|
Le Saboteur posted:The one thing I find totally unbelievable is how quickly they make the modern world fall in this show. Goes from like 0 to religious militia they've never heard of once locking women out of their jobs. I know why they do it because of a lack of time it's just really weird how they chose to do it. Margaret Atwood is not a political scientist. An explanation for how the Sons of Jacob pulled off their coup d'etat is also missing from the book. But then politics beyond gender politics isn't the focus, so it's not a big deal. I can only wonder how this thread will react when the series gets to the particicution.
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 01:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 07:59 |
|
|
Le Saboteur posted:First particicution happens in the second episode. Or was it in the pilot? I forget. It's been probably a decade or more since I read handmaids tale so I can't say how closely this is keeping to the book. The particicution is the second to last thing to happen in the book. All Offred describes before then are the results of "salvagings."
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 02:51
|
|
|
Ballz posted:Did they explain why Offred's best friend was also designated a hand maid when she clearly never had a child? Or do they indoctrinate the Marthas alongside the hand maids? Handmaids are selected from just about every unmarried woman (including those in voided second marriages) of childbearing age. Proof of fertility is a bonus, but not a requirement. Marthas tend to be women who are for some reason known to be infertile or those past menopause who are still able enough to serve as household servants. Aside from Wife, there are two other roles women can play, but I'm here because I recently read the book and I don't have Hulu, so I don't know how much more I should say.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 04:19
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:That said, I don't think Gilead would actually be that sustainable in the long-term because its economy seems pretty much non-existent, and it seems generally technophobic. Hell, I bet it's birthrate is probably much lower than other countries that actually tried to use science/medicine to address the issue. They only a handful of kids being born already, and the most advanced piece of medical equipment they had during the birthing scene was a stool with a hole in it. It's not. The book is set only a handful of years after the revolution, and the "middle period" of cyclical purges and internal power struggles begins soon afterwards. The book's epilogue is a historical conference set 200 years in the future, and the implication is that Gilead has long since fallen. Really the biggest trouble with accepting the rise of Gilead isn't "it could happen here" so much as "it could happen this fast and this successfully." We're a nation of hundreds of millions spread across about a third of a continent, our states have independent military forces (National Guard), and the countryside is full of zealous gun nuts who would not all be happy with the Sons of Jacob's creed. There would be a lot more violence and chaos even in New England before things settled into the uncomfortable peace depicted in the book. But like I said before, the point of the book isn't to show how quickly and easily this could happen. It's to show how uncomfortably close we are to it already.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
Red Oktober posted:I've just had a thought - is Offred named that because she literally belongs to Fred? Same with Ofglen? It's been 16 years or so since I read the book so I can't remember - that's horrifying if so. Yes. The names of Handmaids change to reflect the head of their current household.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 23:51
|
|
|
I can't speak to the series, but the impression I got from the book was that the conflict was mostly settled on the East Coast, with only terrorists and holdouts in the Appalachians and an underground resistance in the cities. The regime also had enough control over the Midwest to resettle all people of color to Native American-style reservations in those states. It's implied that most of the active fighting is taking place in the West. Then again, everything is told from the protagonist's limited perspective and what little news she gets is guaranteed to contain at least some lies.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2017 00:24
|
|
|
Pinky Artichoke posted:I really love the individual black characters in the show thus far...but yes. Removing the white supremacy angle makes it feel less authentic to the US's actual heavily-armed authoritarian rear end in a top hat problem. Maybe the resettlement will happen in the future since Show Gilead hasn't conquered the Midwest yet?
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 04:40
|
|
|
Ego-bot posted:Does the book ever say where these radioactive 'colonies' are? Scattered throughout America, along with other "colonies" for toxic waste spills. Both environmental hazards have contributed to the plummeting viable birth rate.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 05:05
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:I couldn't tell if the Doctor she saw was serious or it was another trap for June. If it's the scene I'm thinking of from the book, it's not a trap as such but the doctor would not be above blackmailing her later.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 21:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 07:59 |
|
|
In the book, Handmaids get three postings that each last one year (plus pregnancy, if applicable) in which they have to conceive and deliver a healthy child. If they do, they're set for life and will never be declared an Unwoman or shipped off to the Colonies. If they fail to have any children after three tries, one of those things will happen.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2017 05:23
|
|