The Handmaid's Tale
Ratings1,727
Average rating4.1
Heard amazing things about Claire Danes reading this. It really was amazing as they said.
AMAZING book. So glad I read it at this time and age. It is easily one of those books like The old man and the sea - that may be misconstrued the first time you read it, because you are not ready. Maybe I still am not. But I already see so much...
My first Atwood read was actually The Year of the Flood, and honestly it didn't grab me the way I thought it would based on reviews. I picked this book up because I'm trying to read some “classics” that I missed, and it blew me away. Such concise, terse language which nonetheless blooms into something amazing. It's not a happy read–way too close to home in that “our society is a thin veneer” sort of way, but that's the strength of the book as well, of course: With a few years, things could change significantly for the worse for all of us, and for women in particular. (When I was growing up, the idea that women wouldn't have easy, cheap access to abortion by now seemed silly, for instance.) This is definitely a book I will read again and again.
SPOILER BELOW
One odd thing that hit me as I finished the book up last night is the shift in tone at the very end, as it is revealed that the Mayday folks are there to save our protagonist–the whole book seems to be building to her suicide, almost from the first page, and then BAM! she's part of the resistance. It seems so unlikely, in a way–but also, it speaks to the fact that many of us don't see the resistance going on all around us, aren't familiar with the ways in which people resist every damn day. I suppose the ending is ambiguous on purpose...
I'm a little stunned by the number of people who didn't like this–on a basic level, claiming it was difficult to read; on a more philosophical level, claiming it was improbable. On the basic level, once you get used to the lack of quotation marks and some stylistic choices, this book is such a fast read. As far as lack of plot, I'm baffled by such statements. I've run across literary fiction with far less plot. And as far as the content, well, it's dystopian near-future. As our heroine says, ‘Context is everything.' And I feel like naysayers are forgetting the context of the time period. The rise of fundie Christianity, the backlashes against feminism, the political climate. It's, perhaps, hyperbole, but that is only to make it's point. As a feminist and ex-Christian, I found this novel chilling and not at all that farfetched, considering what is happening even thirty years after this book was written. Sure, we aren't wearing big robes to hide ourselves. But consider how loud and powerful the Christian right actually IS, how government infringes constantly on the rights of women, how victims are blamed when bad things happen. Maybe what happens in the book isn't literally happening now, in our lifetimes; but characters like the Aunts and Commanders explain multiple times the thought processes that bring America to become the Republic of Gilead, that brought women to the terrible state in which they found themselves–hidden way, property, with no rights. And those though processes are seen loudly, clearly, all around us every day here and now. So this wasn't far-fetched to me, not at all. It wasn't dull. It was anger-inducing and horrifying. The fact that some people thought this book absurd is, to my mind, a trifle disturbing.
Frankly, I'm surprised I didn't have nightmares.
Damn, that was some intense shit. And timely! Timely because the f-word has been coming up again and again in my life these days: from the office to casual evenings with lady friends. The f-word being “feminism”. Inadvertently, I have found myself in a froth of angry femrage as things such as unequal pay, gender policing, gendered toys and other patriarchal nonsense have been much bandied about in my social circle.
So a feminist dystopia was just perfect. Also wonderful was that it was set in Cambridge, MA. Doubly wonderful was that I IDed Cambridge from the merest VIBE, man, from the mere mentions of a “subway stop near a river”, “the city beyond”, “the university” with “red bricked walls”. This protagonist! She speaks of Cambridge! It was nice to have that vindicated with more blunt mentions later on (like when she's like, “over the river... IN BOSTON”).
Anyway, I was meant to read this 15 years ago in AP English class. I didn't, because I was sometimes a lazy student. I read it now instead! It was marvelous. Probably better as an adult feminist lady, rather than a silly teen.
Offred (get it?) is a red-cloaked “handmaid” in a weird, Near Future land (Cambridge, Massachusetts, ahem) where men are men and ladies are TOTALLY AND COMPLETELY SUBJUGATED. Seriously, it is awful. Offred is called of-Fred, for firsts. For seconds, she has to wear the equivalent of a giant red, shapeless sack and a dog cone - lest she SEE too much, that crazy hussy! She is to be quiet and look down and NEVER EVER READ and every month, on ovulation day, she gets sexed by “the Commander”, the older dude who is head of household in the mansion where she lives. He does this while she LAYS ON HIS ACTUAL WIFE, who pretends to be the one getting sexed. It is awful. Godawful. It is so crazy, in so many ways.
Anyway, this is clearly a land where Republicans - ha, I kid! - Tea Partiers - still kidding! sort of kidding! - okay, Texas Tea Party-type Republicans (!?) - have taken over New England (horror of horrors). The birthrate is down, eco-problems lead most babies to be born with three heads, and religious fundamentalism grips the land. Women have now become “Econowives” (baby chamber/cleaner/cook for the poor), or fancy “Wives” (baby chamber for the wealthy), or “Handmaids” (baby chamber for the wealthy, if the fancy Wives can't cut it), or “Marthas” (as in Stewart, i.e. cooks/cleaners for the wealthy), or “Aunts” (gender police at the crazy re-education centers). There are obvious echoes of the Holocaust, Iran in the 1970s, post-Taliban Afghanistan, Khmer Rouge Cambodia, and basically any dystopia, real or imagined. The plot also follows the usual narrative arc, with the usual heartbreaking betrayals and horrifying moments of seeing the human spirit get crushed. What did Orwell say? A face getting smashed under a boot, forever and ever? That stuff.
It's really a bummer.
It's also beautifully written, with dense, layered wordsmithery, with lots of Georgia O'Keeffe-y meditations on blooming flowers and sex organs and touch and sensation and repression and the lusty soil, etc. The wordplay is clever, sometimes to the point of self-indulgence, but, oh Margaret Atwood, I can't get annoyed at you. It was all too good.
The epilogue is clever to the point of ZANY; like, I wanted to just put the book down and scream from delight, like a little kid. (Does anyone else get that? With books? Just me?) It's also semi-reassuring, though the dystopian ambiguity (think 1984's ending, or Brazil's, etc) is relatively intact. So don't worry, hard-hearted readers, there is no Disneyfication! It is horrible, start to finish. Offred has (one of the?!) worst lives ever!
And that's the crux of it, of course. That, like any good dystopian book, it eventually (or has already) COMES TRUE. This picture circulated my social media toobs a while ago, and, yes, it's ironic. And also very sad. And also indicative of Orwell's predictive genius. Dude was writing about 1930s Fascism, and he basically predicted the world of Snowden and Manning. Similarly, M.T. Anderson wrote (the mind-blowingly awesome) Feed a few years before Facebook, but he basically predicted the world we're getting: a world where Google/Facebook want to become not only the interface between you and the Internet but, preferably, between you and REALITY, so you can just consume, consume, consume. Cuz, you know, their shareholders! i.e. Google Glass/Oculus Rift, and so forth.
Similarly, with this, Atwood isn't (only) describing the shape of things to come, but she's also describing, well, the sorry history of Afghanistan, or any country where women's rights have taken HUGE, brutal steps back. Just look at this. It's awful, and tragic, and scary. It makes me want to donate to Planned Parenthood (do it) like crazy.
Oh! And I haven't even gotten into the wonderful, textured portrayal of actual feminism that Atwood portrays, what with Offred's awesomely ancient 1970s Women's Lib mom or her awesomely punk, riot grrrl lesbian BFF from college, Moira. It is great. But I feel this review has already gotten too long so I'll just say READ IT READ IT READ IT. CONSUME CONSUME CONSUME.
I think this is an scary tale of a might be world. It is a fiction similuar too sienceficton i style but without the technology. It is amazing how realistic and diffrent it is at the same time.
What can I say about this book?... It's a classic. It's something I would like to reread. It's something I wish I read in high school. Offred is such an engaging and interesting narrator. Her voice is what really captured me throughout the book. Seriously, there are so many discussions that can be sparked from this book, so I'll just leave you with this quote from Valerie Martin's introduction to the Everyman's Library edition of this novel. It pretty much sums up a lot of my thoughts about The Handmaid's Tale:
“It is not an exculpatory tone; the thin light it sheds will not illuminate much. It won't tell us why people were so cruel and unjust then, but it can remind us of the way we would, the way we do, on any given day, explain our participation in the injustices we accept and perpetuate. It is what we do.
...Offred's voice speaks clearly, and this is what it says: History will catch up with us, it isn't dead any more than we are, it lives in and upon us, parasitically, like the bacteria in our intestines, without which we would die. If you want to see the future, keep looking steadily behind you, because the future, no matter how much we may pretend we don't know it, is history.”
Nolite te bastardes carborundorum.
I enjoyed this book and was impressed with the world it created. It raised some interesting concepts such as the difference between ‘freedom to' and ‘freedom from' and really made you empathise with the plight of the main girl.
I enjoyed the other Atwood book I read better. This was told from the perspective of one person and while interesting, I felt like there was other information that could have been given to make for a better story.
This was the first book I read in 2013 by a female author – after reading 36 other books. After finishing it, my initial reaction wasn't altogether positive. The more I reflected on the book, I came to realize how amazing a world Atwood created in this dystopian tale. Not one of my all-time favorites, but still great storytelling.
This was the first book I read in 2013 by a female author – after reading 36 other books. After finishing it, my initial reaction wasn't altogether positive. The more I reflected on the book, I came to realize how amazing a world Atwood created in this dystopian tale. Not one of my all-time favorites, but still great storytelling.
Read a little over the half of it. Good book, but I didn't care for the story. I've seen the movie, and didn't like it as well. Not my kind of reading.
Good, crazy and very terrifying. Atwood's detail leads the reader into a word that NONE of us want to live in. I had to read this for my English class, and I don't regret it at all!
I have read many dystopian novels, the genre is one of my favorites. Oftentimes, the world created is without threat or consequence; I do not feel nor believe the full oppression of the regime in the novel, or the rules that are in place seem abritrary or ridiculous.
Over and over, when I scour for new dystopia to read, The Handmaid's Tale cropped up every time. It is truly a shame I didn't immediately dig into this book when it was initially purchased for me.
We are first introduced to Offred, a Handmaid in the Republic of Gilead, a woman who is old enough to remember a better time before. Through the entire story, we are spoken to as if we are there with Offred, hearing her story. This definitely served to bring me with her into this horrible world, and to feel alongside the small triumphs, her panic, and her heartbreak. We slowly learn about Offred's past, the nusances of her position, and the world she now is forced to carve an existence from.
I can only describe the manner of writing as ‘flowy'; it creates spectacular imagery that isn't a stretch nor a burden to read:
A Tennyson garden, heavy with scent, languid; the return of the word swoon.Light pours down upon it from the sun, true, but also heat rises, from the flowers themselves, you can feel it: like holding your hand an inch from an arm, a shoulder. It breathes, in the warmth, breathing itself in. To walk through it in these days, of peonies, of pinks and carnations, makes my head swim.
There are zero infodumps, a trait I do unfortunately see in dystopian novels. We are only shown was is needed, and are slowly revealed pieces of Offred's story; her past, her “training”, her current situation, her hopes. It weaves itself together into a wonderful ending, with an addendium that enhances the conclusion.
If I had to pin down one thing that I felt was a negative, it would be Offred's lack of personality; It felt as if she was merely a vessel that we stepped into to see the world from her eyes. If this was intentional, it was masterfully done.
Five stars, and an insistence that if you enjoy well-written dystopia or even a fantastic story, place The Handmaid's Tale at the top of your list.
Full review at SFF Book Review.This is considered a classic for good reason.Long as it may have taken me to finally pick up this book, it has lived up to every bit of hype I had heard before. I have been very fed up with what is sold as “dystopias” lately, especially in the YA genre, and I needed something with the same power as George Orwell's [b:1984 5470 1984 George Orwell http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1348990566s/5470.jpg 153313]. Now this is a very different book in subject, but the tone is just as horrifying, the world as full of terror - and that's how it should be.It is strange to say that I enjoyed cuddling up with this book, under a nice blanket and with a cup of tea by my side. Because this is not exactly a comfort read. It shocks and terrifies and, above all, makes you think. As my first Atwood, I am duly impressed and will read many more of her books.Highly recommended.8,5/10
Short Review: excellent audiobook narrated by Claire Danes. The book is set in a dystopian world where women are only good for procreation. OfFred (women no longer have names but only relationships to the men around them) narrates her story. Through a series of flashbacks she tells how the world changed from the previous order to the theocratic one where she now lives.
The books is very compelling, even if the timeline and cultural changes don't make complete sense.
My full review is on my blog at http://bookwi.se/the-handmaids-tale-by-margaret-atwood/
I've always loved this book, but I used to think the world was a little silly and far-fetched. Upon rereading, it's absolutely terrifying
Very good, though perhaps it was a mistake to choose to read this in the summer.
Deserved a Reread
In just three years the USA has gone from freedom to total control. Women and men are divided into classes, but unlike women, men can work their way up through the ranks. Women, however, have a set place in society and that place is vividly displayed by the clothes they wear: striped gowns for the lower classes, the econowives; green gowns for the Marthas, the servants of the upper classes and red for the Handmaidens, the surrogates who bear the children of the infertile upper classes. It is to the Handmaidens that the main character of the story belongs. Her name is Offred and in the time before, she had a daughter, a husband, a job and a bank account. This was all taken away from her and now she is just a walking womb. She is not permitted to read or possess anything other than her clothes. She is also not allowed to converse with anybody more than is strictly necessary, there are ears everywhere to hear what she is saying and tongues ready enough to report her words. If she fails to get pregnant she will be sent away to ‘the colonies' whose members clean up toxic waste and where life expectancy is low. Despite all her attempts to remain a good citizen she gets drawn deeper and deeper into subversive activities.
I first read this book a few years ago and couldn't understand what all the hype was about. I think the reasons I didn't like it that much the first time round were that it is quite slow, written in the first person, dystopian (I prefer post-apocalyptic) and held up as an example by feminists. None of these qualities really endeared me to the story although I found the idea itself intriguing. I was used to more pace and more action. In the few years' interval my tastes seem to have broadened because I enjoyed it much more this time, probably largely due to the fact that I knew what to expect. I love the historical notes at the end, they give the story a feeling of authenticity. The same device was used in ‘the Passage' and I enjoyed it then, too. It's cool to read about something in the future as if it is already in the past. As for the feminist side, well, that isn't a problem with the book, that is a problem with my understanding of the word. When I think of feminism I think of women who don't want equality but a reversal of roles. That isn't what this story is about. I really hope though, that if some government today decided that women couldn't own money or have a job, we would fight harder than the women in this book. Maybe we should start hoarding our cash in our pillows - just a thought ;-)
I think I last read this book sometime around high school. The afterword section of it - especially the part with the “underground frailway” had left me with a negative feeling about the world after Gilead. it bothered me for years.
Now that I've re-read this, though, I seem to recognize Professor Pieixoto as a particular type of academic, that of an academic asshole. These may well always be with us.
‰ЫПTell, rather than write, because I have nothing to write with and writing is in any case forbidden. But if it‰ЫЄs a story, even in my head, I must be telling it to someone. You don‰ЫЄt tell a story only to yourself. There‰ЫЄs always someone else.‰Ыќ
I must confess that I was annoyed by the frequent use of comma splices. I longed for semicolons and dashes.