Silent Servitude

Dystopias are the literary version of Charles Dickens's Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come. They give us a glimpse at what might be, should we not fight for what is.

I have always been attracted to dystopias: they offer a lesson for us to learn, a future to prevent. These negative versions of society challenge us to rise up and act in areas where we are tempted to sit idly by thinking, "Surely that won't happen to me." Each dystopian author presents readers with a lesson to learn. In Fahrenheit 451 and 1984 mankind must take care how government can use technology to limit intelligence. The Giver challenges us to remember the past in order to build a more vibrant future.

The Handmaid's Tale gives voice to the silent, demanding we fight for our future in the midst of a troubling present by remembering the blessings of the past.

Atwood presents a society where women are servile to men. Nuclear war has scarred the earth: harming reproduction of vegetation, livestock . . . and humans. Due to the low reproductive rate of humanity, the Republic of Gilead gains control and forces women into servile positions reminiscent of Biblical times. Poor women or those who have had "indiscretions" in the past are given four options: forced sterility and service as whores; Marthas who function as household servants; Handmaidens, whose sole purpose is to become impregnated by whatever Commander  has interred their service; or choose banishment to serve a short life in the radioactive wasteland. Sterile women or those outside of childbearing years only have three options, while those healthy and under the age of thirty-five may choose to be handmaidens.

The later is the choice of the nameless protagonist of The Handmaid's Tale.

"We yearned for the future" (3).

The novel is a splintered tale of the handmaiden's present with abrupt glimpses into her past and "the time before" the Republic of Gilead seized power. Throughout the novel, the handmaiden shares her struggle in accepting the role society needs her to play and her desire for the freedoms of her past.

I was unexpectedly drawn into Atwood's tale. While the pace of flashbacks took some time to get used to, I appreciated the style of the novel: as if the handmaid were telling me the tale in person, with asides to the memories of her past. I also appreciated that, while sexual interactions were necessary to the plot, Atwood did not give more detail than needed. The base descriptions of the interaction between Commander, Wife, and Handmaiden added to the struggle the handmaiden was having within herself.

There were two items of the story that seemed unnecessary or took up too much space: the handmaiden's search for a friend she met at the beginning of her capture and a club scene between her and the Commander. Truly, I felt these could have been left out entirely, although the latter scene was somewhat justified in the epilogue.

Oh, the epilogue. Whatever you do, don't skip over the epilogue of this book. A brilliant addition to the story---which I won't ruin. Just make sure you read this one from cover (author introduction) to cover (epilogue).

Rating: 4/5 stars
As I said, it took some time for me to get into the style and pace of Atwood's writing and there were a few scenes that seemed unnecessary. Besides that, The Handmaid's Tale is a truly wonderful dystopia, creating a believable alternate future and presenting the reader with a powerful lesson.

The Republic of Gilead

Have you ever been assigned a book, and, purely because it was assigned, found you had a growing disdain for the title without doing a moment of research?

Have you ever heard someone else's opinion on a novel and found yourself immediately turned off from reading it?

Both of these were reasons I avoided picking up Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale. Add to that my caution about any book turned to movie/tv show and you found the book I avoided like the plague.

So, what were my major concerns before reading the book?

• Representation of Religion
  One of my peers who chose to read the novel during our graduate course said that Atwood's book confirmed his/her hatred and abandonment of Christianity specifically and of religion in general. As a follower of Christ, I was concerned that this book was not a proper representation of Christianity, but I wasn't courageous enough to read the book and have that conversation at the time.
• Feminism
  Because I chose another book for the grad course, I could only view the novel through the eyes of those who did read it, and the response was overwhelmingly feminist. Now, I am an advocate for women, but I do believe much of the feminist movement has gotten out of control, focusing on only the negative and not on how men and women work together to create our world. 

 What drew me to the book?

Honestly? I caved to peer pressure. I recently joined the PageHabit team and started a "bookstagram" and The Handmaid's Tale kept popping up. I realized that I could not justifiably disregard the book until I had at least attempted to read it. Plus, I purchased it for $1.50.

Have I sold you yet? I know this sounds skeptical, but bear with me and keep reading.

The Introduction

The Handmaid's Tale, though it has recently gained national attention via a Netflix show based on Atwood's book, is not a new publication. Atwood began writing the dystopia in 1984 and it was originally published two years later. In 2017, with the production of the Netflix show underway, Atwood added an introduction to the novel. The teacher in me never skips the introduction and I was please to find that the author addressed the concerns I listed above. 

First, she addressed the topic of feminism:

"...is The Handmaid's Tale a "feminist" novel? If you mean an ideological tract in which all women are angels and/or so victimized they are incapable of moral choice, no. If you mean a novel in which women are human beings--with all the variety of character and behavior that implies--and are also interesting and important, and what happens to them is crucial to the them, structure, and plot of the book, then yes. In that sense many books are "feminist" (xvi).

 Here Atwood so poignantly addresses that fact that any book which presents women as fallible human beings is presenting women in a favorable, realistic light. Many novels have female characters that are crucial to the story who face incredible situations, yet never stop fighting for their individuality and freedom.

Second, she addressed the topic of religion:

"Is The Handmaid's Tale anti-religion? Again, it depends on what you mean by that. True, a group of authoritarian men seize control and attempt to restore an extreme version of the patriarchy, in which women (like nineteenth-century American slaves) are forbidden to read. . . . they can't control money or have jobs outside the home, unlike some women in the Bible. The regime uses Biblical symbols, as any authoritarian regime taking over America doubtless would, they wouldn't be Communists or Muslims" (xvii). 

This is the paragraph that actually opened my eyes and encouraged me to read the book with an open mind. Notice some of her words: "an extreme version of the patriarchy", "unlike some women in the Bible", and "uses some Biblical symbols".

Every good dystopia is built upon making a minor thing--which is often innocent or useful--an extreme problem. In the Hunger Games the world is divided into industries, in Divergent it is character traits, The Giver takes away memories to wipe away fear (and happiness). Atwood creates her dystopia by taking principals and traditions of Christianity and seeing how they could be used to create an adverse, authoritarian society.

Note secondly, that Atwood addresses how this world treats women differently than women in the Bible. Many women in the Bible held positions of power and respect. The Proverbs 31 woman is a well-rounded, independent woman. While she does perform many of the tasks that are mandated for the Marthas and Handmaids in The Handmaid's Tale, we also see that she oversees her household (verse 15) and purchases land (verse 16) and that through the characteristics described from verses 10-31, she earns her husband's honor and trust. The men of Gilead have no respect for women, and the women thereby have little respect for themselves and those around them.

Finally, Atwood points out that the authoritarian government she created uses Biblical symbols.
I won't ramble much longer as this ties to the last point. Unfortunately, many people--religious and non-religious--have used symbols, stories, and principles found in Scripture to advocate for causes that, I believe, are completely in opposition with the Bible. Did Jacob have two wives? Yes. Did Rachel give her handmaid to Jacob to provide children in her name? Yes. Does that mean God condones such actions. Absolutely not.

As you can see, I had quite a bit on my mind as I opened the cover of The Handmaid's Tale, but that didn't prevent me from reading the dystopia from cover to cover.