uhhhh I cannot believe this won the Booker Prize. It would be like if Go Set a Watchman won the National Book Award.



The Testaments is more action-packed and faster paced, much more explicitly didactic, and... mainstream... than The Handmaid's Tale. I'm not a lit snob, but I am judgey. I had different expectations for this book. At several points I honestly wondered if this had been ghostwritten because of how by-the-book (sorry, couldn't help myself) the plotting and timing was. It seems scripted for TV episodes—like maybe Atwood had written the outline but someone familiar with screenwriting developed it.

First, though I have read a few novels by Margaret Atwood, her strength really lies, imho, in her poetry. Too bad none of her clever wordplay made it into this book. It's very straightforward, functional writing, focused on explaining "why" or moving the plot forward as quickly as possible.

Second, the chapters are all first-person and switch between the perspectives of three different women. Sometimes the chapters end with dramatic pauses and a cliffhanger-structure, but none of the reveals are facts that I didn't figure out from the first pages of the book. I think it would work on-screen, but it takes more work to grab readers with emotional reveals than it does to grab viewers—this is a nature of the medium, not a reflection on the intelligence of the audience.

Third, a few ongoing elements in the book did not actually pan out to bring anything explosive to the plot. It's Chekhov's gun—if the reader's attention is constantly drawn to an element or object, there better be some major plot purpose that happens because of said element. This is fiction writing 101. There's one thing in particular, no spoilers, that I think would work on-screen by adding drama but it only serves the plot a big fat plate of empty air.

To end on a positive note: I liked that a lot happened, never a dull moment in Gilead. And also I liked that RBG is a main character in this book ;)