cross-posted from: https://literature.cafe/post/2164461

I have been keeping an eye on this series over in [email protected] and was intending to link the discussions for SF titles that I saw. The Handmaid’s Tale is definitely an SF title that has seen it’s share of fans and detractors. It has been banned or attempted to be banned in many jurisdictions including Western ones.

What is the communities thoughts on this book, does it unfairly extend Christian philosophy into questionable territory or does it not go far enough? Is it pornography, and if so, why? Let’s hear your thoughts.

Bonus video: Margaret Atwood using a flamethrower on the unburnable edition of the book.

    • FuglyDuckEnglish
      9•1 year ago

      I’d agree it’s not really sci-fi.

      Science Fiction is a branch of speculative fiction that looks at the impacts of science or technology on society, culture or individuals. It doesn’t even have to go into technology itself.

      Handmaid’s tale is more about political/cultural speculation than science

      Some of my least favorite sci-fi are the ones that beat you upside the head explaining why there’s no such thing as artificial gravity generators or FTL or whatever. Fine, you don’t need to have it if you want harder sci-fi. But do you really think the characters are going to dwell on something so routine as transition from accel-gravity to microgravity…. everytime a ship makes the transition? Or back into routine accel gravity?

      Leviathan Wakes was the most recent that did this.

      • lemmyvoreEnglish
        4•1 year ago

        If those particular characters have a bee in their bonnet about it… 🙂 then it is what it is. It might make the story more enjoyable, it might make it less.

        I agree that it’s a very cliche writing tool to have the characters dwell explicitly on everyday things just to draw attention to them, but if it’s not overdone I think it can be a powerful tool.

        Sometimes they can hit particularly hard and not just as mood pieces either. I remember a phrase in a Greg Egan book where the character wonders if their reality is real or simulated, and surmises that for as long as they are still capable to ask themselves that question it makes a crucial distinction. It made me stop and think; it’s not a rare topic but it really matters how it’s put and where it’s the flow of the book.

        • FuglyDuckEnglish
          8•1 year ago

          Probably the best way to deal with it, is to have someone for whom the information isn’t new- maybe a first timer in space, or something.

          For example, in Babylon 5, they didn’t explicitly state it so much as just showed the starfuries flipping around. (Which absolutely blew my mind way back when. The “of course” lightbulb went off.) or also Babylon 5, Sinclair commenting that setting aside the space for a zen garden was hard because of oxygen generation and crops; explains where the food comes from, etc.

          Or, like Amos bitching about being in heavy grav because some idiot bleeding heart had tor report it. Or Naomi bitching about maintenance from the hard burn, etc.

          What annoys me is when it’s not natural- if that makes sense. It’s information the author sees as important to convey to the reader, but if it’s not presented naturally in the context of the story, it’s jarring.

          We’re not stupid, generally, so we can pick up on things. We’re not comic book fans, after all.

          (Excuse me while I run and hide….)