Stupid Mail

HEY I'M LARGELY OFFLINE these days, editing is going to be iffy at best.  Checking of details even more so.

The profoundly stupid Simps thinks I attacked Margaret Atwood for writing her "Gilead" books when I said they were worth reading, she can write.  What they are not worth doing is mistaking for being more than fiction or a roadmap to the dangers we really are facing.   I read it more than thirty years ago, that I forgot the title doesn't bother me much, especially as brought up by someone who never read anything MA wrote in his life. 

I think Cat's Eye is a far more interesting book, one that is far harder to read, more challenging.

What I did criticize about Margaret Atwood is her belief that liberal democracy is going to save us from the very results that have come with liberal as opposed to egalitarian democracy.   Stupy didn't argue with anything I said about that because he didn't understand it.

That said, I think cousin Mary's review from 1986 linked to the other day was even more apt today as it was then.  Atwood's horror tale is a series of fictitious stereotypes from pop-history that tells us nothing about the past and little about the present and she gets the real source of such stuff in real Women's lives right now, as I listed in my second post.   

I like Margaret Atwood and I like some of what she wrote but the first of the two books the one that gets all the attention - the one I've read - is just a scary story.  That's why it's popular, it's also popular because she goes after a weak force that it's not dangerous at all to attack, she doesn't attack the real source of subjugation and enslavement and deadly oppression of women, right now.   If she really wanted to look at the real thing, she could have written one about those entrapped in the porn industry and prostitution.  That one wouldn't get made into a TV show because the media she is a part of is collusive in one which is inseparable from the other.