thank you !! yeh i hav done a lot of reading recently !
thank you !! yeh i hav done a lot of reading recently !
The function of the physical, social and moral environments in Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale is to convey the themes cast in a dystopian view of the future where a rigid, patriarchal and theocratic society has been established. First of all, The Handmaid’s Tale was set in future, in Massachusetts. From several references in the novel, it is established that due to environmental destruction by the emission of nuclear and other toxic wastes, fertility has been reduced while infant mortality has been risen. Therefore, the society use military force to turn it back to the way it used to be or more even conservative. They have introduced new social practices and moral codes justified by a literal reading from the Bible. Since the main character, Offred, was set as the handmaid who was one of social justifications to increase fertility, Her experiences that was showed in the book positioned the reader to view most elements of this society to be extremely negative. Also, the facts that Gilead was set in the Harvard University where was the most educational institutions today present a great irony. It is a symbol of choice, freedom and knowledge. But since it was closed, it showed how the Gilead society was strictly forbidden any of individual freedoms. All laws such as giving the rights of free expression have been erased.
Even though we've already talked about the color symbolism in the Handmaid's tale, I want to add more thought into it.
The handmaid's color is red, which makes me to think about the Scarlet Letter as soon as I thought about it. The scarlet letter was a mark of sexual sin. Go back to the handmaid's tale, the handmaids are basically sinners from the society, even though they might think that they are better than the women who lived in the colony. Basically, they wearing their invisible scarlet letter. Also, The color of red symbolizes fertility. I also made a connection from the Kite Runner. There was a pomegranate tree in the book, which symbolizes the fertility, as well. Also, I noticed that Offred who is the narrator has a "red" on her name. I thought it is pretty interesting.
Also, the wives wore blue. I thought about the sky and sea, which also represent the blue. The sky and sea are basically just superior presence. Wives are considered as the superior human being compared to the handmaids or other women.
Light vs. Dark in Dystopian Society: A Case Study
Light vs. Dark is a literary archetype that highlights a struggle engrained in the human psyche. Light is often associated with truth and purity while dark, its nemesis, represents evil and deceit. In Dystopian literature, the light vs. dark archetype, like many other literary stereotypes, is inverted in meaning, often reflecting the delusion of the dystopian society. In many dystopian novels, though for the perpetrators of the society light is still protection and truth and darkness evil and concealed corruption, the main character finds the society's light to be intrusive and a violation of privacy, even deceitful and corrupt, while associating freedom and truth with darkness, along with all other personal liberties lost in the dystopian society. The change in meaning of the light vs. dark archetype is present in both Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale and George Orwell's 1984, but the struggle between the two forces ends differently in each novel and is, in its end, symbolic of the hope present in the dystopian society, or lack thereof.
In both The Handmaid's Tale and 1984 light is subtly and often detailed in describing setting. Any kind of illumination surrounding the main character becomes most important during that character's moment of transformation, during which the most significant decisions of the novel are reached that will forever alter the character's life in dystopian society. In The Handmaid's Tale, it is never completely dark in the Republic of Gilead, as the searchlights are even at night nearly blinding so as to detect any kind of “mischief” in the darkness. For Offred, however, even the minimal darkness in the night allows for personal freedoms, such as her nightly mental escapades and secret rendezvous with the Commander and Nick. Light is ultimately significant to her final moments in the novel as well, as she surrenders to the potential help or harm that awaits her in the black van and steps up "into the darkness within; or else the light” (Atwood295). Though the darkness to the Giladean government, the Sons of Jacob, is a force of evil, darkness is for Offred a much needed solace and free time, in which her quest toward increased self-preservation, remembrance of the past, and hope gains the most ground. The lights of Gilead are a means of invading privacy that uphold the dystopian theme of constant surveillance, a theme even more evident in George Orwell’s 1984. “Big Brother is watching you” constantly in Oceania, along with telescreens, hidden microphones, and other modes of surveillance are planted to instill fear and reverence for the Party’s omnipotence and omnipresence. There are so many technological modes of observation, in fact, that light is not as significant in this respect until Part III of the novel, in which Winston is imprisoned in the Ministry of Love. Here Winston is stripped of all the technological norms of society under the Party and must use physical surroundings, or rather what he perceives are his physical surroundings, to make sense of what is happening to him. In this part of the novel, Winston details the intensity and color of the light that surrounds him everywhere he is tortured and beaten, especially during his one-on-one encounters with O’Brien. Light described in this way allows readers to get a sense of Winston’s physical surroundings while going further in empathy with Winston’s situation. Yellow lights are often associated with Winston’s physical pain, the color yellow being significant in its use as a warning or precaution. Winston encounters yellow light when he is struck on the elbow with a truncheon, and he later claims that “all that happened then was merely a preliminary, a routine interrogation to which nearly all prisoners were subjected” (Orwell240). Strong white light is what Winston encounters during his moments with O’Brien, in which he experiences the worst torture and transforms the most. Though he becomes accustomed to most cruel lighting, such as the glaring lights shone “in his face until his eyes ran with water” (Orwell241) and his growing “used to sleeping with strong lights on his face” (Orwell275), the harsh white light of Room 101 that undoubtedly plays a role in Winston’s utter betrayal of Julia, a burden he withstood throughout his torture, and ultimate complete conversion to the Party mindset. The novel ends with Winston confessing his love for Big Brother in broad daylight, “light-years distant” from the free-thinking man he used to be but now a fully engaged Party member with no real knowledge of what he knows. The ending of Winston’s story in light is indicative not only of his unfortunate conversion to the dark side of Party ideals but also the lost hope that he will return to his former state and that the Party will be overthrown. Unlike Offred, Winston is not given the chance to step up into potential freedom that lies in another land but is forced to conform to the mindless, loyal wraith that the Party desires him to be. Light in Dystopia is reversed in its duality, but it remains a tool that authors can and often use to illuminate underlying themes regarding true freedom and honest truth, how they are defined in current society, and how humanity is affected by these definitions.
Feb 18 2010 and Feb 19 2010:
I will focus on Winston and Big Brother’s definitions of “Truth” “Freedom,” and then “Love.” First of all, in the Ministry of Truth, which "was enormous pyramidal structure of glittering white concrete, three hundred meters into the air" had the three slogans of the party. And "Freedom is slavery" of one of them. Somehow all the words are related into the doublethink. The purpose of doublethink is to mess up one's mind. The name of ministry made it everything trustworthy. Therefore, people never be able to think correctly because the title of Ministry of Truth, itself had a power of truth that makes people to believe in everything. For example, people would think that freedom is slavery is because ministry of truth said so.
However, Once Winston wrote down on his diary that "freedom is freedom that to say that two plus two is four." However, O'brien showed completely that Winston was completely wrong. And he asked Winston what if the govt said it is five not four. But Winston still claimed that it would be 4. After he said that to O'brien, only thing Winston got was more pain. This scene proves that people including Winston is slaves. And the government proves that it has freedom to do whatever it wants to the slaves.
Winston said that the Ministry of Love was the most frightening one. Compared to the other one, there were no windows in it at all, which bring the symbolism of light and dark. On part 3, when Winston was arrested in the Ministry of Love, "he was in a high-ceiling windowless cell with walls of glittering white porcelain." Even though there is no window, the inside of extremely bright. So this book reminds me of the "Heart of Darkness." Because it shows that the light is not always for hopefulness and stands for the positive image. The brightness of Building seemed to seek through and read all the prisoners rather than its hopefulness. Therefore, the light has a function of the eye that can see the prisoners and read their minds more clearly.
I also want to talk about Syme and Newspeak. Syme is Winston's friend who works for the new edition of Newspeak dictionary. He is too smart and knows a lot of things in the society. Therefore, Winston knows that Syme will be vaporized like others. Syme knows the purpose of Newspeak and how it will bring the true ideal of Big Brother. What he talked to Winston was basically mentioned in Goldstein's book. So I was wondering if he had already read the book. And he might finally be vaporized after the government was able to catch the evidence of Syme when he talked about the true purpose of Newspeak to Winston, which was an clear act of enemy from the society. Just the government had already knew Winston was an enemy from the society and watched him for 7 years. They didn't anything to him, until they finally catch the clear evidence. Maybe that is what happen to Syme. And Symn was caught, I should have noticed that Winston would finally get caught at the end, if what I said was true.
The Newspeak definitely what the society wanted to set up. What the society was forbidden was strongly criticized in the Newspeak language. But what the society encouraged people to performed this ideal, always have the positive meaning in the Newspeak language. For example, chastity was called "goodsex" in Newspeak. The sex was forbidden unless it was needed.
I want to compare between The Handmaid's tale and 1984. Since both of them are dystopian literature, there were a lot of similarities.
- The ironic names. For example, the Angel from the Handmaid's tale. The Angel was not an angel who saves one's life from the danger. But instead it was like a spy for the government and takes charged of helping a government's total control. Also, the everything that includes "Victory" was ironic. Because contrasted to the real meaning of victory, everything with victory had a very low quality
- Also, Winston from 1984 and Offred from the Handmaid's tale show a complete selfishness, which was what the government wanted, or at least what they believed what human naturally has selfish instinct. In the Handmaid's book, Offred used Nick to enjoy her individual and personal life. She made a love with Nick and wanted him to always there for her whenever she needed him. At the end, when she was arrested, she was hoping or thinking that Nick would help her out to get out of this society, which is her true selfishness. Also, in the 1984, the government had already figured out the natural instinct of human and used it a weapon. For example, when O'brien used rats to suffer Winston. Winston said that just do the same thing to his lover and betrayed her, which show his definite selfishness. But the problem is the government already knew that human is so selfish and all they think about it theirselves. In 1984, human natural selfishness was a weapon to confess people's sin and finally realized the true power of big brother.
I want to talk about how the society misused its belif and power to control citizens. For example, the technology was overly developed. There were countless number of telescreens and microphones to control people. However, the techonolgy was never used for the citizens. The electricity was limited and was used for the propaganda. Even though there were elevators, they didn't work anyway. Not only that, the technology term was limited to the people, unless they have something related to the scientific jobs. The C vocabulary was consited of scientific and technological terms. However, "there was no vocabulary expressing the function of Science as a habit of mind, or a method of thought, irrespective of its particualr branches." The governemnt made sure that the technology only has to be use for it, not any other things. Also, excluding some high class people, the most of people hardly maintain their lives. It is ironic. Becaus Ociena believed that "wealth, in the senseof personal possessions and luxuries, should be evenly distributed, while power remained in the hands of a small privileged caste." Probably they just said it to make people believed in governemnt.
For Week of 2/22/10 - 2/26/10:
In George Orwell's 1984, the main character Winston recalls many dreams he has had. Sometimes Winston's dreams can help him make sense of his past - like the dream of his mother and sister helps him realize the depth of their love and sacrifice for him - and foreshadow future events, in this sense giving him psychic power. The dream I am refering to in paticular is Winston's dream of Julia, before he knows anything about her, ripping off her clothes in a sort of meadowed area, which he refers to as "The Golden Country," and walking toward him; later he recalls both the meadow and her nudity as it unfolds in reality before his eyes "almost as swiftly as he had imagined it" (125). Winston's dream of O'Brien, in which he is told they will someday "meet in the place where there is no darkness" (244) is most likely a thought interjected by O'Brien into Winston's subconscious - as in Part III of the novel O'Brien does meet Winston in the Ministry of Love, where darkness is replaced by dazzling, disorienting, and transforming light. This reveals the genius of the Thought Police and the Party in general, as they know individuals well enough - most likely through the telescreens and other technological surveillance mechanisms - to know how to manipulate their subconscious, the one aspect of their existence supposedly untouched by the enforced dystopian reality, to even enforce their reality there; this results in truly omnipresent and omnipotent Party ideals.
Winston's definitions of truth, love, and freedom change drastically in Part III of the novel where he encounters this dazzling light of Party enlightenment. He is forced to abandon the ideas that "freedom is the freedom to say two plus two is four" and even that of "all hope lies with the proles" in favor of O'Brien's single, all-encompassing idea that "whatever the Party holds to be truth is truth. It is impossible to see reality except by looking through the eyes of the Party" (249). With this truth, freedom and love become obsolete and worthless. Even Winston's dreams cannot escape the ever-watching eye of the Party, and he later regards his memories as false. All that lies within him after O'Brien's revelation is the logic that "2+2=5" and the fact that he, according to the Party, "won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother," the destroyer of self and savior of complete "majority rules" in 1984.
Hey, I'm going to do a little thread reviving here and share my thoughts on a few things:
Here's how I define the following terms relating to 1984:
Truth - Winston sees the truth as an unalterable fact, something that exists in the real world as well as in the minds of the people. This is why he picks something as factual as '2 + 2 = 4', as he feels that no one could ever dispute this is the truth. He finds the photograph of the three 'thought criminals' and holds on to it desperately, because it exists as a tangible truth to him. Therefore, Winston subscribes to the idea that truth cannot be hidden, as evidence of it can be found in reality. Big Brother however defines truth as whatever the Party wants its citizens to believe. Reality to the Party only exists in the mind, and therefore truth can easily be changed. Photographs are meaningless to the Party.
Love - to Winston, this is the one emotion through which he feels he can rebel against the government. Love to him is the caring for another of ones own choosing, without outside interference. The Party usually dictates who can be married, and traditional views of love are generally extinct. Even parents and their own children seem not to love one another. Winston whole tryst with Julia is his desire for an unregulated relationship in which he can express feelings for someone without fear of betrayal.
Freedom - to Winston, the most important aspect of freedom is the right to do and say what you want, not what the Party says you must. Winston craves for the right to be able to do what he desires without the constant threat of detection. The Party defines this idea as slavery, as the person is robbed of identity alone. Only together can any one man hope to live on in his efforts to better the Party and therefore the group defines him.
I also wanted to share my thoughts on the end of 1984. I felt that Orwell had the greatest shocker of all time! Sure, I could easily see something like that coming but it still has the emotional power to deeply unsettle me. I find it much more realistic than the traditional hopeful ending of most dystopian novel (Fahrenheit 451). I thought that the entire point Orwell was trying to emphasize was that there is a point which every person can be driven over and never come back. There are tortures so horrible that even the most strong-willed person will be broken--which is Winston's fate. Orwell challenges the optimistic belief that people can be saved within their minds, and that if we withdraw there we can be saved. Orwell says that instead this is the place of our undoing, as the fears that we have can be exploited to drive us almost insane, willing to do anything. It is this message that hit me when I read the last four words in 1984.
Finally, I was impressed by George Orwell's amazing power of writing. By Part 3, I had started to see the logic in the Party's definition of truth and freedom! I was somewhat disturbed by this, as I knew these ideas were clearly wrong, but he twists everything up so much that I could no longer say that what i had believed was right. So by the end of the novel, I felt as if I had been 'converted' into a Party member myself.
can anyone give me any ideas on this essay title, its a comparative piece on the dystopias The handmaids Tale and 1984;
'Compare and contrast the presentation of relationships as a means of survival in the novels'?
Im trying to think of different themes of relationships to compare between the two; at the moment im thinking about the way in communication is prohibited and therefore the risk of the relationships and why they are so important. Also how they help or hinder the protagonists in rebelling against the party machines, and the way in which the past is consolidated and how this presents a possibility of hope of change.
the forging of human bonds to keep in touch with their humanity.
Any help much appreciated
In Relation to "The Handmaid's Tale":
After reading "A Modest Proposal" by Dr. Jonathan Swift, the clear connection between "The Handmaid's Tale" and "A Modest Proposal" can be seen. In both of these stories, the women have a lower role in society, and they are seen as "sex machines". Why are the women given this type of role in both the novel and the excerpt? Well after reading both the novel and the excerpt, it can clearly be seen that women are used in this form because men are usually the main leader's in society, and women have physical weaknesses that reject them to fight back. This shows that women are shown weak in literature, and therefore they are unable to fight back and defend themselves.
In both the novel and the excerpt, men are seen as the savers of society, and they are the ones that could do anything they desired. They could even fulfill their lustful desires without worrying about anything. Why is this so? And what does this say about the role of men in literature? Well after looking at both the novel and the excerpt, men have the freedom to do anything they desire because they are usually the leaders of society. And since women are under them in society, men usually have control over the women. This shows that men in literature are usually the leaders, and therefore they are shown as the strong characters.
The Handmaid’s Tale has many qualities of dystopian literature. The society in the novel is opposite from utopia, and presents the world in all its negative aspects. The novel shows how warfare and technological advances have left the Republic of Gilead in a very bad position. The handmaids are seen only as bearers of children, and are used as machines in the process. Women who in Pre-Gildeadean times were mothers and wives now have to take on a roles of Handmaid’s, listening to a twisted form of religion that justifies what they are forced to do. In the Republic of Gilead women are enslaved, tortured, and not allowed the feeling of love or enjoyment- the embodiment of dystopia. Another Dystopian element of the novel is the existence of the Colonies. The Presence of these colonies show that the Gilead society has no value for women’s lives and that there is no belief in redemption. Overall, the biggest dystopian element is that the leaders of Gilead have convinced all their subjects that the republic is better for them than the old society was. They emphasize that this control of women makes them protected and should make them feel important- creating what the society reveres the most. This belief forced upon the people of Gilead through twisted bible readings and stern rule enforcement shows that the society is truly dystopian.
The Historical Notes show that the republic of Gilead was formed on the basis of many things that existed before it. Offred’s narrative about the pre-Gilead period shows the reader what flaws the Gilead Regime wanted to fix in society. The revolution shows the change in the status of woman, and the actual Gilead period shows many flaws in the new societal ways.
The analysis in the Historical notes shows that the post-Gilead period might have been a mixture of ideals in the Pre-Gilead period and Gilead period. I find Pieixoto’s comments about judging the Gilead period very interesting. He says that Gilead should not be judged too harshly because all such judgments are “culturally conditioned”. The novel gears the reader towards sympathizing with Offred, and disapproving of the actions of Gilead.
Pieixoto’s appeal of understanding suggests that such moral ambivalence sows seeds for future evils. He discusses her as a part in achieving the goal of reproduction, belittling her tale as only a crumb of history. This shows that even societies like ours and like professor Pieixoto’s that are considered progressive still hold seeds from the Gilead period, a period of oppression of women.
Last edited by asdf99; 01-24-2011 at 08:11 PM.
The religious reference to the bible of the name Gilead shows how dystopian the novel is. The Gilead in the bible is an area that was peaceful and healing, while in the Handmaid’s tale does the contrary to women. Gilead was supposedly intended to be peaceful and healing (fixing of the low birth rates, and the effects of the environmental degradation), but instead its created resulted in the opposite of that for women. It didn’t even achieve its original goals at all; with the commanders being sterile towards old age, most women did not get impregnated by them.Originally Posted by hp 4ever!
In response to gujuprinz, I have some more to say about the society view of women in this period that you mentioned.
“I used to think of my body as an instrument, of pleasure, or a means of transportation, or an implement for the accomplishment of my will . . . Now I’m a cloud, congealed around a central object… which is hard and more real than I am”
This passage shows the contrast between how women were seen before and during the Gileadean period. The passage refers to Offred’s old and new view of herself, which embodies the change of society she lives through. Before Gilead she saw her body as an instrument and the main embodiment of her character. Now she thinks her body is only important because of its child bearing abilities. Offred’s new view shows that she has taken in Gilead’s attidute toward women, treating them not as special and different individuals, but more like uniform objects that can deliver what the society needs.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
