Again with the feminism? Let's do it.

One of the most relatable subjects for any person, whether they be scholarly, politically active, socially deprived, or anything between and beyond, is the comparison between the sexes.  Labels of many shapes and sizes formulate to denominate those with various stances regarding feelings towards the sexes; chauvinist, feminist, sexist, etc.  Gender significance is a theme with high attribute in The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood, as it is the basis of all interactions between the sexes and the social echelons in the given society, focusing mainly around diminishing feminine roles in society.

All women in the presented society hold some form of lesser status, when compared to the men in the society.  The handmaids, specifically, seemed to be the lowest of the groups of women on the social totem pole.  Offred, the handmaid of which the novel is centered around, describes women in her society by saying that, “There is supposed to be nothing entertaining about us, no room is to be permitted for the flowering of secret lusts; no special favors are to be wheedled, by them or us, there are to be no toeholds for love.  We are two-legged wombs, that’s all: sacred vessels, ambulatory chalices” (Atwood 136).  This society has turned women, specifically the handmaids, into tools for various purposes.  The handmaids, as described in the excerpt, are simply used as tools of reproduction, not allowed to feel emotion; enjoyment, lust, love, fulfillment.  Similar feelings towards women are conveyed when Offred describes the handmaids’ hoarding of butter, and how essential it is for their skin.  Offred says, regarding that the handmaids, that they, “…are containers, it’s only the insides of our bodies that are important.  The outside can become hard and wrinkled, for all they care, like the shell of a nut.  This was a decree of the Wives, this absence of hand lotion.  They don’t want us to look attractive.  For them, things are bad enough as it is” (96).  It is now apparent that the handmaids are not the only class of women who face unjust treatment.  The Wives do as well, and it can be inferred that all other classes of women also face this unrighteous treatment.  It is evident that echelons are made in the society of Gilead based on sex, as the men are superior to the women in every aspect.  Inferiority of women gives the plotline a chauvinistic tone, but gives the meaning of the story a feministic tone, and therefore makes the point easier to understand and more relatable.

                The most appealing line in the novel to me would be during one of the first, if not the first, descriptions of the Wall made by Offred.  She says, “…there are six more bodies hanging, by the necks, their hands tied in front of them, their heads in quite bags tipped sideqays onto their shoulders.  There must have been a Men’s Salvaging early this morning.  I didn’t hear the bells.  Perhaps I’ve become used to them” (32).  It is learned later in the novel that a Salvaging means, ironically, a killing of numerous people.  By Offred saying that she must be used to the bells tolling the Salvaging of people, it offers little hope for humanity as the mass taking of lives is now a routine ritual, unnoticed by many.  Nobody seems to care about humanity anymore, based on Offred’s reaction.  This line seemed, to me, to be an early indicator of the lack of emotion that would be a central motif of the novel.

                Overall, I would say I relatively liked the novel.  At first it seemed to me to simply be another novel revolving around feminism, like the other hundreds of thousands of books I’ve read in academia.  More feminism seemed to be simply dull and boring, and therefore I thought I’d greatly dislike it from the start.  However, there was something different about The Handmaid’s Tale.  It was its uniqueness, as it was, in fact, unlike anything I’ve ever read in the past.  It gripped me as its own novel, not a simple imitation of a past work, and didn’t lead to the typical utter disgust I feel when reading yet another feminism-centered novel.  I understand that the novel is about more than just feminism, but, since that seems to be the focal point of this post, I’ll stick with feminism in my closing statements.  For Atwood’s presentation of feminist ideals in a different way than typically presented, I approve of the novel, and will even venture to say that I enjoyed it.

We, by Yevgemy Zamyatin

The imagery found in We, by Yevgeny Zamyatin, is by far the most interesting part of the novel, I think, because of its relevance in relation to the style of writing.  We is written as a collection of records, or journal entries, from D-503’s daily experiences, therefore, most likely, D-503 had to have written his journal entries at the end of the day, that is after everything that the audience knows happened has occurred.  As such, the imagery found in the novel had to be of great relevance to D-503 to have been lodged into his memory, and it also shows much of D-503’s character growth.  When D-503 witnesses the disintegration, one could call it, of a man by the cast-iron hand controlled by the Benefactor.  D-503 describes the scene, saying:

“The hand fell, loosing the current.  A sharp blade of unbearable light.  A shudder in the pipes of the Machine, crackling that you could hardly hear.  The spread-eagled body was covered by a light, sparkling little puff of smoke, and then before our eyes it began to melt, and melt, and it dissolved so fast it was horrible…Still, every time it happened, it seemed like a miracle.” (Zamyatin 48)

Though he described the scene of a man turning into pure water in the blink of an eye as horrible, he also believed it beautiful and a mechanical marvel.  Any person with a soul would feel utter disdain and supreme fear from this sight, but, as he is soulless at this point in the novel, D-503 sees beauty in it.  He lacks emotion, thus clouding his ability to process that which is happening in the world around him.  The first truly troubling image that D-503 describes is when he visited I-330 for the first time, armed with his pink ticket.  I-330 leaves his presence to change, and when she reappeared, she wore, “…a light dress of an old-fashioned cut, saffron-yellow.  This was a thousand times more evil than wearing nothing at all.  Through the thin material you could see two pointed tips that glowed pink like coals seen through ashes” (54).  This is the first taste of real emotion that D-503 experiences, and he has no idea how to react to the “evil” seduction which he faces.  It is highly significant that images, such as the two aforementioned, are the images that are written in his journal.  It is the imagery that shows the most significant change in D-503’s character; that is emotion.  At first, D-503 is an emotionless, generic being; soulless to all extents.  Then, after being introduced to I-330, and having his eyes opened to new images, new experiences, he becomes more alive and unique.  Thus, I feel imagery is a highly interesting topic in the book.

            My favorite line in the book is most certainly from D-503’s last meeting with the Benefactor.  The Benefactor says to D-503, “Remember: In paradise they’ve lost all knowledge of desires, pity, love–they are blessed, with their imaginations surgically removed” (207).  Then a little bit later, D-503 contemplates on humanity, mentioning if he had a mother.  He says, “And if for her I could be–not the Builder of the INTEGRAL, and not Number D-503, and not a molecule of OneState, but just a piece of humanity, a piece of her own self–trampled, crushed, outcast” (208-209).  This compilation of passages, to me, displays the true meaning of the novel.  The Benefactor, resembling a totalitarian, bent on generating a population of synthetic happiness and ignorant bliss, attempts to take away that which D-503 discoveries is most important in his life; humanity.  This humanity, represented in the book by imagination, is what I-330 has brought to D-503, and is what D-503, inevitably, must give up.  The central meaning of We is that in order for humanity to function adequately, individuality and emotion must be encouraged, not discouraged.  In this dystopian society, the Benefactor discourages all individuality and emotion by giving those under his rule a false sense of paradise, ignorant bliss.  D-503 represents humanity attempting to emerge from the darkness of the false paradise; searching for human imperfection.  

            Overall, I disliked the novel simply because it was far too weird.  That may sound rudimentary, but there were too many aspects of it that I found difficult to grasp and enjoy.  The main aspect I disliked was the animals, or furry humans, whatever they may be called.  The concept of the animalistic creatures holding more just ideals than a dystopian human society bothered me, for it posed evolutionist notions, I thought; meaning that primal beings, the ancestors of humans, are superior intellectually and in societal aspects compared to human beings.  This disturbing thought compels my deep disdain for this book, for the most part.  The frightful image of the cast-iron hand disintegrating the man to pure water was the only part of the book I liked.  Is it frightful? Most certainly it is, yes. Is it unreal? As unreal as anything can possibly be! Cool? So, so very cool.  Such an interesting science-fiction type of anomaly in a book is the only aspect that could keep me entertained throughout the two-hundred twenty-five pages of dry insanity, as it left me sitting on the edge of my seat, waiting for the next person to be vaporized.  Aside from that, not a very good novel.