Jennifer's Reviews > The Handmaid's Tale

The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
628399
's review
Dec 04, 07

really liked it
bookshelves: classics, science-fiction, fiction
Read in August, 2005

(edited from a paper I wrote in college about the book)

In 1986, when Margaret Atwood published The Handmaid’s Tale, Ronald Regan had declared “Morning in America,” and society was going to renew itself by returning to the old values. The Christian right, in its infancy at the time, was rising in reaction to the Free Love, and the horrors of AIDs. The 1984 election gave us Willie Horton, and a reminder about how violent and evil society had become. Finally, even though Chernobyl happened shortly after the book was published, the Union Carbide disaster in Bopal, India was still fresh in the headlines—a reminder that even the air is not safe. It was not hard at the time to extrapolate the ultimate end that this cocktail of fundamentalism, conservatism, violence, disease, and disaster would bring, but what Atwood could not know, is how much of her novel would become reality in the world.

Amazingly, twenty years after it was written, there are elements of the story that have become true—perhaps not in the United States, where the story takes place, but throughout the world. The most obvious first connection is with many of the issues regarding women’s rights and religious fundamentalism that are taking place in the Middle East. It was shocking to read in the book that the initial attack on the US Government was blamed on Islamic Fundamentalists, though the story was written after the Lockerbie Pan Am bombing, and the massacre at the Rome airport. While this kind of terrorism was only in its infancy, Atwood’s insight is almost prophetic in the book. When the Murrah building in Oklahoma City was bombed, the initial reaction by the media was to blame Islamic terrorists, when in fact—like the novel—the terrorism was homegrown. The scale of the attack that took out the US Government in the novel is also eerily similar to the attacks of September 11, 2001. Reading this novel in the post-9/11 world can send chills down one’s spine: the novel includes suicide bombings at checkpoints, restrictions of rights in the name of safety, blind patriotism, and an overwhelming belief that there is only one true religion, and deviants from this should be killed.

While George Orwell’s 1984 is often referred to as an insightful perspective on modern society whenever someone puts a video camera on a street lamp, or the government begins referring to negative events with positive doublespeak. Orwell’s world never materialized in full, and likely never will materialize to the degree he created. Instead it is Atwood’s distopia, seemingly outrageous at the time it was written, that became reality. This novel should serve as a cautionary warning about the result of any extremist view taken to its logical conclusion—the Taliban is proof that society cannot dismiss the notions of this book as outrageous and extreme. They have proven in the last decade, a plausible end to the error of letting fundamentalism in any form guide one’s society.

351 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read The Handmaid's Tale.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

01/29 marked as: read

Comments (showing 1-25 of 25) (25 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Jay (new) - rated it 1 star

Jay Gowen Your review supports my contention against the book--Atwell's distopia is not consistent with what more than a thousand years of history teaches us about western civiliation. Western societies move from the religious to the secular, not the other way around. To use the Middle-East as evidence of Atwell's prescience is comparing apples and oranges.


Travis Bird Well, I was amazed when I read that bit about Islamic terrorists. Actually, Lockerbie was in 1988.

Prior to the Iranian revolution people in the West perceived terrorism by Muslims as isolated/related to the Palestinian issue. Atwood's imagined scenario is somewhat prescient.


Allison My reading of the book considered the backlash against feminism and free/aware sexuality that Reagan and his moral majority pushed in the 80s. In my opinion, we are still suffering a hangover from that backlash. Fundementalist Christians are a very powerful force in this country, pumping a lot of money and well-educated young people into politics and business. Given the continuing fear of losing Christian/family values and of America being "lost" to non-WASPs, I can see a near future where this group takes more popular control and pushes its agenda in all manners. The current obsession with fertility treatments, control of reproductive rights, and the role of "modern" women echoes the distopia of the book. Being reduced to reproductive ability and then losing complete control of ones body to the state seems a very relevant issue to me.

Still, I see us at the edge of the precipice rather than already falling over the side. I won't argue that we've hit the crisis point yet.



message 4: by Voitaray (last edited Jun 11, 2009 07:45PM) (new)

Voitaray Your review is terrific and I am grateful for the history recap of the 1980's as it relates to Atwood's tale. Your first commentor, Jay, sounds quite cavalier about apples and oranges and western civilization. Male dominated religions (all?) rear their ugly excesses over and over again with the help of economic crisis, fomenting of hatreds, and of course, war. These days we have as much to fear from the Taliban (currently trying to take over nuclear-armed Pakistan) as we ever did/might from hard-line Christianity. It's a small world after all.


Benjamin Wetmore Willie Horton was from the 1988 race. Others have pointed out some historical errors, I think it suggests a desire on your part to mesh many iconic moments together to fit your narrative rather than those events actually weaving together as nicely as you'd desire.

Specifically, I think it's hard to argue that modern feminism faced a setback by 9/11, or that theocracy returned, or that the roles of women were somehow subjugated as a response to national tragedy. It's pretty convenient to use every major historical moment and spin it in such a way that proves your thesis, a perfect non sequitur.

I realize this is, from what you say, a college essay and so, perhaps, this is too tough, but so it goes.


message 6: by Uk_id (new)

Uk_id @Ben Wetmore: What you said is along the lines of what I was thinking.


message 7: by Bert (new)

Bert It sounds like what the far right wants to do today in this country. Replace the constitution with old testment law


message 8: by Finn (new) - added it

Finn Very thoughtful review, thank you!


Donna Bert, come out of the cave. There is a whole world you are missing. BOTH parties are working with the wealthy to remove all rights, including those supposedly guaranteed by the constitution. But they want plutocracy, and they have no respect for the Old Testament unless it should happen to be the most expeient way for them to assume total control. They are far more likely to be GATU worshippers, the antithesis of the Old Testament.


KarenC As we watch the 2012 Republican candidates debate and try to out-conservative each other, you may all want to reconsider your comments about this prescient piece of literature. How could Atwood have seen this coming 27 years ago?


Elizabeth @Donna, Plutocracy is a pejorative term and isn't based on any kind of actual political philosophy. Basically it's a reference to the lack of consideration to the lower classes or the poor. It's not a political affiliation that one would intentionally choose. Unless you meant that the current political parties are ignorant to the social needs of this society and therefore seem more like a plutocracy which would be more accurate. I doubt that our author Ms. Atwood was trying to predict the world as it is now. She probably did her research and found out about how the Islamic Fundamentalists treat their women, since the current state of the Islamic people has been in place since forever, and drew some pretty dire consequences from those assumptions. So I doubt she really had any insight but based on the culture and occurrences in the 80's she was able to visualize the potential outcome and devise a distopia where men are allowed all the freedoms and woman are debased.


Karolyn I was struck by this too and especially the fertility issues pre-HPV.


message 13: by Donna (last edited Jan 17, 2013 09:19AM) (new) - rated it 1 star

Donna I meant it as a perjoragive term. Those to whom it refers have no (or since you are nit picking, *few*) specific political organization(s), but their desires align so often, they can be thought of as an organization, for all practical purposes. Islam (as in Muslim Brotherhood, founded by Western influces, btw) is but one form it takes.


message 14: by Diane (new) - added it

Diane To whoever said Western civilization moves from religion to secularism (as if that were some sort of truth from heaven), I disagree. Iran was a secular, Western nation until the Revolution when it thus moved toward theocracy, and ousted the Shah. It is now one of the strongest theocracies in the world. The same thing can, and will happen to the United States unless we stop our petty squabbling and keep voting against these sorts of people.


Karolyn @Diane agree! Myth of progress: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idea_of_...


message 16: by Patricia (new) - added it

Patricia wow! love your review! gonna put book on my to read list


Karolyn Also -- how about the change in present day Russia with strong evidence of collusion and support between the state and Orthodox Church in a formerly officially atheist country.


message 18: by Mickey (new) - added it

Mickey America is about as Christian fundamentalist as China. Or Syria.


message 19: by Mickey (new) - added it

Mickey Diane, point out for us all the laws being passed in the US that prove we are moving towards a religious society and not a secular one. Is America more secular now or not?


message 20: by Goryla (new)

Goryla nice coment


message 21: by Kate (new) - rated it 5 stars

Kate Please tell me you all know the Taliban is not Iranian.


Abhilash Nandi A great review. I must say.
Still after reading the novel I had certain doubts which I couldn't phrase myself.
Like why was Artwood so inclined on the extremists such as the K.G.B???
Your viewings cleared some doubts and helped a bit with others.

Except the above mentioned.

I really cannot believe that Artwood foresaw the talibans and others "." "." s just by researching medival Christianity, the K.G.B , the byzantine period.. the post WWII Canada.

Nevertheless, TY


message 23: by Lisa (new) - added it

Lisa Having read this novel in a time when Douchebag Trump is proposing ID markers for Muslims and state governors are refusing Syrian tefugees, I am astounded and horrified by how familiar the world of "A Handmaid's Tale" feels to me.


message 24: by Kate (new) - rated it 5 stars

Kate Well said. When I first read this book about 20 or so years ago, it made a lasting impact on me. To this day, I am wary of fundamentalist religious beliefs and the way women are often viewed, treated, or could be treated, if dynamics go unchecked.


message 25: by Kim (new) - rated it 5 stars

Kim Hector-white Nazi Germany meets Isis, verses women.


back to top