The Handmaid’s Tale

Some kind of overview

The difficultyIs where to start. This is an extremely rich text which can lead to an overwhelming sensation of “how do I do justice to the text in such a short space”.

This is exactly the position I found myself in as I attempted to write this presentation.

Atwood does a lot. She says a lot. She crafts a lot. In essence, she gives us too much to work with and so you need to be aware that it is best to focus your revision on specific aspects, rather than trying to capture the entire force of the novel.

A side note

Apologies:

This presentation is likely to be less pretty than the previous work on Amelie. If only The Handmaid’s Tale was a picture book…

What is the purpose?

It is worth starting with purpose because knowing what Atwood is trying to achieve will give us the frameworks we need for writing paragraphs and essays.

From purpose comes the need to uncover how these purposes are achieved and the success of the author – this process is at the heart of good analysis.

As I say though, the text is extremely rich and I will only be able to begin to touch on what this novel achieves.

What do I think?

It’s about a way of seeingAtwood takes the world and re-imagines it to an extreme. It’s all about examining the possibilities of the future so that we might examine our own present for the seeds of that future nightmare. In terms of discussion you can almost always get into the way in which Atwood is giving the reader the opportunity to examine the world as it could be, but also as it is.

So, I think it’s about:• Women, the female body and feminism• Tyranny and the mechanics of control• Language and its relationship to freedom

And these ideas aren’t mutually exclusive. You could say they make up a Venn diagram where issues from one slip and slide into the others. The female body is changed by the tyranny of the system, language is a key element of the mechanics of control, etc.

I believe that this triad essentially covers the theme statements we looked at during the unit on the novel. If we remember…

These are extremely broad and I’ll attempt to unpack them so there’s stuff you can write about

Theme StatementsYou want to make sure you have the stuff in bold written down, you can make decisions

around how much of the explanations you want to include.

The power of language and the effect of its abuse - How the distortion and careful selection of language can distort truth and be used as a tool of oppression. The subjective nature of language and the problems caused by ignorance or refusal to accept such subjectivity.

The political use/objectification of women's bodies - How the female body is used as a bastion of hope while women remain deeply oppressed and treated as subhuman. The body is separated from the individual, with the body becoming of greater importance.

The nature and effect of surveillance - The progression towards self-surveillance to the point that governmental surveillance is no longer necessary. The problematic relationship between surveillance and freedom.

The causes and problems of being complacent - How oppression and subjugation breeds complacency as people become increasingly grateful for very small freedoms.

The nature of identity - What shapes identity, the importance of names, the importance of history.

So, women, the female body and feminism(s)

“Waste not want not. I am not being wasted. Why do I want?”

“I am not being wasted”, this is a nice representation of Atwood’s writing strategy. She does a brilliant job of expressing the degradation of the female body until it simply becomes an object. A material possession to be used, and therefore discarded at will.

She wants because she is human – and this is a fundamental tension in the novel. Between Offred’s basic humanity and the determination of the system to strip Offred of that very humanity. As a human, Offred should not be asking this question, but she is. As a human, she has the right to want – but not in this society. It is a powerful expression of how women can and have been treated and the consequences of such treatment.

Dolls, animals, machines…

"I wait. I compose myself. My self is a thing I must now compose, as one composes a speech. What I must present is a made thing, not something born.”

"Moira was like an elevator with open sides. She made us dizzy.“

“They used to have dolls, for little girls, that would talk if you pulled a string at the back; I thought I was sounding like that, voice of a monotone, voice of a doll.”

“It makes the men like dolls on which the faces have not yet been painted; like scarecrows, which in a way is what they are, since they are meant to scare.”

“Janine groans again, her head bent over so all we can see is her hair. Crouching like that, she's like a doll, an old one that's been pillaged and discarded, in some corner, akimbo.”

“I felt shrunken, so that when he put his arms around me, gathering me up, I was small as a doll.” (her relationship with Nick)

Dolls, animals, machines…“We would exchange remedies and try to outdo each other in the recital of our physical miseries; gently we would complain, our voices soft and minor key and mournful as pigeons in the eaves troughs.”

She walks demurely, head down, red-gloved hands clasped in from, with short little steps like a trained pig's, on its hind legs.

“By we she means me. It's up to me to repay the team, justify my food and keep, like a queen ant with eggs.”

“I wait, washed, brushed, fed, like a prize pig.”

“Without a word she swivels, as if she's voice-activated, as if she's on little oiled wheels, as if she's on top of a music box, I resent this grace of hers.”

Outstanding craftingThe above slides show just how much consistency and crafting Atwood has put into her writing and I think it is fairly easy to see why she has put such effort in to controlling her imagery:

Atwood wants the reader to see the extent to which Offred’s way of seeing the world has been affected by the regime. She now sees the world in terms of objects. This is a pretty powerful expression of the command of the regime – it has literally altered Offred’s way of describing the world. Things have lost their soul/humanity and the world has very much become material – but not nice material; animals, machines, dolls. The connotations of the imagery she has chosen is indicative of the dystopian feel of the novel.

This is all good stuff to throw in the mix when you’re writing discussions because it is inherently tied to one of Atwood’s wider purposes for the novel.

Imagery – a side noteThere is a very good worksheet on imagery available on First Class that goes through Atwood’s imagery in detail. It is very worth your while having a decent bank of techniques used by Atwood – simile, metaphor, symbol and personification will be the easiest and most recurrent.

Atwood’s imagery gives us a very good insight into Offred’s character because Offred is the one saying the words. It’s important to analyse her choice of image because it will give us a very good sense of how she feels about herself and the world around her.

Back to being objectified

I want to stick with the doll imagery for a little bit because it recurs over and over again in the novel. It is a symbol for a number of ideas.

So, you have to ask yourself – why did Atwood keep coming back to this image? In a novel about life in a dystopian society, why so many dolls?

I think there are two reasons – one gives us some insight into Offred as a character, while the other works a means for understanding something about how we live.

OffredThe doll is an outstanding image/symbol for Offred. It encapsulates her status/position in society. Consider:• She is manipulated• She is dressed up• She is paraded• She is gifted – not the good, talented kind – rather, she is puppeted, played with, and finally discarded.

As a representation of Offred’s position, it captures all of the complexities and locates them with a single image. It is very clever writing and is a clear expression of Atwood trying to get us to have a particular attitude towards Offred – she wants us to pity and sympathise with her, she wants us to see her as passive.

The doll is a symbol of the position and status of the Handmaids.

But it’s bigger than this

The image stretches out beyond the text and touches our reality. For me, this is what makes the doll imagery so powerful. Let me explain.

Try and consider the delicious irony of...

In the context of the novel...

Dolls are traditionally given to girls to play with, idolise. Think about it – the doll is passive, it’s job is to be looked after, cared for, treated well. As a representation of femininity it is suggesting the role of the female is a submissive one – one in which the female (the doll) submits to its carer.

If this seems like a stretch – consider the traditional male equivalent...

The action figure

• Consciously aggressive• Commanding• Dominant

The action figure creates narratives of exploration, domination, destruction, power. As a symbol, the action figure represents an equally ridiculous image of masculinity – one of brutal conquest.

Back to the dollAtwood’s doll symbol gets right at the heart of the way society depicts women from the earliest point. She has taken an aspect of reality and blown up to a point where we have to take notice. It’s just that her doll’s have come to life and are the Handmaid’s:• submissive• passive• to be cared for/protected/looked after

I feel here that Atwood is really getting at one of the fundamental reasons women have lacked power in the world – they are cast in the role of the doll from a very early point. She wants the reader to consider this, to consider just how problematic it is, to see what happens to a woman who isn’t empowered.

And so the doll is a superb symbol/metaphor for what can happen to women if the don’t actively seek out and demand equality in a world that casts them as the submissive gender.

To take it to its extreme, we could say Atwood is threatening her reader, suggesting that if they don’t challenge the status quo they are leading women towards a state of utter submissiveness – and although this may not equal Handmaid status, it won’t be far off.

And therefore feminism

The above stuff is a fairly important reason as to why this novel is considered feminist. Atwood is highlighting the consequences of women (and men as well) not taking feminist advances seriously and continuing the fight for equality.

Even though this is fiction, even though this is dystopian distortion of reality, Gilead remains a powerful metaphor for what could happen to women if they don’t remain vigilant in their fight for gender equality.

Atwood: “Don‘t become dolls!”And so the novel is very much about fighting objectification.

Offred’s body hatred is a direct result of her objectification by the regime. She struggles to look at herself because the regime has stripped her of her woman-ness – and so how can Offred see herself as human? Reconsider:"I wait. I compose myself. My self is a thing I must now compose, as one composes a speech. What I must present is a made thing, not something born.”

The regime has stripped her of her identity by making Offred consider herself as sub-human.

Not actually an Atwood quote

How the bastards grind you downBut it’s not just objectification that needs to be fought against, it’s everything that society does to assert that women are inferior. The regime does a very good job of ensuring that women feel a sense of guilt and shame simply for being female. Consider the commander’s language:“And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.”And therefore all women should suffer eternal guilt, or so says Gilead.

That combination of objectification and guilt is a very powerful means of controlling the female population by destroying their sense of identity and then making them hate the very womanhood they used to embrace. This is a totalitarian regime working at its most efficient

Tyranny: Power, control and discipline

A totalitarian system will always do whatever it feels necessary to retain power. The most efficient way of doing this is to destroy the humanity of it subjects so that a) they can’t fight back and b) they don’t believe they deserve any better than they’re getting.

Consider: Does Offred think she deserves better?What about Offred’s child?What about Offred’s potential grand daughter?

The mechanics of powerIn order to keep cutting away at that humanity, Atwood crafts the following:• The dress code – a simple and effective way of destroying any sense of

individuality. It could be argued that a sense of individuality is paramount to feeling human and so stripping this away is important for the regime. It is another way Atwood expresses the consequences of objectification. Offred is only now judged by her colour, she knows this, and it’s demoralising.“But the frown isn't personal: it's the red dress she disapproves of, and

what it stands for.”• The system of surveillance she crafts – people watching people destroys

any sense of community. It breeds isolation and cuts the individual off from any sense of shared humanity – there is no trust, only scepticism and doubt.

“It's a mistake to hang back too obviously in any group like this; it stamps you as lukewarm, lacking in zeal.”

Not even within the Handmaids is there some sense of sisterhood. Equally, they observe and analyse their partners for any signs of unorthodoxy. Remember what happens when Ofglen ‘disappears’ and is replaced. Offred must feel out the new Ofglen, only to know she’s being watched:

“…What they used to call May Day.""Did they?" she says, light, indifferent, menacing. "That isn't a term I remember. I'm surprised you do. You ought to make an effort? She pauses. "To clear your mind of such? She pauses again. "Echoes."Now I feel cold, seeping over my skin like water. What she is doing is warning me.She isn't one of us. But she knows.”

Even the sky is watching Offred

“The moon is a stone, and the sky is full of deadly hardware, but oh god how beautiful anyway.”

There is no escaping the sense of being watched. This is how Gilead retains control. It has established a surveillance culture where they no longer need security cameras, or any kind of technology. Self-surveillance does the job far more efficiently and has the added benefit of turning people against each other.

So much of this is about controlling the body.

Offred becomes so hyper aware of her the fact she is being watched that she does what she can to control how and what her body expresses. Consider the sitting room with Offred and Nick:

“Nick walks in, nods to all three of us, looks around the room. He tootakes his place behind me, standing. He's so close that the tip of hisboot is touching my foot. Is this on purpose? Whether it is or not weare touching, two shapes of leather. I feel my shoe soften, blood flowsinto it, it grows warm, it becomes a skin. I move my foot slightly,away.”

She knows that no one could observe this transgression, but she still knows it’s a transgression and she alters her behaviour accordingly. She denies herself a bodily pleasure due to her own self-surveillance.

Is this that far away from our own world?

Consider, is there ever a time you haven’t done something, or have stopped doing something because it was socially frowned upon? Or perhaps something you’ll do at home but won’t do in public (obvious things aside)?

These won’t be in the same league as Offred, but the principal is similar.

Where to find freedom?

Offred finds it in her own mind, but I think more so, she finds it in language and words.

In the largest sense the story itself is expression of the power of language. Offred is able to at least control how her story is read. Language is her escape – her use of language allows her to go above/around her persecutors so that at least within the language she is free to represent something of the truth of herself.

More locally“I sit in the chair and think about the word chair. It can also mean the leader of a meeting. It can also mean a mode of execution. It is the first syllable in charity. It is the French world for flesh. None of these facts has any connection with the others. These are the kinds of litanies I use, to compose myself.”

It is worth saying that this is Atwood inserting some of herself into Offred. Atwood loves language and these language games are classically Atwoodian. Beyond that though, this is how Offred composes herself.

Question: Why might following a thread of thought about the word chair bring Offred a sense of peace or stability?

“None of these facts has any connection with the others.”

There is no inherent logic in Offred’s exploration. The words take her where they take her, there are no links and therefore she feels as though she has no control over where these explorations will take her.

There is freedom in this. Meaning is still something that is created and established by the individual. The regime can’t entirely control language – it will always slip and slide because of how weirdly linked together language is. There is some sense of power here for Offred – she’s able to subvert the regime in her own mind.

So, language can be seen as Offred’s hope and saviour.

But it’s also ironicRemember:“I go out into the polished hallway, which has a runner down the centre, dusty pink. Like a path through the forest, like a carpet for royalty, it shows me the way.”

And...

“some fairytale figure in a red cloak”

These are just a couple of examples where the imagery used by Atwood and Offred is deeply ironic. We know Offred isn’t royalty – and even if she is it is some deeply twisted royalty where her title in no way reflects her treatment. We know she is no fairy tale figure – there is no such innocence to her place or to her awareness of the situation. The irony establishes the tone. It sets up this feeling of despondency and resignation – it reminds us that Offred understands her situation and all she has left are these language games.

And finally, it is her persecutorThe language of the Bible is what helps keep Offred in her place and essentially ensure she will never rise about that particular place. And what’s interesting, is that it is the literal interpretation of the language that is so tyrannical.“Give me children, or else I die. Am I in God's stead, who hath withheld from thee the fruit of the womb? Behold my maid Bilbah. She shall bear upon my knees, that I may also have children by her.”

This is what has established that Offred should be a Handmaid in the first place. Language is used as a means of justifying her treatment. And it doesn’t stop there...

“The Commander continues with the service:"I will that women adorn themselves in modest apparel," he says,"with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with braided hair, or gold, orpearls, or costly array;"But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works."Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection." Here he looks usover. "All," he repeats."But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over theman, but to be in silence."For Adam was first formed, then Eve."And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was inthe transgression."Notwithstanding she shall be saved by childbearing, if they continuein faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.””

Here language is Offred’s tormentor because no license for interpretation has been given.

Interpretation is freedomFor Offred, her explorations of language are pure interpretive freedom. She allows the language to take her where ever it chooses. There are no restrictions for her in that space. There is no literal mindedness. There is always only a multitude of meanings that constantly fly around, bumping into each other.

For the regime, there must only ever be one meaning and it must be specified by the regime and enforced. This is the difference.

Language is both the means of freedom and the means of tyranny.