Welcome

Hello, and welcome to my blog. In my postings I will be detailing my reactions, thoughts and research regarding Margaret Atwood's book, The Handmaid's Tale. As seen below, I have already created a few entries while I read the text, and a list of links that may be helpful while researching Atwood and her works.

The purpose of this blog is for me to educate myself, as well as any readers, on a Canadian author and some of her work. Many young Canadians don't necessarily like the idea of reading Canadian literature, because of books they've been made to read in school. But I think there is a lot of amazing writing in this country that people simply need to be educated about.

Links List

These are all helpful links regarding The Handmaid's Tale, Magaret Atwood, and Canadian Literature:

Atwood's Official Site
Atwood's Wikipedia Page
An Interview with Margaret Atwood

The Aunts as an Analysis of Feminine Power: An Essay
New York Times Book Review of The Handmaid's Tale
Time Magazine's Book Review of The Handmaid's Tale
About the Movie The Handmaid's Tale
The Handmaid's Tale Movie Trailer

The Canadian Encyclopedia: Margaret Atwood
The Margaret Atwood Society

What else is there to tell?

"I wish this story were different. I wish it were more civilized. I wish it showed me in a better light, if not happier, then at least more active, less hesitant, less distracted by trivia. I wish it had more shape. I wish it were about love, or about sudden realizations important to one's life, or even about sunsets, birds, rainstorms, or snow."

Maybe it it about those things, in a sense; but in the meantime there is so much else getting in the way, so much whispering, so much speculation about others, so much gossip that can not be verified, so many unsaid words, so much creeping about and secrecy. And there is so much time to be endured, time heavy as fried food or thick fog; and then all at once these red events, like explosions, on streets otherwise decorous and matronly and somnambulant.

I'm sorry there is so much pain in this story. I'm sorry it's in fragments, like a body caught in crossfire or pulled apart by force. But there is nothing I can do to change it..."

I wonder what else Margaret Atwood feels there is to write about, what other parts of this story could be more interesting. It certainly is not a glamorous story, it is actually quite the contrary, but it is frighteningly real and I believe that gives it merit. And in a way it is about love, and about sudden realizations. It is also about the human psyche, which is, in my opinion, one of the most interesting things there is to write about.

Furthermore, The Handmaid's Tale left me with numerous questions, and really made me think. I will continue to question how much power the government has, or could have if they chose to. Also, I will remain in awe that in this book the way the government gained control of the people was through their bank accounts, and terrified that people in reality are now putting microchips in their interact cards. But I think the most important questions this book raises are not those concerning politics, but those that delve into human nature. Regardless of the restraints and dangers that face the main character she continues to feel, and in turn has an affair with the only single man in the household. The man who is meant to be in charge, the Commander, also falls prey to his own desires and wishes for nothing more than to have a real conversation, without ceremony or fear, and achieves this by inviting his handmaid to play scrabble with him late in the evening -- this of course is entirely against the rules. I believe both of these occurrences are entirely within the scope of human reality, and if in our modern society people were told how they should live, and had huge restraints put on them, I would not be surprised if they reacted in similar ways. It is human nature, I believe, to want and to feel, and if society did not have some tolerance of these things people would find other ways to express them. Whether through an affair, or scrabble. I really believe that once a person believes something is right, or wants something enough, they will find some way to achieve their wishes, no matter the cost. 

Nolite te bastardes carborundorum.

Do not let the bastards grind you down.

"...I've tried to put some of the good things in as well. Flowers, for instance, because where would we be without them?"

(Atwood, 251)

Love.

"Now, tell me. You're an intelligent person, I like to hear what you think. What did we overlook?

Love, I said.

Love? said the Commander. What kind of love?

Falling in love, I said.

The Commander looked at me with his candid boy's eyes. Oh yes, he said. I've read the magazines, that's what they were pushing, wasn't it? But look at the stats, my dear. Was it really worth it, falling in love? Arranged marriages have always worked out just as well, if not better.

Love, said Aunt Lydia with distaste. Don't let me catch you at it. No mooning and June-ing around here, girls. Wagging her finger at us. Love is not the point.

Those years were just an anomaly, historically speaking, the Commander said. Just a fluke. All we've done is return things to Nature's norm."

(Atwood, 206)

Is love really not part of 'Nature's norm'? Have we held it in such high esteem for so long because that is what we believed to be right, not because it is what we truly feel?

From what I've read and heard of love, it's far from a rational emotion, but it is one that most people experience to some extent in their life. Where would we be without the endless stories, poems and songs about scorned love, unrequited love, everlasting love and most importantly of all true love? The world would be a less interesting place to say the least. The majority of the entertainment in our world centers around some kind of love plot line. And I believe we are richer for it. With most people striving for someone to share their lives with I like to believe that less people are striving for less honourable things.

The emotions we feel are inescapable, whether they are for good or for bad. I believe that it is the ups and downs of our feelings that make us feel alive. Life would be all too dull with out these heights and depths.

I'd rather die terrified...

True love...

It.

"The night before we left the house, that last time, I was walking through the rooms. Nothing was packed up, because we weren't taking much with us and we couldn't afford even then to give the least appearance of leaving. So I was just walking through, here and there, looking at the things, at the arrangement we had made together, for our life. I had some idea that I would be able to remember, afterwards, what it had looked like.

Luke was in the living room. He put his arms around me. We were both feeling miserable. How were we to know we were happy, even then? Because we at least had that: arms, around.

The cat, is what he said.

Cat? I said, against the wool of his sweater.

We can't just leave her here.

I hadn't thought about the cat. Neither of us had. Our decision had been too sudden, and then there had been the planning to do. I must have thought she was coming with us. But she couldn't, you don't take a cat on a day trip across the border.

Why not outside? I said. We could just leave her.

She'd hang around and mew at the door. Someone would notice we were gone.

We could give her away, I said. One of the neighbours. Even as I said this, I saw how foolish that would be.

I'll take care of it, Luke said. And because he said it instead of her, I knew he meant kill. That is what you have to do before you kill, I thought. You have to create an it, where none was before. You do that first, in your head, and then you make it real. So that's how they do it, I thought. I seemed never to have known that before."

(Atwood, 180)

This part makes me very sad, but at the same time somewhat amazed. I've never considered before what it would take for an ordinary person to kill. It makes perfect sense that they would create a distance between themselves and the object of their violence. But how long would it take for them to be convinced of this distance? I don't think it's very believable that Luke had created a divide between himself and his beloved pet in that instant, that simultaneously. Or would he be able overlook the distance at the time because it was necessary to kill the cat to keep his family safe? Could he put just enough distance in between to be able to commit the murder, and then justify it at a later time?

It also makes me wonder if soldiers are trained in some way to distance themselves from their enemies, or if it is something they learn for themselves --something inherent in them. There must be some part of the human mind that is able to close itself to the horrors of war. On the other hand, many soldiers respond dreadfully to the atrocities they witness on the battle field -- doctors call it post-traumatic stress. There must be some way to train those in the military to separate their minds from the brutality around them.