Okay, team, the key to this post is saying something ARGUABLE and supporting your argument with evidence from the text (because that is what analysis is, after all: a supported argument).
Try to teach us something. Get specific with your argument and support. Help us see this novel in a new way.
You have several options. Choose one of the following:
1. In her book review, Mary McCarthy asserts that "characterization in general is weak in The Handmaid's Tale. Do you agree or disagree? Follow up your general answer with a specific characterization of a character of your choice in the novel. Help us see that character more closely and analytically.
2. We talked today in class about whether this novel is an effective dystopian text. What is your specific opinion on this and why? If you answer this one, you must go beyond the chart we generated in class.
3. There are many themes explored in this novel. Choose a theme and argue what this novel says about it. If you choose this one, don't even think about reading Sparknotes for ideas; I want YOUR critical thinking and insight.
4. What is the purpose/power of the way this novel is written? You can analyze Atwood's writing style or the novel's organization or its point of view...lots of options here.
Make sure to read everyone else's posts before coming to class tomorrow. Please also come with a hard copy of both this post and your previous post (background research on global attitudes towards women). Thanks.
Margaret Atwood writes The Handmaid’s Tale in way that makes it hard to distinguish between what’s really happening to Offred and what is happening in her mind. Atwood imbeds Offred’s flashbacks into her everyday life. One minute the story will be told from reality as Offred sits in her bedroom, and the next minute it may be told as a flashback to a time with Luke or her daughter. This is an effective writing style because the reader gets lost in the flashbacks. It is hard to distinguish what is reality which is exactly why Offred is remembering her story. She thinks about life before Gilead so that the world she is living in now will not seems so real. It gives her hope. On page 39, Offred thinks about how pretending her life is story will help her believe that it will end. She thinks to herself, “I would like to believe this is a story I’m telling. I need to believe it. I must believe it. Those who can believe that such stories are only stories have a better chance” (p. 39). This shows that her separation form reality through her memories helps her to cope with what is happening to her. Atwood’s writing style allows the reader to do the same.
ReplyDeleteOne of the main themes in this book is the manipulation of the people by those in power. As Atwood said, "anyone who wants power will try to manipulate you by appealing to your desires and fears." The Republic of Gilead purposefully alienates the wives, econowives, marthas, and handmaids in order to maintain control. The other women believe that the handmaids are unrespectable because of their position. The econowives even spit at Offred and Ofglen when they try to show sympathy for the dead child because the Econowives must work harder than the handmaids (44). Also, the handmaids are taught to be wary of the wives, for the wives consider them "a reproach" for being unable to procreate (13). Jealousy runs unchecked between the women in this society and the government plays on that jealousy. By being unable to overcome their jealousy of other classes, the women are unable to come together across class lines and overthrow the government. Not only are the social classes estranged, but the women within the handmaid class are distant from one another. Offred never talks to Ofglen except for the phrases mandated by the Republic to be safe. The reason for this coldness towards one another is that, as Offred states, "[Ofglen] is my spy, as I am hers" (19). Their fear of one another being an Eye who tattles to the government ensures that the women will remain isolated and not fight back.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Mary McCarthy’s review on The Handmaid’s Tale I would have to agree with her. This book does not make me think of how women will be viewed in “our”, American future. Instead it makes me analyze the livelihood of Islamic women in the world today. After briefly studying a woman’s role and specifically her wardrobe in Islamic society during one of my Current Global Issues classes, I was struck by how similar the function of women’s clothing is and how it defines their role in society. There is a verse in the Koran that says, "And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and guard their private parts and not to display their adornment except that which ordinarily appears thereof and to draw their headcovers over their chests and not to display their adornment except to their [maharim]”. In Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale women are required to wear garments that divide them based on their function within the household. While Islamic women are not required to wear an assigned color hijab, the function of the hijab is the same as the robes worn by the women of Gilead: to reinforce their role in society. Both in Gilead and in Islamic culture’s women are sacred, should be protected, and should not draw attention to themselves. Women in Gilead are “a shape, red with white wings around the face, a shape like mine, a nondescript woman…looking down the white tunnels of cloth that enclose us” (Atwood 19), the hijab’s serve almost exactly the same purpose as well as being very hard to see out of. While McCarthy makes a valid point that there aren’t many specific elements in Atwood’s novel that point to American problems that could someday lead to a distopia like Gilead, it does however draw distinct lines to the clothing policy followed by the majority of Islamic followers.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Mary McCarthy's idea that The Handmaid's Tale is lacking in strong characterization. Throughout my reading of this text, I have felt that many of the characters lack distinctions. We are given so little information, especially about the men, that the reader must struggle to understand what makes them different people. As McCarthy brings up, the distinctions between Luke and Nick are slight. Even Offred seems to fail to see the differences between them. When Nick kisses her the night she attempts to steel the flower, she says, "Luke, you'd know, you'd understand. It's you here, in another body" (99). Until she catches herself a moment later and realizes they aren't simply the same person in different bodies, she is not able to clearly make distinctions between them. Also, Luke's character remains very vague. Offred gives us basic details, such as that he was her husband, but even the most in depth description she has given so far does not include sensory details. This occurs on page 104 when she mentions "his hair, the bones, the plaid wool shirt, green and black, the leather belt, the work boots." However, she never says what he looks like, sounds like, or any other memory of him she would have like that. One reason for Offred not thinking of such details could be that these memories are too painful. But where I disagree with McCarthy is that she believes this lack of characterization is a problem with this novel. I think Atwood did this intentionally in order to clearly display to the reader a society in which everyone is forced to be similar to those around them.
ReplyDeleteOne of the themes in The Handmaid's Tale is the issue of protection vs. liberty. What should the government (or those in charge) do to protect the ordinary people/citizens, and when protection infringes on personal rights and liberties, when should the line be drawn? In the interview posted on the blog, Margaret Atwood says the benefits of Gilead's society is “Women aren't whistled at on the street, men don't come climbing in the window in the middle of the night. Women are "protected."” Furthermore, the text supports that this “protection” is one of the main justifications to the society’s strictness. When the handmaids are being trained, they watch movies that depict women graphically being raped and killed to show them what life could be like if it weren't for the strict rules that are put in place (page 118). So how far are we willing to go in order to be protected? Would we rather live with the risk of horrible things like rape and murder or would we rather sacrifice some of our freedoms for guaranteed safety? The answer may seem obvious when thinking about a society as radical as the one Atwood describes. But as she says in the interview, “there isn't anything in the book not based on something that has already happened.” So would we rather give up the privacy of our phone calls or live with a larger threat of terrorism? Is it ok for a three year old to go through a full body pat down if the government says it must be done for airport safety? It's never easy to know where to draw the line, but when we give up too many freedoms to the government, the result can be tyranny. This is illustrated in The Handmaid's Tale. The protection for women from things like rape and murder is there, but when the women break the rules, the consequences may be just as severe. After all, a government that is big enough to give you everything you want, is powerful enough to take away everything you have.
ReplyDeleteIn today’s society, we are all allowed to have our own beliefs. Some people believe in God, others in Brahman or Buddha. Some people believe in divine creation while others think evolution is the law of the land. Each person has his own interpretation, and no two people have the same beliefs. However, as Margret Atwood sets up her “utopian” society, she has to get rid of these individual beliefs. How does she do this? She takes away the ability to read and write. This freedom from interpretation constantly appears in The Handmaid’s Tale, and it is how the new regime controls the transition population. Once a society like our own, these people are forced into an extremist, conservative new world where there is one way or no way. In order for the citizens to accept this one way, they are no longer allowed to have their own beliefs. Thus, only certain people are allowed to read and write because it is through the first hand experience of reading documents or novels that people come to form their own opinions. When citizens are simply told something and have no way to contradict it or sufficient evidence to believe a certain way, it is the taught belief that embeds in their minds.
ReplyDeleteThis inability to learn for themselves is displayed during The Ceremony. Before this chapter in the book, the reader knows that reading and writing are prohibited, but it is not until now that the consequences of this are fully explained. In The Ceremony, the Commander reads the Bible, but he is the only person able to access it in the household. “The Bible is kept locked up, the way people once kept tea locked up, so the servants wouldn’t steal it” (87). In this quotation, the servants are a metaphor to the women. Just as the rich did not want their valuable possessions being stolen, the leaders of the fundamentalist society do not want women to have access to the Bible, the treasure of the new society. It is too dangerous as Offred explains: “Who knows what we’d make of it, if we ever got our hands on it?” (87). She realizes that by not allowing them to read, women are unable to interpret the Bible for themselves. The Commander only reads certain passages from the Bible that pertain to their society, but what about everything else? The women do not know if everything in the Bible agrees with the current society even though the government implies that it does. Offred can be seen questioning her limitations, not completely believing that the one way they are taught to interpret the Bible is correct. As she and the other Handmaid’s chant various phrases with the Aunts, Offred says that these phrases are “from the Bible, or so they said” (117). By adding the last part, “or so they said,” she is questioning the Aunts. She is skeptical of the things she is being taught because she is unable to see it for herself in the Bible.
In the fundamentalist society, by only allowing access to reading and writing to some people, the government limits knowledge. In doing this, people have to accept what they are taught. Yes they can question it, but there is not other belief presented to them. Thus, by allowing the freedom from interpretation, the government is slowly molding the transition generation into believers.
One recurring theme in The Handmaid’s Tale is the theme of children. Adults are constantly compared to children. On page 87, Offred, Cora, Rita, Nick, and Serena Joy are compared to children in the chapter preceding the ceremony. Offred says, “we can be read to from it, by him, but we cannot read. Our heads turn towards him, we are expectant, here comes our bedtime story.” Children expectantly wait for their bedtime stories, read to them by their fathers. Another instance of this is on page 97. Offred is in bed but she can’t sleep, and she says, “I fold back the sheet, get carefully up, on silent bare feet, in my nightgown, go to the window, like a child, I want to see.” These instances of adults being compared to children occur more frequently as the book goes on.
ReplyDeleteThis constant comparison to children highlights the dependence of the Handmaids, Marthas, and Angels on those in charge of them. Children need to be taken care of. That’s why there are babysitters, schools, and parents. This dystopian society reverts adults to their child-like state, and the regime places them in environments where they have babysitters, “We aren’t allowed to go there except in twos…she is my spy, as I am hers...if either of us slips…the other will be accountable” (19); they go to school – under force – as adults, as illustrated by Offred’s recurring flashbacks to Aunt Lydia’s teachings; and parents, as illustrated on page 87 with the “bedtime story.”
Children that are dependent and well taken care of generally don’t rebel and try to rise up against those taking care of them, as a rule, because they have nowhere to go if they do. There will always be exceptions, such as Moira, but for the sake of this dystopian society, the rule is followed. The regime intentionally structured this new society to make those most likely to rebel, the Handmaids, Marthas, and Angels, feel as child-like as possible and make it clear that if they do rebel, there is nowhere for them to hide to escape punishment.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteA major theme in The Handmaid's Tale is one of identity. The women in the new society have had their identities stripped from them. Their individuality has been stolen. Their prior names have been taken and replaced with new ones identifying them by a man. Handmaids have been given names made up by of(man's name). Wives are called wives or wife of (husbands name) and Marthas are just called by title. Women have had anything used to define them in their past life taken from them. They were removed from their children, home, possessions, and husband. Anything that makes them different from someone else was gone.
ReplyDeleteOne way a person builds an identity for themselves is through the choices that he or she makes. In the society in The Handmaid's Tale, almost all choices are taken away. "Nothing is going on here that I haven't signed up for. There wasn't a lot of choice but there was some, and this is what I chose"(94). Offred admits that there was at least one choice she was allowed to make, but in the new society there are very few options to choose from anyway. The only identity given to the women is by their duty in society. But even with this identity their individuality is prohibited by a uniform specific to their duty. This uniform takes away individuality in clothing and also in the shape of the woman's body. The new society has removed every almost every aspect of an individual identity that the women had.
A theme in The Handmaid’s Tale is the contrast between loyalty and disloyalty. Offred shows her loyalty to her husband by hoping for their reunion. She thinks to herself “Any day now there may be a message from him. It will come in the most unexpected way, from the least likely person” (106). Another example of her loyalty to Luke comes after she kisses Nick and thinks “Luke, you’d know, you’d understand. It’s you here, in another body” (99). The friendship between Offred and Moira also shows loyalty. After Moira’s escape from the Center, Offred thinks about her often, saying “Moira was out there somewhere…The thought of what she would do expanded till it filled the room.” (133). The continued emphasis on Luke and Moira shows that they are in Offred’s thoughts. The emphasis that Offred gives to the reader shows how loyal she is to them. We don’t know Offred’s real name, but we know Moira’s and Luke’s.
ReplyDeleteDisloyalty is seen between the Handmaids and the Wives and between the Handmaids. At the end of Chapter 19, a scene between several Wives and a pregnant Handmaid is shown. The Wives say of Janine “Such a, so well behaved, not surly like some of them” (115), but as soon as Janine leaves, the conversation takes a different direction. “Little whores, all of them, but still, you can’t be choosy.” (119). This shows that the Wives hate the Handmaids, even when they are forced to act politely towards them. Though Janine is the subject of this disloyalty, she has been the disloyal one herself. When Moira disappeared, Aunt Lydia told her “I wasn’t you to keep your ears open. Maybe one of the others was involved…And come and tell me about it, won’t you, dear? If you hear anything.” (132). Janine is being asked to spy on the other Handmaids at the Center. Offred recognizes this disloyalty, saying “She was a danger to us, we knew that.” (133). I found it ironic that the people that Offred seemed to be loyal to were those from whom she was separated. Is she loyal to Luke and Moira because they have not had a chance to be disloyal to her?
I believe the dystopia that Atwood creates is effective partly through its loopholes. One of these is the fact that only one interpretation of the Bible is told to the women, yet surely many of the women have read the Bible before Gilead came into existence. Although women such as the handmaids know that the interpretation that the current regime is focusing on is narrow and restrictive, it seems that they have all forgotten what they have previously read. Offred seems to remember much about her previous life, except what she was taught religiously. The most we see her allude to religion is when she examines the egg and says, “ I think that this is what God must look like: an egg” (110). This shows that our society could turn into an extreme such as Gilead, when we forget our education and opinions.
ReplyDeleteThe dystopia also seems to be effective because the members of the society are helpless to escape or communicate to start a revolt. Although Offred is not entirely convinced of Gilead’s beliefs, she is restricted of confiding in the other handmaid’s about her concerns because of the fear of spies. She says about the handmaid she walks to the market with, “She has never said anything that was not strictly orthodox, but then neither have I. She may be a real believer… I can’t take the risk” (19). This shows that although this generation may not be fully convinced, they are fearful enough not to revolt, leaving a greater chance of the society to survive until the next generation which will know no different.
I believe that this novel is an effectively written dystopian text because I believe that Margaret Atwood has done an excellent job of portraying the sort of society. However, do I think that it’s believable? No. Does it scare me? No. Do I think that my life could turn into Offred’s? No. (Hopefully, I’m not being naive.) However, for the sake of a fictional novel, yes, I think that this text describes a brilliantly designed dystopian society. The rules of the handmaids, the birthing stool, and all of the other bizarre “situations” that go on in the story prove how this society is a dystopia and how the dystopian government is corrupt.
ReplyDeleteIn class, we discussed how such a novel causes us to strengthen or possibly question what we believe. However, I think that Margaret Atwood wrote this novel to make her readers’ imaginations come alive. She wants to force her readers to truly forget what’s going on in their lives and force them to embed their imaginations in her story. While this is usually the wish of all authors, Margaret Atwood tries to aggressively pursue the challenge by throwing the dystopian society at her readers. It opens their imaginations and causes them to think. It causes them to think differently, to think creatively. Instead of asking: Is this novel an effectively written text, I think it’s appropriate to ask everyone: Is this text doing an effective job of capturing your attention to the extent that you are using your imagination? Is your imagination going wild when you are reading this book? Hopefully it is; Margaret Atwood would hope so.
Margaret Atwood makes you question. An unrealistic thing such as a dystopia often seems very improbable. “There’s no way that could happen to me”. But Margaret keeps threading pieces of Ofglen’s past through the society of Gilead. And that makes me question. The theme I draw from this is an impermanent state. Ofglen always has faith in the past, and the possibility of the future. She never buys into this dystopia. The fact that she knows she was drug from her normal life 3 years ago causes this faith to build within her. Her future seems so unstable, therefore she must be rooted in some form of faith so she doesn’t lose her footing in her past (the real world) completely. At times, as a reader, you think she has fallen prey to the Dystopia surrounding her. But with as little as one word you find her faith shining. You believe and convince yourself she’s not immersed in this culture. Her body may be apart of it, but it seems her spirit is elsewhere. “If such noises were ever made here”, “I am out of place”, “He will get me out”(57, 97, 106). These are planted in the midst of heated scenes, and then all of a sudden you’re transported back to reality. To the reality she is living, and the reality outside the walls of Gilead, that must and has to exist. Not only for her sake, but because she has such devout faith that where she came from was real. I am afraid of her losing her footing in the outside world, and catching the trap of Gilead. That faith is what she will need to escape, or at least to remain an individual. Ofglen’s impermanent state is uneasy for sure, but nonetheless because her unknown and known’s are mixing, they’re making it confusing for her past world to not disappear without warning.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI believe that this novel is an effective dystopian text. In class, we said that we read dystopia in order to think about what the future could hold, question what we believe, and question current society. When reading this novel, I have definitely been thinking about what the future could hold. I don’t necessarily believe that the Republic of Gilead could ever exist here, but it isn’t something to dismiss by saying (as Lauren mentioned earlier) “Oh it could never happen to me.” That’s what people say when they watch something scary on the news “That stuff only happens at so and so area. It could never happen to me.” This type describes the attitude Offred used to live by in the old days. “The newspaper stories were like dreams to us, bad dreams dreamt by others. How awful, we would say, and they were, but they were awful without being believable. They were too melodramatic, they had a dimension that was not the dimension of our lives” (57). Offred is saying that because people had a tendency to dismiss the news as something that could never happen to them, this society came to existence.
ReplyDeleteSo, she is telling us to wake up. Do something. Question society. News isn’t just news—it is reality. The Republic of Gilead is an extreme, but the things that happened in order to make this Republic come into existence are completely realistic. The future could hold anything.
Throughout The Handmaid’s Tale a consistent theme of power displays itself. Living in this dystopian society, each member is given a specific job with specific rules and regulations which they are required to follow, with each class possessing a little more power than the one below it. Because the amount of power is so small, the desire to put the other members in their place always exists, especially among the women of the society.
ReplyDeleteThis society is full of tension, with most of it existing between the Wives and the Handmaids. The Wives don’t have much power to begin with because their ability to have babies has decreased, and therefore they depend on the Handmaids to bear them children. Because the Wives have to depend on the Handmaids, they are always quick to prove who holds the most power in the relationship. When Offred first arrives at her new posting, the Commander’s Wife chooses to greet her herself instead of letting the Martha do it like usual. “So you’re the new one, she said. She didn’t step aside to let me in, she just stood there in the doorway, blocking the entrance. She wanted me to feel that I could not come into the house unless she said so” (13). The Commander’s Wife acted in this way in order to immediately establish who is in charge and set the tone for the relationship between them. Although the Wives may not have much power, they do hold more power than the Handmaids, and they are sure to make that clear.
Although the men seem to have the most power in Gilead and the Handmaids the least amount, the Handmaids still have some power over the men in charge. Offred makes this clear during the first shopping trip. As Offred and Ofglen are passing through the security check, one of the young guards catches a glimpse of Offred’s eyes, which is forbidden. Offred feels the embarrassment of the Guardian and seizes this moment as her chance to show that despite the fact that the men possess the most power in this society, she as a woman still has power of them. “I move my hips a little, feeling the full red skirt sway around me. It’s like thumbing your nose from behind a fence of teasing a dog with a bone held out of reach” (22). Offred finds that she “enjoys the power; power of a dog bone, passive but there” as she teasing the young Guards (22). Although this society is very strict on the interaction between the men and women, there is still general attraction, and no amount of laws make those raw feelings disappear completely. Offred admits that this power is only temporary, but she enjoys the satisfaction of exercising it over the men.
Offred is telling her story. Whether she is reporting her daily events in Gilead or remembering and sharing the past she is always telling her story; and in this she finds power. Because Offred is telling her own story she has the control. “If it’s a story I’m telling, then I have control over the ending” (39). She finds power in being able to recall her memories. This is a different type of power because it is not exercised over anyone. This type of power is unique and solely for Offred, because she does not tell the story to anyone in her society but only to herself. Sharing any type of information from the past or even just talking is dangerous, but by sharing her story with herself, and the readers, she isn’t breaking the rules. She is just showing that she has not conformed to the beliefs of this world, and she still has the power to remember.
Power is a reoccurring theme of this book, but it’s not only the power which each member holds over the others but the power the members hold within themselves. If a member has not been completely brainwashed then they hold the power to remember, which gives them hope for the future. This type of power is the most important because it is able to keep the members strong and unbroken. This power does not show control over anyone else, but it is the strongest in the society. The power to remember and to believe in better future gives the ability to look ahead while still looking behind. This power is the only hope.
The way Margaret Atwood organizes this novel has the reader questioning what will happen next and why it happened. She leaves the reader with many questions throughout the novel. Some questions are never answered like Offreds real name before the Gilead. But Atwood did this on purpose in order to force the reader to question the whole novel.
ReplyDeleteAs the book progresses, it becomes easier to distinguish between what is happening in the present and what has happened in the past. Offred often speaks of her daughter and husband, then in the next paragraph she goes on to talk about the Ceremony. She even says on page 49, "But the night is my time out. Where should I go?" Considering this is Offreds only time to do with whatever she pleases, Offred takes control and decides what she wishes to think about. This is the only time in the novel that Offred does what she wants to do rather than what others tell or want her to do.
Atwoods placement of each of Offreds personal thoughts reminds the reader that Offred is still a human being and does continue to think for herself at times.
The Handmaid's Tale, by Margaret Atwood, is an effectively written dystopian story. While it is written fictionally, this story is meant to cause us to question our own society. It is very naïve of us to think that this could never happen to America. We have already lost so many liberties in America that we are promised in the constitution due to religious reasons. For example, the prohibition of abortion. The reason why abortion is illegalized in many places because of religious reasons. In the Christian religion, every human life is considered sacred and so therefore, killing a fetus that may or may not ever be able to feel yet is considered murder. However, people due to the United States military are killed every day. Also in America, before testifying in a court room, a person is required to swear with their right hand on the bible. The phrase 'In God We Trust" is still religious, but it is not specifically Christian. The bible, however, can not be looked at any other way than Christian. This is not nearly protested enough in our society and we often times just ignore it. In The Handmaid's Tale, there is no talk of women protesting their being thrown out of their jobs or being unable to use money anymore. And, there is a huge connection between church and state. For example, the only channel's on TV are the news channels and gospel. "A male choir, with greenish-yellow skin, the color needs adjusting; they're singing "Come to the Church in the Wildwood." Come, come, come, come sing the basses. Serena clicks the channel changer. Waves, zig-zags, a garble of sound: it’s the Montreal satellite station, being blocked. Then there's a preacher, earnest, with shining dark eyes, leaning towards us across a desk. These days they looks a lot like business men." (page 82) This quote is said by Offred. It is used here to show that the channels that are not something church or news related are censored by the government. That obviously means that the government is only allowing the two things it approves of and controls: the news and the religion. Everything in Gilead is said to be controlled by religion. It is scary, to me, that this society is controlled by something that so many people in America, now, follow with pure faith. I honestly think that if a big church in America announced that something was how God wanted it and that the bible said it was true that many people would follow it. In 2008 76% of American's said they were Christian. It scares me that these people might not think for themselves but instead would follow whatever the church or bible supposedly tells them.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the first few chapters of "The Handmaid's Tale", I realized that the power does not lie in the hands of the Commanders, it lies in the hands of the handmaids. This power is also evident because of the point of view of the text. Because this novel is written in the eyes of a handmaid, we see what they have to go through and how much power they hold over society. There is a passive power in the handmaids that is talked about in chapter 4. "Then I find I am not ashamed at all. I enjoy the power; power of a dog bone, passive but there" (22). This passive power is the power to excite men. Going with what Morgan said, those who have power manipulate those without it. The men do not possess the power to excite women at this time because women are too afraid to even look at the men, let alone show a reaction to their bodies. When Nick winked at Offred, her mind was racing and she had no idea how to handle it. If the point of view was not in Offred's perspective then we would never know the power Offred has over the guards at the gate.
ReplyDeleteThe handmaids also are some of the few women left in Giliad that can have children, this makes them vital to society. "I am too important, too scarce, for that. I am a national resource"(65). This also shows that the handmaids have more power than others in society and yet we are shown through Offred's experiences that they are the most frowned upon, ignored, or hated in society. There is so much conflicting power between handmaids, Marthas, Aunts, and Wives. According to the text, handmaids are mostly the women who have the children and in this society that is the main goal. This gives them the power in society; however, women used to have all equal power because babies were not a woman's reason to live. Along with power, comes control. "What I put into them: my own clothes, my own soap, my own money, money I had earned myself. I think about having such control"(24). Women had control before Giliad and now the link between power and control has been broken women have the power, but men have control over that power. It is the handmaid's point of view that has shown us this broken link.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteA topic that is prevalent in most Dystopian literature is fear, and The Handmaid's Tale is no exception. In fact, fear seems to be an overwhelming concept that goes hand in hand with worry and stress for any of the Handmaids.
ReplyDeleteOffred and the others crave something so simple as human touch, something that we take for granted every day, yet she is too terrified of being caught to indulge. “I hunger to commit the act of touch. But even if I were to ask, even f I were to violate decorum to that extent, Rita would not allow it. She would be too afraid. The Marthas are not supposed to fraternize with us”(11). She is hungry for touch, so touch starved that she is almost willing to commit a crime, to violate decorum. But her fear stops her in her tracks.
Offred wants to fulfill her duty, to get pregnant, and the doctor offers her a perfect out, but she is so terrified of being caught that she doesn’t take it. Even after denying him, she is terrified. “My hands are shaking. Why am I frightened? I’ve crossed no boundaries, I’ve given no trust, taken no risk, all is safe. It’s the choice that terrifies me. A way out, a salvation”(61). She is so afraid of being caught and then brutally punished like Moira or worse, subjected to the unknown fate of the Unwomen, that she doesn't really live anymore.