i hate that i love... this book

One thing about the book that strikes me is the way the author is so suspenseful. At first I didn't even realize that is what she was doing. I just thought that the book was very frustrating. Now i realize that she was withholding information on purpose. Like a very subtle cliffhanger that keeps you reading. Some other themes besides suspense that are forming include:

1. brainwashing
2. conformity
3. procedure
4. religion
5. war
6. rebellion
7. secrecy
8. deceit
   
9. and corruption
   

wow, that was more than 3 or 4. Oh well, there are a lot of themes in this book. And most of those could be combined or condensed. Today in our literature circle groups we discussed a lot of different possible essay prompt questions One of the questions that we discussed was 'if you were Offred, what reasoning would you have for complying with this new way of life?'. I think this is a good question because everyone would have an answer because it deals with opinion. However, because it is an opinion, it might be difficult for two people to debate. A good debate question might be, what are the benefits of the Gilead society compared to our society, why? This would be better because there are more times when evidence could be used, making it a good debate topic. I think if I was offred, my only reason for compliance would be fear or a form of lying low. If I was planning some amazing escape or comeback I would comply and feign acceptance.
There is a section of the book that describes when they were being trained to be Handmaids. They have to tell stories of things that happened to them as a little kid. One of the girls is telling about how she was gang raped when she was 14. As if brainwashed all the girls listening had to chant "her fault, her fault, her fault" (pg. 72). This quote really proves the themes listed above. It is important to see this quote to help to get an understanding of the way this book is written. It is written with such a blunt outlook on life in this society. There is no sugar coating.

Lit Circle Responses #1

When I read The Handmaid’s Tale, by Margret Atwood, I picture a world very different from our own. I picture a world that thrives off solidarity and hostility. I don’t think that this is a strange view to have of the book. The way Atwood describes the world of Offred, Rita, Nick, and Cora is clearly an exaggeration of an already twisted view of our society. I say this, because when reading The Handmaid’s Tale, it is easy to see a lot of connections between the book’s setting, and the setting of our lives. One example of this is on pages 82-84. The whole household (with the exception of the commander) is watching the nightly news in the sitting room. As Offred watches the old man behind the anchor’s desk, she describes his cheerful features and his trustworthy aura.
She listens to him reassure her of her own safety and the safety of the country. “The anchorman comes on now. His manner is kindly, fatherly; he gazes out at us from the screen, looking, with his tan and his white hair and candid eyes, wise wrinkles around them, like everybody’s ideal grandfather. (Pg. 83)” Lets rewind a couple decades. Not much is different between the mass media of the 80’s, and the mass media of The Handmaid’s Tale. There are still sympathetic yet determined looking anchors peddling lies and false fronts to promote social comfort and prevent unrest.
So, is it just a coincidence that Margret Atwood’s book was published in 1986? Was it a coincidence that the two worlds are so similar? Or was she simply stretching and illuminating the scary world around us? What an interesting realization to have after a week of “isn’t this book freaky…” and “imagine if we had to live like this!”. Now I am starting to think that ‘freaky’ doesn’t even begin to cover it.