Image Courtesy of Hulu.
*** Note to readers: The passage I analyzed is included at the end of this post ***
Margaret Atwood’s 1985 novel The Handmaid’s Tale is a criticism of the real-world global subjugation of women and racial minority groups. Set in the Republic of Gilead, a totalitarian version of the United States, the story follows a woman named Offred and her experiences as a Handmaid for the ruling class. As one of the only fertile women remaining in the age of declining births, Offred is subject to monthly state-sanctioned rape by her owner, the Commander, in hopes that she will become pregnant. Old enough to remember her adult life before the rise of the current tyrannical regime, Offred regularly contrasts her memories of freedom with her current world which is coloured by oppression and fear. Through the story of a woman pinned in the confines of a dystopian patriarchy, Atwood excoriates the brutality and oppression faced by minority groups. In particular, the examination of Offred’s conversation with a doctor through a New Historicism lens allows for the emergence of Atwood’s revulsion towards discrimination and her consequent call-to-action for social justice.
Social activism in the United States and Canada in 1980s was not as vivid as it had been in the 1960s and 1970s. Some historicists claim that citizens were more interested in pursuing personal economic success following the end of the United States recession, while others claim that the general population had simply grown tired of protesting. Either way, support for various social campaigns like the Civil Rights Movement in America and Second-Wave Feminism began to diminish. As a result, Atwood’s criticism of various power injustices in her novel was very likely influenced by her personal opposition to the slowing of social progress in Canada and in the United States in the 1980s.
One passage in particular thoroughly demonstrates Atwood’s advocacy for justice. In chapter 10, Offred is taken to her obligatory monthly fertility checkup where her doctor offers to secretly have sex with her in order to help her increase her chance of getting pregnant. In this passage, the protagonist's internal commentary provokes the audience to reflect on the severe oppression of women and minority groups. At the start of the passage, Offred rejects the doctor’s offer in fear of getting caught and killed. However, she considers the requirements for prosecution and realizes that the crime is not easily punishable; she needs to be caught by two witnesses while performing the act. Here, Atwood highlights the improbability of receiving punishment for committing rape in order to criticize the judicial system in America and Canada for its inability to protect rape victims, as sexual assault cases have historically been overlooked by courts. Furthermore, Offred’s hesitation is enhanced by her fear of government spies. By describing Offred’s paranoia and inability to trust others, Atwood is helping the audience understand the perpetual terror experienced by those who face systemic racism and under authoritarian rule. As the passage continues, Atwood intensifies her criticisms of the social injustices that exist in the real world. She uses the doctor's ability to manipulate Offred’s test results as an indirect way to accuse figures of authority for corruption. She also uses the Colonies and Unwomen to refer to the exploitation of minority groups at labour camps. However, the conclusion to the passage contains the most important statement of all. While Atwood’s protagonist is considering rape to be her salvation, she still requests to have the assault delayed. Once granted the extra month, Offred experiences shock at having her wishes respected because she is not used to having a choice. Here, Atwood steps beyond criticizing the social issues in society and instead begins to provide the audience with a powerful solution: respect. Effectively, she eradicates all excuses for inequitable actions by showing readers that the way to end discrimination is to simply to listen to the voices that need to be heard. Therefore, through this passage and her novel, Atwood’s examples of inequitable power dynamics aim to facilitate a social justice call-to-action for her readers.
Works Cited:
Atwood, Margaret. The Handmaid’s Tale. New York, USA: Anchor Books, 1998 ed. Print.
Janowiecki, Michelle L. Protesting in the 1980s and Beyond. American Archive of Public
Broadcasting. Web. Dec 2, 2017.
Burkett, Elinor. Women’s movement. Encyclopedia Britannica, 2016. Web. Dec 2, 2017.
History.com Staff. Civil Rights Movement. A&E Networks, 2009. Web. Dec 2, 2017.
__________________________________________________________________
Excerpt from page 61, chapter 10.
“It’s too dangerous,” I say. “No. I can’t.” The penalty is death.
But they have to catch you in the act, with two witnesses. What
are the odds, is the room bugged, who’s waiting just outside the
door?
His hand stops. “Think about it,” he says. “I’ve seen your chart.
You don’t have a lot of time left. But it’s your life.”
“Thank you,” I say. I must leave the impression that I'm not
offended, that I’m open to suggestion. He takes his hand away,
lazily almost, lingeringly, this is not the last word as far as he’s
concerned. He could fake the tests, report me for cancer, for infer-
tility, have me shipped off to the Colonies, with the Unwomen.
None of this has been said, but the knowledge of his power hangs
nevertheless in the air as he pats my thigh, withdraws himself be-
hind the hanging sheet.
“Next month,” he says.
I put on my clothes again, behind the screen. My hands are shak-
ing. Why am I frightened? I've crossed no boundaries, I’ve given
no trust, taken no risk, all is safe. It’s the choice that terrifies me.
A way out, a salvation.
Wow Miasya! This is a very thoughtful blog post and I wholly support and agree with your arguments. I conducted some research myself about social activism in the 1980s and I found some rather interesting results that may have influenced Atwood’s novel as well. First, I'll get into some history of the 1980s. One significant setback in women's rights during this decade was Ronald Reagan's presidential win and his subsequent legislation regarding women's rights. Former Californian governor, Ronald Reagan, was notorious for his opposition on issues such as abortion, rape, and other women's reproductive rights. In fact, he was the one who first introduced the order that banned federal money from being transferred to various NGOs if they promoted or provided information about abortion. (This policy is called the 1984 Mexico City Policy.) Reagan’s adamant objection against abortion (and giving women a choice in decisions relating to their own bodies) proves Atwood’s argument that social progress, as was seen in the 1980s, cannot slow down. Otherwise, women and minority groups will only suffer setbacks, in which basic freedoms and rights will once again be limited or removed. Moreover, related to Reagan, he was even accused of raping actress Selene Walters after their meeting at a Hollywood Nightclub. This now brings me to your point about rape, which I found incredibly insightful. Having understood a bit better the social climate as well as the background situation of those who were in power during 1980s, I agree that Atwood not only emphasizes the prominent problem of rape in society and the degree of corruption in many figures of authority, but she also urges her readers to take action, rather than stand by and watch as social justice and equality slowly fade from our minds. As Atwood said in a recent interview for The New York Times regarding her opinion on established order and political changes, “Anything could happen anywhere, given the circumstances.” I hope we will not instigate the circumstances that will cause the world of the Republic of Gilead to become a reality.
ReplyDeleteCompelling post Miasya! Your post summarized wonderfully what messages are intertwined in Atwood’s work and what statements she was making about social justice. I agree and support the ideas you brought forward, however, I think your use of the word racism could have been tweaked and replaced with something else. Racism is commonly defined as “a prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior”. I understand that in using it you were highlighting the prejudice against a minority, but since we are unaware of Offred’s race, I think sexism would have been a better term as sexism if the stereotyping or discrimination on the basis of an individuals sex. Furthermore, when address the social justice issues in in novel, I think classism ties perfectly into what you are talking about. Beyond Offred being raped due to her sex and being a minority, she is living in society rampant with classism.
ReplyDeleteIn 1981, a wave hit when the economy was recovering from inconsistent wages and inflation from the 1970’s. People took a new stance on classism and starting looking beyond monetary wealth, and the idea of materialism was prominent. The clothes that people wore and the objects they kept with them, the brands they had etc. became the basis in which people were judged and placed into class groups. Classism strongly highlights that the upper-class has more opportunity than lower class allowing the high-class to continuously succeed. As Offred says “He’s wearing the uniform of the Guardians, but his cap is tilted at a jaunty angle and his sleeves are rolled to the elbow, showing his forearms, tanned but with a stipple of dark hairs. He has a cigarette stuck in the corner of his mouth, which shows that he too has something he can trade on the black market” (19-20). The quote in itself shows what being of an upper class can mean, the Guardian (Nick) is allowed to show his skin, which she is not, as well, she knows that because of the cigarette he holds in his mouth he is of an upper class and therefore has connections and opportunity.
The Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape has published studies that have statistics supporting that people of lower class have high vulnerability to sexual harassment, assault and exploitation because they are too afraid to challenge their high-class counterparts. In an article by Donna Langston titled “Tired of Playing Monopoly” the author says “some people explain or try to account for poverty or class by focusing on the personal and moral merits of an individual. If people are poor, then it’s something they did or didn’t do: they were lazy, unlucky, didn’t try hard enough, and so on”. This idea is seen in terms of Offred, since she has yet to bear a child it is seen as her fault and she is stuck as a Handmaid, not allowing her to move up in social classes. The links between classism and rape culture are very strong and are both very prevalent social justice issues in The Handmaid’s Tale. Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed your post and am looking forward to seeing more!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHi Miasya, my name is Isabelle and I really enjoyed reading your post. I read while walking home from school, and when I encountered this passage I stopped dead in my tracks; it was the first time that I truly understood just how vulnerable our protagonist, Offred, is.
ReplyDeleteI had not considered that, through this encounter, Atwood was trying to inspire her readers to participate in the fight for social justice. When you said this I immediately thought about a passage in chapter 10 where Offred says “Nothing changes instantaneously: in a gradually heating bathtub you’d be boiled to death before you knew it”(page 56). Offred then continues, by saying that all of the small and seemingly insignificant changes, that had served to oppress women, escalated and eventually led them to becoming, essentially, slaves. She ends her thought by saying, “We were people who were not in the papers. We lived in the blank white spaces at the edges of print. It gave us more freedom. We lived in the gaps between the stories”(page 57). In this passage, Atwood is doing something similar as in your passage, Miasya. She is, quite blatantly warning her readers that if they do not suffer from obvious oppression, they should still combat injustices. Even if the causes seem small and insignificant, they must be opposed, since those can easily grow into the major oppression of some groups, possibly even including them.
Anyway, thank you for your insightful analysis. I look forward to reading your future posts!
-Isabelle