|
bookpossum, While I would agree Dr Jordan's presence felt too intrusive, I can sort of see the problem that Atwood faced. She needed a perspective that was independent from Grace, one that could go places and talk to people and see things without Grace's strange disconnect, but having introduced such a character into a central role it becomes necessary to elaborate so that they don't seem like a cypher. Finding the right balance would have been very difficult.
I'm also inclined to suggest that Dr Jordan was introduced to provide a male perspective on the times, and on Grace. I wasn't really impressed with his performance in this aspect either.
issybird, I think the roman à clef idea might have opened up the possibilities, and it certainly would have made the idea of the book more attractive to me. But it's possible Atwood might have written much the same book anyway, depending on what it was she had in her mind.
The only thing I know about The Crown is that Claire Foy is playing the young Queen Elizabeth II, a fact I took notice of only because Claire Foy did such an excellent job of playing Adora Belle Dearheart in the TV mini-series Going Postal. (Loved the character in the book by Terry Pratchett, so was pleased to see it so well portrayed on screen.)
But your observation about biopics is one of the reasons why I prefer fact or fiction and not mixed. The makers try to have it both ways, but from the audience perspective it might just as well be entirely fiction.
|