Saturday 28 September 2019

Book Review - 'The Testaments (The Handmaid's Tale #2)' by Margaret Atwood

This review can be summed up by what the other middling-to-negative reviews of 'The Testaments' have already said, and I agree with some of them.

Okay, my own thoughts it is then:

'The Testaments' has a bit of brilliance, a bit (well, a lot, actually) of mediocrity, and an undesirable amount of the side order of Huh?, WTF and Why?, all mixed into it; for a sequel to the fantastic and hugely relevant 'The Handmaid's Tale' published thirty-four years previously.

I do see what some people mean when they say that it's as if Margaret Atwood was trying to appeal to a broader mass audience, and not always succeeding. But the writing is great, quick and engaging, and the book can be read in two days tops, like over a weekend. The legacy, chronicles, and cautionary tales of 'The Handmaid's Tale' and the empire Republic of Gilead are even more relevant now than they were thirty years ago, and a continuation could be needed.

However, 'The Testaments' doesn't really add anything new to the political climate and discussions, and suffocating atmosphere, pertaining to women's reproductive rights, and their rights as human beings and not breeding stock as a whole. There isn't anything plot related about, or specifically relevant to, our current times. Does planning on how to overthrow abiding corrupt and inhumane governments count?

Issues such as abortion and older white men controlling women's rights to their own bodies are present, but they are a little too subtle, too few and far between, and placed like an afterthought with no deeper meaning behind them for my liking. It's the same with the slut shaming and victim blaming: they are arbitrary, and are not explored beyond surface level.

For a feminist book about misogyny rooted in stubborn, regressive religious dogma, 'The Testaments' contains a false rape accusation (did Gillian Flynn have a hand in writing this? Why the fuck did that have to be there?!), and copious amounts of female backstabbing and literally murderous hatred among women (we are only told about how men betray each other in order to obtain higher power and political influence as well, and then very briefly, and also it is a lot of the male characters on the side against Gilead who get the most things done in the book. Like, the women outside of Gilead are nearly as useless as the women inside it).

And it is absolutely inexcusable for a 2019 feminist text not to include POC and/or LBGTQ characters. There simply aren't any to be found - except for a nameless girl in Gilead thought to originally be from Mexico, who is removed quickly, presumably towards her torture and death, like hundreds before her, in one sentence and disappears indefinitely from the codex. What was the point of that? 'The Handmaid's Tale' could get away with its lack of inclusion and diversity because it was written in the eighties - what is Ms Atwood's excuse this time? It is a serious offense and oversight for a book about extreme oppression and history repeating itself (or just rhyming with itself, to quote one of the best lines in the book). The word "segregation" is mentioned only once, and it is in reference to the gender divide in Gilead.

Another thing that put me off in 'The Testaments' is the character inconsistencies. They all seem to change motivations and views at a drop of a hat, whenever it is convenient to the plot, and I don't think this is due to unreliable narrators and so-called forgeries of historical documents ('The Testaments' is told in written confessions and diary entries).

I had trouble keeping track of the timeline as well. Suddenly in the middle of the book the young teenage characters in Gilead are adults in their early twenties, and nothing about them changes, so they might as well still be teenagers. The effects of living in the stifling, limiting, static and fearful environment in Gilead? Eh, I neither know nor care. It is rather flimsy.

A feature that particularly irks me is one of the teenage girl narrators - I won't say who due to spoilers, plus her name keeps changing regularly and no one seems to give a damn - becoming a symbol for freedom from the evils of Gilead via infiltration set up entirely by the adults around her, so she's basically a tool with no will of her own. Sure, she lashes out and expresses opinions a lot, even in the worst, most baffling circumstances, but it has no impact on her situation whatsoever. So much for her own voice. All the while she has a little (hetero) love story in her head (what is this? A poor woman's 'The Hunger Games'?), and I'm thinking, "Your parents were just murdered. Oh yeah, remember them? I guess not, seeing as you never mention them again."

Yet, while I was disappointed - despite having wisely kept my expectations low, and I am usually markedly adverse to sequels - I do still like the writing in 'The Testaments'. Even though the content can get melodramatic, over the top, contrived, ridiculous, inconsistent, and very predictable, with plot twists that any seasoned reader could see coming a mile off. Ms Atwood can make this world, scarily similar to our nonsensical world, somewhat believable.

Is 'The Testaments' necessary? Did it need to exist? Probably not, but anything to keep the real world conversations it represents going on in the mainstream consciousness, in the midst of the #MeToo movement, and political and government party corruption. It is like YA but containing much darker and heavier content.

Content warning for suicide, pedophilia, and sexual assault and violence towards women, including by men with guns.



I don't know. Maybe I need to reread 'The Handmaid's Tale'.

'The Testaments' - it tried, and got an average grade, I suppose.

And no I have not seen the TV series adaptation. A piece of work, but especially a book, should be able to stand on its own, as its own story.

Speaking of, if TV exists in Gilead, surely smuggled movie and series DVDs must exist there as well. Anything can get smuggled in Gilead. But any reference to pop culture, like the references to historic slavery and subjugation, is completely absent in 'The Testaments'.

*sigh* The more I think about it, the more I realise what potential was wasted.

Final Score: 2.5/5

No comments:

Post a Comment