The Testaments

Brutal.

Having read The Handmaid's Tale in 2017 and watched the TV adaptation (and then the subsequent series 2) - the world of Gilead was still petty fresh in my mind.

The Testaments, as the outline says, picks up 15 years after the Handmaid's Tale. The book uses the records of three characters' account to recount Gilead in it's more mature state.

It's Aunt Lydia's account that I really enjoyed. The character in The Handmaid's Tale was pretty horrible and tricky to relate to, but I felt like the TV series somehow added a much more complex layer to Aunt Lydia and now The Testaments gives her a voice, and I love it.

Aunt Linda tells of the time the Gilead comes into being and how she came to hold such a powerful position.

What's particularly brutal and scary about The Testaments and the stories of Gilead's inception is how it skims so closely to our own reality with its own fear of the different and long time brewing of hatred, racism, sexism and homophobia. It doesn't take a great leap to see our own reality take a turn like this to result in a repressive state such as Gilead.

The real only glimmer of hope is that, like The Handmaid's Tale, the story is being recounted in the future inside of an academic environment and lessons are to be learnt the same way we might study Nazi Germany. The Testaments has the same reflection and study of a society that has ended.

The Testaments both looks at Gilead's time of creation but also it's downfall.

I found the book to be a really enjoyable, challenging read. I also definitely benefitted having had The Handmaid's Tale in recent memory. I'd highly recommend.

J'ai adoré ! Je sais que cette suite a été beaucoup critiquée et du coup j'avais pas mal d'appréhension mais je n'ai pas été déçue du tout.
J'ai trouvé le dernier tiers un peu trop rapide mais tout le reste de l'histoire m'a absolument captivé.

I really enjoyed this, though I'm not really sure how necessary it was overall. Really interesting stories.

I loved the Handmaid's Tale, and I liked this book, too. The story takes us back to Gilead, but also to Canada. We learn more about the Aunts and how Gilead is founded and ruled. Not as ground-breaking as the original book, but definitely a good sequel, no reason to be concerned, Dear Reader.

My neighbour got this for me (shes gifted me alot of books over the years that i never read) but i remember a while after our power went out for nearly a whole day and being that at the time i was fully nocturnal i spent my time playing solitare on my mums work laptop until that died, couldn't draw or paint because i felt it was too hard with candle light and so read it as i had nothing else to do. Id not yet (and still havent) read the handmaids tale so some of it didnt make sense to me for a fair bit of the book, but i think i felt intrigued by that. I ended up reading this in under a week and feeling very surprised in myself, having not read a book outside of school since probably year 7 or 8. The jumping narrative format definitely helped keep me engaged and pull me along in the book as a non reader and i remember enjoying it a fair bit because of this!

The audio narration is fantastic - that bumps it up to 4. In reality this a 3 maybe 3.5 story. Enjoyable enough but not as gripping at The Handmaid's Tale.

I liked The Handmaid's Tale. It took its time to deliberate, make us want more and then leave us hanging, holding our breath. Its atmosphere was claustrophobic, its implications were vague enough to let us fill in the rest with our worst nightmares. Gilead was beyond a nightmare. It was my personal inferno.

It worked so effectively in part because it was structured around a single voice, that of Offred's. She couldn't know everything, so we wouldn't have to know everything about Gilead. This made everything feel authentic.

Now that The Testaments is here, and after having read it, I am merely shaking my head as sagely as I can. Part of me dreaded what was coming when the book was announced, but I tried to play down that streak in me that was skeptical. The first season of the TV show was excellent, quite successful in capturing the hopelessness of the book, and it wasn't Atwood's fault the show took a nosedive after that.

There are several reviews that describe The Testaments as either fan fiction or YA literature. Those hit pretty close to home, I think. Since I haven't read anything else from Atwood I can't compare to what her other books might be like, but much of this book felt more like The Hunger Games, and while that book has its place as an entertaining dystopian adventure, it's not a connection I was expecting to make. Yet there it is. On one hand I applaud Atwood for her courage to completely deconstruct the first novel and go in a completely new direction with this latter book, but on the other it's a path taken by so many apparently lesser writers it's somewhat beguiling as to what the point of the book might actually be. And then again it's understandable: there's no point to write a sequel in the spirit of the original, since it stands so well on its own that it would be even harder to justify the sequel's existence.

Since I find the TV show rather banal in how it has morphed into an action-adventure with some shocking social commentary for frills, I'm disappointed yet not altogether surprised to find that The Testaments has followed in its wake. It's predictable, the characters waltz around (and in and out of) Gilead as carefree as ever, and even the occasional sparks of Aunt Lydia's personality can't rescue it from itself.

Atwood at her best. Reminiscent of “Year of the Flood” in the changing perspective between various female narrators. Aunt Lydia is one of the most interesting fictional characters I have ever encountered, so complex and conniving - she plays a longer game than any I've ever seen. The expectations were enormous for a sequel people have wanted for over 3 decades, and our esteemed author delivered on all counts! I cried, my heart ached for the untenable world these characters are searching for a way out of - and I binge-read the book in two days, mostly because I wanted to know how it ends, but also so I could return it to the library and let someone else read it ASAP!

I can see why people aren't rating this highly. It is weird to revisit The Handmaid's Tale now but I also loved that she did. I know when I read Handmaid's Tale I had so many questions about the logistics and workings of this world. I'm a sucker for world building and this book accomplished it in a unique way. I for one enjoyed reading it and feel like it's worth reading if you enjoyed the first book.

This was a really well done follow up to Atwood's iconic The Handmaid's Tale. It was a very interesting return to Gilead through the eyes of multiple narrators, all of whom play key roles in one of the biggest questions of the first novel - the eventual fall of Gilead. It was truly interesting to see how it all played out.

It did feel a little bit like Atwood wrote this with the tv show in mind, but not in a bad way. The bulk of its action is set roughly 15 years after the point we are currently at in the show, so it's clear she wanted to tread in territory far enough removed from Offred's story to give that narrative time to breathe. But it was really satisfying to read this, set in the somewhat near future with characters that are becoming familiar. Though there are some major differences particularly regarding Aunt Lydia that the show would not be able to adapt wholesale, should they ever get to this point in the story. It will be interesting to see how much of this they eventually choose to incorporate into the show, if they even get to this book's timeline in their planned series.

OK, but disappointing. Felt like a dumbed-down, thriller style sequel, with none of the incredible writing and allegory and allusion that characterised the Handmaid's Tale. Sure, it tied up some loose ends and added depth to the original story, but I don't feel like it added all that much. Not sure how it was deemed worthy of the Booker!

A literary novel that makes you think and keeps you turning the pages. A brilliant sequel.

I greatly enjoyed The Testaments, which I couldn't quite say of The Handmaid's Tale. While I think that the latter is the better book, this one was a fantastic thriller that sucked me right in. Three characters provide their perspectives in The Testaments: Aunt Lydia, a powerful figure and one of the highest ranking women in Gilead's hierarchy; Agnes, a girl growing up in a well-off family in Gilead; and Daisy, a girl growing up outside of Gilead, in Canada.

The novel serves as a great expansion on the world of The Handmaid's Tale, and it was interesting to hear from such diverse viewpoints. Early on, it's revealed that Aunt Lydia is working against the regime. Her case serves as a timely reminder that, for the most part, the difference between “bringing down the system from the inside” and “full and enthusiastic participation” is imperceptible. Ultimately, I think that this lesson is the book's most noteworthy contribution, especially coupled with the knowledge that, while the book had a happy ending, it could just as easily not have.

This book is very powerful and a captivating read. It sounds a bit weird to use words like loved or enjoyed for this kind of book.

It's been a very long time since I read The Handmaid's Tale. I think The Handmaid's Tale is a bit better, in my opinion, but this is very good too.

A fitting sequel. Thoroughly enjoyed the multiple perspectives and another glimpse into Gilead.

I'm not going to spend too much time on The Testaments, Margaret Atwood's follow-up to The Handmaid's Tale. I do think it's a competent and well-written modern novel. The story arc is well established and the characters fill their roles with ease. It gives an adequate conclusion(?) to the story of Gilead, although I don't know that it was a necessary addition to the story. It answers some questions, but I question whether these answers will hold the long-term value their secrecy held for the last three decades.

Outside of necessity, I think the biggest critique I have is simply that it lacks the exceptionally riveting atmosphere of The Handmaid's Tale. We've been shown the world as perceived by a Handmaid, now we're given the world through the eyes of an Aunt, a Daughter, and an Outsider. These characters give us a more full view of the world of Gilead, but they've all been given access to a larger view than “Offred” was ever given. The blinders placed on handmaids was a large part of what made Gilead so haunting. Now we're privy to the bigger picture and things don't seem so out-of-control and hopeless. The rest of the world goes on. It's not really all that different from the world we've all lived in our entire lives.

I loved this. It is (in my opinion) that rare gem of a novel that is a fun thrilling read, and has literary merit and importance. I found Aunt Lydia's back story harrowing, and actually had to put the book down at times. It made me laugh, the end made me cry - and Gilead was truly terrifying. Worth all the buzz and the hype!

Really a 3.5.

The perspectives of 3 women inside Gilead. One broken down to become an instrument of the evil regime. One innocent who came of age only knowing the totalitarian misogynist ways. And one looking in from the outside, with unexpected ties to characters within. Their fates collide to push a domino stone that ultimately helps bring down the theocracy.

It wasn't as captivating as the original book, but it was a very engaging read, in a who-dunnit way. Speeding up towards reveals and an action finale.

I am also quite intrigued by the fact that Atwood defined the future for some of the TV adaptation characters.

I think it's more of a 3.5.

The Handmaid's Tale was never a classic in my head because I had never heard about it, until probably a little while before the announcement of the Hulu series. Even then, I was only compelled to read both that book and 1984 because of their drastically increased sales following the 2016 elections and I wanted to know what the fuss was all about. And I ended up with quite a lot of mixed feelings, the major one of them being dread. But I was never in awe of it in its entirety, only parts of it. So, when I decided to read The Testaments, I had no expectations of being blown away; mostly just a curiosity to know what might have happened next. And for all intents and purposes, this book answers that question very well.

My most significant memory of the reading experience of HT was feeling absolutely horrible and terrified if this was a dystopia that might not be entirely implausible in our future. And that's why the book still lingers in my mind - the author managed to create such a brilliant world that it evokes such deep emotions in us and obviously some of the things happening around in our world also reinforce the feeling that Gilead might not just be a fictional future. That's where I think this book misses the mark a bit, because we already are familiar with the world and there's lot less new to be horrified about. But we do get a brief glimpse of the lives of refugees, the underground operations in Canada and how they try to save women from Gilead and how most of the other countries ignore the atrocities of this regime due to the fear of war. We also get to know more about the inner workings of the Aunts, how they came to be in those positions and how the whole system of Gilead is propped up on a bed of secrets, lies and deceit. I liked these additions to the world but I just didn't think a lot was added to what we already know.

The writing was the main issue I had with HT - I found it very difficult to follow and maybe it was due to how detached Offred was as a narrator, I felt similarly towards the narrative. Thankfully, this one ended up being much more straightforward and easy to read. There are also multiple POVs, so it was nice getting to know more than one character, but I also felt we never got to know anyone too deeply. The pace is pretty consistent, but a little slow because we can't be expecting this to be an action packed novel. I really thought the ending would be more suspenseful though, but the buildup wasn't tense enough and it ended fairly quickly too. However, as someone who found the first book very difficult to get through and the show even more troubling (because of the tough subject, I abandoned it after a few episodes), I thought this was much lighter on the horrors and felt like a normal dystopian novel - which is pretty surprising considering it's Man Booker Prize nominated.

As this book takes place almost 15 years after the story of Offred in HT, the two young women whom we follow here have grown up in a world where Gilead is a reality. Agnes is the child of a Commander, as such it's the only world she knows and it's the only faith she believes in. It's only after she learns some secrets that she begins to question her faith, and what does she have left if not her beliefs. She was the one character I thought we get to know quite well, her motivations and feelings and her deep seated desires.

On the other hand, Daisy grows up on the other side of the border and even protests about the atrocities of Gilead alongside other Canadian citizens, but when tragedy strikes and some truths are uncovered, she decides to help the underground resistance. While I completely understood her grief and confusion about her life, I thought she acquiesced too easily to the call for action, and most of her plot after that moment felt very unrealistic. I guess I'm still confused if she was brave or just idealistic and naive.

And the surprise POV was of Aunt Lydia. I of course didn't think I would like reading her words, but I have to say I was surprised. I completely loathed her in HT and while my aversion towards her didn't reduce, I guess I understood why she did what she did and how she came to be that much of a formidable figure in the power hierarchy of Gilead. And while I have to admire her smarts, cunning and survival skills, I am still unsure about the motivations behind her grand plan. And I definitely would have liked to get more answers about that. But her POV is definitely very refreshing to read because this is the only time we get to read atleast a little about a powerful woman instead of the accounts of countless other oppressed women in this world.

Finally, I don't think my review of this book is going to change the opinion of anyone who wants to read this book. But I do want to mention that if you are someone who absolutely adored HT and want a true sequel for that book, this one is not it and you may be disappointed. However, if you just want some answers about what eventually may have happened to Gilead and what led to it's downfall, I think you'll like this much more. Probably best not to go in with a lot of high expectations.

Sometimes we dream about sequels for favorite books. We never really think they will happen. Or, if they do, the sequels are deeply disappointing.

Not so with The Testaments, sequel to Margaret Atwood's widely-beloved The Handmaid's Tale. What happened next? we all wanted to know. The Testaments wraps things up nicely.

I'll be brief about the plot: Three different stories of three very different women, and all three come together with powerful results.

The fear that underscores this book is the unvoiced secret fear of all women today, the horrifying thought that all the freedoms so hard won can be easily and thoroughly snatched away. My hope for this book is that it is a shot of immunization against that potential future. Please get your inoculation and tell others to get theirs.

Let's be clear: The Testaments is no Handmaid's Tale. As a sequel - even as an individual work of fiction - it doesn't measure up to the brilliance that is its predecessor.

What it is, however, is closure. For all of us who have yearned to know what happened - did she make it out - did Gilead ever fall - The Testaments brings answers to our questions. And it does so as a strong, engaging, fascinating work of fiction.

Atwood uses three voices to tell Gilead's continuing story, and while I found them all engaging, the voice of the Aunt was the most compelling for me. I found this novel to be a quick read - I was entirely engaged from page one, and didn't want to put it down until I had reached the end.

I think, for those of us who have loved this novel over the years, The Testaments will be satisfying. It doesn't reach the same levels as some of Atwood's previous work, but it is still a solid and welcome work of fiction.

An enjoyable read - but also, sadly, an unnecessary one. I can't help but wonder why Atwood felt the need to write this book (marketed as a separate, but related, story to The Handmaid's Tale, which is simply not true). It seems she felt compelled by her readers, new and old, and their questions to write The Testaments. The quality of writing is nowhere near that of Atwood's prize-winning works and rather more akin to that of your run-of-the-mill books - which is not to say it is bad writing, just that it is by no means the elegant prose of The Handmaid's Tale. The plot is predictable and, at points, poorly conceived. If this was not a world I was desperate to know more about, I'm sure my rating and satisfaction with the novel would be much lower.

I would rather not go into spoilers but I so wish Atwood had written a completely separate story, with none of the same characters as the original (or characters linked to them or to those in the TV series). Gilead is a truly fascinating world to explore and there were so many avenues Atwood could have taken.

I think the only sequel I was more disappointed with was The Cursed Child, and that's not even a sequel OR a book OR written by the author. So what sequel is really at the top of the list here?

At one point I could have sworn I was actually reading early 2000's YA, complete with a combat training montage.

I already want to do a reread ASAP