I have a piece of coursework to write on 1984, I have chossen to write about the portrayal of women and their views. It's driving me crazy, can anyone help?!?!? Please!!! :flare:
Printable View
I have a piece of coursework to write on 1984, I have chossen to write about the portrayal of women and their views. It's driving me crazy, can anyone help?!?!? Please!!! :flare:
Im afraidf I can only help you with the handmaids tale if you need that :D
That would be great Night shade!!!
What is it that you need help with exactly, derangedangel18? If you are more specific, maybe some members can offer their views on the issues you are stuck with.
ok Well lets see women in Ht there are 4 types as well as the Aunts. all are colour defined. Oh and dont forget the Unwomen. lets see Moira is the modern post feminist woman. whats her name the narrators mother was a feminist. Women are betrayed as secondry to men always.umm you know what Im going to need less vauge outline of what exactly you need. :nod:
I'm looking more for specific areas of the novel now which show how women are portrayed and their views on the society. I have discovered that offred doesnt really express an opinion of her own, she just comments other peoples opinions. I'm also looking at sexual relationships in some depth and how they compare with 1984. Also psychological manipulation, physical control, fear, and the control of sexual pleasure. The control of information e.g news and the control of language e.g limits individuals ideas and capability of expression. Is something i would like to add to my essay so any links to passages or quotes which are relevant to these topics would be helpful for either novel.
Today I found that the red-armed prole woman in 1984 could represent a prime example of reproductive virility. Does any one think it would be a good idea to link this to the colour of the handmaids dresses in HMT?
Can anyone help me out with some quotes and/or passages to link these points to the novels?
1. restriction of language and personal expression
2.use of propaganda to rule
3.ambiguous ruller/ who is Big Brother
4.missinformation and lack of it
5.restriction of sex except for "breeding purposes"(The Handmaid's Tale)
6.both prophetic novels, based on past historical events
7. Both winston and offred use form of mental escapism
Number one is the bit about the faith cushion.
2 is the bit in the chapter before the cermoney where they listen to the news also most everything the Aunts say.
5 hummm the bit about the 2 young guards where she says somthing along the lines of they now only have each other and that is a sin or somthing.
I definitely think you could color symbolism to relate the role of the women in the Handmaid's Tale. Specifically, the red garment of the Handmaid's and the blue garment of the Commanders' Wives.
Let's start off with red (source=The Dictionary of Symbolism: "In the Christian artistic tradition,...women of easy virtue wore red" (Biedermann 287). Thus, in relation to the Handmaids, this could represent the outlook of the Wives of the Handmaids. They seemed to think that women such as Offred had loose morals perhaps because they were jealous of them. Also, red is a symbol of blood and thus it can be seen as a representation of the fertility of the Handmaids. The lack of red for the other women (e.g. Marthas) could signify the lack of their fertility. In addition, the women in this society seem to gain attention as soon as they reproduce. Thus, red could symbolize the envy and anger directed towards the handmaids when they reproduce. Also, a great quote to support the role of women being childbearers is seen on page 221 of The Handmaid's Tale: "Notwithstanding she shall be saved by childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety" (originally from 1st Timothy: 2).
However, blue (garment color what the Wives wear) is used quite ironically in my opinion. "Blue, the symbol of the truth and the eternity of God (for what is true is eternal), will always remain the symbol of human immortality: (Biedermann 44). This obviously not the case for the Wives for they gossip, get things from the blackmarket, encourage the Handmaid's to "wrongfully" carry out relationships with other men to produce, and they further their husband's careers through soul scrolls (pg. 167).
:yawnb:
Censorship:
"They only show us victories, never defeats. Who wants bad news?" (Atwood 83).
Forbidden words:
"I almost gasp: he's said a forbidden word. Sterile. There is no such thing as a sterile man anymore,, not officially. There are only women who are fruitful and women who are barren, that's the law" (61).
Use depictions rather than words since words are forbidden:
"The two others have purple placards hung around their necks: Gender Treachery" (43).
"I take the tokens from Rita's outstretched hand. They have pictures on them, of the things they can be exchanged for: twelve eggs, a piece of chees" (11). ***This is significant because it shows that they cannot even talk to get the groceries. They just show a picture of the item and then they get it.
Silence:
"How I used to despise such talk. Now I long for it. At least it was talk. An exchange, of sorts" (11).
"We learned to whisper almost without sound. In the semidarkness we could stretch out our arms, when the Aunts weren't looking, and touch each toehr's hands across space. We learned to lipread" (4).
Semaphores:
FIND THIS QUOTE: When Nick uses his hat as a signal for Offred to indicate whether or not she has to meet the Commander. The signal "5" that Moira gives to Offred indicating to meet in the washroom in 5 minutes.
**Restricting the language of the people is restricting how much of their identity can be expressed because language is a key aspect in expressing your individuality. Yet, since it is regulated, it will be easier to control the people for without language, certain inhabitants of Gilead are left w/ little to no identity, and those without an identity are easier to control for the government can install one for them. (e.g. Offred loses majority of identity when she sees her little girl happy without her. Towards the end, she begins to accept Gilead as her home whereas earlier she wanted to escape and find her family).
Also, Scrabble games demonstrate the power of language.
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.
One of my favorite poems that I've ever read is "Ladies in Gentleman in Outer Space" by Ron Padgett. It's such an intriguing piece for it describes the inevitability of change. Also, it strongly reminded me a of a renoun dystopian piece: The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood. Both the poem and the novel have the protagonist commenting on the fact that life changes so quickly. This is seen in the poem when the protagonist says that everything "changes...so quickly it literally surpasses [his/her] belief" (lines 2-6). Similarily, in Handmaid's Tale, there is a moment in where Offred contemplates on how her life had changed so quickly. Thus, perhaps the message in both of these works concerning change is to "butter and serve" (16). I belief this means to "coat" yourself with knowledge (like how butter coats the vegetables) so you'll be prepared for the change and so your mind will not be clouded with disbelief due to the astounding change (brace ourselves for change).
Yet, it all depends on your interpretation!
Butter and Serve to me almost agrees with the dystopias. I see it as more of a "Go along with whatever comes at you and you will be ok, so if you go along with whatever comes at you, it suggests that you do not attempt to resist the oppression that is coming from the dystopia. In this sense, "Ladies and Gentlemen" would be perhaps an ironic look at what most people within a society would do if they experienced oppression.
The slogan for this society has been the most interesting aspect in this novel to me because it is a form of doublethink. To clarify, the slogan that I'm refering to is:
"WAR IS PEACE(Orwell 16).
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH"
It is a form of doublethink as seen by the following passage: "[Smith's] mind slid away into the labyrinthine world of doublethink....[T]o hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them" (35).
The different verses of the slogan are quite contradictory as seen by the first one: war is peace (normally one associates the act of war with violance). The act of doublethink benefits the society by creating confusion in the mind of those engaging in it as we discussed in class. Yet, there are other benefits as well as seen with this slogan.
Let's start off with the first verse: war is peace. The government wants its members to believe in this statement because if the members of the society are constantly at war, then the government is able to benefit in 2 ways: 1). The members of the society are able to channel their anger for the government towards the enemy nations. As a result the people will be calmer(this shows how the government controls their emotions as seen in Handmaid's Tale). In addition, the members of society are kept busy so that they won't have time to plot against the government. All of these aspects maintain peace in between the government and its people.
The second verse: freedom is slavery. The freedom of the people would result in the slavery of the government becuase the people would hold the power to command the government to do certain things making the government a subordinate, powerless slave. Thus, the government strongly limits the freedom of the people to make the people the slaves (this allows for the gov. to have an omnipotent status).
Lastly, ignorace is strength is quite crucial for the government becuase the ignorance of the people will result in the people's lack of knowing things that can be used against the government (e.g. the photograph Smith had).
The result of the action reflects the what the government desires (war=result of peace b/w the gov. and its ppl. This reflects the government's desire to maintain total control including the control of the ppl.'s emotions....freedom=result of slavery for gov. so the gov. takes it away since it desires to be in control). So it seems so far the slogan reflects that (on a large-scale basis) the government's focus is more oriented towards the result rather than the act (care about the fact that the war would result in peace rather than what enemy nation war is ag. or what weapons). This could ultimately result in the downfall of the government becuase let's say for instance that the nation was fighting against Urasia and lost. Well, firstly the government would have new problems becuase it would be quite difficult to remove any evidence of Big Brother saying that Urasia would lose. This would be obvious and concrete proof that Big Brother isn't all that knowledgeable or powerful since his crummy army lost to Urasia.
I think that the Party Slogans are not so much as tools to manipulate the people as they are actual truths into how they keep the social hierarchy of the proles, outer party, and inner party, or low, middle, and high classes. The Book that Emannuel Goldstien (aka. O'Brian) wrote actually explains in great detail of the main intentions of the party on page 184.
Leandra Barnes: Class Discussion Substituton
There were several aspects within the section of Part Two: I-V that intriqued me. One of which was my suprise concerning the "dark haired girl" aka Julia. I believe her character as a whole is an accuate representation of majority of the Party people within 1984. Although she is young and overly involved in organizations such as the "Junior Anti-Sex League" and the junior spies, she still completely loathes the society and only rebels against it in secret. "She only questioned the teachings of the Party when they in some way touched upon her own life," suggesting that she would in no ways be interested in changing parts of the society that did not directly affect her. Because of this, i beleive her to be a coward, like all other members of the Party. She disagrees with its principles, but merely puts on a front while she secretly indulges in her desires. Her cowardice is also evident while she is talking about her first love affair:
"She had her first love affair when she was sixteen, with a Party member of sixty who later committed suicide to avoid arreest. 'And a good job too,' said Julia. 'Otherwise they'd have had my name out of him when he confessed'" (131)
Julia was completely indifferent when the man that she supposedly "loved," just as she had claimed to "love" Winston in her secret note (108). She was only looking out for herself, signifying that in a society such as this, even the profound word "love" can become corrupted. Julia's character as a whole is also an example of how it would be possible for such a horrible society to come about in the first place. Her character embodies numbness and indifference. While Winston tried to explain to her the wrongs that the Record Department committed, "she did not feel the abyss opening beneath her at the thought of lies becoming truths" (154). She simply did not care because it had nothing to do with her. Julia even went as far as to say that she would rather take risks "only for something worth while, not for bits of old newspaper" (155). Frankly, those bits of old newspaper represented evidence and truth, meaning that Julia has no value for truth, prefering to risk her life several times over for sex. Because Julia, like the others in the sciety, are numb and indifferent, they make no effort to rebel or change things, merely continuing the cycle. In order to lead a revolution, you must be willing to sacrifice yourself for a better future, for people that you will have never met or known. However, in a society in which people, are "no interested in the next generation" and only able to focus on themselves, such an overthrowing of power will never occur (156). The majority is unable to understand, to grasp the concept, and because of that, "the Party [is able to impose] itself most sucessflly on people incapable of understanding it" (156).
Alot of other things I found include the following:
The reoccurence of themonth of May reminded me of May Day in HMT. Spring signifies birth and love, representing its purpose in both novels.
Role of Language: Julia uses language as a way of rebeling against the Party. "Julia...seemed unable to mentin the Party, and especially the Inner Party, without using the kind of words tha you saw chalked up in dripping alleyways...It was merely one symptom of her revolt against the Party and all its ways" (122). This parallels to Offred's ability to use words in Scrabble as a way of rebeling against what is forbidden.
Winston's fear of rats out "of all horrors in the world" could be paralleled to a fear of a person who is a rat, in the sense that they "rat" other people out (144).
Parallel to GOST: But you could not have pure love or pure lust nowadays. No emotion was pure, because everything was mixed up with fear and hatred. Their embrace had been a battle, the climax a victory. It was a blow struck against the Party. It was a political act" (126).
When Winston began meeting with Julia on a regular basis, he felt that "the process of life had ceased to be intolerable [and] had no longer any impuse to make faces at the telescreen or shout curses at the top of his voice" just like Offred di when she began seeing Nick (150). Also, "he did not touch the diary during those days," his means of rebellion, just like Offred refused to spy on the Commander for May Day due to her obsession with Nick (111).
oh yah....and Syme DID vanish :P
hi can anyone please help me out in this title.i really dont know how to start it off and i need some help with some quotes refering to the characters searching for love and images associated. can someone please help me out thank you
I HAD WRITTEN THIS POST LAST WEEK on Saturday on paper! Another post I had written was basically described on pg. 164 (about how the society was so hypocritical b/c Winston worked in the Ministry of Truth yet he was falsifying all of the information to uphold the omnipotent status of Big Brother.
***WARNING: SPOILER! Don't read until have finished the book!
Also, the structure of the slogan resembled that of a pyramid. Perhaps I'm reading too much into it, yet it seems that even the pyramid-like structure reflects even how it's related to the society's hierarchial structure (which resembles a pyramid in the sense that the base of the pyramid is quite larger than the top in terms of population, since the proles make up ~85% of the population if I remember correctly. The Outer Party members make are the second largest....the inner party members make up the top of the pryamid w/ the least amount of the overall population being in this party. In relation, the last line of the slogan is the longest of the lines.....then freedom is slavery is the second longest. War is peace is the shortest....this could be just a coincidence, but the war is peace aspect has to do w/ the Ministry of Peace. Those working at the ministry could be part of the Inner party, however that is not known for certain. Yet, O'Brien reveals to Winston that the wars are a tactic to rid the society in the book that he wrote and gave to Winston. Therefore, it is probable that either he has once worked for the Ministry of Peace or that his Inner Party friends work there. Once again though, this is not certain. This slogan works in the favor of the Inner Party members as I've discussed above. Freedom is slavery seems to describes the outer party members like wilson because they have limited freedom in comparison to both the inner party members (who get to have 30 mins. of privacy by turning off the telescreen) and the proles (who have access to the past memories...and other forbidden items). These members are enslaved due to their lack of freedom. Lastly, ignorance is strength describes the proles for they are ignorant of the power they possess as Winston reveals (if there is hope, it lies in the proles. However, the proles don't realize the power of numbers and the fact that they could overthrow the gov. since they consist of more than half of the pop). Both the inner party members and the outer party members are not ignorant becuase as seen w/ O'Brien and Winston's knowledge of the oppression imposed on the people. Now, why would these two structures coincide? In fact, the Ministries that enforce each aspect of the slogan (which I had noticed b4 the book had revealed to us that the ministry of love does quite the opposite of "loving" through torturing people=doublethink!). The ministries also have a pyramidal structure too!! Hmm..so many similarities in the structure being pryamidal could possibly be a method to symbolically demonstrate the stratified power and wealth at the top. However, I believe it is used to exemplify the common dystopian element of the hierarchy based society which is also seen in The Handmaid's Tale.
war is peace
freedom is slavery
ignorance is strength
WARNING SPOILER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I thought it was really interesting when Winston discovered what was really meant by a place without darkness: “In this place, he knew instinctively, the lights would never be turned out. It was a place with no darkness: he saw now why O’Brian had seemed to recognize the allusion” (Orwell 229). This passage refers to the prison that Winston is kept in. At first when they had mentioned a place without darkness, I had thought that it meant a place where they could be open to talk about things and to not be monitored by the Party. Instead as Winston discovers it is a place where everything comes out and he can not hide behind the darkness any longer. As seen in the Handmaid’s Tale night and darkness often provide a sort of cover for the character to disobey all the rules and be free to think how he/she wants to think. Now that Winston is stuck in the prison he is know longer free and will never again no the feeling of hiding something from the Party.
Another interesting passage was when Winston was talking with Parsons who had also recently been arrested for speaking badly of Big Brother in his sleep. Parsons tells Winston, “Do you know what I am going to say to them when I go up before the tribunal ‘Thank you’ I’m going to say, ‘thank you for saving me before it was too late’” (Orwell 233). This passage shows the kind of mentality that the Party imposes on its people. It breaks them down until they have no thought in their mind except for their love of Big Brother. This foreshadows the reason why they keep Winston alive for so long. I find it amazing how they can get people to feel guilty about saying something in their sleep, but the people who actually commit true crimes get treated a lot better. Then again that is how the society works political crime or crimes towards the Party are thought worse than normal ones.
Also what was really weird was the relationship between Winston and O’Brian during Winston’s imprisonment. Winston described O’Brian as “the tormenter, he was the protector, he was the inquisitor, he was the friend” (Orwell 244). Even though, O’Brian spends his time torturing Winston, Winston still finds some kind of comfort from him. When Winston believed that O’Brian was a part of some kind of resistance, O’Brian became very important to him, because he finally found hope that there were others who thought bad about the Party and were actually willing to do something about it. However, when Winston realizes that O’Brian was not on his side he still hung on to O’Brian, because he still wanted to believe there was some hope left. This is what makes it so sad, when Winston finally gives his hope and mind up and finds love for Big Brother.
One passage that was really creepy was on page 256 when O’Brian was talking to Winston and tells him, “Never again will you be capable of ordinary human feeling. Everything will be dead inside you. Never again will you be capable of love, or friendship, or joy of living, or laughter, or curiosity, or courage, or integrity. You will be hollow. We shall squeeze you empty, and then we shall fill you with ourselves” (Orwell 256). This passage shows an important concept of the governments in dystopian societies. As long as the rulers ensure that its people have no way of thinking their own thoughts or feeling their own feelings. Feelings are an important part of why rebellions and revolutions occur. They are a huge part of why people rise up against their rulers it gives them a system of right and wrong and makes them angry when they feel as though they are not being treated fairly. By depriving the people of their own feelings they become mindless drones and blind followers of the Party, which is exactly what the Party wants. This is shown finally at the end of the novel when O’Brian’s threat comes true for Winston and all he feels is what the Party wants him to feel.
**I completely forgot about my previous posts about these dsytopian novels (of course there are some modifications know that I’ve finished the book :).
Here are some interesting things I’ve noticed in 1984:
On page 6, Winston discusses his room: “It was partly the unusual geography of the room that had suggested to him the thing he was now about to do” (Orwell 6). I never really thought about it before, however is the geography of the room a false security blanket for those trying to rebel? Is it a strategic ploy by the Party members to bring out the rebels such as Winston. If so, then this would explain the fact that they know the fears of the those that rebel as seen with the scene in room 101 where the rats were on the other side of the wall (e.g. Winston’s greatest fear). This is explained by the possibility that by bringing out the rebels, the Party members can scrutinize their every move to learn of their fears (the others are left alone which of course is both productive and ingenious).
In class today (which was a while back), we discussed the importance of the diary--specifically the fact that it could be symbol of hope that there actually will be a rebellion in Winston. However, is it really a symbol of hope for the future? Winston states that he was writing the diary “[f]or the future, for the unborn” (Orwell 7). However, through examining the assertion that “[w]ho controls the past…controls the future: who controls the present controls the past” (35), it seems to be that the Party is the future for they control the past (through memory swipes, limit on artifacts of past, since the only antiquary we knew turned out to be a member of the Thought Police) and they control the present (limited rights, privacy, and privileges for the subordinate classes). Thus, they must control the future according to the assertion (also it makes since because the control of the present is essentially control of the future b/c say the Party is dominant at 3:33 p.m. and 28 seconds…well, now that time has past so therefore they control the past at all times. The Party is still controlling due to the fact that the control the present…well, the present at this precise moment is the future in relation to the time 3:33 p.m. and 28 seconds. Therefore, they are always controlling).
In addition, we later find out when Winston is in Room 101 that “if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever” (267). Therefore, those of the future generation will not be able to see according to their own free will for there is a boot on their face “forever.” Therefore, the diary will be useless in the sense that the vision necessary to read it will not be available to those of the future since they are controlled.
The hope that Winston has though lies in the proles. Yet, “[u]ntil [the proles] become conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious” (70). Meaning, it is never going to happen as O’Brien points out on page 261. Once again, the concept of hope is a ruined cause.
Also, another interesting correlation the “place” where Winston and O’Brien meet, “in the place in where there is no darkness…[which was] the imagined future” (104). In this imagined future, Winston hopefully imagined the concept of rebellion occurring. However, towards the end, the reader learns that Winston in fact knew what the future held for him as he stated to O’Brien for it held his vaporization (“We are dead. Our only true life is in the future” (176)).
So, why would Winston do such things when he knew the outcome was going to be quite the opposite of what he hoped for?
Perhaps this is seen by Offred’s wise comment that “people will do anything rather than admit that their lives have no meaning. No use, that is. No plot” (Atwood 215).
:yawnb:
In class today (which was a while back), we discussed the importance of the diary--specifically the fact that it could be symbol of hope that there actually will be a rebellion in Winston. However, is it really a symbol of hope for the future? Winston states that he was writing the diary “[f]or the future, for the unborn” (Orwell 7). However, through examining the assertion that “[w]ho controls the past…controls the future: who controls the present controls the past” (35), it seems to be that the Party is the future for they control the past (through memory swipes, limit on artifacts of past, since the only antiquary we knew turned out to be a member of the Thought Police) and they control the present (limited rights, privacy, and privileges for the subordinate classes). Thus, they must control the future according to the assertion (also it makes since because the control of the present is essentially control of the future b/c say the Party is dominant at 3:33 p.m. and 28 seconds…well, now that time has past so therefore they control the past at all times. The Party is still controlling due to the fact that the control the present…well, the present at this precise moment is the future in relation to the time 3:33 p.m. and 28 seconds. Therefore, they are always controlling).
In addition, we later find out when Winston is in Room 101 that “if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever” (267). Therefore, those of the future generation will not be able to see according to their own free will for there is a boot on their face “forever.” Therefore, the diary will be useless in the sense that the vision necessary to read it will not be available to those of the future since they are controlled.
The hope that Winston has though lies in the proles. Yet, “[u]ntil [the proles] become conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious” (70). Meaning, it is never going to happen as O’Brien points out on page 261. Once again, the concept of hope is a ruined cause.
Also, another interesting correlation the “place” where Winston and O’Brien meet, “in the place in where there is no darkness…[which was] the imagined future” (104). In this imagined future, Winston hopefully imagined the concept of rebellion occurring. However, towards the end, the reader learns that Winston in fact knew what the future held for him as he stated to O’Brien for it held his vaporization (“We are dead. Our only true life is in the future” (176)).
So, why would Winston do such things when he knew the outcome was going to be quite the opposite of what he hoped for?
Perhaps this is seen by Offred’s wise comment that “people will do anything rather than admit that their lives have no meaning. No use, that is. No plot” (Atwood 215).
:yawnb:
This is probably a HUGE stretch but is O’Brien actually Goldstein? Was he allowed to remain in the society because he acted as Goldstein to stir up hatred against another person other than Big Brother? Goldstein did seem to have mysteriously escaped and disappeared (Orwell 11-12) just as O’Brien managed to get out of Room 101. O’Brien does discuss the fact that he can get his face changed: “We may be obliged to give him a new identity. His face, his movements, the shape of his hands, the color of his hair-even his voice would be different….Our surgeons can alter people beyond recognition. Sometimes it is necessary” (173). Also, when Winston first mentioned the book, he stated that “Goldstein was the author and which circulated clandestinely here and there. It was a book without a title” (13). Well, all of the things are true about the book that had no title being secretly handed around with the philosophy of Goldstein embellished within its pages. So, perhaps the author of the book could truly Goldstein, which is O’Brien along with some other people. Once again, I know it’s a stretch but it could be true since the bombings, the wars, etc. all seem to be fabricated. So, why not the true identity of Goldstein?
***My question is why did Oceania survive and not Gilead?
I think it’s due to the fact that the control of Oceania was ultimately more than Gilead due to their tactics of constant pain:“‘How does one man assert his power over another, Winston?’ [asked O’brien]. Winston thought. ‘By making him suffer,’ he said. ‘Exactly. By making him suffer….Power is in inflicting pain and humiliation” (266). In Gilead, the physical pain inflictions seemed to be quite low than those in Oceania, since those in Oceania had a special room dedicated into humiliating the victim and inflicting a substantial amount of physical pain on the victim. It is through these inflictions of pain that those in Oceania can get inside of you, which is the ultimate factor that leads in the victory of the Party unlike Gilead’s fate (since Gilead wasn’t really able to get inside of you marked by Offred’s thoughts and memories that were not changed at all unless it was by her command. This means she has power over her mind, but Winston didn’t as seen by the fact that he agreed that “2+2=5” (290). The influence of constant pain is also seen by Offred’s comment: “But who can remember pain, once it’s over? All that remains of it is a shadow, not it the mind even, in the flesh. Pain marks you, but too deep to see. Out of sight, out of mind” (Atwood 125). In Gilead, physical pain is not endured on a massive scale where it is in Oceania. Therefore, pain in those of Oceania is in sight, in mind, which leads to the Party’s prevalence. Through the strict control of the mind, the Party members are able to ensure their power will prevail for they are able to control the present and thus the past thus the future (refer to quote on page 35 in Orwell’s 1984 for the actual quote).
Hi there. I have been set an essay question by my teacher and i have to discuss the similarities and differences of the presentation of the theme of freedom in 1984 and the handmaids tale.
I would be grateful for anyone who could shed some light on this as i am stuck with where to even begin :(
Thanks guys :p
HELP!!!URGENT wiv comparison of dystopia in 1984 and The Handmaids Tale
Hi ppl i hav an essay q? -'hw do the novelists use the dystopian form to reflect the respective concerns of their societies?'
in the Handmaids tale by margaret atwood and 1984 by george orwell.
am stuk on what exactly to ryt so wud b highly grateful if sumone cud help...fankoo
or ne1 can email me at [email protected]
thanx again
How long does it have to be? And if you read Orwell's 1984 you'll know the answer to that quite easily. To write any sort of literature one must have prior knowledge to the subject, even if its only a minor glimpse. You could argue that Orwell was stating how Russia would end up if its Communist regime would continue, but that is why he wrote "Animal Farm."
I'm not familiar with the other novel, but from reading Orwell's works I do believe that he took Stalin's communist regime into mind and placed it into 1984. I'm not going to give you the outright answer because that isn't what analyzing literature is about, nor am I doing your homework.
Oceania survived because the book was written by a better writer, G. Orwell, then Gilead, by M. Atwood.
woah! i wasnt expectin u 2lol i jst askd for help...mailny stuk wiv jst how to start it realy..and thanx neways for the help
Just as Rob Fusion said, you should read up on how society is like during the time of writing. For the Handmaid's Tale, I suggest reading up on the Feminist Movements and the right wing politics.
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.:alien::flare::sick::bawling:
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 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