and believable and compelling.

Contrasting them to the Canadian raised Daisy was perfect.

Speaking of that, whoa, Atwood let Canada really have it a few times there.  "Cavemen, blow on them they topple" or whatever it was, and she didn't spare the rest of the world's timidity in the face of Gilead pressure much either.

Edited September 14, 2019 by Umbelina

[Umbelina]

Oh, and it's a small thing, but I love the book cover, both front and back, especially the handmaid in the ponytail on the back cover.  I didn't understand the green before I read it, but now, of course, it's perfectly clear, as is the free woman arms spread on the front cover.  

Applause for that.  (are there more women hidden in these images?)

Edited September 14, 2019 by Umbelina

[anyanka323]

I thought it was a worthy followup to The Handmaid's Tale, very much living up the expectations.   It was interesting how some of the show's plotlines, especially in the last two seasons, get some resolution here. 

Aunt Lydia's backstory for her involvement in Gilead makes more sense here than it does on the show.  Of course, the book has the benefit of her being of one three primary narrators and more development than on the show.  It's a much more chilling and thought provoking path towards her rise in Gilead, because

Spoiler

of her choice to survive through collaboration with Commander Judd.  She truly was a self-made woman in the US pre-Gilead, and she wasn't going to give up that status and position.

The quiet strength, power, and resilience of Becka, Agnes and Daisy/Nicole were one of the strengths of the book.  For me it was the

Spoiler

ability of both Becka and Agnes to make their own paths as Aunts rather than give into their families' demands of forced marriages that was a highlight.  You knew something wasn't right with Becka and her father the dentist, but it was unsettling nonetheless when it was revealed that she had been sexually abused by him. 

The book has been shortlisted for the Man Booker Prize already.  Atwood has also never won a Nobel Prize for Literature, and this year 2 awards are being given.  One will likely go to a writer who primarily writes in English, so it could be her year. 

[Umbelina]

On 9/11/2019 at 6:15 AM, greekmom said:

I finished it at 11 pm last night.  I loved it and am very confused.

  Hide contents

I cannot believe Aunt Lydia would EVER work for Mayday even on the sly.  And assisted women in issues such as bringing down pedophiles and justice to men who didn't follow the rules? The same Aunt Lydia who mutilated Emily, beat the crap out of hundreds of Handmaids?   Very far fetched I say.  I am thinking maybe another high ranking Aunt was doing this behind the scenes and they used Aunt Lydia's name to hide the actual Aunt who assisted them? 

Hated Commander Judd.  Wished they would have made a passing reference about SJ & Fred.  Sad that Hannah had to grow up in Gilead.  Wish they told us what happened to Becca. Interesting that both Nick and Luke are part of Mayday and safe in Canada each with their daughter. 

That's all for now I guess. I will have more.

They did mention Fred being purged I think, as far as the show and the limited timelines we have from both books, I'd think his death would be imminent.

I completely CAN believe Lydia worked behind the scenes not only to carefully protect herself, but also to bring the whole stinking mess down.  Also, it really explains her contrary behavior on the show, one minute harsh, the next letting various handmaids including June get away with murder.  

Basically, I think she looked at each person in Gilead as "what use can I make of them for my own purposes/safety?"  Although the book doesn't go into it that much specifically about June, I do think Lydia found her rebelliousness "useful" in various ways.  Nicole getting out for example, became a very important tool for Lydia.  June was a "leader" among "her girls" and chaos can be a very useful tool to someone intent on eliminating all of those horrible men and women responsible for Gilead.

As she says later "Bullet or no bullet?  Bullet."  Lydia made her choice when she shot an innocent woman.  Subsequent tortures we part of the necessary actions to secure her power and position.

Yes, people had to be hurt and to die, but so what?  If Lydia didn't do that she would be one of those hurt or dead people.  Following the path she chose, she was able to eventually bring down ruin on many who hurt others, and Gilead itself.

ETA

I bet Ann Dowd is clapping her hands with glee about now, and I kind of hope we see a bit of her hidden camera action soon on the show.

Edited September 14, 2019 by Umbelina

[Stiggs]

6 hours ago, Umbelina said:

They did mention Fred being purged I think, as far as the show and the limited timelines we have from both books, I'd think his death would be imminent.

I completely CAN believe Lydia worked behind the scenes not only to carefully protect herself, but also to bring the whole stinking mess down.  Also, it really explains her contrary behavior on the show, one minute harsh, the next letting various handmaids including June get away with murder.  

Basically, I think she looked at each person in Gilead as "what use can I make of them for my own purposes/safety?"  Although the book doesn't go into it that much specifically about June, I do think Lydia found her rebelliousness "useful" in various ways.  Nicole getting out for example, became a very important tool for Lydia.  June was a "leader" among "her girls" and chaos can be a very useful tool to someone intent on eliminating all of those horrible men and women responsible for Gilead.

As she says later "Bullet or no bullet?  Bullet."  Lydia made her choice when she shot an innocent woman.  Subsequent tortures we part of the necessary actions to secure her power and position.

Yes, people had to be hurt and to die, but so what?  If Lydia didn't do that she would be one of those hurt or dead people.  Following the path she chose, she was able to eventually bring down ruin on many who hurt others, and Gilead itself.

ETA

I bet Ann Dowd is clapping her hands with glee about now, and I kind of hope we see a bit of her hidden camera action soon on the show.

I agree - I feel like the Lydia we knew makes more sense now. And there was always a huge part of me hoping that Lydia was like, a quadruple agent. And if she recognized that June could be of use, it at least explains why June still has both of her eyes and all of her fingers, not to mention a breath in her body. 

The Pearl Girls were a brilliant addition to the story. And genius of Lydia. 

[Umbelina]

5 hours ago, Stiggs said:

I agree - I feel like the Lydia we knew makes more sense now. And there was always a huge part of me hoping that Lydia was like, a quadruple agent. And if she recognized that June could be of use, it at least explains why June still has both of her eyes and all of her fingers, not to mention a breath in her body. 

The Pearl Girls were a brilliant addition to the story. And genius of Lydia. 

Yes, I really liked the addition of the Pearl Girls, and Lydia was brilliant there.

I've reread the book, first the whole thing, then twice more, once focusing on just the girl's chapters, and once on just Lydia's.  Rereading Lydia's last night brought a few more reactions from me, perhaps because I read more slowly and thought about more individual lines there.

One of the key lines to me was the moment she vows to get back at them.  I'll quote it maybe later, I'm off to do things today.  However, it was AFTER being forced to sit in that stadium for so long, peeing and pooping themselves, frying in the sun for days on end, witnessing and then participating in the murders of other business women.  Then of course the cells with non working toilets and no toilet paper, spotty running water, stink and despair everywhere as they were broken down.  Finally the Thank Tank in complete darkness and isolation with intermittent beatings and for some, rapes.  

The three days at the Holiday Inn after that, showers, bathrooms, beds, sheets, blankets, being clean.  She makes the right calls in her second interview with Judd, her participation in her first murder, and yet, she still has enough wits about her to request a great deal of autonomy for the Aunts, in a way that flatters him, and she gets it.

At some point in there there are just a couple of lines where she swears to get even with them for all of that, her rage and determination is palpable.  That was no idle threat, that was a solemn vow to herself, and it shaped the rest of her life.  On this read through, I recognized that, the power of a moment like that.  I've HAD a moment like that in my life, and it's a vow you do not break.  It's everything.  

I completely understood her actions from that moment on.  She kept that solemn vow to herself, and knowing in her soul that she would do that?  Kept her going through all of the rest of the BS of Gilead.  She was smart, she thought, she controlled herself, she trusted no one except herself, she was patient, she was careful and brilliant, and step by step she eventually fulfilled that vow.

ETA

I really appreciate that Atwood didn't hammer that whole thing home repeatedly.  It happened.  Once.  It was real.  It was done.  That decision was carved in stone for Lydia, right then.  No need to keep referring to it throughout the book, or for Lydia to repeat it to herself in later chapters, as many authors may have done.

For Lydia, that moment was so real, so palpable, it became her guiding star, and best of all?  She kept that solemn vow.

Edited September 14, 2019 by Umbelina

[Umbelina]

Here is the short paragraph from Aunt Lydia I was talking about above.  Page 149.

She's been beaten 3 times while in the isolation completely dark Thank Tank, after all the previous indignities and tortures designed to turn human beings into animals, as she puts it.

Italics Atwood.

"Did I weep?  Yes:  Tears came out of my two visible eyes, my moist weeping human eyes.  But I had a third eye, in the middle of my forehead.  I could feel it: it was cold, like a stone.  It did not weep: it saw.  And behind it someone was thinking:   I will get you back for this.  I don't care how long it takes or how much shit I have to eat in the meantime, but I will do it."

That was chilling and powerful to me, but not until the second read through.  I think I was rushing a bit too much, since this one is definitely a page turner, during the first read.  On second read, I think Aunt Lydia's entire future life was decided in that moment, during that vow.

Edited September 15, 2019 by Umbelina
clarified

[AllyB]

I finished the book this morning and am ultimately very disappointed. First off it's an entertaining easy read. I mostly wasn't bored throughout and wanted to keep reading. I say mostly because in the final chapters, the escape from Gilead, there was absolutely no tension because how these characters and their world would end up was made explicit from their first chapters. We mostly derided Bruce Miller stating that June can survive everything the plot throws at her because the story is told by her at some point in the future. But that was definitely the case here. There was never any tension for the two younger characters because their ending was known right from the start. So the chapters that might otherwise have felt tense didn't. Then one character goes to sleep and when she wakes up a multitude of major events have passed which she hears about over the course of about 5 sentences and then we're essentially done. The end was all tell (swiftly) with no show and I ultimately found that really unsatisfying.

I also had some issues with a few of the major events in the book itself. Mainly with baby Nichole. Offred got in the back of that van in the early stages of her pregnancy. So early that she didn't actually know for sure that she was pregnant and Fred and Serena hadn't a clue about it. We know from there that she made it to Maine and made her tapes. And other than that was lost to history. Yet in this book Baby Nichole that nobody in Gilead knew about nor should they ever have had means to know about, was a big deal. A huge deal because her 'legal' father, Fred, who shouldn't have known she existed wanted her back. And she continued to be a big deal long after Fred was purged. This makes no sense.

In the future, apart from her relatively anonymous tapes Offred is unknown and untraceable. Luke and Nick are unknown and untraceable. Yet their daughters are free celebrities who have given full testimonies that are a matter of public record. And all five are so publicly reunited that they declare it on a statue in a park! But nobody could ever work out what happened to Offred, who she really was and what happened afterwards? Nope, doesn't make sense.

And lastly, Lydia's backstory. The original book and even the crappy tv series have always inferred that the creation of Gilead was akin to a slow boiled frog. Small changes, freedoms eroded a little at a time, so that by the time it was unpalatable it was too late. Yet in Lydia's backstory we are told that Congress was bombed, women lost control of their money, the constitution abolished and professional women (including the receptionist) rounded up in the space of about 3 days. That's not a slow boiled frog. It's a microwaved frog. She sits in the stadium berating herself for not leaving sooner, but what sooner? No more than 4 minutes passed between her learning that her bank accounts were frozen and the constitution abolished and her arrest. Even if she wasted no time after learning about women not being allowed money, she wouldn't have made it out of the building. It was lightening fast. The opposite of everything ever implied in the original book.

Lastly, that Judd, and the other founding Sons of Jacob, would think that turning women like Lydia in the space of a couple of weeks and then handing her power of the kind the aunts, especially the founding aunts, would have is just stupid. The stadium treatment, followed by the carrot and stick approach of the Thank Tank and the Holiday Inn is an interesting idea. But not for turning modern women with no religious inclination into what is essentially the female leadership of Gilead. It's stupid. Gilead was well planned. There would have been 3 other women like Vidala who had been groomed for years and years in advance of Gilead in order to become those 'founding aunts.' The SoJ would not have been dependant on just one pre-prepared woman and 3 who they 'made' in a hurry. I could buy Lydia finding her way into the aunts as a means of survival and working her way up really quickly, while always trying to bring the system down. But not that Judd had earmarked her as a leader before the treatment, yet never, ever moved to work on her until the lightening fast take over and then he was so happily confident in his superfast brainwashing system that he gave her massive amounts of independent power immediately. It, again, makes no sense. The Lydia backstory on the tv show wasn't great but it made far more sense than this did.

So overall, I think the book was a big step up from the garbage that the tv show has become but it's massively flawed in itself. It was fine as I read it, as I enjoyed the entertainment aspect of it. And Atwood is a lovely writer. But the more distance I have from reading it, the stupider it's becoming. And I only finished it a few hours ago. In this way it's reminding me of the first of the Kelvin timeline Star Trek movies. Entertaining enough while watching it that I ignored all the stupidity, but still so stupid that I wasn't even out of the cinema before all the 'but!!!!! s' started refusing to be pushed aside anymore. 

 

[Umbelina]

8 hours ago, AllyB said:

I also had some issues with a few of the major events in the book itself. Mainly with baby Nichole. Offred got in the back of that van in the early stages of her pregnancy. So early that she didn't actually know for sure that she was pregnant and Fred and Serena hadn't a clue about it. We know from there that she made it to Maine and made her tapes. And other than that was lost to history. Yet in this book Baby Nichole that nobody in Gilead knew about nor should they ever have had means to know about, was a big deal. A huge deal because her 'legal' father, Fred, who shouldn't have known she existed wanted her back. And she continued to be a big deal long after Fred was purged. This makes no sense.

Well, we don't know where that van takes her in the book, it could be quite similar to what happens on the show, or it could be something completely different.    

There is no correlation between getting in the van and it taking Offred to the cabin in Maine. We don't even know if she was ever IN that cabin, the tapes could have been left there at any time and they didn't have to be left by her.

8 hours ago, AllyB said:

In the future, apart from her relatively anonymous tapes Offred is unknown and untraceable. Luke and Nick are unknown and untraceable. Yet their daughters are free celebrities who have given full testimonies that are a matter of public record. And all five are so publicly reunited that they declare it on a statue in a park! But nobody could ever work out what happened to Offred, who she really was and what happened afterwards? Nope, doesn't make sense.

I am not AT ALL sure they are "celebrities" at all.   Where did that idea come from?  They have been asked to tell their stories, and those are documented.  We don't know if they were "public record" or top secret and just kept in Mayday files for years.  Even the statue their children and grandchildren erect at the end is vague, no "celebrity" status, just first names of the daughters, no names of the mother or fathers.

It's quite likely that they all remained as incognito as possible even after Gilead collapses, after all, Gilead had those supporters in the Canadian government, and certainly not all of the leaders would be executed, and then there are the Eyes.  June, her daughters, and her two Mayday husbands would probably have still been in danger, from those resenting that they helped bring down Gilead.

Did I miss something about fame or celebrity?

8 hours ago, AllyB said:

And lastly, Lydia's backstory. The original book and even the crappy tv series have always inferred that the creation of Gilead was akin to a slow boiled frog. Small changes, freedoms eroded a little at a time, so that by the time it was unpalatable it was too late. Yet in Lydia's backstory we are told that Congress was bombed, women lost control of their money, the constitution abolished and professional women (including the receptionist) rounded up in the space of about 3 days. That's not a slow boiled frog. It's a microwaved frog. She sits in the stadium berating herself for not leaving sooner, but what sooner? No more than 4 minutes passed between her learning that her bank accounts were frozen and the constitution abolished and her arrest. Even if she wasted no time after learning about women not being allowed money, she wouldn't have made it out of the building. It was lightening fast. The opposite of everything ever implied in the original book.

The frog boiling part (from the first book, not just the show) was all of the little things that were happening for years.  Things described in the show and in the book, abortion being made illegal (June's mom was protesting that) and the rise of the ultra religious right, the back to basics movements, the denigration of women choosing to work instead of "old fashioned values" and honoring men, book burning, etc. 

 The 3 branches of government being slaughtered, martial law declared, and frozen bank accounts WERE the quick part, or the microwaved part.

So it was BOTH a slow boil for a few years and then the BOOM quick final bombings/takeover.  Both were part of it.

8 hours ago, AllyB said:

Lastly, that Judd, and the other founding Sons of Jacob, would think that turning women like Lydia in the space of a couple of weeks and then handing her power of the kind the aunts, especially the founding aunts, would have is just stupid. The stadium treatment, followed by the carrot and stick approach of the Thank Tank and the Holiday Inn is an interesting idea. But not for turning modern women with no religious inclination into what is essentially the female leadership of Gilead. It's stupid. Gilead was well planned. There would have been 3 other women like Vidala who had been groomed for years and years in advance of Gilead in order to become those 'founding aunts.' The SoJ would not have been dependant on just one pre-prepared woman and 3 who they 'made' in a hurry.

It sounded like that torture went on for over a month, possibly two months.

I agree they probably had other women groomed, but how many of those were "wives" rather than people who could do what Aunts would do?  Indeed, these were the ultimate misogynists and I can believe that they had their hands rather full with, I dunno, destroying the entire United State's government and taking over everything.  Judd's not wanting to waste his or his fellow commanders precious time on "women things" does fit, they had a hell of a lot to do, rebuild a country from the ground up, wars everywhere with those who fought them, handling trade, the world, getting all the letters removed, redesigning everything from grocery stores, to trade, to medical care, hell all of it was redone.

Would they have had more "Vidalias?"  Maybe, but given their disdain and dislike for women, perhaps they overestimated some of them, and once the shooting started, and bombs, some of the other "Vidalias" crumpled or were found to be useless or annoying.  

Anyway, there are many reasons Judd, initially being stuck with the rather large task "handle the women" wouldn't want to do that, or would realize he wanted to delegate that less than stellar title/role and move on to more lucrative and honorable roles himself.  So, he picked out the women he thought had those kinds of skills, did his various tortures, broke them, then plucked the best of those left from the blood.

Win Win for him, and he gets to move on to a different and more respectable role, while at the same time taking credit for the Aunts work.

It all fits for me, and while I see what you mean about "knowing they made it from the beginning" that part didn't bother me at all, it was still a page turner for me...  In the beginning I had no idea who they were telling their story to, let alone at what stage of their life they were doing it.  Obviously by the boat and rowing part, I knew they made it at least to someplace to WRITE or "tell" all of this, but honestly, that could have been back in Gilead, or years later.  So I didn't really know until the very end that they indeed make it to Canada, and are reunited with June.

After that I suspect they, like their mother, remained in hiding for a very long time.

Edited September 15, 2019 by Umbelina
typo and clarity

[Umbelina]

I wanted to mention Commander Judd.  Him looking like "Santa Claus" did remind me quite a bit of Commander Lawrence.  It was odd, at some point I wondered if the show writers had a clue about this other commander, but not much of one.  Obviously probably just a coincidence that they looked so similar, their roles were certainly different.  Still, a tiny bit jarring as I kept picturing Bradley Whitford!

It distracted me a little bit, and after putting the book down, I started thinking about Whitford as Judd, and being glad he wasn't!  Will the show tackle the whole Commander who kills each young wife as she gets a bit older and less attractive as the virginal pubescent child?  That might be a very fine line to walk...

ETA

Also wanted to mention the one nod to racial injustices that Atwood included in the book, or at least mentioned as another fiasco.  The "Certificate of Whiteness."  

I'd also like to know more about that whole relocation or resettlement thing in North Dakota.  Actually, I want to know all of it.  Why?  Who did they send?  It sounds like a Gilead thing to do, and the tales of some of them managing to escape to Canada, frostbite and missing fingers/toes/noses and all certainly sounds like a harrowing tale.  

Although I doubt the "military" side of things referred to in the epilogue will ever actually materialize?  I would LOVE, LOVE it if Atwood did write yet another book that discusses those sides of Gilead's failures.  Specifically the entire west coast, most of Texas, parts of Missouri, Utah, and the Chicago/Detroit areas resistance and successes!  

Interestingly enough, this quite matches the map that leaked, except for Missouri.

I really want to know, less about the military side, but more about how they were living, who was leading them, how many of those leaders were female, when and how did all of those groups reunite with Alaska and Hawaii to bring down Gilead for good?  How many former Army/Navy/Marine/Coast Guard/National Guard members did they have helping them?  

All of that.  

Come on Margaret!  Just one more book!

Edited September 15, 2019 by Umbelina
eta and map

[AllyB]

8 hours ago, Umbelina said:

Did I miss something about fame or celebrity?

I guess so. Daisy is told to smile for the waiting news cameras as she passes out. And when she comes to, she is told (among the other 100 things in a massive info dump) that they are all over the news "sisters defy odds" "Baby Nichole escapes Gilead." As is the microdot concealed in her tattoo. As is all the information on the microdot. It's not explicitly spelled out that they are celebrities but if you are the baby symbol of escape from Gilead for 16 years, then you go back to Gilead, find your sister and smuggle out a load of information that somehow brings Gilead down. And you do the final part on camera, dramatically collapsing live on tv as you reach safety. You are a celebrity. The sister by your side is a celebrity. Your two very different lives and reunion and daring escape to end Gilead are going to be mega-news whether you cooperate or not. Their newly reunited mother and fathers will not remain secret and anonymous, though they may avoid the massive level of celebrity that would be unavoidable for the sisters. And in fact if Gilead is ultimately ended by bad PR(?) the sisters being out there front and centre with a Mayday controlled narrative would be a big part of that. As is clear by the fact that Mayday arranged for all the news cameras to be there when the girls landed.

[Umbelina]

1 hour ago, AllyB said:

I guess so. Daisy is told to smile for the waiting news cameras as she passes out. And when she comes to, she is told (among the other 100 things in a massive info dump) that they are all over the news "sisters defy odds" "Baby Nichole escapes Gilead." As is the microdot concealed in her tattoo. As is all the information on the microdot. It's not explicitly spelled out that they are celebrities but if you are the baby symbol of escape from Gilead for 16 years, then you go back to Gilead, find your sister and smuggle out a load of information that somehow brings Gilead down. And you do the final part on camera, dramatically collapsing live on tv as you reach safety. You are a celebrity. The sister by your side is a celebrity. Your two very different lives and reunion and daring escape to end Gilead are going to be mega-news whether you cooperate or not. Their newly reunited mother and fathers will not remain secret and anonymous, though they may avoid the massive level of celebrity that would be unavoidable for the sisters. And in fact if Gilead is ultimately ended by bad PR(?) the sisters being out there front and centre with a Mayday controlled narrative would be a big part of that. As is clear by the fact that Mayday arranged for all the news cameras to be there when the girls landed.

There were television cameras, and mentions of newspapers writing stories about the two sisters that escaped, during their landing.  The reporters probably surmised that the document dump was connected to the two of them (I honestly can't imagine Mayday sharing that information however, and there is nothing that says the newspapers mentioned the microdot, just that they were releasing those files.)

So they had their 15 minutes, probably more like at least 2 weeks of some kind of fame, and that might have helped rally all the resistance fighters against Gilead that were still fighting.  I'm sure it was a boost to morale.

The real damage was done by the document dump from Aunt Lydia though, and that is ultimate what weakened Gilead and caused even more purges of the Commander class, leaving them extremely vulnerable to attack from both within and without.

I guess it could go either way after that.  My surmise was that they were all disappeared quietly by Mayday, and June faded back into the woodwork soon after the reunion.  There was no mention of either father being there for the girls at that time, but it sounds like they met them at some point.

Even after Gilead fell for good though, they would still have enemies, so probably lived fairly quietly...I don't think they became The Kardashians.  If anything, interviews with them after that first rush would probably be done in secret, without cameras shortly after that, and June would have had to fade into the woodwork very soon, since she was still a target of assassins. 

That statue that didn't even mention their names is a huge clue to that, even grandchildren later, they didn't put any of their names out there, and none on the documents secreted away in that boat's files either.  So care was taken.  Which is what I would expect, especially since Gilead had spies and helpers inside of Canada, and didn't fail completely for a few more years at least.

Your version could be true I suppose, but it would be extremely dangerous, and I doubt either girl would live long enough for grandchildren, or even children of their own, and their mother would certainly be dead if she lived in the open.

Perhaps, after Gilead was completely dead for a few years, they could have lived more openly, or, more likely, relocated to California, Hawaii, or Europe, but then why no names on that statue plaque?  

Edited September 16, 2019 by Umbelina

[Nicski]

I loved the book! I also certainly hope that the series time jumps to cover this.  Am I the only one thinking that Ada and Elijah helping Daisy/Nicole In Canada is actually Moira and Luke?  The description of Ada was spot on... as it was told from Daisy / Nicole perspective she would not have known that.

[nodorothyparker]

I'm only halfway through this so far as I'm trying to really take my time and savor Margaret Atwood's prose and how she plays with language, but the further in I get the more I'm wondering about the relationship between the show post first season and what we're seeing on the page.  There's been a lot of speculation/criticism about the showrunners and how they've "ruined" Atwood's vision, but without reading much of the press surrounding the book I'm having a hard time not immediately concluding that Bruce Miller did have at the very least the broad strokes outline of where this was all going and that the problem has largely been in his execution of it rather than making it up wholesale, much in the same way that the Game of Thrones showrunners were left to color in the very broad outlines from where that series left off and then caught no endless amount of hell for how poorly they filled in those very large blanks.  To think otherwise is to think that Atwood cribbed what she liked from him, thus his vision, and is now putting her own spin on it.  So it's at least mildly interesting to me to speculate on whose vision is actually whose.

As always, my feelings about this may still change as I get farther in. 

[alexvillage]

On 9/15/2019 at 9:10 AM, AllyB said:

So overall, I think the book was a big step up from the garbage that the tv show has become but it's massively flawed in itself

3 hours ago, nodorothyparker said:

I'm only halfway through this so far as I'm trying to really take my time and savor Margaret Atwood's prose and how she plays with language, but the further in I get the more I'm wondering about the relationship between the show post first season and what we're seeing on the page.

I have been sitting on this book since it was released (Audiobook by Libro.fm). What you both said is part of why.

I love how Margaret Atwood uses words, sarcasm, analogies, so I will definitely read/listen to it. But I can't make myself start because I hated what the show runners did with the story, I even stopped watching mid-season, and for what I am seeing, MA just rolled with it and took the mess that they created and developed into a story that might become another bad TV idea (probably not as much as the original though).

I was hoping she would be more of a dissenter and come up with her own story, even if it negated everything the show runners destroyed. Because fuck that shit and what the show became. 

Alas, she might be eying another big buy for the rest of the story, so in a sense she is making sure they just like it so much - because if keeps in line with their view - and will pay a lot for the rights of this book.

Disappointing. 

Or maybe it is just my utopian view that quality art shouldn't become hostage of capitalism. Oh well.

[Umbelina]

5 hours ago, Nicski said:

I loved the book! I also certainly hope that the series time jumps to cover this.  Am I the only one thinking that Ada and Elijah helping Daisy/Nicole In Canada is actually Moira and Luke?  The description of Ada was spot on... as it was told from Daisy / Nicole perspective she would not have known that.

I doubt it.

Luke, for example, is mentioned as also being in Mayday and in hiding in the book, not by name but by "your father."  I also don't see why "Ada" wouldn't tell her best friend's daughter who she is, or that her mother was her best friend.

I do think that Atwood's broad strokes of June as part of Mayday were given to Miller and team, possibly even more than "broad strokes."  It was certainly implied in the first book that June was involved with Mayday as well, or they at least were involved with her.

In NO way to I think Atwood was a sell out here, I think she wrote a book, inspired to do so for the reasons she gives in afterwords of the book.  I loved it, and I loved getting her conclusion after so many years.

[Stiggs]

14 hours ago, Nicski said:

I loved the book! I also certainly hope that the series time jumps to cover this.  Am I the only one thinking that Ada and Elijah helping Daisy/Nicole In Canada is actually Moira and Luke?  The description of Ada was spot on... as it was told from Daisy / Nicole perspective she would not have known that.

For a bit I was really thinking that Ada was Moira - super hoping, too - then she described her background and it wasn’t like Moira’s. I also think she would fess up and tell her she was her mom’s BFF. 

God, now I want a similar book but from Moira’s, Emily’s and Luke’s POV. 🙂 I am greeeeedeeeeee. 

I am re-reading Surfacing right now, and I am just amazed at how masterfully Atwood tells stories, and how beautifully distinct her voice is. I have a feeling I’m going on an Atwood re-read bender. My Hemingway re-read bender of 2016 lasted a good six months, heh. Let’s see how this goes - I now embrace audiobooks, so it might go faster. 🙂  

[Anela]

I have the book! I just haven't started to read it yet. 

[nodorothyparker]

So I finally finished the book and it basically confirmed for me my earlier supposition that the show is another Game of Thrones: That much of what has been bemoaned as ruining the author's original work beyond where the source material left off is from the author herself and the problem has mostly been with the execution.   That's basically the only burning question I had going into this and was pretty much willing to roll with it beyond that.

As always, I like Atwood's prose and I can appreciate that she was able to write another well put together chapter of a universe she created more than 30 years ago.  Beyond that though, much of it felt very expected.  Lydia predicted in the original book that it would be much easier for the generation that followed because they wouldn't be troubled by the memories of the freer world before, but this world is about what I would have expected from a violently misogynistic totalitarian regime where men could give into their worst impulses unchecked and a generation of girls have been raised in this circumscribed hothouse environment to be fearful of their own shadows or the specter of the random penis and so unschooled that Agnes doesn't have any idea how big Gilead is or which direction is which even if she could read a map to point the way to Canada.  The only real surprise at all came in seeing that Gilead would even offer girls an out if they'd rather be dead than Wives rather than tell them to suck it up and lie back and think of Gilead.

I'm still not sure myself how I even feel about Lydia.  There's a powerful parable there about how easily the victimized can be conditioned to become the victimizer under the right circumstances, and I suppose I'm not really shocked that when confronted with the overwhelming evidence of how perverted the ideals of Gilead have become that she would side with the burn it all down and start over crowd, if that's even what she truly believes she's doing.  But even there, the whole setup of getting Daisy/Nicole into Gilead only to have to smuggle her back out feels ridiculously overwrought to achieve that end beyond the OMG Sisters! reveal.  What's the point beyond just wanting to lay eyes on Nicole for herself?  It's unnecessarily risky when she's already got the Pearl Girls unknowingly carrying messages for her.  She likely could have achieved much the same ends with Agnes with the same information that hey you've got blood relatives right over there if you just do this one thing.  It doesn't help that there was really no suspense heading into the pat happy ending since we already know they got away with it or there wouldn't be two separate testimonies about it.

I didn't hate it but it doesn't have nearly the power of the original.

[dleighg]

I am about halfway through and very much enjoying it. However, it is a bit confusing (maybe it becomes more clear by the end) since obviously the time frame in which Agnes is writing must be very different from that of Daisy. Daisy is 16 years old in this book, while Agnes is 13 or so. Clearly Agnes is 5 or more years older than Daisy in real life, right?

[Umbelina]

1 hour ago, dleighg said:

I am about halfway through and very much enjoying it. However, it is a bit confusing (maybe it becomes more clear by the end) since obviously the time frame in which Agnes is writing must be very different from that of Daisy. Daisy is 16 years old in this book, while Agnes is 13 or so. Clearly Agnes is 5 or more years older than Daisy in real life, right?

Yes, that confused me at first as well, she does clear it up later quite easily/cleverly but with just a few lines...later in the book. They are telling

Spoiler

their stories as memoirs, telling them about the same time, but their stories obviously took place (childhood etc) at different times.

Edited September 30, 2019 by Umbelina

[dleighg]

I've reached the point where it's cleared up. Agnes/Hannah's story skips quite a few years (9 to be exact-- her training period) before her story line meets Daisy/Nicole's story line. So she's now 23 and Daisy is 16.

Edited September 30, 2019 by dleighg

[txhorns79]

On 9/22/2019 at 7:30 PM, nodorothyparker said:

so unschooled that Agnes doesn't have any idea how big Gilead is or which direction is which even if she could read a map to point the way to Canada. 

This is something I wondered about.  As time passes, and you end up with a generation of girls without much schooling and no ability to read, how can you function as an Econowife or Martha?  I mean, even if they have cookbooks that use only pictures, it seems like you'd still need some basic math to understand measurements and the like.  This is probably what happens when you give way too much thought to all this. 

[Empress1]

On 9/22/2019 at 7:30 PM, nodorothyparker said:

specter of the random penis

The exchange between Aunt Lydia and one of the other aunts in which the aunt says that Becca refuses to be married and initially doesn't say why, and then when Aunt Lydia presses her, admits, "It's the penises," had me cracking up.

I've been a fan of Atwood's since I was introduced to her in high school English. There were points when I felt like she didn't quite nail Nicole's dialect. But I thought her world-building skills were - are - masterful. Reading about the way Aunt Lydia was broken down, each challenge. When Lydia says they began to stink and talked about not just the body odor that comes with not bathing or changing clothes for days but the fact that some of them were menstruating and weren't given anything to deal with it, I felt like I could smell them. Agnes growing up as a true believer and just how limited that made her, in terms of life skills. I thought the journey the sisters took illustrated that particularly well. Thirteen-year-olds talking about marriage to men five times their age. The Particicutions - frenzied women tearing Dr. Grove limb from limb. I thought it was all so powerful.

Re: Becca, I read her death as intentional, resigned. I thought that her even suggesting the cistern in the first place was a sign; as Aunt Lydia pointed out, she could have hidden in the library. The space was supposed to be cramped but I doubt it was life-threatening in the way that the cistern was, particularly given that Becca knew someone had drowned there before.

I knew who Agnes and Nicole were right away. I wasn't spoiled, but I could just tell.

On 9/14/2019 at 3:25 AM, Umbelina said:

I bet Ann Dowd is clapping her hands with glee about now, and I kind of hope we see a bit of her hidden camera action soon on the show.

When Ann Dowd was cast, I thought she was an excellent choice. Now I think so even more, because she's a good enough actress to carry the weight of Testaments Aunt Lydia, should the show move in that direction. You can picture her living entirely in her head, calculating, assessing, figuring out who and what will be useful to her so she can achieve her goals. She wouldn't stop being smart and ambitious in Gilead. (I remember thinking that when we were introduced to the neonatologist turned Martha on the show, that she must have been bored out of her mind.)

[Umbelina]

2 hours ago, Empress1 said:

When Ann Dowd was cast, I thought she was an excellent choice. Now I think so even more, because she's a good enough actress to carry the weight of Testaments Aunt Lydia, should the show move in that direction. You can picture her living entirely in her head, calculating, assessing, figuring out who and what will be useful to her so she can achieve her goals. She wouldn't stop being smart and ambitious in Gilead. (I remember thinking that when we were introduced to the neonatologist turned Martha on the show, that she must have been bored out of her mind.)

Indeed she could.  I hope the show incorporates this into the current show, and doesn't "save" it all for a NEW show.  Aunt Lydia could start having flashbacks of her own, and hopefully soon, and related to the beginnings of Gilead!

On 9/30/2019 at 12:13 PM, txhorns79 said:

This is something I wondered about.  As time passes, and you end up with a generation of girls without much schooling and no ability to read, how can you function as an Econowife or Martha?  I mean, even if they have cookbooks that use only pictures, it seems like you'd still need some basic math to understand measurements and the like.  This is probably what happens when you give way too much thought to all this. 

IIRC the future econowives in Agnes' class were being taught different things, while the future Wives girls were being taught fancy embroidery, for example, the future econowives were being taught functional sewing.  I wish she had included the cooking aspects in school for them as well, but I have to imagine they would study that as well.  It doesn't take much work to learn how to bake or boil meat, or steam veggies, bake potatoes, make toast, or cook eggs after all.  Breadmaking is also pretty simple with practice, and muffins and biscuits are super easy to make, and practically foolproof, though of course actual quality may vary.  I can see several ways they could do that without reading.  Special measuring cups and spoons for each item, with a picture.  Bread ones with RED line for flour, BLUE spoon for yeast, WHITE spoon for salt, PINK spoon for sugar, and a YELLOW line on the cup for milk.  Etc.  Honestly, once you've done it 20 times you don't really need to measure much but the yeast.  Biscuits and muffins are even simpler.  

Good point though, I wish cooking had been mentioned, or something like "on Wednesdays the future econowives go to the school for Martha's for cooking lessons and are given their special equipment.

I really adored the way they addressed the girls inside Gilead growing up with no significant memories of normal life, and so terrified, and at the same time, uniformed about sex, except for the fear of course.  Pedophilia was, unsurprisingly as prevalent as it had ever been, with perhaps, greater chances of getting away with it.  The "blame the victim" parts of all of it were sadly, not that different from the way too many people feel about it all even today. 

[Empress1]

55 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

The "blame the victim" parts of all of it were sadly, not that different from the way too many people feel about it all even today. 

I felt so awful for Becca when she said she couldn't turn in her father because no one would believe her, and then on the flip side, if they DID believe her, he'd be put to death and it would be her fault and she couldn't live with that.

One line from the book stays with me: "No one wants to die. They just don't always want to live in the ways that are allowed."