Margaret Atwood

“This book has been written in 2021 with all the inherent prejudices therein. I apologise in advance to any 25th century readers for ALERF tendencies (Andromedan Lifeform Exclusionary Radical Feminism). Future readers will no doubt check their Milky Wayan privilege and re-educate themselves accordingly”.

This presumption that the present's notion of "right" and "wrong" is better than the past one. Or some potential future one

Indeed. I sometimes wonder what will be the cancellable offences in 50 years time.
I guess it will be something none of can predict - I mean who imagined 20 years ago that people could lose their jobs for saying only women can have children or whatever.

Can’t believe that of all the options open to her, Atwood went for Do It To Julia I’m not surprised though, she has routinely done that to feminists as she is one of those women who think they’re too clever to fall for feminism (usually by misrepresenting or misunderstanding it).

As for the book banning, it would be hilarious if it wasn’t so worrying. I used to wonder why the zealots didn’t worry that one day, it would be their views that became unacceptable, and their books being banned. I have recently come to understand that they think that each time they prove their allegiance with some OTT struggle session or denouncing, they’re warding off the chance of that happening. They really do think that the displays of obedience and virtue will protect them in the future.

I’ve said it so many times, but they really need to have a think about Robespierre to figure out how that usually goes.

It seems a bit arrogant to me. "These prejudices were wrong then and are wrong today."

This presumption that the present's notion of "right" and "wrong" is better than the past one. Or some potential future one.

It's temporal supremacism. Does this era have any right to lecture on some previous one?

It would only seem to put such disclaimers in old books if we also put messages in newly-published books apologising for present attitudes to future readers. We can start with everything by Robin diAngelo...

[quote TwoDrifters2]@beastlyslumber I agree the middle sentence is unnecessary. But if it stops people with no critical thought process of their own from taking umbrage, and allows the books to still be published and stocked, then I don’t mind.[/quote]
I agree

This feels a bit different, they're saying they banned the books because of misogynist and racist themes, but the books are about standing against misogyny and racism

Is the misogyny why they are getting rid of the handmaids tale?….thats stupid, I don’t get it

@beastlyslumber I agree the middle sentence is unnecessary. But if it stops people with no critical thought process of their own from taking umbrage, and allows the books to still be published and stocked, then I don’t mind.

Sorry but I hate that message. Why should a novel start with a moral sermon? Gross and patronising.

The banning books thing had been going on for a few years now. Libraries burning copies of To Kill a Mockingbird. It's terrifying.

I opened a new book the other day and read this page inserted at the front. Makes sense to me - why can’t they all just have this?!

It’s not 1984 it’s Fahrenheit 451.

For interest, what is supposed to be the problem with The Handmaids Tale?

History might not repeat itself but it has strong rhymes in the present.

It actually shows the limitations of the idea that “those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” as even those who know about the past convince themselves that their cause is special, different, not remotely the same...

Those who cannot remember, or cannot understand the past. Or are too wrapped up in their own righteous cause to acknowledge the past.

That was Halifax. I lived there for many years.

Thank you for confirming my memory! I felt like Mrs Garvy because I remembered it so well but I couldn't locate it by searching.

It's completely crazy.

Well, that's not at all worrying, Embarrassing.

Oh my goodness. How is this happening.

How long until there's a concerted attack on public networks streaming Handmaids's Tale ?

Milieu Control. This involves the control of information and communication both within the environment and, ultimately, within the individual, resulting in a significant degree of isolation from society at large.

Sacred Science. The group's doctrine or ideology is considered to be the ultimate Truth, beyond all questioning or dispute. Truth is not to be found outside the group…

Doctrine over person. Members' personal experiences are subordinated to the sacred science and any contrary experiences must be denied or reinterpreted to fit the ideology of the group.

Dispensing of existence. The group has the prerogative to decide who has the right to exist and who does not…Thus, the outside world loses all credibility…

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Reform_and_the_Psychology_of_Totalism

Regarding the dystopian book removal, for the last few years I've deliberately bought books which I think are important in hard copy, not ebook or not only ebooks, because of a vague idea that amazon might decide to edit or restrict them. I've got a copy of 1984 from a charity shop squirrelled away

We've always had banned books, forbidden ideas, but I've always thought that a country which bans books ends up looking rather idiotic. This feels a bit different, they're saying they banned the books because of misogynist and racist themes, but the books are about standing against misogyny and racism. They're misrepresenting them in order to justify banning them. That's a really odd thing to do. Why has Canada of all places gone so extreme

I'm from the generation of teenagers where, if we heard that something - a book, a film, a record, even a style of hair or clothing - was banned, we'd deliberately seek it out. Now it's the teenagers doing the banning.

Jesus

That's really disturbing about the book removal.
I mean, those books are of their time and are MEANT to TEACH kids about what's wrong, by promoting and provoking discussion and deconstruction.

Taking them away is indeed Orwellian - "wrong think" and "new speak", based on Communism of course. Canada would probably crap a brick if they understood how like Communism their regime is becoming - they think they're so fucking "liberal", they've no clue!!