On Aug 24, 2004, at 11:27 AM, Bryon Daly wrote:
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:13:13 -0400, Erik Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 12:44:51PM -0400, Bryon Daly wrote:On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:03:39 -0400, Erik Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 08:45:57PM +0900, G. D. Akin wrote:
My question is this: what makes a book/story SF?
Simple. It should be fiction, and it should involve science or something
related to science in some major or minor way!
So by this classification, would you consider Atwood's "The Handmaid's
Tale" not to be SF?
Haven't read it. Heard a couple things, not sure if they are true. Most
women infertile? Why? Was there a (at least somewhat) scientific
explanation given?
Nuclear war. IIRC, there's not much detail/specifics on the war itself or the
exact cause of widespread infertility beyond that.
And the nuke thing is tenuous at best. I got the war, yes -- but infertility I read as being the result of bioweapons, not a nuke exchange.
Atwood is beautifully vague on this, because it really doesn't matter. What she posits is a world controlled, at least as far as Offred is concerned, entirely by men, all of whom are clearly of a particularly virulent stripe of Christian fundamentalism. Without specifying denominations, and going solely on what she wrote, I can say the likely culprits' church name would rhyme with Bouthern Craptists. (Or, if you're like me, "Ducking Bouthern Craptists.")
It's a passable book, worth the read though a bit irritating in places; and do yourself a favor and ignore the afterword. It really shouldn't have been included.
-- WthmO
The best way to be free from religious terrorism is to be free from religion. --
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
