The story has shocked much of the literary world, which widely mourned [Alice] Munro with glowing tributes after her death in May at 92.
"I did not learn the details of this until everyone else did, though I’d had hints not long before this past weekend. Horrifying," Canadian novelist Margaret Atwood, a friend of Munro’s, said in an email to The Post.
If something horrifying might be true, but you only have "hints" and not "details," you have some responsibility. Not only was Atwood Munro's friend, but Atwood writes books that purport to nudge and instruct us about morality. "The Handmaid's Tale" seems to be taken as a perceptive observation of the evils inherent in our culture, a warning to see and to act before it is too late.
Posts
65 comments:
The Handmaid's Tale" seems to be taken as a perceptive observation of the evils inherent in our culture, a warning to see and to act before it is too late.
Yes, but you’re being invited to act to help the bad guys…
Sexual abusers look for situations where they know women will defend them…
priest, principal…politician
If you're going to talk about evils in our culture, remember that Stepparents are more likely to abuse children than birth parents.
Since Democrats and their media enablers pounced upon Atwood's most famous work to thrust it into discussions of Trump and wield it like a cudgel, I dismissed the dystopian message. The Leftist Media and democrats have a sad history of taking current fiction and trying to use it as a warning of what will come if republicans gain power: be it ice ages, flooded worlds, slavery, nuclear war etc.
After a lifetime of enduring this BS propaganda that never comes true, while watching these same people use 1984 as an instruction manual, I actively avoid any fiction or movie or series with a "message" (Sure it means holding back the urge to read or view things when fresh, but I've adapted to it) and I enjoy better mental health because of this practice.
Better than whom? Better than all the crazy people pushing Handmaids memes or alleged allegories in any medium. So am I surprised to hear she did nothing for an actual abused young lady? Not at all. Is anyone?
What was Atwood supposed to do?
@Christopher B: remember that Stepparents
Stepfathers especially. This is no surprise now or at any point in history.
Women (and females of other mammal species) who change partners tend to cut off the children of a prior partner, turn a blind eye to abuse, or even kill their offspring. Many animal species are predatory killers of the offspring of others. See male lions, the cuckoo bird, the brown cowbird, etc. See how predators in general target the young and old/weak as easier to catch and eat.
Describing this as "horrifying" is merely wishful thinking and virtue signaling. Nature is red in tooth and claw.
The crafter of language? The? A cheap propagandist, more likely, and all too obvious by the scolding moral tone, always an effective tactic. Let us not forget it was every German's duty to hate the Jews.
rrsafety writes, "What was Atwood supposed to do?"
You don't know? It's a process that starts by asking.
"What was Atwood supposed to do?"
Be an advocate for the abused. Observe, listen, and ask questions.
I once worked at a toddler daycare. Part of my job was to change diapers and help the kids use the training potty. One girl, while I waited, said something that set off alarms for me. When I mentioned the comment to her mother, she admitted that she was in a custody battle with her husband who had been abusing his daughter and her infant sister.
A hint can become a detail if you take a minute to pay attention.
The Handmaid's Tale is a mediocre book with nothing much to say about our society and culture. It's popularity is a result not of its literary or philosophical quality, but of its political usefulness. (I feel the same way about Lord of the Flies--a book that gets human nature completely wrong but has been celebrated anyway for the same reason.)
If Atwood believed her own hype, she would have done something. Maybe just ask questions and make sure Munro knew she suspected, but even just that is more than the nothing she did do.
Atwood's not saying that she knew about it while it was happening. It sounds like Munro's friends heard about it when the stepfather was convicted. Nonetheless, there's no sign that anyone went public or dropped her after learning that she was going to stay with him.
@quaestor
This occurred in 1976. Atwood said, “I’d had hints not long before this past weekend.” So she found out about 48 years after it happened. Again, what was Atwood supposed to do?
@Kate
I suggest you read the article.
Implying Atwood has culpability in this matter is ludicrous, even for someone with the mind of a trial lawyer. The abuse occurred nearly fifty years ago, the perp died more than ten years ago, yet Atwood is somehow the one left holding the bag because she learned about it in the past few weeks?
Resolve to do better at reading and thinking and implying.
My late wife was born in the slums of Manila. At the time of her death, 20 years ago, she was a U.S. naturalized citizen, a college graduate, earning a six figure income as a software trainer in corporate law firms, and she was my partner in the music biz, where she was on the verge of breaking out into national recognition as a blues singer.
She viewed the abuse and therapy mania of the West as downright stupid and self-defeating. In her view, people should just suck it up, stop bitching and complaining and get on with overcoming their obstacles and struggles. This is a dominant view in the Philippines because the therapeutic “help” isn’t available for the vast majority of people. Filipinos are the most successful immigrant group in the U.S., and I think this refusal to bitch and complain is a primary reason.
My wife’s philosophy worked for her. She refused to focus on her abuse and suffering as a child, accepted that as her God given starting point, and figured it was her job to find the way to success. I highly recommend this strategy.
Nice post, Shouting Thomas. Thank you for sharing.
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...
"Since Democrats and their media enablers pounced upon Atwood's most famous work to thrust it into discussions of Trump and wield it like a cudgel, I dismissed the dystopian message."
Meanwhile, in certain countries and communities where a particular belief prevails, dystopia is happening. It's politely ignored because it would be impolite to speak of it.
If I were a public figure with this problem, a child being abused by a subsequent spouse, I would first of all make sure the problem had been addressed within the family, making the child the priority for mending the damage. But I would shield the child from public scrutiny, and thus keep the matter as private as I practically (and legally) could, for the sake of the child.
But: "And after Munro learned of the abuse from her daughter 16 years later, she reacted without sympathy to Skinner and chose to stay with Fremlin; they remained married until he died in 2013."
So, this is the author of 'The Handmaid's Tale'? This is a story. She reacted without sympathy, but used the material creatively, in her writing? What is the real cause of the breast-beating, now? That it happened at all, or that they knew at the time, and did nothing about it? Or that they haven't reacted in outrage, publicly, virtuously - but are now ready to trot out their virtuous sorrow, now that it has become public? Yeah. Cowards. Hypocrites. Guilty until they prove themselves innocent, isn't that their preferred tactic, when the robes come out?
@Shouting Thomas: My wife’s philosophy worked for her. She refused to focus on her abuse and suffering as a child, accepted that as her God given starting point, and figured it was her job to find the way to success. I highly recommend this strategy.
Politics focuses on soft and fuzzy topics when a culture is extremely wealthy (i.e., USA for a long time). Many then use female ANXIETY for political advantage. This has involved abortion, the "kids" dying per the military draft, the "kids" in gangs shooting other "kids," children who are bullied in school (e.g., gay / transgendered), etc. When the economic fundamentals of food and shelter are met, people routinely shift to the soft concerns.
While many (Democrats) use female anxiety for political gain, predators in the Democratic Party also use fake compassion for females to exploit/get sex. This includes Bill Clinton, John Conyers, Harvey Weinstein, Al Franken, and many more.
Politicians are predators.
The Handmaid's Tale" is about morality. It literary pornography for women who have raped fantasy.
Next Althouse will be saying 50 Shades of Gray is a business book
Even if Atwood had had those "hints" contemporaneously, I can see how it would be difficult to believe their implication when it's a friend who is implicated. Surely in my life I must have known someone who was being abused or was an abuser (as I think back, I even have a candidate in mind), and perhaps I overlooked "hints" because of course there's no way that guy would abuse his daughters - I go to church with him!
I'm not going to judge. But I hope I'll learn from this story.
That's kind of elliptical, MadTownGuy, and I'm not sure what you are saying. Perhaps it's "communities where a particular belief prevails" that's throwing me off. I'm not following your attempt to link (unsaid) beliefs and (unarticulated) actions.
And it seems to have little relation to the excerpt you quoted from me. Obviously there are dystopian societies, even here in the USA, but as alluded to in my statement that has nothing to do with Trump. It is the attempts to use fiction as an anti-Trump cudgel that I find distasteful and worthy of dismissal.
Nobody said that living up to your own moral compass was easy. That makes it even more important to do if you live your life in public and hand out lots of advice. When you eat the cake, it's gone.
Atwood is somehow the one left holding the bag because she learned about it in the past few weeks?
Well, there's a strong implication that Atwood is lying. Everyone else in Munro's circle learned about this in 2005, but not Atwood? She never asked her friend why her husband had been convicted of a crime?
I don't get the impulse to kick the victim here. All we know about her is that she pursued her assailant and got him convicted, and she told her story. Someone's going to have to explain to me why either of those is a problem.
Ditto, Shouting Thomas.
"The Handmaid's Tale" is about morality. It literary pornography for women who have raped fantasy."
On Reddit years ago during the height of the Handmaid's Craze there was a great thread about just that concept, with a lot of corroborating primary research. When people think about A Handmaid's Tale, they really should view it as a type of romance novel instead of science fiction, in the same way that "Bear" is a romance novel, not a book about Ursid biology.
Not only was Atwood Munro's friend, but Atwood writes books that purport to nudge and instruct us about morality.
A bullshit characterization of a ridiculous piece of tripe.
I liked 'The Handmaid's Tale' better when it was titled 'If This Goes On...' and was written by Robert Heinlein.
When things got real, Margaret didn’t want to get involved.
The handmade tale was being published coincident to The Handmaid's Tale being written. #LeverageLiterature #DemocracyDarkness #MeToo #HateLovesAbortion
"When things got real, Margaret didn’t want to get involved."
She's a woman. Even the most flamboyant homos have more grit.
Munro was a Nobel Laureate. You expect better behavior from Nobel Laureates....I know enough about Atwood to avoid her books, but I've never read or avoided Munro's books. I don't know anything about Munro's books. She is far more culpable than Atwood, but isn't Atwood the one who preached against such crimes in her books?.....People act in their self interest. This includes Nobel Laureates. From what I read, Munro felt that her life would be better with an ongoing relationship with her husband than with her daughter. Still, given such a stark choice, she should have chosen her daughter. I guess Atwood chose her ongoing friendship with Munro over adherence to a principle. I guess that's wrong but it's a far blurrier issue.
Surprise, surprise, surprise. Another one who was busy accusing others of her own faults.
Levine's Dreams? Sino-Fauci predemic? Sanctuary jurisdictions? Trans parades in schools, scouts, churches, libraries? Albinophobia? Biden showers with his daughter? A baby a "burden"? A lot of hints in plain sight.
1. Unlike Munro, Atwood is among the living.
2. Unlike Munro, Atwood's work has an ongoing effect on American culture and her credibility on feminist issues matters.
3. To focus on one person is not to say she's more culpable than the other. The stepfather is the most culpable person here, and I hadn't ever mentioned him.
4. Don't confuse legal responsibility with moral responsibility.
5. I'm interested in the cagey way Atwood chose to explain and distance herself. That's an aspect of morality happening before your eyes and here, you see it done, in real time by a literary figure who has been held in very high esteem.
No news here. Feckless liberal who said she had reason to know is dumbfounded by discovery that evil is real and exists among her friends.
Here is a pro tip: the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince people that he doesn't exist.
"books that purport to nudge and instruct us about morality"
"Purport," yes. LOL. Which raises the question: is all prog lit a form of gaslighting?
There is no obligation (legal or moral) to broadcast to the world things you think you might know. You can curtail your own interactions with people you discover to be wanting, and you can warn your family about them. That's about where it ends IMO.
I read Handmaid's Tale when it was new. IMHO it has one memorable scene: a Handmaid is executed, hanged, and all the local Handmaids are made to not only watch, but to participate by grasping an extension of the rope.
Other than that I found it merely polemical.
My daughter lost her mother to cancer when she was 14. She grew up in Woodstock, the ultimate in the therapeutic and abuse hysteria. Everybody around my daughter wanted her to stew in therapy and kindness and compassion.
My wife entered her life shortly after her mother’s death. Both my daughter and I were more than a little shocked that my wife absolutely refused to entertain my daughter’s self-pity and bottoming out. Instead, she grabbed the kid by the scruff of her neck and dragged her back into performing in school, insisted that she be publicly cheerful and bought her a dog.
To this day, my daughter does not appreciate the incredible job my wife did in pulling her out of a deep well of despair. However, my daughter graduated from college after a long struggle, married a good blue collar guy, became a school teacher, and has three beautiful kids. Very prosperous and happy.
I resisted my wife’s efforts because I too am schooled in the spoiled brat ideology of the abuse and therapy cult. Thank God, my wife was such a strong and intelligent woman that she overrode me and did the right thing.
Perceive something, publish something is a Democratic tale of Progressive provenance. However, the climate is changing, and the liberal litany is under skeptical scrutiny.
Why does it seem like powerful people regularly state that they had some knowledge of abuse but failed to act? Weinstein, Epstein, Atwood…is there a social-privilege thing going on? Is this endemic?
"Why does it seem like powerful people regularly state that they had some knowledge of abuse but failed to act?"
Most of them are in on it.
"Weinstein, Epstein, Atwood…is there a social-privilege thing going on?"
Yes
"Is this endemic?"
Yes
William said...
"You expect better behavior from Nobel Laureates."
I've been acquainted with a fair number of Nobel laureates across a range of fields.
It is true that we expect better behavior from such people, but it also is true that our expectations are doomed to disappointment. Aside from the combination of luck, talent, and perseverance that led them to their achievements, Nobel laureates really are no better or worse than the rest of us.
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...
"That's kind of elliptical, MadTownGuy, and I'm not sure what you are saying. Perhaps it's "communities where a particular belief prevails" that's throwing me off. I'm not following your attempt to link (unsaid) beliefs and (unarticulated) actions."
OK, I'll say it: Islam.
"And it seems to have little relation to the excerpt you quoted from me. Obviously there are dystopian societies, even here in the USA, but as alluded to in my statement that has nothing to do with Trump. It is the attempts to use fiction as an anti-Trump cudgel that I find distasteful and worthy of dismissal."
Agreed. My point is that there's undeniable hypocrisy from the folks who claim that Trump's policies will create "The Handmaid's Tale" when it's already playing out in real time in countries around the world, and in enclaves right here in the USA. The people pushing that narrative ignore that it already exists, and that it's not even on any of the conservative or Trumpian agendas.
Oh dear. the doyennes of the Toronto literary world have skeletons in the closet. How common.
I mean that in two senses, the scandal is so declasse and cover ups are something the Toronto intellectual elite (aka the chattering class)are well known for.
I found the example of the CBC radio superstar Jian Ghomeshi (well known for his softball interviews of the elite) amusing. Everyone who was anyone in Canadian media knew for for a decade he liked to slap his partners around. Yet the reporter who broke the story was vilified for being so gauche as to turn on his own class.
The end result was very informative. Ghomeshi admitted to the assaults. He got off with a slap on the wrist for one charge. The crown attorney figured they had a slam dunk and went to trial with well rehearsed witnesses. Too well rehearsed. The judge was not amused to find the witnesses had coordinated their testimony. Not to mention Ghomeshi had kept everything including the emails from his partners showing how eager they were to come back for more.
IIRC the phrase the judge used for the witnesses was "predatory".
Decades old claims about dead people? After the Satanic day care claims I am not going to believe anyone about anything without a lot more proof.
Don't confuse legal responsibility with moral responsibility.
If Margaret Atwood learned in the last few weeks that Andrea Robin Skinner was sexually assaulted by her stepfather nearly fifty years ago, that information was undoubtedly gleaned from a draft of Andrea Robin Skinner‘s Toronto Star essay published two days ago. Are you arguing Margaret Atwood had a moral duty to go to authorities with the information, or to scoop Andrea Robin Skinner’s essay by publishing an essay of her own? Inquiring moral minds want to know.
"crafter of language"???
Writer?
tim maguire:
(I feel the same way about Lord of the Flies--a book that gets human nature completely wrong but has been celebrated anyway for the same reason.)
Indeed:
"In his memoir, Ocean of Light, Warner described what they had accomplished on the island while stranded for 15 months. "The boys had set up a small commune with food garden, hollowed-out tree trunks to store rainwater, a gymnasium with curious weights, a badminton court, chicken pens and a permanent fire, all from handiwork, an old knife blade and much determination," he wrote."
Never ever take a work of fiction as a description of reality.
@themiddlecoast
"Why does it seem like powerful people regularly state that they had some knowledge of abuse but failed to act? Weinstein, Epstein, Atwood"
So now Atwood is comparable to serial rapists because she learned a few weeks ago that a 92-year old's dead husband was an abuser 50 years ago? This is all madness and very weak reasoning.
"There is no obligation (legal or moral) to broadcast to the world things you think you might know. You can curtail your own interactions with people you discover to be wanting, and you can warn your family about them. That's about where it ends IMO."
You can talk to your friend about what she is doing. You can also refrain from saying: I didn't know.
How many children are abused and not helped by friends and neighbors who are in the gray zone between knowing and not knowing?
There's something called willful blindness.
What did Margaret Atwood know and when did she know it?
Obviously, I don't know.
But I am judgmental about the statement she made: "I did not learn the details of this until everyone else did, though I’d had hints not long before this past weekend. Horrifying."
How long? What kind of hints? Obviously, I don't know, but I don't like the distancing and the coldness of it. I don't think it is consistent with feminist values about sexual molestation.
...
The Handmaid's Tale" is about morality. It literary pornography for women who have raped fantasy.
Next Althouse will be saying 50 Shades of Gray is a business book
7/10/24, 8:05 AM
Hmm. With all those typos, maybe my wife is correct that I need to slow down and not try to multitask and concentrate on one thing at a time. Scary.
Friendships between very famous people are self serving and reinforcing social mechanisms. A person has to achieve a high level of success on their own to be part of the group. Then in addition to the networking and business opportunities, just being seen with other equally famous people has beneficial effects to become even more famous. Endless photos are part of the routine.
However famous people are bound to find out secrets about each other which would be damaging not only to that individual but to others in the group. I suspect there is a of code of silence out of a sense self preservation. Otherwise they would have no social life.
I agree that there is something inauthentic about the mock horror expressed by Atwood over something which she very likely already knew for some time. She’ll never say exactly how long.
Thank you for the free link! unfortunately the WP never lets me use them because they cover the article with an offer to resubscribe and wont let me get past that. Seems they are using false advertising about the actual accessibility of the "free" link.
Perhaps morality isn't Atwood's thing after all.
Leftist literary and arts circles are rife with sexual abuse of women and children. Marion Zimmer Bradley and her husband were well known as child abusers in their circle, yet no one did anything about it. Why? Because a LOT of them were, and still are, abusing children. It is a leftist trope. “Tear down all the boundaries”. Where did you think that would lead? Atwood has likely been at house parties where this was an open practice or was intimate friends with people involved in child sex abuse and did nothing. Now she’s “shocked!l. Phft.
Look at the “artists” who have advocated child - adult “sex”. None of them are western conservatives. They are all some species of leftist or they are Muslims.
‘Atwood told The Daily Beast: “It was a bombshell for me. I’m shocked. I’m still trying to get my head around it. I had heard a rumor about it but very few details, after Gerry was dead and Alice was in an institution.“‘
This reminds me a lot of what happened to Marion Zimmer Bradley after it came out that her husband was a child sex offender and she had knowledge of his actions and did nothing, Later her daughter revealed that she had been abused by him and that Marion would assist her husband in accessing and abusing young boys. This caused a lot of shock at the time and the publisher ended up donating all the sales from Marion’s ebooks to be donated to the charity Save the Children. How long did people suspect and not report because of the popularity of the author or was afraid of damaging some sort of cause that they associated with the author?
It seems quite a similar reaction to how Atwood reacted to Munro who was apparently looked up so much for her stories involving women that she seems to not have wanted to look too strongly at rumors suggested that she was not quite what she appeared to be in public. Perhaps winning a Nobel prize somehow discourages people looking into rumors bacause they would appear to be fools for honoring this person with a.Nobel prize?
Outward moralists, whether religious or not, are scum. In my experience.
Don’t trust them.
Thank you Madtown. That makes sense and I agree 100%. I understand reluctance to talk openly about the Thing that shall not be named. It is killing Europe as we speak.
Do what the preacher says, not what the preacher does.
Post a Comment