REVIEW: The Handmaid's Tale

Margaret Atwood's THE HANDMAID'S TALE was the first dystopian novel I ever read. It was a book my mother recommended, and like some of my Mom's other recommendations, I found it both brilliant and brutal. As a matter of fact, Atwood as an author is both brilliant and brutal. She takes a hard look at humanity's worst tendencies, and she builds grim and harrowing narratives from them. The hardest thing about Atwood's fiction, in my experience, is how possible it all seems.

All of that aside, she is a fabulous author. Her characters are real and compelling, and her storytelling keeps you turning pages. Want to see one of the things I'm most proud of as an author? From RT Book Reviews five years ago (shameless plug alert!):

It takes guts to kill your heroine before page one, and Fisher has that in spades. Paying special homage to Stanislaw Lem’s Solaris (in particular, the moving Steven Soderbergh/George Clooney film adaptation) and Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale, Fisher’s sci-fi romance debut thoroughly impresses. In Elizabeth’s struggle to reconcile the mystery of her existence as a ghost, Fisher offers a pitch-perfect balance of a cohesive scientific vision with poignant, naked emotion.

Seeing Atwood's name in the review for my debut was pretty special. There is a Latin phrase that Offred (June), the handmaid, discovers scratched on the wall of her closet that I had my heroine Elizabeth also inscribe in English in her "closet": Don't let the bastards grind you down. (And by the way, happy bookaversary, GHOST PLANET!)

In case you haven't read THE HANDMAID'S TALE, or know little of the plot, I will give you the setup. This summary is based on the Emmy Award winning Hulu TV adaptation of the novel, which I am reviewing here. It won EIGHT Emmy Awards, including Outstanding Drama Series, out of 13 nominations.

The story focuses on the trials of Offred ("of Fred"), whose real name is June. After a US civil war, the nation of Gilead is established by a fanatical religious group. Due to environmental factors, it has become very difficult to conceive and carry fetuses to term. Fertile women (whether married or single) are rounded up by the new government and farmed out to the ruling families to be used as surrogate mothers. This slavery is justified in many cases by the fertile women being judged "fallen." In June's case, she has had an affair with a married man—they eventually married and had a child. Her family attempts to escape to Canada, but they are caught. June's husband is shot, and her daughter is taken away from her. June is given an ear tag (yes, like a cow), sent to Handmaid school for a horrifying glimpse into her new reality, and finally placed in the home of Commander Fred Waterford and his wife Serena Joy. Serena was once a career woman and author, and she served as a founding member of this new society—one in which she is no longer permitted to read, write, or participate in government.

The Hulu adaptation stars Elisabeth Moss (MAD MEN's Peggy Olson) as June. I watched this 10-episode series over the course of the last couple of weeks. I have to say, I would totally have binge-watched this show, grim as it was, had my husband been interested in watching it (coward!). It was beautifully shot, with superb performances from Moss and from Yvonne Strahovski, who played Serena Joy. Both faced the challenge of portraying women who themselves were always acting. In fact, all the women in this series were superb, and I must also give a nod to Madeline Brewer, whose performance as the broken Janine was heartbreaking. My one small knit was I did not find the male characters as compelling, though Joseph Fiennes is chillingly unpredictable and hypocritical as Commander Waterford.

The way they drew this single novel out into a full 10 episodes was to show the back story of a number of the characters in flashbacks. Particularly interesting was the history of Serena Joy, who had been an activist at one time in her life, and in this new world is relegated to the roles of hostess, domestic manager, and wife (though sex for fun is no longer allowed, so she is wife in name only). She also only gets to wear green dresses! She's lucky it's a good color on her. At the end of the series you are left wondering, was that monster always inside her, or is that just one of the potential side effects of constricting and oppressing such a bright and passionate woman? 

Since so far all I have talked about is scifi, I will say there is some romance in the series. Through flashbacks we see how June met and fell in love with her husband, and in the current storyline there is a character she turns to for comfort—and that relationship turns out to be key in a number of ways. But this is no SFR, so be ye warned.

I finished the series last night, and the ending was similar to the novel's. I know there is a second season coming, so I am left wondering what it will be about! I assume that it will explore beyond the ending of the book, and based on the quality of this first season, I will definitely be tuning in.

Ready Player One read by Wesley Crusher

Since I moved outside Seattle and have children who live half the time in the city, I do a fair amount of driving. I initially opened an Audible account because the girls got it into their heads they wanted to learn French, and it seemed a good way to pass the drive time. Now we've rearranged our schedule so they are going back and forth less, and I've been using the Audible credits to listen to books I might not otherwise have the time to read. Plus, some books are just made to be read out loud. I particularly love listening to Neil Gaiman's books, because they are read by the author and I could listen to him talk about organizing his sock drawer.

Recently I had some credits to use up and went to the Oracle (Facebook) to ask for advice. A fellow author recommended READY PLAYER ONE, in particular because it is read by Wil Wheaton, who played Wesley Crusher on STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION. Wil is a funny guy, and he's played a gamer in a couple of YouTube series (my favorite being Felicia Day's THE GUILD). He is the perfect voice for the first-person perspective of a post-apocalyptic gamer geek, and there is this awesome moment when ... nope, not gonna spoil it.

So let me start by saying Donna reviewed this book back in 2013. I read her review again before posting this one to ensure there wasn't too much overlap. If you are interested in seeing the movie (scheduled for release next spring) AND you're one of those people like me who prefers to read the book BEFORE watching the movie, now you have your deadline.

This review is high-level and only contains minor spoilers. It's adapted from my Goodreads review specifically for Spacefreighters.

READY PLAYER ONE by Ernest Cline, read by Wil Wheaton
Genre: Young-adult sci-fi with romantic elements

I didn't have high expectations for this book. I'm a middle-aged woman, and READY PLAYER ONE ("RPO" henceforth) is about a teenage gamer essentially living inside a virtual world anchored in a post-apocalyptic society. I have played both arcade and computer-based games, but not in decades. I did not expect that I'd relate. But as Donna notes in her review, this novel is RIDDLED with references to 80s culture, and I was a teenager in the 80s. Music, TV shows, movies, commercials, even specific computer models I owned in early adulthood. What a genius decision by the author, amirite? You get the young adult audience, because that's the age of the protagonists, plus all the Gen Xers and some Baby Boomers too. And I had further reason to identify with the protagonist: he lives in a trailer park in Oklahoma City, where I was born and raised. (I never lived in a trailer park, but I knew people who did. Plus they were on the news every time there was a tornado.)

From the original book cover art. It's gorgeous,
though based on Cline's description
the trailer stacks were much closer together. 

RPO is sci-fi at its best. There's an underdog hero and an evil corporate villain, and they fight their battles with super cool tech, in both the real and virtual worlds. The post-apocalyptic world Cline paints is very believable, as you can see the seeds of his calamities already germinating in today's society. For example, Cline depicts government so ineffective and in bed with corporations as to be useless in its original role of serving the interests of the populace, and corporations that have been given broad powers over the lives of private citizens.

Believe it or not this young-adult-centered geekfest even includes a sweet love story. It doesn't take up a lot of screen time, but it's critical to the plot and the ending wouldn't be nearly as satisfying without it. Can you really fall in love with a person you've never actually met? You be the judge. And as for the ladies, they DO represent in this story. Frankly when I started this book, I figured I'd have to just be okay with it being about a bunch of dudes in their basements. Granted, a lot of the 80s reference ARE very male-oriented. The only female rock musician I remember being referenced (Pat Benatar) was mentioned in conjunction with Artemis, the protagonist's crush. But whatever.

Admittedly it took me a while to get into this story. As stated above, I have little in common with the protagonist (Wade) beyond our knowledge of 80s culture, and besides that there is a fair amount of setup and backstory to get through. Wade also has a tendency to use cliché phrases (ie, "armed to the teeth"), which as an editor and fellow author pulled me out of the story at times. But once the story clicked for me, I was swept away. (Hubs started listening to it with me about halfway through, on one of our drives to town, and after a bunch of initial protesting, he was asking to listen to it at home EVERY DAY until we finished it.) There's so much attention to detail in the world building, it feels like you're inside the game. In fact at times the detail can be a little tedious, but it fits the story, as these details MATTER to Wade.

Now I'll tell you what I liked best about this story, besides the amusement-park-ride quality of the plot. As Wade goes about his quest for the ultimate high-stakes Easter egg, which has been hidden inside the virtual world (the Oasis) by its now-deceased creator, you find yourself rooting and cheering at every turn. He's just a kid vying for a prize along with thousands of other "gunters," but it's fun to watch his obsessiveness and attention to detail begin to pay off. The REAL payoff, however, comes as Wade begins to evolve as a person, developing relationships that bring out his more noble qualities—empathy, loyalty, openness to emotional vulnerability. Qualities that, fairly or not, we don't often associate with gamer personalities. Wade learns to use his powers for the greater good, and that's a quality with timeless, universal appeal.

The ladies of Wonder Woman: All the feels

Do we at Spacefreighters Lounge have room for another post on WONDER WOMAN? I'm thinking hellz yeah.

In fact, I don't really need to say much more than this:

I've lived to see my childhood princesses become generals. pic.twitter.com/CjVyYt1c4T

— M Evan Matyas 🏳️‍🌈 (@EvanMatyas) June 5, 2017

(Cue soundtrack)

Let me just say... this 49-year-old woman right here on this Spacefreighters barstool? As she watched Robin Wright kicking ass all over that beach, she had to fight not to blubber like a baby into her popcorn and Earl Grey tea. And yeah, I'm talking about myself in the third person because that's just how epic this experience was.

Women of a certain age are invisible? Well I dare you not to see THIS coming, because if you don't, it'll be the last thing you ever don't see:

One of my fave things about @wonderwomanfilm: @realrobinwright as Antiope, with wrinkles & battle scars as amazing older woman #WonderWoman pic.twitter.com/zbl9WNWXCF

— Cindy Gallop (@cindygallop) June 2, 2017

Want to revel in the awesomeness that is Wright's Antiope? Go here.

A lot's been said about Diana herself as well as Antiope, but let's not overlook Hippolyta, queen of the Amazons and 2017 Mom of the Year. She's all, not MY daughter, I'm keeping her safe from the world's evil and especially that asshat Ares. Cuz that's how moms roll. But when it becomes obvs that Diana's got mad skillz, a heart of gold, and a date with destiny, mom sends her off with her blessing AND all the family bling.

Never let it be said that we EVER get too old to need role models.

As for Diana herself, I'll just repeat the word Donna used in her review: Mesmerizing. My daughter and I hardly moved in our seats. I could watch those slow-mo combat acrobatics for days, and I usually fall asleep during action sequences. The film could have included another hour in Amazonian paradise and I would have been perfectly happy. Not that I'd want to miss a single moment of the stranger-in-a-strange-land performance that followed.

The film may not win Best Picture. The overall plot, we can probably all agree, is not without flaws. And also, DON'T CARE. By the end of the movie I could hardly contain my feels. Antiope and Hippolyta representing all over the place, and Diana standing up for the little guy while stomping the bad guy because Diana's gotta do Diana, yo.

Hie thee to thy nearest multiplex.

"It's about what you believe. And I believe in love. Only love will truly save the world."

I think I've reached my cliffhanger saturation point

Has anyone else noticed how pretty much every series these days relies on cliffhangers? I started watching THE EXPANSE this week, and I'm enjoying it so far. (Thanks for the tip, Laurie!) But just like everything else I've watched recently, each episode wraps with a cliffhanger. In other words it wraps without actually wrapping.

Call me old-fashioned, but I like FIREFLY. Did the feeling of closure Whedon rewards us with at the end of each episode keep me from watching more? Did it keep YOU from watching more? How about Star Trek (pick your favorite flavor)?

What really got me thinking about this was my kids. They're watching a series called JUST ADD MAGIC. At the end of every single episode, they come flying at me with shouts of, "We have to watch another one! It ended on a MAJOR cliff-hanger! PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE!" Over and over. Just like little drug addicts. This caused me to do some research to see if dopamine is involved (cuz that's how I roll), but in this specific case it appears to be due to a stress/fight-or-flight reaction. Check it out:

There's a psychological reason cliffhangers are so effective. The human mind hates uncertainty. Uncertainty implies volatility, randomness, and danger. When we notice information is missing, our brain raises a metaphorical red flag and says, "Pay attention. This could be important."
(via Psychology Today)

So it makes sense that Hollywood uses cliffhangers (and has for decades). But let's call a spade a spade: it's manipulation.

All storytelling is manipulation. I get that. All of us writerly types use every trick we know to keep the reader engaged. But has anyone else heard that saying, "Rattle, rattle, here come the cattle?" (A co-worker of mine used to say this when our company was hosting a meal for employees and called us to the table via intercom.) That's how I'm starting to feel when watching these shows  —  like a cow responding to a rattling feed bin.

I guess what I'm missing is subtlety. And balance. Do we have to be as predictable as the sunrise with this stuff? Do these writers/producers/etc. not have the energy to create such great characters and plots we WANT to tune in, whatever happens at the end? And for those shows that clearly have quality writing (like THE EXPANSE), do they not have enough faith in their own story to trust we'll come back?

We watch everything on demand these days, and it could be that's why this is starting to grate. If it had not been an option for me to play the next episode of JUST ADD MAGIC for my kids, they wouldn't have begged, and I wouldn’t have had to say no. I wouldn't be faced, when watching DOWNTON ABBY, with that midnight decision of whether to watch "just one more." On top of that, watching multiple episodes in one sitting keeps us cycling through that conflict/semi-resolution/cliffhanger until we can literally see ourselves running in the hamster wheel. (It's true! I even had a little streak of pink hamster hair.)

Couples on Cliffs

I think cliffhangers are a lot like the conflict between heroine and hero in romance. It creates the same response in our brains. "Will they or won't they? I have to know!" (Never mind the fact we know they WILL, because that's a whole other discussion.)

I came to romance via sci-fi/fantasy. I had to learn about what makes a relationship interesting. Conflict. Tension. Micro-tension. These are important in every aspect of the story. But recently I've had cause to wonder whether even this has become fatiguing for readers. Foz Meadows addressed this in a blog post (Bad TV Romance: Could You Not?):

... there’s still a common misconception in TVlandia that romantic relationships are only really interesting when imminent or imperilled; that any sort of emotional contentment or continuity between the characters will be boring to watch.

Now that's just one person's opinion. But recently, upon the recommendation of RT Book Reviews (and many Goodreads readers), I picked up the fantasy romance RADIANCE. And frankly, I was stunned.

!!!!!! SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT !!!!!!

There is zero conflict between the hero and heroine. Just before their arranged marriage takes place, they accidentally meet without knowing who the other is. Their peoples have a tenuous alliance, and they're of different species. Technically they're almost-enemies and find each other hideous to behold. But they rapidly become friends, develop affection, and eventually find chemistry and passion. Every threat to their union comes from outside the relationship. They are unfailingly gentle and kind to each other.

RADIANCE is very popular, and it was a recent pick for Felicia Day's Vaginal Fantasy book club. When I finished the book, I looked up the YouTube review because I was dying to know what they thought of it. I mean surely at least spicy Bonnie must have hated this book. (My debut GHOST PLANET got an overall positive review from VF, except for Bonnie, who thought the heroine lacked backbone.) But all four of the ladies loved it, specifically citing how refreshing it was to read about a hero and heroine who are good to each other. A plot that poses no internal threat to the relationship. A book where a man who was supposed to be their friend and ally, in the finale turned out to be … (drumroll) … just that. Their friend and ally. A book where the villain gets her just reward and isn't preserved to continue her reign of terror into the second volume.

!!!!!! END OF SPOILERY MATERIAL !!!!!

All this has got me wondering if it could be there are lots of us who are tired of our emotional buttons and levers being manipulated.

On a personal level as an author, it made me think about my own work-in-progress. Fifty pages in, I'm noticing the conflict between the heroine and hero smoothing out. I have a little bit of PTSD around this issue, having been schooled pretty thoroughly about conflict in my first submissions to agents, and then later in RWA workshops and how-to books. And in many stories (maybe even the majority), that conflict does make sense.

But also, it could be that if our stories are leading us another direction, we need to listen to that. To trust our own ability to tell a story, and not rattle the feed bin just because that's what we've been taught to do.

How do you feel about cliffhangers? How do you feel about romances where the couple's challenges are predominantly external?