BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Handmaid's Tale

 
 
sine
15:12 / 04.11.04
I was thinking that now might be an interesting time to do a reread of this book and discuss it. Thoughts? Is anyone interested?

Opening questions: Is it just the feminist 1984 or is it a chilling predictor of a trend away from secular reasoning in the States? Has anyone seen the new opera version on in Toronto?
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
15:40 / 04.11.04
Isn't it Gilead?

Anyway, I'd be interested, partly because I am currently reading Oryx and Crake on the bus; but I can't commit to a reading until I've finished that one, and you may feel the moment has passed by then.
 
 
sine
23:36 / 04.11.04
My bad. It clearly is time for a reread.
 
 
sine
03:47 / 05.11.04
but I can't commit to a reading until I've finished that one, and you may feel the moment has passed by then.

No, not at all. I've got more than enough on my plate, and I imagine it'll remain topical for, oh, at least four years say. Let me know when you're good to go, and anyone else besides, and we'll do it altogether.
 
 
Ariadne
09:59 / 05.11.04
I'd be interested - I was thinking much the same thing earlier this morning. so yes, count me in
 
 
Benny the Ball
13:42 / 05.11.04
Haven't read it for a while, so may be worth it - what I remember is thinking that it was a little heavy-handed, that the ending was a bit smug, and that I liked the names, Ofred etc...

Then again I was a miserable little student with a chip on his shoulder back then, so maybe I should re-read it, as I loved Great Expectations when I re-read that away from school...
 
 
Sax
13:59 / 05.11.04
I was thinking about this book just as the results were coming in from America. And I quite like the ending - I'm a renowned hater of dystopian futures so knowing that the Republic of Gilead was a passing fancy and that further on in time the future would be populated by nice, liberal people with wonderful ethnic names saved me from having nightmares.

One thing always rankled, though: Would even the staunchest neoconservative be happy changing the name of the United States?
 
 
Nobody's girl
13:49 / 07.11.04
...yeah. I was going to give this book to my partner's cousin this Christmas. She lives in Ohio and is a passionate Republican and Christain Fundamentalist. But apparently she knows of it and probably wouldn't read it

One of the moments that chill my blood from this book (apart from the "Particicution") is the part where the narrator is fired from her job and wanders into her local shop to pick up some fags. The woman who usually works there has been replaced by a teenage boy with a bad attitude who informs her that her bank account is empty. She gets home and finds out that all women have had their money transferred to either their husband or male next of kin- "Any account with an F instead of an M. All they needed to do was push a few buttons. We're cut off."

That and-

"There were marches, of course, a lot of women and some men. But they were smaller than you might have thought. I guess people were scared."

"I didn't go on any of the marches. Luke said it would be futile and I had to think about them, my family, him and her... I started doing more housework, more baking. I tried not to cry at mealtimes."

To paraphrase Atwood- we mustn't forget that places like Gilead exist. It's not a matter of science fiction, it's a matter of geography.
 
 
ibis the being
20:12 / 12.11.04
[KKC - Ooh, Oryx and Crake. I loved that one.]

I just reread this over the summer. It was chilling to read when we have a religious zealot (or two) in the White House. A lot of the dramatic flourishes - the chanting, the the sexual arrangement of wife-handmaid-Commander - don't seem "realistic" in the sense that I can picture them happening the US. I think it's clear that Atwood is allowing a little hyperbole into her portrait of what could happen on the slippery slope of legislating morality and specifically the morality of female sexuality/reproduction.

However, much of the premise is shockingly believable.

It was after the catastrophe, when they shot the president and machine-gunned the Congress and the army declared a state of emergency. They blamed it on the Islamic fanatics, at the time. [...] That was when they suspended the Constitution. They said it would be temporary. There wasn't even any rioting in the streets. People stayed home at night, watching television, looking for some direction. There wasn't even an enemy you could put your finger on.

*Shudder.*
The part of the book I like less are when she (the narrator & by extension Atwood) suggests that a secret misogyny, or at least desire to control women, lurks beneath the surface of even the most sensitive man - although, to be fair, she acknowledges that her suspicion . In general, I don't care for the woman v man aspects of the story, which I feel obscure the more crucial plotline of a powerful theocracy slowly but surely stripping citizens of their rights and culture.

Incidentally, the book takes place in Boston, which besides being a famously liberal US city, made national news nearly ten years after THT was written, when John Salvi killed two people and wounded 5 more in an abortion clinic in Brookline (1994).
 
 
sleazenation
22:16 / 14.11.04
First of all can someone amend the summary so it refers to Gilead rather than Gideon.

Its been about 10 years since I read Handmaids tale but I do seem to remember the point being made in the text that in Gilead the freedom of the majority of men is just a tightly controlled as that of the women. That is not to say that the methods of control and the horriffic responsibilities placed on the two genders are the same, but they are certainly both unpleasent.
 
 
Nobody's girl
06:56 / 15.11.04
Yeah, I think no-one in Gilead has an easy life. Even the Commander is obviously deeply unhappy with his life in Gilead although he obviously isn't suffering to quite the same degree as, say, the Unwomen.

Because we know that Atwood is a feminist, I think it's easy to dismiss aspects of the story as "women v men". I think that's a bit of an oversimplification.
 
 
ibis the being
12:03 / 15.11.04
I think it's easy to dismiss aspects of the story as "women v men". I think that's a bit of an oversimplification.

Eh. I know that. I wasn't dismissing anything. "Women v men" is an oversimplification because I was using a bit of verbal shorthand based on the assumption that people reading the thread have read the book. I assume no one's saying Offred doesn't contend with male oppression and/or struggle with her relation to men on a personal level as well as societal and governmental, because she clearly does that.

And yet that was far from the central concern of my last post. I think the last two posts actually oversimplified and dismissed my contribution to the thread.
 
 
Nobody's girl
21:38 / 15.11.04
Fair enough.
 
 
Peach Pie
01:02 / 28.12.04
Do you think Offred straight dislikes the commander, or is their relationship more complicated than that?
 
  
Add Your Reply