Any one fancy a discussion thread for the handmaid's tale?

Ok thanks 😎

Though I haveto confess that I atfirst thought it was about the name Pam. Wondered why Pam was such a bad name £It was malicious to saysomeone was call anyone that!!!

Think it's because she was neither serenenorjoyful. The suggestion being all names are pseudonyms - except the !commander

Slightly confused about the bit in the epilogue when it mentions that the character Serena Joy was a malicious invention..?

Marking my place here as I've just started the book.

I'll be back as soon as I've finished

DD is watching the TV series in school at the moment and when we spoke about it the other night one of the things she said was "Serena Joy is nothing like she is in the book, they have made her really young and pretty" and I thought of course they have. Ooooh the irony!

I have just binge read it in two days and I loved it. I really don't think I will be able to watch the TV series now though. I know I would find the way they have "fleshed out" the story for TV really jarring and irritating. And it also puts me off it's that others have said the TV adaptation has upped the shock factor which I don't feel was needed at all. The book was horriffic, it doesn't need added clitoris removal or whatever and to me feels like those bits were added to suck in the Jeremy Kyle-warching demographic.

whever my credit/debit card is rejected I think "it's happening" and wonder if the people around me would get the reference....

I did dystopias for A-Level too including THT!

I re-read it last week. I found it fascinating reading it again at nearly 40 with two DC having previously read it at 17. At 17 I thought I would have found a way to escape or kill myself (like the first Offred I guess) but I now know I'd be more compliant to ensure I didn't place my children at risk. The removal of Offred's daughter has had a far more profound impact on me this time as I understand what that truly means for her.

Interestingly I've found myself thinking about Serena Joy and the impact childlessness might have had in shaping her. I don't think I gave Serena a second thought at 17 other than to think her a massive bitch!

I don't think it's a text I really understood until now. I think I was too black and white as a teenager. It takes maturity to learn characters can't be divided into good and bad and are shaped by their experiences.

The way they seized control of women's finances and employment was terrifying in how simple and plausible it could be. More so today than at the point it was written!

I read it years ago and still remember the effect it had on me. I was driving through France with my then boyfriend and had a sudden panic that someone would catch us or that my bank card wouldn't work or something. It really affected my emotions and stayed with me. I'm not sure I could read it again.

Yes I agree Ghosts the TV series does really flesh out the book - there is more shock and overt horror though. I like the sense of oppression, menace and helplessness in the book. In the TV series there is more outright rebellion against the regime.

In the book it is made clear by Serena a number of times that Offred is in a really bad position - you get 3 placements and then if no baby -the colonies or worse and even if you do get pregnant the likelihood is miscarriage, still birth or severe mental and physical disability (a "shredder" - so they kill such babies?) - this is not made so clear in the TV series.

There is going to be a second TV series so they will have to take the plot beyond the book's content

I read it recently after watching the first episodes of the TV series. (There's also a thread in Telly Addicts about the adaptation).
I think the TV adaptation has fleshed out the story and upped the shock factor even more (there's no eye or clitoris removal in the book for example).

I suppose the book doesn't have a neat and tidy ending in which Offred is reunited with her family and witnesses the downfall of Gilead. But interesting to see future academics looking back on the regime.

I've just finished it and was also a little disappointed at the ambiguous ending. Was Nick to be trusted?
I've also been following the 📺 series and wonder how they'll pad it all out since my coup is only 300 pages or so long.

Years since I read the book - am marking this thread to enjoy later.

No such thing as a sterile man, only women who are fruitful and those who are barren.

The triumph of ideology over practicality.

Somewhat that is what I thought. If failing fertility is the main problem for the society then giving fertile women to the middle aged,most likely infertile commanders is not optimal - surely the handmaid's getting pregnant using viable sperm would be optimal and the babies could then given to the Commanders. However, I suppose they want blood related babies from the "elite" minds to inherit the top positions creating dynasties for the future.Only having sex with the handmaids after the ceremony monthly also limits the chances of a pregnancy.

I suppose Gilead has tried to eschew as much modern science as possible - the purging of doctors etc. and aims to get back to "basics".

It strikes me as ironic that many younger men will be in lesser roles and not allocated wives wasting fertility, rather than focusing women's fertility on the older Commanders potentially wasting young women's fertility on men with little chance.

I know the regime is focused on control of women via the perception of a matriarchy (Wives and Aunts) but it's not an effective way of managing the fertility rate problem.

Offred clocks that Nick is so low status that he hasn't been allocated "a woman." I thought that later on we would find out that these men had a brothel for them too to keep them working for the regime for which they could earn points (like soldiers had in Victorian times)

I always wondered if the econowives were fertile and if so, were they allowed to keep their babies or would they be "adopted" by the elite.

I reread the book recently and I was amazed at how far through I was before it was made clear precisely what Offred's "job" was.

I expect the wives /econowives are allocated based on the class of their husbands. Since they are the ones who matter.

It is written like a flow of consciousness and specifically about her own narrow experience of the changes in society.

The openness of the ending is unusual but makes sense within the context given.

The TV series is begining to differ from the narrow focus of the book, but feels in keeping. I notice that Margaret Atwood is a consulting producer. Given that the book is a good 30 years old, there's good scope to update with content in line with social awareness.

I have wondered how women are allocated their roles, particularly Wives and Econowives. I presume it's based on their previous level of class. The handmaids are more clear as they've been proven fertile already although in less moral circumstances such as Offred's husband having been divorced.

MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS

SuperFlyHigh I also liked where the main book ended - is Nick to be trusted?

I found the epilogue jarring - it is a big change in tone and a bit confusing at first but I liked the exploration of the idea that in the future events that are so visceral to us now will just be a footnote in history and judged more pragmatically. I was watching TV a few weeks back (while reading THMT) and it was brought up that on the Daily Politics in 2008 Diane Abbot said that “I suppose some people will judge that on balance Mao did more good than harm. You can't say that about the Nazis" - could have been in the Epilogue about the Gilead regime.

I did not get the sense that Offred was "recording" her thoughts at a later date as I read the main text, more that she was talking directly to me as the reader in the present. Was Offred even the recorder of the historical tapes in the epilogue?

I thought it was sad but true that Offred was from the difficult transitional generation who had known freedom but that for her daughter the Gileadean way of life would be the norm. Would her daughter be married off in a mass wedding in a few years time?

When I first read the book (when it came out) I was in my early 20's and so identified with Offred the most but basically I'm a Martha now - a drudge and invisible work horse.

No one was happy in the book they all seemed depressed - even the Commanders who seemed to "have it all" lived under the threat of Purges.

Another dystopian novel recommendation - The Power by Naomi Alderman.

I read the book when it first came out and re-read it recently. Haven't started the TV series yet.

I don't think the commander's wife was treating Offred better towards the end because her feelings changed, more that she wanted something. If Offred had sex with Nick it increased the chances of her getting pregnant. Also, as pp said, the commander's wife was disaffected with her situation and the reality of Gilead not living up to her earlier ideals.