1984 + The Handmaids Tale

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hp 4ever!

Throughout our English course over the year, we've examine the aspect are often used to demonstrate a certain aspect of a character/characters (e.g. see my post on Nathan Price in The Poisonwood Bible). The same seems to true for Handmaid's Tale, except the religious aspect of the society is to demonstrate a common element in dsytopian novels: a deceptive societal goal. Firstly, let's start off by examining the name of the society, which is Gilead. Gilead is a religious reference to the Bible and it describes an area that was a peaceful and healing area. Yet, in reality, Gilead in the novel is the extreme opposite for the women. This is demonstrated by Offred's pain due to her new life: "I want her back. I want everything back, the way it was" (Atwood 122). Offred is filled with despair for her child and her husband are both far waay from her. She claims that "[t]here's nobody [she] can love, all the peoople [she] could love are dead or elsewhere" (103). This seems to quite a healing society huh? (being quite sarcastic there). Also, the concept of peace in this society is laughable for there is wall full of hangings! Thus, it can be concluded that this biblical allusion is used in an ironic sense.
Yet, it seems the majority of the allusions are used in an ironic sense. The Book of Job is another one for it is primarily about Job being tested by having Satan taking things away from him and Job not blaming God at all. Although this is taught to the society members to be willing to sacrifice everything for God but even those in power don't follow this and they make the Handmaids sacrifice all of their positions. This is seen by the existance of the black market (the Wives get Cigarettes and the Commanders get Vogue).
So, the main question is, why are the religious illusions used ironically. Well, I believe it is to show that the goal is deceptive for no one is healed nor does anyone seem to be paid for the sacrifice. The is a perfect element to demonstrate a dystopia and perhaps that's why Atwood used the allusions in this manner.

Closing thought: "Bible is kept locked up" (87) in this society: it's the source of truth. Therefore, the truth is hidden from the eyes of those that are powerless to be able to use the powerful tool of religion to justify their sinful desire for power.

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gujuprinz

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.

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asdf99

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.

---

I don't think Pieixoto was belittling Offred. Seeing as how his entire lecture was based off of the intel she gave him and his compatriots, I doubt that he had anything but gratitude and respect for her. The lecture shows the difference between the Gileadean era and the one Pieixoto is speaking in. With the new (and at the same time old) freedom they have been given, men like Pieixoto can explore the past more freely. This freedom, however, would not have come into existence without the help of women like Offred and her friend Ofglen.

The end of the handmaid's tale ruined the "surprise" element of the book. Remember in "Inception", at the end where everybody in the theater stood up and cussed at the screen? That's the feeling at the end of the handmaid's tale, without the historical background. Lois Lowry didn't reveal what happened to Jonas at the end of "The Giver", and that was the whole idea. The reader is supposed to fill in the blanks for his/herself. With the historical background coming in at the end of Handmaid's tale, that element is removed to a degree. No, Pieixoto does not reveal what happened to Offred, but he does reveal how they got from point A to point B. Why even put it in the manuscript? What does it ADD to the reader's experience?

One aspect of the historical notes that I found to be very important was Atwood decision to make the time gap between when Offred actually lived through the Gilead regime and the analysis on her perspective of the events which took place. The reason this time gap is important is because it seemed that Atwood wanted the reader to pay attention to the fact that the time gap allows the people analyzing Offred to develop their own opinion regarding the regime and to be able to look back at the regime and determine whether it was really worth the struggle or if it was even really necessary at all. This time gap also makes the novel seem a lot more realistic to me. It reminds me of Anne Frank’s Diary, and how Offred like Anne Frank lived through a very traumatic and horrible time period, yet she manages to keep some sort normalcy in her life, even if it is a constant routine or something as simple as interaction with a male. Also it reminds me of how in middle school kids are taught about Anne Frank’s Diary and the Holocaust, and in the “Historical Notes” the people attending the seminars are doing the same thing, only instead they are studying Offred’s recollection of the Gilead Regime and they are learning about all aspects involved in the Gilead Regime itself. Theses aspects combined also make the novel seem more dystopian which might have been Atwood’s goal all along.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boom^boom

The end of the handmaid's tale ruined the "surprise" element of the book. Remember in "Inception", at the end where everybody in the theater stood up and cussed at the screen? That's the feeling at the end of the handmaid's tale, without the historical background. Lois Lowry didn't reveal what happened to Jonas at the end of "The Giver", and that was the whole idea. The reader is supposed to fill in the blanks for his/herself. With the historical background coming in at the end of Handmaid's tale, that element is removed to a degree. No, Pieixoto does not reveal what happened to Offred, but he does reveal how they got from point A to point B. Why even put it in the manuscript? What does it ADD to the reader's experience?

---

I think that the fact that the historical notes are added at the end of the novel gives the novel itself a more realistic touch. Keeping in mind that the novel is dystopian, shouldn’t a dystopian author to want to make the novel seem as realistic as possible? When learning about history we already know what happened and what the end result was, yet we still learn the little details involved in the event, and are not able to fill in the blanks our selves because it was history. By adding in the Historical notes, to me it seems as if this is exactly what Atwood was aiming for. I think that she wanted her readers to read the novel and in the end feel as if it really could happen in their world, that it could be their future, and people would eventually discuss that future in the same way the characters of the historical notes discuss the Gilead Regime. Also, even though at the end, we learn that Offred did manage to escape into hiding, the reader can still fill in the blanks for him or herself regarding what happened to Offred after she went into hiding.

I liked how Atwood had everything almost reverse itself in the end. This relates back to the "nature always wins" theme. Back during the time of exploration, the Europeans brought their diseases and greed which wiped out the Native Americans. Then during the time of The Handmaid's Tale, many of the Gileadeans wiped themselves out with toxins and poisons from the war and the colonies. About the people with odd names in 2195, I think this symbolizes both an increase in Native Americans and the ability for one to choose his/her own name. With the Caucasian population so low, all the minority groups have probably become the majorities. However, I think this favors the ability to pick names because I mean, after being oppressed for so long, the least someone could be allowed to do is to pick their name, especially since the handmaids couldn't even use their biological names during Gilead.

The names in this thing were awesome. I liked how Offred not only means that the commander's name was Fred, but also references the red color of the handmaid's dresses. When the Commander takes Offred to the jezebels, she gets to change clothes, and take the "red" "Off". This symbolizes a return, sort of, to her old life. Because she is not really Offred, she has a normal name, just as Ofwarren is really Janine. The same thing happens when she goes to Nick. She gets to remove her new life for a while, and return to what she used to be able to do with Luke. The way that Atwood works subtle things like that is really interesting.

On a totally different note, what were the significance of the greetings said between the handmaids? I didn't recognize them, hopefully someone can help me out with how that connects to the religious aspect of Gilead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boom^boom

The names in this thing were awesome. I liked how Offred not only means that the commander's name was Fred, but also references the red color of the handmaid's dresses. When the Commander takes Offred to the jezebels, she gets to change clothes, and take the "red" "Off". This symbolizes a return, sort of, to her old life. Because she is not really Offred, she has a normal name, just as Ofwarren is really Janine. The same thing happens when she goes to Nick. She gets to remove her new life for a while, and return to what she used to be able to do with Luke. The way that Atwood works subtle things like that is really interesting.

---

I agree with this quote, and going off that, I thought the color symbolism was very appropriate for this novel. The Handmaids' red dresses reminded me of Hester Prynne's Scarlet Letter "A"; it draws attention to both of these women's sexual status. Atwood did say that Gilead was intentionally similar to the days of the Puritans and their religious intolerance. The red also symbolizes birth and blood. The wives' blue clothes symbolizes their sadness and frustration that they can't have kids, and the commanders' black items symbolize the power and (in Fred the Commander's case) evil for placing women in such an inferior place.

I found it interesting how the guardmen are called Angels. Yes, the guards are protecting the women, but they're also forcing them to stay and give away their futures to be handmaids. Angels are supposed to help people and be in heaven, but the women can't even talk to the Angels or anything. Gilead is definitely not heaven...more like the opposite. :devil:

A really sad part of this novel is when Offred is singing Amazing Grace with the messed up lyrics (54). If there is one word that doesn't describe Offred, it's definitely the word "free". It's sad how the Aunts teach that women have to "walk along the same street, in red pairs" (24) with no freedom whatsoever just so men won't "shout obscenities" (24) at them. The women of Gilead are brainwashed to believe that they are free. So Offred is free of being free, which actually means being a servant for life.

1. Since the form of government in The Handmaid's Tale is a theocracy, religion (Bible) based, shouldn't access to the Bible be easier? Not being "kept locked up, the way people once kept tea locked up" (87)

2. After Offred and Ofglen see the old church they "turn our [Offred and Ofglen] backs on the church and there is the thing we've in truth come to see: the Wall" (31) Is the presence of the Wall being right in front of the church a symbol or a message that the Gildean government has in mind?
I was thinking that it could be like those saying, "die in front of god", thats why it is in front of the church. I am not sure about it.

The wall, to me is positioned directly accross from the church to show the contrast between the superficial nature of Gilead, and the true fuel of Christianity: sacrifice. Christianity was born out of a public execution. The wall symbolizes the crucifixion of Christ, with the Gileadean government (i.e. Eyes, Guardians, etc.) symbolizing the Romans. Gilead, in its attempt to relinquish those who would oppose it, has unintentionally created a revolution, once again similarly to the way that Jesus was silenced on the cross. Those who die on the wall become martyrs, and represent the sacrifice that Jesus made.

"So, the main question is, why are the religious illusions used ironically. Well, I believe it is to show that the goal is deceptive for no one is healed nor does anyone seem to be paid for the sacrifice. The is a perfect element to demonstrate a dystopia and perhaps that's why Atwood used the allusions in this manner." (hp4ever)

I think that Atwood used irony to contribute to the dystopian feel of the novel, and it also helps Atwood emphasize her point that "utopian" societies always fail. It's ironic that Gilead, a society supposedly based so much on religion, has a serious lack of religion. Nobody really talks about going to church, and the Aunts and commanders twist the words of the Bible to tell the handmaids that the only thing they are good for is their fertility. If a woman isn't fertile, she's up the creek. Only men are allowed to read the Bible (or anything at all) to keep women oppressed. In a way Gilead is like the Puritan society because the Gileadeans are willing to kill people "in the name of God".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hp 4ever!

Throughout our English course over the year, we've examine the aspect are often used to demonstrate a certain aspect of a character/characters (e.g. see my post on Nathan Price in The Poisonwood Bible). The same seems to true for Handmaid's Tale, except the religious aspect of the society is to demonstrate a common element in dsytopian novels: a deceptive societal goal. Firstly, let's start off by examining the name of the society, which is Gilead. Gilead is a religious reference to the Bible and it describes an area that was a peaceful and healing area. Yet, in reality, Gilead in the novel is the extreme opposite for the women. This is demonstrated by Offred's pain due to her new life: "I want her back. I want everything back, the way it was" (Atwood 122). Offred is filled with despair for her child and her husband are both far waay from her. She claims that "[t]here's nobody [she] can love, all the peoople [she] could love are dead or elsewhere" (103). This seems to quite a healing society huh? (being quite sarcastic there). Also, the concept of peace in this society is laughable for there is wall full of hangings! Thus, it can be concluded that this biblical allusion is used in an ironic sense.
Yet, it seems the majority of the allusions are used in an ironic sense. The Book of Job is another one for it is primarily about Job being tested by having Satan taking things away from him and Job not blaming God at all. Although this is taught to the society members to be willing to sacrifice everything for God but even those in power don't follow this and they make the Handmaids sacrifice all of their positions. This is seen by the existance of the black market (the Wives get Cigarettes and the Commanders get Vogue).
So, the main question is, why are the religious illusions used ironically. Well, I believe it is to show that the goal is deceptive for no one is healed nor does anyone seem to be paid for the sacrifice. The is a perfect element to demonstrate a dystopia and perhaps that's why Atwood used the allusions in this manner.

Closing thought: "Bible is kept locked up" (87) in this society: it's the source of truth. Therefore, the truth is hidden from the eyes of those that are powerless to be able to use the powerful tool of religion to justify their sinful desire for power.

---

The Irony may also be showing how some people think they are doing the right thing by doing this to the handmaid's. Of course there are people who don't truly car about religion, but there are still those that offred is afraid might, "be a real believer... I can't take the risk" (Atwood 19). Atwood may be warning people; following something or someone blindly can have great consequences, as seen in the rule of Gilead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sal7861

1. Since the form of government in The Handmaid's Tale is a theocracy, religion (Bible) based, shouldn't access to the Bible be easier? Not being "kept locked up, the way people once kept tea locked up" (87)

2. After Offred and Ofglen see the old church they "turn our [Offred and Ofglen] backs on the church and there is the thing we've in truth come to see: the Wall" (31) Is the presence of the Wall being right in front of the church a symbol or a message that the Gildean government has in mind?
I was thinking that it could be like those saying, "die in front of god", thats why it is in front of the church. I am not sure about it.

---

The Gileadan government is not a true theocracy. This is what separates Gilead from the Puritans; the Gileadeans are a vindictive, power-hungry government raised in depotism instead of piety. They keep the bible locked away to keep their subjects to keep them from learning the way, similar to the way that the Southern plantation owners kept their slaves from reading. Reading gives knowledge, and knowledge gives power, which is exactly what the Gileadeans want to prevent.

1. Why is there still football in Gilead? Who decided that football, a horribly violent sport that does very little good for one's physical/mental health, was ok, while things like reading and scrabble weren't?

2. What is the significance of the aunt's names? Offred references Aunt Lydia about 4349869583444309 times, which makes me wonder if it has some sort of connotation that I missed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sal7861

1. Since the form of government in The Handmaid's Tale is a theocracy, religion (Bible) based, shouldn't access to the Bible be easier? Not being "kept locked up, the way people once kept tea locked up" (87)

2. After Offred and Ofglen see the old church they "turn our [Offred and Ofglen] backs on the church and there is the thing we've in truth come to see: the Wall" (31) Is the presence of the Wall being right in front of the church a symbol or a message that the Gildean government has in mind?
I was thinking that it could be like those saying, "die in front of god", thats why it is in front of the church. I am not sure about it.

---

Answering #2, I think that the placement of the wall is a message. It shows the religious irony of this novel because religion is something that's supposed to unite people, not divide them, and the Gileadean government uses God (symbolized by the Eyes, Angels, and Guardians) to control by means of fear. Atwood shows the duality in Gilead by putting the wall across from the Church. The Gileadean government tells its inhabitants to praise and cherish God, but at the same time, they tell people that going against the government (God) will send them to the grave or colonies, good old human sacrifice. The placement of the wall shows how messed up Gilead really is.

1. Since the form of government in The Handmaid's Tale is a theocracy, religion (Bible) based, shouldn't access to the Bible be easier? Not being "kept locked up, the way people once kept tea locked up" (87)


Essentially this is how the society "should" work. I believe Atwood is clearly demonstrating how in this society everything seems pretty backwards. The fact that they (the men) lock up the bible shows that they don't really want the wome to be truely pious. Instead it seems that this government is using religion as an excuse to keep its' people, especially women, in line. By not having a wide spread of people know the Bible, there will be no new interpretations or counter ideas that the government will have to deal with. If this society was actually based off God, not only would the bible be there for anyone to read, the churches would not be closed, and the bible would not have been changed to fit the government's will.

I found some more religious references in The Handmaids Tale. The servants in the house that Offred lives in are called “Marthas”. This is a religious reference to Martha, sister of Mary and Lazarus in the New Testament. She was a friend and follower of Jesus, and her reputation was one of working hard managing her brothers home. Her joy was to welcome others into her home- she had the gift of hospitality.

The name “Handmaid” also refers to the Old Testament. A reference to this can be found in the epigraph:
“And when Rachel saw that she bare Jacob no children, Rachel envied her sister, and said unto jacob, Give me Children, or else I die......And she said, Behold my maid Bilhah, go in unto her; and she shall bear upon my knees, that I may also have children by her”.

In this passage we see that Rachel insists that her husband Jacob bed his handmaid because Rachel is unable to conceive a child. This passage is what Gilead uses to justify its actions by forcing women into being handmaids. Gilead uses this biblical scene in a twisted way, simply as a political maneuver to make the citizens of Gilead believe that they are doing the right thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sal7861

1. Since the form of government in The Handmaid's Tale is a theocracy, religion (Bible) based, shouldn't access to the Bible be easier? Not being "kept locked up, the way people once kept tea locked up" (87)

---

The so called "theocracy" is a hypocrisy. The Commanders claim to be so holy, but in such a restricted society they are the ones doing the worst acts, such as visiting a brothel like, "Jezebel's" (Atwood 249). The Commanders want to have control and do what they want. They use the Bible in a very cautious way, only using select passages. The society was taken with the word of God so it has to be maintained in the same way. If someone who didn't support the theocracy were to have access to the Bible the whole government could have been overthrown alot sooner.

The fact that Gilead uses passages from the bible, picking and choosing only the ones that will help promote the ideology of the regime, can be seen in many parts of the novel. The greeting ritual between the Handmaids consist of set phrases such as “may the lord be open” (29). This not only shows biblical allusion, but also shows how the women are forced to act, being compelled to say phrases of religious nature. It also represent the passivity of their situation. They are not allowed to lead personal conversations and express their own opinions; they have to follow exactly what the leaders of Gilead want them to be. This can be seen in a passage when Offred and Ofglen go on their daily walk:
“The war is going well, I hear,” she says,
“praise be” I reply,
“we’ve been sent good weather.”
“Which I receive with joy” (19)

The names in this thing were awesome. I liked how Offred not only means that the commander's name was Fred, but also references the red color of the handmaid's dresses. When the Commander takes Offred to the jezebels, she gets to change clothes, and take the "red" "Off". This symbolizes a return, sort of, to her old life. Because she is not really Offred, she has a normal name, just as Ofwarren is really Janine. The same thing happens when she goes to Nick. She gets to remove her new life for a while, and return to what she used to be able to do with Luke. The way that Atwood works subtle things like that is really interesting.

On a totally different note, what were the significance of the greetings said between the handmaids? I didn't recognize them, hopefully someone can help me out with how that connects to the religious aspect of Gilead.


The names of the handmaid's show whom they "belong to". For example in the historical notes we learn that there are, "two whose names incorporate the element Fred." (306) The narrator's name means she is "Of Fred". Similarly Ofwarren, belongs to man named Warren. This is important to the novel because it further helps the women in the society loose their identity. A name helps say who you are and now that they are restricted Offred does not know how to find people she knows and not loose herself. This re-naming seems like a rather smart idea by the new theocracy so that opposition cannot form too strong.

1) How come nobody cares about seeing a Martha's face, but everyone cares about seeing a Handmaid's face?


2) What's the significance of Offred comparing everything in the Gileadean city to a museum?

What is the purpose of the prologue? To me it almost felt like it was saying it is ok to take drastic action in drastic times, but the whole book is about showing how awful the consequences of such actions can be. Is this supposed to be irony, or is there some message that was lost upon me. Also I like how it was almost a flowing story, but in truth it is three different passages. Is there any signifigance to this? It it showing that this is a universal idea?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Generic_Idea

The so called "theocracy" is a hypocrisy. The Commanders claim to be so holy, but in such a restricted society they are the ones doing the worst acts, such as visiting a brothel like, "Jezebel's" (Atwood 249). The Commanders want to have control and do what they want. They use the Bible in a very cautious way, only using select passages. The society was taken with the word of God so it has to be maintained in the same way. If someone who didn't support the theocracy were to have access to the Bible the whole government could have been overthrown alot sooner.

---

The passages that the commander reads the wives are only selected because they support the ideology of the republic of Gilead. The passages are used to brainwash the women into thinking that they are doing what is good for society. What’s also significant is that Offred knows that the passages read to her are not the original ones form the bible, but she cannot look up the original words because reading is prohibited and the bible is locked away. The fact that it is locked away shows importance in that it is done to prevent the people from forming their own opinions about the way things should be.
“who knows what we'd make of it, if we ever got our hands on it? We can be read to from it, by him, but we cannot read.” (94)

When Offred is observing the room she has been moved to for being a handmaid she states, "There's a hard little cushion on it, with a petit cover: Faith." (57) Why is it important that Offred finds this word whcich has a religious connaotation as opposed to any other word?

Why does Atwood change words in religious text such as "ceremony" and "prayvaganzas" in the Gilead regime?

Why is the wife present in the Ceremony? Is there a precedent for this in the Bible? Why would they cause the wives this much heart ache? The Commander could just go have the ceremony and the wife could stay in the livingroom or something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rachmaninoff

1) How come nobody cares about seeing a Martha's face, but everyone cares about seeing a Handmaid's face?


2) What's the significance of Offred comparing everything in the Gileadean city to a museum?

---

1)In the Gileadean society, the handmaid's are hidden to avoid them from showing off their bodies. The government thinks that if the handmaids do not have any freedom, they won't have any temptations. Their only job is to produce offspring. Showing off any part of their body is dangerous because it suggests that they do not take their duty seriously. The Marthas are not capable of having kids. Therefor they have more freedom because any temptations won't matter to them.

2)I don't believe Offred compares everything to a museum, but the church was turned into one by the Gileadean government- "The church is a small one, one of the first erected here, hundreds of years ago. It isn't used anymore, except as a museum. Inside it you can see paintings of women in long somber dresses, their hair covered by white caps..." (41). It's interesting that the government turned the church into a museum. It shows how the government changes all aspects of religion to fit their goals. The museum also sensors what it shows. The paintings of women are dressed exactly like the handmaids- long dresses with white wings. This shows how much of an influence the government has on every aspect of society, even religion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by heath24

When Offred is observing the room she has been moved to for being a handmaid she states, "There's a hard little cushion on it, with a petit cover: Faith." (57) Why is it important that Offred finds this word whcich has a religious connaotation as opposed to any other word?

---

The word "faith" is one that describes Offred's view of her situation. During the time she is a handmaid she has hope that things will go back to normal. For example, she likes to think of where her husband Luke may be. She comes up with 3 different scenarios he could be in. She concludes by saying, "The things I believe can't all be true, though one of them must be. But I believe in all of them, all three versions of Luke, at one and the same time...Whatever the truth is, I will be ready for it" (135). This shows that she knows her husband is somewhere. The pillow serves as a way to symbolize Offred's hope for her old life. Though the government may think this pillow means faith to become pregnant, Offred still holds onto the original meaning of faith by continuing to believe things will be alright.

The wives are able to buy prayers at the Soul Scrolls store. Why is it important that the only prayers they can order are "for health, wealth, a death, a birth, a sin" (216)? (in chapter 27)

Offred at one time asks "Which of us is it worse for, [Serena Joy] or me?" (123 - right before chapter 17) Both wives and handmaid's have to give up a lot in this society, but is one situation worse than the other?

In the Handmaid's Tale, since the Church and State are not separated, to what extent are the outcomes different from our world?

In the Handmaid's Tale, to what extent does Atwood use religious references so that the readers could understand the novel?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asdf99

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.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.

---

Not only does religion justify what the government is doing but it also helps the readers better understand the situation. It allows the reader engage more and more in their religion so that if this kind of situation ever happened to them, they can recognize when they are being told the truth and when the truth is twisted. The fact that the Gileadean government is hypocritical is similar to the Puritans in the Crucible. Both the governments were on the same page, except one of them knows that they are hypocritical and the other does not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Generic_Idea

Why is the wife present in the Ceremony? Is there a precedent for this in the Bible? Why would they cause the wives this much heart ache? The Commander could just go have the ceremony and the wife could stay in the livingroom or something.

---

Well, one of the epigraphs from the beginning of the book was from Genesis 30:1-3. "And [Rachel] said, Behold my maid Bilhah, go in unto her; and she shall bear upon my knees, that I may also have children by her." I think Rachel says that Jacob should use my maid and have kids with her, which will be mine. But when you both perform the ceremony, "she shall bear upon my knees." It seems like this is where the Gileadean government got the idea from. To the Gileadean government, the wives are supposed to be happy. But only the wives know that the ceremony is heart-aching and they are probably not allowed to say anything even though they are from the highest caste.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by taztara158

Offred at one time asks "Which of us is it worse for, [Serena Joy] or me?" (123 - right before chapter 17) Both wives and handmaid's have to give up a lot in this society, but is one situation worse than the other?

---

The most important aspect in the Gileadean society is power: the control of it, the use of it to subjugate individuals, the total relinquishment of it, etc. All women, just as you pointed out, have to give up their previous "power" over their male counterparts regardless of their social status. The quote you provided is one that Offred reflects upon right after the first Ceremony that is described in the novel. While it is awful for Serena Joy to have to watch her husband have sex with another woman, it is equally as difficult for Offred to take part in the Ceremony. However, to answer your question, I believe that Offred's situation is worse than that of Serena Joy, mainly regarding the aspect of power. Although both women give up their power in the male-dominated society, Serena Joy still has the power in her household to order Offred and the Marthas around. She is still seen as the "Mistress" of the household and while lacking power over men, she has significant power over other women because of her social status. I believe this power is something that helps keeps the Wives sane, while the Handmaids are always a little over the edge. Wives are allowed to knit and garden while Handmaids are allowed to sit and have sex, which is a reflection of their social status. For example when Offred is exploring her room she tells the reader that "I had a lot of time to pass" (Atwood 50), and the inference is that she had nothing to do with all this time. A little power in this sort of situation is better than none.