Cecily's Reviews > The Handmaid's Tale
The Handmaid's Tale
by
by

Cecily's review
bookshelves: scifi-future-speculative-fict, dystopian-apocalyptic, usa-and-canada, god-religion-faith, series-and-sequels
Jun 07, 2008
bookshelves: scifi-future-speculative-fict, dystopian-apocalyptic, usa-and-canada, god-religion-faith, series-and-sequels
I first read this in the late 80s: shocking, though a little far-fetched, I thought. When I joined GR in 2008, I gave it 4* from memory, but reread a year later with GR book group and gave it the full 5*.
In 2019, I skimmed it again before reading the follow-up, The Testaments (see my review HERE). Gilead no longer feels far-fetched.
Review from 2009
A wonderful hybrid: a book that is eminently readable, but packed with fascinating and thought-provoking ideas and symbolism.
It's set in the near future in a dystopian totalitarian theocratic state where many are infertile, so there has been a backlash against permissiveness and women are subjugated to the point where they are not allowed to read or write (even shop signs are just icons). Of course, the regime never considers that men could be at fault in any way, including their fertility or lack of.
Offred tells the story of how she became a handmaid, assigned to one of the elite, purely for breeding purposes.
Truer than you want to think
All the many and varied restrictions, practices, divisions and penalties imposed by the regime have really been applied somewhere in the world, albeit not all at the same time and place. One of the things that stops the book being gloomy is the resilience of the human spirit: there is a resistance movement among the lower classes and even amongst the elite, illicit things go on. The fear of being caught creates a good sense of tension.
Faith and ritual
Faith and ritual are important, both to the regime as a means of control and, in a different way, to individuals as a way of making life bearable.

Image: A game of Scrabble (.)
Symbolism
The symbolism is rich, especially tulips and the colour red. The handmaids' sole purpose is procreation, their cycles are closely monitored, everything they wear is red and other important red items (such as a path) are pointed out. Whilst the shape of tulip flowers clearly echoes genitalia, they are also likened to a wound and teeth, and they and other flowers are described in different ways to indicate fertility or sterility. Serena Joy's knitting is a compulsive form of reproduction with sinister echoes of Dickens' Madame Defarge in A Tale of Two Cities.
Themes and questions
The big questions are around ownership of oneself and one's body, and about motherhood (biological versus adoption).
The state is patriarchal, but an army of matriarchal "aunts" enforce rituals and build a hive mentality to support each other and hence the regime. Are the handmaids prostitutes (is Nick too)? No, because they have no choice. They are slaves. They "sell" their bodies for the survival of themselves as individuals and of the human race. The aim is (supposedly) solely procreation, not anyone's pleasure (the wife is always present).
Do the ends justify the means, and should the handmaids accept some responsibility for going along with it? The more you read (including the follow-up, The Testaments), the more you realise that's not possible. And if "context is all", what is truth? You could read this several times and never come up with exactly the same answer.
See also
* The Testaments, obviously, which Atwood wrote 30 years later, to show how Gilead fell and how Aunt Lydia came to be Aunt Lydia: see my review HERE.
* The 1990 film of Handmaid, which many dislike (and I don't really remember). However, the screenplay was by Harold Pinter, and it starred Natasha Richardson, Faye Dunaway, Robert Duvall and Aidan Quinn. See .
* The 2017-2019 TV series. Series 1 was a pretty good adaptation of Handmaid, but series 2 and 3 took the story further, with new material. See .
* When She Woke has many parallels, but I didn't like it: see my review HERE.
* Fahrenheit 451: see my review HERE.
In 2019, I skimmed it again before reading the follow-up, The Testaments (see my review HERE). Gilead no longer feels far-fetched.
Review from 2009
A wonderful hybrid: a book that is eminently readable, but packed with fascinating and thought-provoking ideas and symbolism.
It's set in the near future in a dystopian totalitarian theocratic state where many are infertile, so there has been a backlash against permissiveness and women are subjugated to the point where they are not allowed to read or write (even shop signs are just icons). Of course, the regime never considers that men could be at fault in any way, including their fertility or lack of.
Offred tells the story of how she became a handmaid, assigned to one of the elite, purely for breeding purposes.
Truer than you want to think
All the many and varied restrictions, practices, divisions and penalties imposed by the regime have really been applied somewhere in the world, albeit not all at the same time and place. One of the things that stops the book being gloomy is the resilience of the human spirit: there is a resistance movement among the lower classes and even amongst the elite, illicit things go on. The fear of being caught creates a good sense of tension.
Faith and ritual
Faith and ritual are important, both to the regime as a means of control and, in a different way, to individuals as a way of making life bearable.

Image: A game of Scrabble (.)
Symbolism
The symbolism is rich, especially tulips and the colour red. The handmaids' sole purpose is procreation, their cycles are closely monitored, everything they wear is red and other important red items (such as a path) are pointed out. Whilst the shape of tulip flowers clearly echoes genitalia, they are also likened to a wound and teeth, and they and other flowers are described in different ways to indicate fertility or sterility. Serena Joy's knitting is a compulsive form of reproduction with sinister echoes of Dickens' Madame Defarge in A Tale of Two Cities.
Themes and questions
The big questions are around ownership of oneself and one's body, and about motherhood (biological versus adoption).
The state is patriarchal, but an army of matriarchal "aunts" enforce rituals and build a hive mentality to support each other and hence the regime. Are the handmaids prostitutes (is Nick too)? No, because they have no choice. They are slaves. They "sell" their bodies for the survival of themselves as individuals and of the human race. The aim is (supposedly) solely procreation, not anyone's pleasure (the wife is always present).
Do the ends justify the means, and should the handmaids accept some responsibility for going along with it? The more you read (including the follow-up, The Testaments), the more you realise that's not possible. And if "context is all", what is truth? You could read this several times and never come up with exactly the same answer.
See also
* The Testaments, obviously, which Atwood wrote 30 years later, to show how Gilead fell and how Aunt Lydia came to be Aunt Lydia: see my review HERE.
* The 1990 film of Handmaid, which many dislike (and I don't really remember). However, the screenplay was by Harold Pinter, and it starred Natasha Richardson, Faye Dunaway, Robert Duvall and Aidan Quinn. See .
* The 2017-2019 TV series. Series 1 was a pretty good adaptation of Handmaid, but series 2 and 3 took the story further, with new material. See .
* When She Woke has many parallels, but I didn't like it: see my review HERE.
* Fahrenheit 451: see my review HERE.
Sign into 欧宝娱乐 to see if any of your friends have read
The Handmaid's Tale.
Sign In 禄
Quotes Cecily Liked

“Nothing changes instantaneously: in a gradually heating bathtub you'd be boiled to death before you knew it.”
― The Handmaid鈥檚 Tale
― The Handmaid鈥檚 Tale

“I believe in the resistance as I believe there can be no light without shadow; or rather, no shadow unless there is also light.”
― The Handmaid鈥檚 Tale
― The Handmaid鈥檚 Tale

“As all historians know, the past is a great darkness, and filled with echoes.”
― The Handmaid鈥檚 Tale
― The Handmaid鈥檚 Tale
Reading Progress
June 7, 2008
– Shelved
June 9, 2008
– Shelved as:
scifi-future-speculative-fict
Started Reading
February 4, 2009
–
Finished Reading
July 25, 2009
– Shelved as:
dystopian-apocalyptic
August 9, 2009
– Shelved as:
usa-and-canada
February 23, 2016
– Shelved as:
god-religion-faith
March 20, 2024
– Shelved as:
series-and-sequels
Comments Showing 1-44 of 44 (44 new)
date
newest »

message 1:
by
Emma
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Oct 28, 2009 08:46AM

reply
|
flag

I feel I can't take all the credit though because I reread it for a (欧宝娱乐) book group, so analysed it more thoroughly than previously and bounced ideas off others.

A recent book, When She Woke, combines THT with The Scarlet Letter to create a modern take on women in society.

Yes, more than 20 years ago. Here is its IMDB page:
Many fans of the book dislike it, but it's so long ago that I saw the film (which was probably 10 years before my first reading of the book), that I can't make a meaningful comparison.
However, the screenplay was by Harold Pinter, and it starred Natasha Richardson, Faye Dunaway, Robert Duvall and Aidan Quinn.


I hope it justifies the chance, though that rather depends on why you were avoiding it and what changed your mind. Fingers crossed.


I deliberately avoided reading reviews of this much-beatified novel, so as not to spoil my enjoyment.
Personally, I find your writing to be conspicuously better than the author's.
I really find the whole thing confusing and I perhaps need to lie down and have a rest.

I deliberately avoided reading reviews of this much-beatified novel, so as not to spoil my enjoyment."
Thank you, Kevin, for liking this old review. It does at least have the advantage of (relative) brevity. I agree it's best not to read review shortly before embarking on a book, but I'm sorry that in this case, such caution wasn't sufficient for you to enjoy the book.
Kevin wrote: "I really find the whole thing confusing and I perhaps need to lie down and have a rest."





Thanks, Carol. I fear that 18 months on, you may be even more unnerved.
(I can't have seen a notification for this, so didn't come here, so didn't see subsequent comments.)

Thanks, Angela, and apologies for not seeing this earlier (see my comment to Carol). Many people are being reminded of its importance now, and a new film adaptation is imminent.

What a coincidence! That connection might warp your view of Dickens' novel a little but not too much, I hope.

Thank you for the review!"
A one-sentence review! Good stuff.


I strongly recommend it, both because you've read some slightly dystopian books, and because it's so relevant now. If you haven't seen the TV adaptation, I recommend that, too. Series two is new territory, but still close to the spirit of the book.

I did see the first season, and quite enjoyed it, but haven鈥檛 yet gotten around to watching season two. I鈥檝e heard mixed reviews for it, but since you say it鈥檚 close to the spirit of the book, I鈥檒l be sure to give it a try.

Eek. The responsibility! ;)
It's just my opinion. Early on in series two I had a few doubts about sticking with it, but I think it's got better and better since. I don't know what Atwood thinks about it, or to what extent she's been involved.


Yep, the pressure鈥檚 on now :P
I鈥檒l let you know how it goes. It鈥檚 good to hear that it gets better as the season progresses...I felt the same way about the first season, and ended up very glad I stuck with that. Plus, I think Elisabeth Moss is a wonderful actress, so even if the story is slow at times, I鈥檒l enjoy watching her :)

I don't know the context in which Atwood expressed an opinion on legislation in Argentina. Given her fame, and her passion about women's issues, she may have been asked her opinion. But even if not, she's entitled to her opinion, as are you. The fact you disagree doesn't make her a bad person!

She's also a Scientologist, which puts an interesting slant on the role. (I don't know enough about Scientology to put much weight on that, but merely note the fact.)

Thanks. I'd firmly recommend it, but even if you haven't or won't read it, have a look at the TV adaptation. It's very dark, but very relevant.

Noted the suggestion for Fahrenheit 451, which has been idling on my shelf for a year now. :D

Thanks, but yours isn't superficial. It's very different and more personal, but variety like that is why we write, read, and discuss reviews here.
Ms. Smartarse wrote: "Noted the suggestion for Fahrenheit 451, which has been idling on my shelf for a year now. :D"
Give it a go. It's brilliant.


I鈥檇 recommend Mockingbird by Walter Tevis as another book where people have stopped being curious and questioning, as a survival mechanism.


Thanks, Alex. It is a landmark book, despite (because of?) its age. Definitely worth reading.

I'm glad you're finding them helpful. The inevitability of death is one thing we all share, and one subject all religions focus on in different ways.
I was raised religious, and earnestly tried to believe in my late teens and early twenties, but when I gave up, I was fortunate to be happy in my agnosticism, then atheism, but I know that's not the case for everyone.
PinkieBrown wrote: "Yet those beliefs are the foundation of judgments which can affect others lives when they are politicised...."
Yes, that's the danger Atwood portrays so well. Others can believe in whatever God(s) and rituals they like, but when their beliefs judge me, that's not good, and when that extends to legislation that limits my life, that's way worse.
PinkieBrown wrote: "I鈥檇 recommend Mockingbird by Walter Tevis ...."
Thanks, Pinkie.

"what if the same thing happened somewhere else" is as far as the book goes as far as speculative fiction

Terrible, wasn't it? And in living memory.
Rebecca wrote: "... "what if the same thing happened somewhere else" is as far as the book goes as far as speculative fiction"
I see it more as all the things in the book have happened, just not in the same place at the same time - that's where the "speculative" applies.