You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.05 AVERAGE
4.05 AVERAGE
An adventure! I think I liked this better than the first one. There was certainly more humor in these perspectives which is a bit of a relief when the dystopia is as dark as this one. Additionally, it is good to have a female perspective in a dystopia that is so hard on women. That said, this is so different from Handmaid’s Tale, one might think they had different authors. Worth reading for all its own quite separate reasons.
Dystopia is certainly more fun in a cult. There is a frightening power in Margaret Atwood’s imitation of Christian fundamentalism. The cult at the core of the Flood is very believable and its values are so delicately drawn that it’s easy to get caught up in the platitudes and music. What I appreciate is that she does not waster her time satirizing or mocking extreme beliefs but explores them deeply and with full permission. It’s not so much a warning or dismay, something that can be overdone in dystopia, but it is an exploration of hope, faith, and our culture’s driving forces.
Atwood has such a remarkable insight on people and culture, this book really reminded me why she’s revered. Even at the end of the world, she pushes at the edges of what it means to exist and seeks out why we should. In this series, I recognize that she is exercising a gleeful freedom from critical or social expectations. Perhaps it’s the liberating magic of birdwatching. A little coocoo, but profound.
Dystopia is certainly more fun in a cult. There is a frightening power in Margaret Atwood’s imitation of Christian fundamentalism. The cult at the core of the Flood is very believable and its values are so delicately drawn that it’s easy to get caught up in the platitudes and music. What I appreciate is that she does not waster her time satirizing or mocking extreme beliefs but explores them deeply and with full permission. It’s not so much a warning or dismay, something that can be overdone in dystopia, but it is an exploration of hope, faith, and our culture’s driving forces.
Atwood has such a remarkable insight on people and culture, this book really reminded me why she’s revered. Even at the end of the world, she pushes at the edges of what it means to exist and seeks out why we should. In this series, I recognize that she is exercising a gleeful freedom from critical or social expectations. Perhaps it’s the liberating magic of birdwatching. A little coocoo, but profound.
adventurous
dark
emotional
hopeful
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Really got good after the first half. A bit too "small world" but good.
challenging
dark
funny
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
Not as good as first part of the trilogy (they practically coincide in time as the second book tells the story from the point of view of other people -there is also convergence in the last chapter). Although it is interesting, unfortunately it is quite blabbering, it loses the tight narrative structure of the first book as the narrative is "broken" into different POVs (which does not always serve the purpose well). Ah, and the hymns... they made me bore to death.
The characters, although in greater numbers, are not more multidimensional than the protagonist of the first part and look a bit papery.
Let's see, will the last part save the trilogy or doom it?
The characters, although in greater numbers, are not more multidimensional than the protagonist of the first part and look a bit papery.
Let's see, will the last part save the trilogy or doom it?
adventurous
dark
tense
medium-paced
adventurous
dark
funny
reflective
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Being back home for Christmas usually means I have plenty of time to read. So far I've read two and a half books. The latest book was the continuation of Margaret Atwood's MaddAdam Trilogy, The Year of the Flood. While this book struggled as well with pace it was more interesting than the first book, Oryx and Crake.
In The Year of the Flood Atwood follows the same timeline. The novel begins when one of the main characters is a child and jumps back and forth to when she's an adult. What we see is the same world but from a different perspective: the God's Gardeners. The Gardeners are a cult who tie Christian theology with the environmental movement. Imagine a Saint Jane Goodall or the doctrine of Aldo Leopold. The Gardeners believe in evolution, but they believe all animals have souls and God established them to be companions to Man. For the most part, the Gardeners are dismissed as harmless, but as time moves forward others take up the Gardener's views. The cult is a refuge for those who are sickened by the corporations. Under the leadership of Adam One, the Gardeners have been pacifists, but a schism takes place and the more radical activists leave. These people are the ones who Crake dupes into helping him.
Another interesting aspect of this novel is how minor characters from the first book become major characters in this book and vice versa. It offers insights that readers won't often find and is something I think about often in fiction.
The Year of the Flood ends around the same place as Oryx and Crake, but carries the action out another two beats. We know what happens when Jimmy/Snowman comes into the clearing now, but we're still left wondering what will happen next. My guess is the third book will follow all of the characters as they move through the present, instead of spending so much time in flashbacks. If you are unsure after reading the first novel, check this one out. It's better and more intriguing.
In The Year of the Flood Atwood follows the same timeline. The novel begins when one of the main characters is a child and jumps back and forth to when she's an adult. What we see is the same world but from a different perspective: the God's Gardeners. The Gardeners are a cult who tie Christian theology with the environmental movement. Imagine a Saint Jane Goodall or the doctrine of Aldo Leopold. The Gardeners believe in evolution, but they believe all animals have souls and God established them to be companions to Man. For the most part, the Gardeners are dismissed as harmless, but as time moves forward others take up the Gardener's views. The cult is a refuge for those who are sickened by the corporations. Under the leadership of Adam One, the Gardeners have been pacifists, but a schism takes place and the more radical activists leave. These people are the ones who Crake dupes into helping him.
Another interesting aspect of this novel is how minor characters from the first book become major characters in this book and vice versa. It offers insights that readers won't often find and is something I think about often in fiction.
The Year of the Flood ends around the same place as Oryx and Crake, but carries the action out another two beats. We know what happens when Jimmy/Snowman comes into the clearing now, but we're still left wondering what will happen next. My guess is the third book will follow all of the characters as they move through the present, instead of spending so much time in flashbacks. If you are unsure after reading the first novel, check this one out. It's better and more intriguing.
Might pick this up again some day, it’s certainly not terrible, but I’m about a third of the way through and I’m not feeling it. Definitely a letdown after just finishing Oryx & Crake which I thought was great.
adventurous
dark
emotional
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes