Has anyone read The Testaments yet?

[Bad Dingo]

Sept 24, 2019 6:31:54 GMT -5 LoveTrains said:

I think it was interesting to see Lydia’s backstory. I don’t think it makes her less evil but it helps make you understand why she did what she did. It’s like how normal people could become Nazis. That doesn’t excuse their horrendous and egregious actions - and they are still culpable and evil - it shows the evolution of it.

I have no idea when I'll get around to reading the book.  Please spoil Lydia's backstory for me.  The backstory in the series was ridiculous (imo).

[Vespasia]

Sept 14, 2019 21:58:40 GMT -5 aurora said:

Sept 14, 2019 20:20:00 GMT -5 cosmowife said:

Ha! I finished the book. I get it now. I was not expecting the twist. And funny enough, my kindle cut off the book right after Offred’s tale ended and said I was done, so I almost didn’t even read the rest. I just noticed that I still had 5% left and clicked back into it. I think I became more used to the style as I got further through the story, and the ending made me like the book more overall. Does Atwood regularly use these types of tricks in her writing? I like twists like this and I may be more inclined to work through another of her stories with the understanding that it might all come together in the end.

Glad you finished! But annoying that Kindle tells people they're done at the end of Offred's story, since the rest is pretty important.

I'm glad this came up because I reread Handmaid's Tale last week and totally missed this.

I'll come back with my thoughts about the Testaments soon. 

[isabel]

Sept 14, 2019 20:20:00 GMT -5 cosmowife said:

Sept 13, 2019 21:03:20 GMT -5 aurora said:

And you might still end up not liking it! But you will understand more.

I liked The Fountainhead at first - I agree it is well-written - but Rand's politics got to me in the end.

Ha! I finished the book. I get it now. I was not expecting the twist. And funny enough, my kindle cut off the book right after Offred’s tale ended and said I was done, so I almost didn’t even read the rest. I just noticed that I still had 5% left and clicked back into it. I think I became more used to the style as I got further through the story, and the ending made me like the book more overall. Does Atwood regularly use these types of tricks in her writing? I like twists like this and I may be more inclined to work through another of her stories with the understanding that it might all come together in the end.

I'm confused by this. Where did it stop?

[isabel]

I'm about 50% through The Testaments right now and really enjoying it. I don't think it's bound to be a classic, but I'm finding it enjoyable to read and that's mostly what matters to me in a book.

[greeneggs]

Sept 24, 2019 6:31:54 GMT -5 LoveTrains said:

It was clearly tied to the series. I’m not sure how I feel about that - but I know Margaret Atwood has been working with them on the series. If anything it gives some clues as to what will happen in the show.

I think it was interesting to see Lydia’s backstory. I don’t think it makes her less evil but it helps make you understand why she did what she did. It’s like how normal people could become Nazis. That doesn’t excuse their horrendous and egregious actions - and they are still culpable and evil - it shows the evolution of it.

I'm glad she told us Hulu's plans for the final season.  I see why she tied in some of the elements from the series into the book but it felt almost like truly great fan fiction for the TV series.

I liked the book but wasn't overly impressed and I'm glad I borrowed it from the library instead of spending money on it.  

[cosmowife]

Sept 24, 2019 11:59:27 GMT -5 isabel said:

Sept 14, 2019 20:20:00 GMT -5 cosmowife said:

Ha! I finished the book. I get it now. I was not expecting the twist. And funny enough, my kindle cut off the book right after Offred’s tale ended and said I was done, so I almost didn’t even read the rest. I just noticed that I still had 5% left and clicked back into it. I think I became more used to the style as I got further through the story, and the ending made me like the book more overall. Does Atwood regularly use these types of tricks in her writing? I like twists like this and I may be more inclined to work through another of her stories with the understanding that it might all come together in the end.

I'm confused by this. Where did it stop?

Kindle stopped the book at the end of Offred’s tale before it went into the symposium in the future. I had to click back into the book to continue reading even though it said I was done.

[isabel]

Sept 26, 2019 12:26:28 GMT -5 cosmowife said:

Sept 24, 2019 11:59:27 GMT -5 isabel said:

I'm confused by this. Where did it stop?

Kindle stopped the book at the end of Offred’s tale before it went into the symposium in the future. I had to click back into the book to continue reading even though it said I was done.

I don't think I've ever read that part and I've read this book 3 times now... Guess I should go back and look at it again.

[cosmowife]

Sept 26, 2019 12:27:39 GMT -5 isabel said:

Sept 26, 2019 12:26:28 GMT -5 cosmowife said:

Kindle stopped the book at the end of Offred’s tale before it went into the symposium in the future. I had to click back into the book to continue reading even though it said I was done.

I don't think I've ever read that part and I've read this book 3 times now... Guess I should go back and look at it again.

Omg!!!! Yes, you need to read that part!

[aurora]

Sept 26, 2019 12:27:39 GMT -5 isabel said:

Sept 26, 2019 12:26:28 GMT -5 cosmowife said:

Kindle stopped the book at the end of Offred’s tale before it went into the symposium in the future. I had to click back into the book to continue reading even though it said I was done.

I don't think I've ever read that part and I've read this book 3 times now... Guess I should go back and look at it again.

It's a crucial part of the whole story!

[isabel]

Ok, I finished The Testaments. I enjoyed it until about 75% of the way through, but the whole thing with Lydia helping them escape was just kind of unbelievable to me. I don't know. I don't really get that part of the story and her motiviations. Also, some of the conversations toward the end between Agnes and Nicole felt stiff and contrived. I realize their relationship was a bit stiff at that point, but the speech patterns just didn't feel right to me.

Overall, I enjoyed reading it, but I think I might have preferred leaving the ending to my own imagination.

[isabel]

cosmowife, aurora, I just read the symposium in HT. That was interesting. I didn't realize some of those elements of the show were part of the book. Glad I went back and read it.

[wawa]

Sept 26, 2019 14:19:11 GMT -5 isabel said:

Ok, I finished The Testaments. I enjoyed it until about 75% of the way through, but the whole thing with Lydia helping them escape was just kind of unbelievable to me. I don't know. I don't really get that part of the story and her motiviations. Also, some of the conversations toward the end between Agnes and Nicole felt stiff and contrived. I realize their relationship was a bit stiff at that point, but the speech patterns just didn't feel right to me.

Overall, I enjoyed reading it, but I think I might have preferred leaving the ending to my own imagination.

I agree with this. The idea that Lydia was playing the long long game to overthrow the regime...is...I just don't know how plausible I find it? And somebody else mentioned this but the shift in tone to a high action thriller was bizarre.

Does the idea that she was secretly plotting to take them all down the WHOLE TIME seem more or less likely for the show watchers? I've never watched it

[isabel]

Sept 26, 2019 14:56:40 GMT -5 wawa said:

Sept 26, 2019 14:19:11 GMT -5 isabel said:

Ok, I finished The Testaments. I enjoyed it until about 75% of the way through, but the whole thing with Lydia helping them escape was just kind of unbelievable to me. I don't know. I don't really get that part of the story and her motiviations. Also, some of the conversations toward the end between Agnes and Nicole felt stiff and contrived. I realize their relationship was a bit stiff at that point, but the speech patterns just didn't feel right to me.

Overall, I enjoyed reading it, but I think I might have preferred leaving the ending to my own imagination.

I agree with this. The idea that Lydia was playing the long long game to overthrow the regime...is...I just don't know how plausible I find it? And somebody else mentioned this but the shift in tone to a high action thriller was bizarre.

Does the idea that she was secretly plotting to take them all down the WHOLE TIME seem more or less likely for the show watchers? I've never watched it

Definitely less likely. I don't find it believable in the slightest. And yes, the change in tone was bizarre! I was so fascinated by just all the customs and descriptions of what was going on, it felt like the plot was gently moving, but the book was more about the details and then all of a sudden in the last quarter of the book it was like WHAM! RUN AWAY! Bizarre.

It was on track for at least 4 stars for me through 3/4 of the book. I gave it 3.

[aurora]

Sept 26, 2019 14:19:11 GMT -5 isabel said:

Ok, I finished The Testaments. I enjoyed it until about 75% of the way through, but the whole thing with Lydia helping them escape was just kind of unbelievable to me. I don't know. I don't really get that part of the story and her motiviations. Also, some of the conversations toward the end between Agnes and Nicole felt stiff and contrived. I realize their relationship was a bit stiff at that point, but the speech patterns just didn't feel right to me.

Overall, I enjoyed reading it, but I think I might have preferred leaving the ending to my own imagination.

I have said before (probably here) that I think some of HT's power derives from the open ending. I delayed watching season 2 of the TV show for a long time as a result. I'm still not sure that The Testaments (or seasons 2+ of the show) were a good idea.

That said, given the existence of the show, I don't think Atwood was wrong to want her version of the story out there.

[StrawberryBlondie]

Bumping because I just finished it.

I was surprised that I really liked it. The ambiguous ending (not the symposium part) I one of my favorite things about Handmaid's Tale so I should probably dislike that it was kind of wrapped up in a bow.

I found Aunt Lydia's storyline completely believable. I don't think it made her seem any less evil, but showed how people are complicated and multi-dimensional.

I'm currently watching season 3 of the show. There's been a few times where I've noticed what seems to be little cracks in Aunt Lydia's veneer, so it's certainly making me look at her a little differently. Or maybe the book is making me interpret things differently than I otherwise would/should.

[wawa]

I keep thinking about Lydia. Like ..what would I even do in that situation? I'm not cagey enough to play the game like that. Pretty sure I'd just have ended up dead. But...isn't it good that she was that cold hearted evil bitch?

That she could just throw so many people into the meat grinder because that's what it took? Was she wrong? Was there a better way to fight at that point?

[StrawberryBlondie]

Oct 10, 2019 11:45:15 GMT -5 wawa said:

I keep thinking about Lydia. Like ..what would I even do in that situation? I'm not cagey enough to play the game like that. Pretty sure I'd just have ended up dead. But...isn't it good that she was that cold hearted evil bitch?

That she could just throw so many people into the meat grinder because that's what it took? Was she wrong? Was there a better way to fight at that point?

So, I'm pretty sure I'd end up dead too.

But - i think her legal career offers some insight. I don't think the book said what she practiced before being a judge, but generally, lawyers are trained in playing the long game, weighing the options, looking out for the self (meaning your client), strategizing how to get to your preferred end, etc - which is very generally what she was doing. And since she was a family court judge, she was probably REALLY good at compartmentalizing.

ETA: I don't think she was necessarily wrong to do what she did. But, I also don't think it was good. Maybe there was another way, but I'm guessing she weighed her options and decided this was the most likely to be successful.

[isabel]

Oct 10, 2019 11:59:28 GMT -5 StrawberryBlondie said:

Oct 10, 2019 11:45:15 GMT -5 wawa said:

I keep thinking about Lydia. Like ..what would I even do in that situation? I'm not cagey enough to play the game like that. Pretty sure I'd just have ended up dead. But...isn't it good that she was that cold hearted evil bitch?

That she could just throw so many people into the meat grinder because that's what it took? Was she wrong? Was there a better way to fight at that point?

So, I'm pretty sure I'd end up dead too.

But - i think her legal career offers some insight. I don't think the book said what she practiced before being a judge, but generally, lawyers are trained in playing the long game, weighing the options, looking out for the self (meaning your client), strategizing how to get to your preferred end, etc - which is very generally what she was doing. And since she was a family court judge, she was probably REALLY good at compartmentalizing.

ETA: I don't think she was necessarily wrong to do what she did. But, I also don't think it was good. Maybe there was another way, but I'm guessing she weighed her options and decided this was the most likely to be successful.

But what about the very beginning where she was willing to kill someone else? That didn't have anything to do with over throwing the regime. She can't possibly have been thinking about how she was going to overthrow this new government at that point.

[StrawberryBlondie]

Oct 10, 2019 12:16:30 GMT -5 isabel said:

Oct 10, 2019 11:59:28 GMT -5 StrawberryBlondie said:

So, I'm pretty sure I'd end up dead too.

But - i think her legal career offers some insight. I don't think the book said what she practiced before being a judge, but generally, lawyers are trained in playing the long game, weighing the options, looking out for the self (meaning your client), strategizing how to get to your preferred end, etc - which is very generally what she was doing. And since she was a family court judge, she was probably REALLY good at compartmentalizing.

ETA: I don't think she was necessarily wrong to do what she did. But, I also don't think it was good. Maybe there was another way, but I'm guessing she weighed her options and decided this was the most likely to be successful.

But what about the very beginning where she was willing to kill someone else? That didn't have anything to do with over throwing the regime. She can't possibly have been thinking about how she was going to overthrow this new government at that point.

I think that was just sheer will to personally survive.

[isabel]

Oct 10, 2019 12:18:17 GMT -5 StrawberryBlondie said:

Oct 10, 2019 12:16:30 GMT -5 isabel said:

But what about the very beginning where she was willing to kill someone else? That didn't have anything to do with over throwing the regime. She can't possibly have been thinking about how she was going to overthrow this new government at that point.

I think that was just sheer will to personally survive.

You know, it's not even so much that she changed her tune and decided to help them escape. It's that I don't understand the why behind it.

In the show, I can actually see her deciding to help get someone like Janine out. It's plausible in my head. Her thought process being that she "loves" Janine (in her own twisted way) and she knows Janine isn't mentally well and just wants to make sure she isn't hung. I can see that and I can understand the why behind it. But I never felt like the *why* was explained in The Testaments. I didn't understand her motivations.

[StrawberryBlondie]

Oct 10, 2019 12:21:15 GMT -5 isabel said:

Oct 10, 2019 12:18:17 GMT -5 StrawberryBlondie said:

I think that was just sheer will to personally survive.

You know, it's not even so much that she changed her tune and decided to help them escape. It's that I don't understand the why behind it.

In the show, I can actually see her deciding to help get someone like Janine out. It's plausible in my head. Her thought process being that she "loves" Janine (in her own twisted way) and she knows Janine isn't mentally well and just wants to make sure she isn't hung. I can see that and I can understand the why behind it. But I never felt like the *why* was explained in The Testaments. I didn't understand her motivations.

I'm extrapolating, but I think her motivations changed over time. At first, I think she just wanted to not die. Maybe the thought was that she can't do anything about it if she's gone, maybe she thought this can't last long and she wanted to be around when things went back to normal, or maybe she just said "not today!"

Then I think the more she got involved, the more she started planning and plotting, she probably first started compiling info for blackmail purposes to save her own ass or get higher up, but then she started to realize she was possibly in a position to actually do something about it.

Issues I have with the show aside, one thing I think it does a really good job of showing is that no one is happy in Gilead.

[aurora]

Oct 10, 2019 12:16:30 GMT -5 isabel said:

Oct 10, 2019 11:59:28 GMT -5 StrawberryBlondie said:

So, I'm pretty sure I'd end up dead too.

But - i think her legal career offers some insight. I don't think the book said what she practiced before being a judge, but generally, lawyers are trained in playing the long game, weighing the options, looking out for the self (meaning your client), strategizing how to get to your preferred end, etc - which is very generally what she was doing. And since she was a family court judge, she was probably REALLY good at compartmentalizing.

ETA: I don't think she was necessarily wrong to do what she did. But, I also don't think it was good. Maybe there was another way, but I'm guessing she weighed her options and decided this was the most likely to be successful.

But what about the very beginning where she was willing to kill someone else? That didn't have anything to do with over throwing the regime. She can't possibly have been thinking about how she was going to overthrow this new government at that point.

I doubt she was thinking as far as overthrowing then, but I could imagine book Lydia thinking she'd be able to fight if she survived, even if she didn't know what the fight would look like yet.

I don't think TV Lydia was like that at all given the one flashback episode she had. They're basically different people in my mind.

[fortnightlily]

I think I would have enjoyed it more if I hadn't seen Season 2 of the show. It spoiled a lot of the surprises and diffused a lot of the tension. I also felt like a lot of the characters got off too easy. Nothing really threw anyone's plans for a major loop.

[pugz]

Hulu has optioned the rights for the book and I wonder if they will make a separate series or just use the storyline in Handmaid's Tale (flash forwards?)

I thought the book was too short and moved too fast. I wanted more about what the society looked like

[lolalolalola]

We are reading this for a book club. Do you think it’s worthwhile if someone hasn’t read or watched the Handmaids Tale?

[pugz]

Oct 10, 2019 22:09:49 GMT -5 lolalolalola said:

We are reading this for a book club. Do you think it’s worthwhile if someone hasn’t read or watched the Handmaids Tale?

I think they need to read HT first as it sets it all up including how the society works.

[StrawberryBlondie]

Oct 10, 2019 22:09:49 GMT -5 lolalolalola said:

We are reading this for a book club. Do you think it’s worthwhile if someone hasn’t read or watched the Handmaids Tale?

Definitely necessary to do one or the other.