|
Some books are entertaining, some have a lasting message. This book is both. Not only did it get me to rethink how I view the world, but the portion where the historian reflects on the history of the events recorded reminded me of how time can desensitize us to lessons learned and repeat the same mistakes.
This book I had to read for school and I was very much hoping it would be at least a little good. Luckily, it exceeded my expectations. Atwood's writing style of switching from past to present and not revealing all of what's happening in the story makes you want to constantly read the book and crave more information. Now, this book is rather depressing and doesn't contain a very happy ending, but the tragedy and mystery behind the main character's life gives you a sense of enjoyment from the book.
The whole aspect of questioning (society, self, religion) is one of the principle reasons (involved within the novel) that there are people who are opposed to this book being taught in schools (to high-school students in particular). There have been many criticisms involving the plausibility of the events that create the society in The Handmaid's Tale in so short a time frame, yet one only has to look to Nazi Germany for an example of how quickly (and efficiently) a society can be changed and `social norms' accepted (this unfortunately is not the only example, just the most extreme). While Atwood is not the first female author to include a female protagonist within an imagined future society, (Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged is one previous novel), her (Atwood's) novel is certainly more accessible given its length (which is comparable again to the shorter novels listed above, 1984, Brave New World, Fahrenheit 451). I have recently re-read The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood, whom I consider to be one of the best living writers. One has to wonder though if those who hold these views have actually read the novel, or at least the whole novel and paid attention to its complex structure. Atwood's understanding of the `visual sense' (or impression) of the printed word (in this future society writing is forbidden) is another reason this novel should be required reading alongside the `patriarchal' writings of Dystopian literature.
This `questioning' of the narrator's tale (and her `current' state of being) is continually reinforced by Atwood in the use of the language in the novel, which we are told in the epilogue has been reconstructed from tapes (spoken word).
Of course there are going to be people, (and people within systems), who would be disturbed by the content and theme of The Handmaid's Tale (sexuality, death, individuation, institutions), which is one of the reasons that make this novel so vital.
The gross or unpleasant themes that are told through the character of Offred are relations of a reality that we would rather not envision.
This novel should certainly be read by anyone who not only enjoys writing (and the construction of it), yet more importantly it (the novel) deserves it's place alongside other 'Dystopian' novels read, taught and studied by male authors such as 1984 (George Orwell), Brave New World (Aldous Huxley) and Fahrenheit 451 (Ray Bradbury).In one aspect then The Handmaid's Tale is a response to the male point of view (written by a male author) relating a future society.
This of course disturbs us as readers (as it should) and results in our deniability in its portended involvement.
The fact that it is written (told) through a female perspective is of course central to the novel and the circumstances that the character finds her self a part of.Along with the overall questioning involved with the events happening in the novel (who has allowed this to happen and why)., we (as readers) also are questioning the validity of the tale which Atwood brilliantly weaves throughout by incorporating such passages as this: "This is a reconstruction.
All of it is a reconstruction now, in my head, as I lie flat on my single bed rehearsing what I should or shouldn't have said, what I should or shouldn't have done, how I should have played it." (The Handmaid's Tale, Atwood, page 134).
Certainly it is easier to ignore The Handmaid's Tale as trivial fiction or the collection of a disgruntled feminist writer (or as I have heard some men say "The rantings of a man hater").
The Handmaid's Tale is an eloquent example of the possibilities that the written word has to shape our understanding of our selves and our place in our real and our imagined world.
the real world that we all still live in. I never normally get around to writing reviews but this book was just so terrible I felt compelled to write something for once. Atwood seems to want to tease the reader by failing to explain any of what is going on directly, and instead wastes our time describing how things used to be, ie. The plot is implausible, the characters are dull and many of the events described are horrific. If you start reading nad get the urge to stop then do it - don't waste your time dragging yourself on - it doesn't get any better.
The United States has become a Huckabee-meets-Palin Utopia, a WASP military dictatorship based on a racist Protestant reading of the Bible. The public executions and rampant classism (Hello. Women are property, illiterate, and subservient.The white military elite engage in the erotics of Scrabble and dressing up in cheap costumes. Unfortunately, nobody seems to be happy, which is odd, since one would expect a little more glee and togetherness in the American Christian Republic. Econowives). also make it a not-so-nice place to live.Instead the reader is shown that this utopia is nothing more than a dark mirror to theocratic tyrannies like Saudi Arabia, Utah, and North Korea (with Kim Jong-il treated like a god).A highly recommended book to give to all your conservative Christian friends and co-workers.
|
