证言

I won't go into too many plot details in the book. I was not caught up in the same hype that many people seem to have been caught up in surrounding "The Testaments" by Margaret Atwood. I agree with many reviews that say that there was a clash between people's expectations and the finished product. But I try hard to separate out my expectations and the intent of the author, which I usually respect the most. Atwood is a brilliant writer - she can write in many different genres and styles and still make the landing. So, I would say that I liked "The Testaments," though I think that "The Handmaid's Tale" is a better book mainly due to the way the narrative is hemmed in by the restrictions of the narrator. Part of its appeal is all that we do not know about the regime and its circumstances. But I am glad that "The Testaments" exists because I think it worth exploring the rise and maintenance of Gilead - and what could have led to its fall. For some, "The Testaments" may be a lesser work because it punctures the mysteries built up in the first novel. But truth be told, I would rather explore the mysteries of tyranny, violence, and power. I found Aunt Lydia's narrative and Agnes' narratives to be stronger than Daisy's (a girl raised in Canada). But I think that all three were necessary. And I think of of the more brilliant sections of the novel comes with Agnes and Daisy are brought together and you see the clash of two different conceptions of femininity. I will say that I did not see the ending coming entirely - maybe because I have not watched the show at all. The ending feels weaker than I had hoped. But perhaps I could say that we are not as used to having happier endings anymore. Tragedy seems more respectable and serious. Yet, if we look at the world around us, there are moments of triumph as well as tragedy. I think that Atwood has earned the right to give us some hope.

This book was not written for me, but instead for a younger (and perhaps more feminine) reader. The Testaments is quite a departure from Handmaid's Tale; more like The Hunger Games, really. On top of that, it's not very good or interesting. What it adds to or expands upon the first book seems needless, generic. The plot and characters land with a the thud of fan-baiting and needless lore. I feel like all the characters are here because of the profits to be had in the "Handmaid's" franchise: a Zoomer character because that's one centroid of the YA audience, who quips artlessly at the Gilead dystopia; the child from the first book because ambiguity and implication are too difficult for internet fandom to tolerate; and a Boomer character allowed to have far more of a in creating a dehumanizing nightmare of a society—while also ACTUALLY also be working to take it apart. (IMO, Lydia doesn't deserve redemption.)