Conference noted::sf

    I may be getting confused here, but it seems to me that THE
    BEGINNING PLACE was definitely sf. Now, MALAFRENA or VERY FAR
    AWAY FROM ANYWHERE ELSE are something else again...
    
    At any rate, yes, what you note is the *real* manifestation of
    the sf "ghetto". Once you are pegged as an sf writer, you're
    sunk. Asimov's books of science essays get filed in the sf
    section of bookstores. Various Ellison non-sf books (such as
    SPIDER KISS or MEMOS FROM PURGATORY) get published with an "sf"
    label on them. Ten years ago, Zebra Books issued a bunch of
    Robert E. Howard books, all with the "fantasy" designation,
    despite the fact that some of them (such as THE VULTURES OF
    WHAPETON) were nothing more than ordinary Westerns.
    
    --- jerry

    It's also interesting to see how various "mainstream" authors
    "get away with it" by writing science fiction novels. I don't
    mean the borderline or not-so-borderline thrillers or whatever,
    but the out-and-out sf novels. Colleen McCullough (sp?) did
    it with CREED FOR THE THIRD MILLENIUM. Cecelia Holland did it
    with FLOATING WORLDS. Doris Lessing did it with her "Canopus
    in Argos" series. And so on...
    
    --- jerry

    Before this gets entirely off on the track of what is or is not
    SF - tho a good topic in itself, I'd like to hear other people's
    reactions to the books themselves. Thankyou

    I feel really unwhelmed by the response to this one - has anyone
    else read either book?
    

I just finished Handmaid's Tale last weekend. I loved it, and I hated it.
I loved it for being a real page-turner; I swallowed it in two gulps. I
hated it for making me look at how fragile my fortress is. I think it's a
great book. I know I'll have to read it again, but I'm not looking forward
to re-reading it any time soon.

It's one of those books that's SF without being science fiction. The central
character, who is also the narrator, has no more access to technology than a
a scullery maid from the middle ages. Technology impinges on her very
indirectly, in the form of an integrated computer system used by the state
as a tool for repression, and in her worries about the effects of toxic
waste. The narrator doesn't have much choice about what she does; what
little choice remains is between a very unpleasant life and a probably more
unpleasant death.  Slippery Jim diGriz she isn't.

The story is set in the near future in and around the Cambridge/Boston area
(this isn't specific in the story, but I recognize the setting from having
lived near there.) The United Stated government has been overthrown by the
religious right and in its place is the Republic of Gilead. If Moammar
Quaddafi were a Christian he'd feel right at home as head of state of the
Republic of Gilead. If the Republic of Gilead had a bill of rights, which it
doesn't, these would be your rights: you have the right to do as you're
told. You have the right to remain silent. Anything can be used against you.

The Handmaid's Tale is about what it's like to be a national resource: a
womb to be used to replenish the ranks of the oppressors.

A friend of mine compared this story to Native Tongue by Suzette Haden
Elgin. She thought Native Tongue was more depressing, and I thought
Handmaid's Tale was more depressing.

Based on the quality of the writing, I'll be looking for more of Margeret
Atwood's work.

Don.

    For those of you who read IASFM there is a review of Always Coming
    Home in this month's issue, plus a good discussion of mainstream,
    speculative fiction versis Science fiction. Well worth getting
    the issue to read it.

    re .5
    
    I believe Atwood died sometime this year, so you won't be seeing
    any more of her works.
    
    A Handmaid's Tale is totally chilling, and in light of the
    Fundimentalist movement very, very believable. After reading AHT
    I had to repress the urge to set fire to the local evangelical church.
    
    Whenever I start having feelings of toleration and good-will toward
    Fundies I read AHT to put my mind back on track.
    
    I think the scene that made my blood boil and put my teeth on edge
    was where the Fundi women seized the protagonists daughter claiming
    that the LORD GAWWWDDDD Himself, Ptl, Halleluha, gave her a sign
    that the child should be hers.  You can see the same kind of crazed
    fervor and certitude on the picket line in front of your local abortion
    clinic.
    
    I find AHT a cautionary tale of the highest importance, and even
    more it is a good read!!!!
    

    re:.7
    
    Where had you heard about Atwood dying? I've heard no such thing
    until your note.
    
    --- jerry

My impression from reading The Handmaid's Tale was that society had gone totally
over to promoting "freedom from" at the expense of "freedom to". The
fundamentalists were aided and abetted in this by feminist radicals, and then
gave the feminists the boot.

The moral of the story to me was the danger of 'the ends justifies the means'. 

Jim.

    It was a while ago that I read "A Handmaid's Tale," maybe just
    a little before the topic note was written--it was when the book
    was in all the bookstores and was even advertised on WCRB or WGBH,
    I forget which.
    
    It was a chilling tale, but in my case for different reasons than
    what was mentioned. 

>    A Handmaid's Tale is totally chilling, and in light of the
>    Fundimentalist movement very, very believable. After reading AHT
>    I had to repress the urge to set fire to the local evangelical church.
    
    (As an aside, evangelical churches shouldn't be equated with
    Fundamentalists.   But this conference is SF not RELIGION or SOAPBOX,
    so let's not dwell on that point.)
    
    What was chilling to me was the total believability of the
    manipulatability of the American masses.  Fundies or Reds, pick
    your villain, the point is the same.  Personally, I have no fear
    of the Fundamentalists taking over the country (or even Greater
    Boston) as in A Handmaid's Tale.  In that regard, AHT is not prophetic
    (in my opinion) but more a Feminist's Nightmare, a fear of what
    might be.
    
    The book does not stand or fall on that particular premise (Fundies
    taking over the country) so you really have to look a little deeper.
    In a work of fiction, the author can of course extrapolate current
    events any way she wants.  The effectiveness of the author in
    projecting her picture is, I suppose, measurable by the response
    evoked.  In that regard, I think Margaret Atwood was very effective.
    In the case of the writer of .7, it was one type of response, and
    quite a different one in my case, but also very strong!
    
  --Simon
    

    I'm confused, it sounds like a good read (AHT), but who is it by?
    There's a reference to LeGuin in .0, and I've never been able to
    read LeGuin, but if it's by someone else I'd really like to give
    it a shot in my copious spare time.....
    
    Willie

    
    A Handmaid's Tale was written by Margaret Atwood (?)
    
    Not Ms. LeGuin, for sure.
    
    DFW

    I believe there's a project afoot to film A Handmaid's Tale.
    
    len.
    

    re .11:  The topic note did not identify the author of AHT by name,
    only as "a mainstream author."  That author is Margaret Atwood.
    The other book ("Always Coming Home") is by LeGuin.  
    
    I haven't read LeGuin lately.  How does ACH compare with Jean Auel's
    Ayla trilogy ("Clan of the Cave Bear" and sequels)?  Or shouldn't
    they be compared?
    
    re .13:
>    I believe there's a project afoot to film A Handmaid's Tale.
    
    Uh-oh!  Watch the Fundies trying to ban it.  <wink>
    
  --Simon
    

    
    They are planning to make a move of AHT. I read this over the weekend
    in the Globe (I think). They have approached Sigourney (sp?) Weaver
    about starring in this.

From the March-April issue of "Duke" alumni magazine page 50:

"In late February, campus-based filming began for the feature-length
movie "A Handmaid's Tale". Based on a novel by Margert Atwood with 
screenplay by Harold Pinter, the film will star Robert Duvall, Faye 
Dunaway, and Elizabeth McGovern."

Duke University's West Campus is gothic architecture, complete with 
cathedral-style chapel. It is located in Durham, North Carolina.

    "A Handmaid's Tale" is in the theaters.  Has anyone seen it yet?  Joel
    Siegal of Good Morning America doesn't recommend it.  He said the film
    is somewhat confusing and he was more interested in what went on in the
    rest of the society that the audience was just shown glimpses of than
    in the main characters.

    The review I saw (I thought it was Siegel, maybe I'm confused about
    which morning show I'm watching) gave it a rave review.  Elsewhere I
    have seen mixed reviews (Rolling Stone panned it), the negative reviews
    almost always comparing it to the book rather than judging it on its
    own merits.  I have yet to see it, but it's on my "must see" list.
    
    len.
    

    I have a review of it in the MOVIES conference.
    
    --- jerry

    I've read the book and enjoyed it thoroughly.  I couldn't help thinking
    about another novel I read by George Orwell, "1984".