Scan barcode
st_urmer's review against another edition
4.0
Satisfying follow-up to Oryx and Crake. I particulary enjoyed how the two main characters' stories were written in two different voices, Ren's in first person and Toby's in second person. The exploration of the extreme end of modern consumer/corporate society was darkly satirical and the characters well drawn. Looking forward to the final volume of the trilogy.
snukes's review against another edition
5.0
This book really resonated with me. If the timing of my reading had been different, it may not have made it all the way up to five stars (an elite and favored status on my shelves), but as it is, I cannot stop thinking about it.
This is the second book in the MaddAddam trilogy. It covers the same time period that the first book covered, but from the perspectives of Toby and Ren, two women living on the rougher side of the social fence, doing the best they can to survive. Core to each of them surviving is their participation in a religious group called God's Gardeners.
Toby, the older of the two, finds herself among the Gardeners as a life-saving tactic, a sanctuary that will protect her from a would-be killer. Her acceptance of the Gardeners' faith is reluctant, and for most of the story, non-existent. She considers leaving them often. She resists being given more privilege and responsibility within the group because she does not feel her weak faith merits it, and doesn't want to deceive anyone about the depth of her faith by taking the new role. When fate forces her into it, she nevertheless takes it on with a sense of patience and duty that I hugely admired. I found it beautiful how, toward the end of the story, when the faith of those who had previously professed more loudly had been battered by circumstance, it was Toby who found strength in the spirit of what they had once held sacred, even as she continued to be somewhat outside it.
Ren, the younger woman, was brought to the Gardeners as a child by her runaway mother. She is raised with the group and finds a home and life there. When her mother later removes her from the group and returns her to the life of an upper class teenager, claiming to all who meet them that Ren has been warped by her time in the cult, Ren feels groundless and lost. She eventually adapts to her new circumstances, but retains a certain nostalgia for her past life. I liked this portrayal because it never became syruppy. Atwood never makes Ren into a caricature of a girl pining for some ideal past. We're always left somewhat in doubt as to the state of Ren's faith. She struggled with it as a child until Amanda came along - Amanda the rebel, who played lip service to the faith while always seeming to have a foot in both worlds. Ren's devotion is much more centered on Amanda than on the ideals of the theology.
The ways in which these two women are flawed, and they flawed ways in which they relate to their religion fascinate me. It becomes even more interesting to me when paired with the nature of that faith itself. God's Gardeners, on the surface, are a group that believe in the sacredness of all life. They are vegetarian because they would not choose to harm another living creature to benefit themselves. They are also fatalists who believe that the Waterless Flood is at hand, and are stockpiling food and supplies in preparation for the coming doomsday. When the group is whole, they are non-violent. Their proselytizing strategy is never discussed, though it seems fairly hands off. They are generally shunned by the "normal" people, though every now and then a "new convert" appears.
What I liked most about this depiction of religion was not the theology itself, but the way the church leader - Adam One - managed the theology. Based largely on Christian mythology, the doctrines of the Gardeners are also unabashedly accepting of the tenets of science. Yes to evolution. Yes to gene-splicing. Yes to all the theories of the cosmos and biology and ecology and psychology. If science has proved a thing is so, then the Gardeners find a way to make sure their doctrine encompasses it, rather than trying to declare that the scientists must be mistaken because God says it is otherwise.
At one point, the children ask the teachers why, if God designed people to be vegetarian, they were given teeth that are designed for rending and chewing meat? Rather than accept the mythologically easy but scientifically shaky suggestion thrown out by one member - that God changed the design of man's teeth after the original Flood - Adam One asks that the members give the matter careful consideration so they can find the correct answer. The answer is never provided within this book, but I love how the issue is addressed. "We have a problem, we have to find an answer that suits science and logic as well as our beliefs." I wonder what would have happened if they could not?
The Gardeners are also pragmatists. While eating meat is frowned upon because that meat was a sacred life, they also recognize that if the End is coming, they will face circumstances that may require them to eat meat or perish. Their choice is not to take the moral stand that will kill them, but to recognize they need for flexibility in dire times. They thank the animal for its sacrifice, and endeavor to carry on with their own lives so that even that tiny sacrifice will not be in vain. They keep lethally poisonous mushrooms in their supplies, because you never know when such might be needed. (The implications of this are both those of mercy, and the much darker sort of need.) They hide by mimicry among people whose lifestyles they revile in order to effect change or preserve their movement as a whole. They adapt and survive while preserving a core set of ideals that everyone is encouraged to return to when they can. No one is judged harshly for doing what they have to do to survive, physically or psychologically.
So, so interesting to me.
And all through this - almost in the background, it seems - the world is going to figurative hell in a handbasket, as it did in the first tale. I am grateful that I didn't wait very long between reading the first book and reading this second, because the ways Atwood ties to the two tales together are intricate and beautiful. As I read, I couldn't help but admiring how well planned the story must have been in her mind, even before she wrote the first book, in order to weave these stories together so tightly. Every time I re-met a character who had been in the first story - sometimes only by brief mention - I felt a nice "oh look!" of satisfaction. It speaks to the great depth of the story.
I assume the third book will move forward in time, now, since these first two stories drew together at the same ending point. I very much look forward to finding out how the tangled fates of all these people will finally resolve, and what the world will look like when they're done with it.
This is the second book in the MaddAddam trilogy. It covers the same time period that the first book covered, but from the perspectives of Toby and Ren, two women living on the rougher side of the social fence, doing the best they can to survive. Core to each of them surviving is their participation in a religious group called God's Gardeners.
Toby, the older of the two, finds herself among the Gardeners as a life-saving tactic, a sanctuary that will protect her from a would-be killer. Her acceptance of the Gardeners' faith is reluctant, and for most of the story, non-existent. She considers leaving them often. She resists being given more privilege and responsibility within the group because she does not feel her weak faith merits it, and doesn't want to deceive anyone about the depth of her faith by taking the new role. When fate forces her into it, she nevertheless takes it on with a sense of patience and duty that I hugely admired. I found it beautiful how, toward the end of the story, when the faith of those who had previously professed more loudly had been battered by circumstance, it was Toby who found strength in the spirit of what they had once held sacred, even as she continued to be somewhat outside it.
Ren, the younger woman, was brought to the Gardeners as a child by her runaway mother. She is raised with the group and finds a home and life there. When her mother later removes her from the group and returns her to the life of an upper class teenager, claiming to all who meet them that Ren has been warped by her time in the cult, Ren feels groundless and lost. She eventually adapts to her new circumstances, but retains a certain nostalgia for her past life. I liked this portrayal because it never became syruppy. Atwood never makes Ren into a caricature of a girl pining for some ideal past. We're always left somewhat in doubt as to the state of Ren's faith. She struggled with it as a child until Amanda came along - Amanda the rebel, who played lip service to the faith while always seeming to have a foot in both worlds. Ren's devotion is much more centered on Amanda than on the ideals of the theology.
The ways in which these two women are flawed, and they flawed ways in which they relate to their religion fascinate me. It becomes even more interesting to me when paired with the nature of that faith itself. God's Gardeners, on the surface, are a group that believe in the sacredness of all life. They are vegetarian because they would not choose to harm another living creature to benefit themselves. They are also fatalists who believe that the Waterless Flood is at hand, and are stockpiling food and supplies in preparation for the coming doomsday. When the group is whole, they are non-violent. Their proselytizing strategy is never discussed, though it seems fairly hands off. They are generally shunned by the "normal" people, though every now and then a "new convert" appears.
What I liked most about this depiction of religion was not the theology itself, but the way the church leader - Adam One - managed the theology. Based largely on Christian mythology, the doctrines of the Gardeners are also unabashedly accepting of the tenets of science. Yes to evolution. Yes to gene-splicing. Yes to all the theories of the cosmos and biology and ecology and psychology. If science has proved a thing is so, then the Gardeners find a way to make sure their doctrine encompasses it, rather than trying to declare that the scientists must be mistaken because God says it is otherwise.
At one point, the children ask the teachers why, if God designed people to be vegetarian, they were given teeth that are designed for rending and chewing meat? Rather than accept the mythologically easy but scientifically shaky suggestion thrown out by one member - that God changed the design of man's teeth after the original Flood - Adam One asks that the members give the matter careful consideration so they can find the correct answer. The answer is never provided within this book, but I love how the issue is addressed. "We have a problem, we have to find an answer that suits science and logic as well as our beliefs." I wonder what would have happened if they could not?
The Gardeners are also pragmatists. While eating meat is frowned upon because that meat was a sacred life, they also recognize that if the End is coming, they will face circumstances that may require them to eat meat or perish. Their choice is not to take the moral stand that will kill them, but to recognize they need for flexibility in dire times. They thank the animal for its sacrifice, and endeavor to carry on with their own lives so that even that tiny sacrifice will not be in vain. They keep lethally poisonous mushrooms in their supplies, because you never know when such might be needed. (The implications of this are both those of mercy, and the much darker sort of need.) They hide by mimicry among people whose lifestyles they revile in order to effect change or preserve their movement as a whole. They adapt and survive while preserving a core set of ideals that everyone is encouraged to return to when they can. No one is judged harshly for doing what they have to do to survive, physically or psychologically.
So, so interesting to me.
And all through this - almost in the background, it seems - the world is going to figurative hell in a handbasket, as it did in the first tale. I am grateful that I didn't wait very long between reading the first book and reading this second, because the ways Atwood ties to the two tales together are intricate and beautiful. As I read, I couldn't help but admiring how well planned the story must have been in her mind, even before she wrote the first book, in order to weave these stories together so tightly. Every time I re-met a character who had been in the first story - sometimes only by brief mention - I felt a nice "oh look!" of satisfaction. It speaks to the great depth of the story.
I assume the third book will move forward in time, now, since these first two stories drew together at the same ending point. I very much look forward to finding out how the tangled fates of all these people will finally resolve, and what the world will look like when they're done with it.
aadaenyaa's review against another edition
Still not as compelling as a The Handmaid's Tale, but I will have to reserve complete judgement until after I read Maddadam, as this was the bridge book that was bringing them all together. I'll need to know how the story finishes up before I can make a decision.
eemiillaa's review against another edition
5.0
My second read left me loving this book as much I remembered loving it the first time. It is the strongest of the novels which seems strange for a second section of a trilogy.
leventmolla's review against another edition
2.0
This book is sometimes mistakenly advertised as the "follow-up" to Atwood's earlier book about genetic apocalypse, "Oryx and Crake". However, this is actually a side story that is taking place around the same time as Oryx & Crake. It is telling the story of two women (but also others) that find themselves in religious sects just before the genetic apocalypse hits the world as described in the earlier book. I have some mixed feelings about the book. it is telling the story in the same era as the earlier book and towards the end loose knots are tied up, but you wonder what this new book adds to the story. In my opinion it does not add much, although it describes in great detail what an environmental "religion" or sect could be like. A bit of disappointment for me....
mermerdundun's review against another edition
2.0
I remember really liking Oryx and Crake when it came out and didn't even realize there was another book that was a continuation of this world (or simply related, to be more specific). But, The Year of the Flood disappointed me greatly. Atwood seemed too focused on creating the future world and its new technologies instead of creating the characters and eliciting any emotions in the reader. I love when "speculative" books include things that make you go "Omg I could SO see that happening," but TYOTF did not make me say that. Instead I was thinking that Atwood got way too carried away with some things that they in fact lost their plausibility and tore me away from the book. Like NO I don't think the demand for crazy-colored wigs will become so out-of-control, EVER, that scientists will create a special sheep-like animal especially for cultivating the wigs. NO I don't think men would ever want to fuck or watch women strip or dance who are dressed like giant birds or lizards at a place called Scales and Tails, nor do I think that legalized prostitution would eliminate any back-alley transactions (after all, the dirty thrill is part of the allure, right?)
I think if I had read Oryx and Crake just before reading TYOTF, I would have had more joy in connecting the dots between the two (although I don't think TYOTF relies on any knowledge of O&C to make sense) but I didn't. And finally, wtf are violet biolets? I couldn't envision this new kind of toilet and... that upset me.
I think if I had read Oryx and Crake just before reading TYOTF, I would have had more joy in connecting the dots between the two (although I don't think TYOTF relies on any knowledge of O&C to make sense) but I didn't. And finally, wtf are violet biolets? I couldn't envision this new kind of toilet and... that upset me.
squid_vicious's review against another edition
5.0
Having survived that devastating plague Crake unleashed on the human race in "Oryx & Crake" (https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/226430831), Toby and Ren are now doing their best to survive the empty yet menacing cityscape they were stuck in when all Hell broke loose. Toby was rescued from a life of hardship and degradation by the Gardeners, a strange eco-cult that predicted the "Flood", as where Ren was made to join them when her mother ran off from a cushioned life to be with one of their leaders. The Gardeners are harmless enough: vegetarians, anti-technology and consumerism, they recycled many biblical stories to fit more seamlessly with the reality they found themselves in. But just as with any other cults, they can be inconsistent and creepy, and neither Toby nor Ren ever feels fully comfortable within their midst. The book explores their unlikely survival, but also life within the cult. Characters from “Oryx & Crake” appear, filling in some of the blanks of Jimmy's story.
Not so much as a sequel to the first MaddAddam book, "The Year of the Flood" is more a parallel to Jimmy's story, where we finally get to see how things were outside the compound where he lived and did his work; this narrative shift, from the perspective of a man on the inside, to two women on the outside, expands the world-building Atwood had started with “Oryx & Crake” beautifully and hauntingly. While it was originally published ten years ago, there are some eerily prescient elements to it: I shouldn’t be surprised, as Atwood is a remarkably perspective writer, who imagines how current trends might unfold in realistic and unsettling ways. The way she describes how much sharper the class division has become, for instance, is not that much of a stretch of the imagination, and the discourse on food and its provenance and “cleanliness” was already a concern when she wrote the book – a concern that has only gotten louder and stronger since. It is also not that hard to imagine that if a bunch of self-righteous and organized freegans got together and decided to form a cult around their principles, they would end up with something very much like the Gardeners.
As usual for an Atwood novel, the prose is gorgeous, fluid and evocative, and I just lost myself in it for a few days. Her cheeky humor also saves what could be a very grim story from being completely depressing. You will definitely get unpleasant shivers as you explore this eerily believable dystopia she created, but then you will also likely find yourself giggling at some of the absurdities humans cling to.
Is it as good as “Oryx & Crake”? I would tend to say yes, because it complements it so perfectly. The only weakness you can really find in it is that you already have an idea of where it's all going if you read the first book – so it lacks the excitement and tension I felt when I first read Jimmy’s story. But if you enjoyed the first book, the second is definitely a must-read. I know there are plenty of mixed opinions about the final installment of the trilogy, but I feel compelled to check it out anyway.
4 and half, rounded up.
Not so much as a sequel to the first MaddAddam book, "The Year of the Flood" is more a parallel to Jimmy's story, where we finally get to see how things were outside the compound where he lived and did his work; this narrative shift, from the perspective of a man on the inside, to two women on the outside, expands the world-building Atwood had started with “Oryx & Crake” beautifully and hauntingly. While it was originally published ten years ago, there are some eerily prescient elements to it: I shouldn’t be surprised, as Atwood is a remarkably perspective writer, who imagines how current trends might unfold in realistic and unsettling ways. The way she describes how much sharper the class division has become, for instance, is not that much of a stretch of the imagination, and the discourse on food and its provenance and “cleanliness” was already a concern when she wrote the book – a concern that has only gotten louder and stronger since. It is also not that hard to imagine that if a bunch of self-righteous and organized freegans got together and decided to form a cult around their principles, they would end up with something very much like the Gardeners.
As usual for an Atwood novel, the prose is gorgeous, fluid and evocative, and I just lost myself in it for a few days. Her cheeky humor also saves what could be a very grim story from being completely depressing. You will definitely get unpleasant shivers as you explore this eerily believable dystopia she created, but then you will also likely find yourself giggling at some of the absurdities humans cling to.
Is it as good as “Oryx & Crake”? I would tend to say yes, because it complements it so perfectly. The only weakness you can really find in it is that you already have an idea of where it's all going if you read the first book – so it lacks the excitement and tension I felt when I first read Jimmy’s story. But if you enjoyed the first book, the second is definitely a must-read. I know there are plenty of mixed opinions about the final installment of the trilogy, but I feel compelled to check it out anyway.
4 and half, rounded up.
rossetto_e_guai's review against another edition
4.0
Seconda parte della trilogia MaddAdam.
Molto più complessa e lunga della prima. In questo secondo romanzo viviamo il pre e post apocalisse dal
Punto di vista delle città dei poveri anziché quello privilegiato del primo romanzo, dove tutti i personaggi lentamente ( molto lentamente) si incastrano con la narrazione deL primo romanzo.
Probabilmente molto più affascinante del primo romanzo ma un pelo troppo lento nella prima parte.
La Atwood sempre incredibile nel ricreare gli universi distopici dei suoi romanzi.
Molto più complessa e lunga della prima. In questo secondo romanzo viviamo il pre e post apocalisse dal
Punto di vista delle città dei poveri anziché quello privilegiato del primo romanzo, dove tutti i personaggi lentamente ( molto lentamente) si incastrano con la narrazione deL primo romanzo.
Probabilmente molto più affascinante del primo romanzo ma un pelo troppo lento nella prima parte.
La Atwood sempre incredibile nel ricreare gli universi distopici dei suoi romanzi.
brattyjedi's review
2.0
I listened to this as an audio book and lost track of the number of times I yelled at my player "I don't care! Get to the good stuff!" If I'd read this as text, perhaps I would have enjoyed it more as it would have been much easier to skip the boring bits to get to the good stuff, but I'm not sure that would be a good thing for the book. The good parts were good and there were more of them than boring bits, but I really shouldn't have had to yell at my audio player at all let alone uncountable times.