What grade would you put it in?

[Eliana]

I read this in high school and I think it's definitely appropriate for that level. High schoolers can handle more than you think. It's really not anymore disturbing than something like Brave New World or 1984, both books that are widely read in high schools.

[Budd]

This is too mature for high school kids. They should instead read Oryx and Crake.


J/K

[i.]

I would recommend for the last two years of high school. This book is a must , specially for young women.It made my blood boil and it make me think as well.

[Lisa]

I thought it was a terrible book (JMO) and would hate to see it as REQUIRED reading. I would say that it is inappropriate for anyone in high school as REQUIRED reading. Many high school kids would do fine but not all. If high school kids want to read it, I would have no objections.

[Jane Oceana]

I read it in 8th or 9th grade. But I think I was a little advanced in my reading and my social life. If I had it to do over I would wait until 11th or 12th grade. I consider it one of the great reads.

[Ella]

I am in 9th grade, and my English teacher recommended this book for me for independent reading. I did not realize how mature in subject this book was until I was already far in, and it was too late to turn back. I would say that this book is too mature in subject for all middle schoolers, and most high schoolers, but some high schoolers may be ready for it.

[Sally]

I read this fantastic book last year - it was my favorite read for the year. I am now 50. I gave it to my niece, who had just turned 21, who also loved it. I think in their early 20s young women have the maturity (hopefully) to deal with the very confronting sexual imagery in the book, and the ideas explored by Atwood. My view only.

Stephanie wrote: "Hi,

I'm writing a paper on The Handmaid's Tale and its censorship history. I would like some outside opinions on its age-appropriateness.

If you were to place the novel in a curriculum, which ye..."

[Melanie]

Stephanie wrote: "Hi,

I'm writing a paper on The Handmaid's Tale and its censorship history. I would like some outside opinions on its age-appropriateness.

If you were to place the novel in a curriculum, which ye..."

I would place it a the senior level of high school due to the political climate we recently witnessed in the U.S.regarding women's rights. The term women's rights once seemed outdated as clearly it was largely assumed that our society had already crossed that milestone. Current legislation is still being entered and voted upon, despite the election, on a range of subjects that include domestic abuse, wages, birth control, abortion, and medical care - all sounding like conversations from another era. It is astounding to consider that in one of the worlds most modernized societies females are being discussed as half a citizen, while being taxed as a full citizen, by male politicians who see no problem in treating them as objects. That one political side of the isle continues to phrase these discussions as women's "issues" rather than as human rights points glaringly towards a future where rights must be vigilantly protected and never taken for granted.
I would have this book in hand of the youthful voter before they go to the polls. At the pre-college age they are emerging into independent thinking and will, with hope, develop critical thinking skills at the college level.

[Sally]

That's a good idea. I live in Australia and we have a female Prime Minister, living in a defacto relationship and without children. A recent poll of women showed that most felt that the opposition leader, a very conservative Catholic male who some call a misogynist, was prefeerred becasue he has a family and therefore "understands" family values. I was horrified by this. Give all 18 year olds this book!

[Amber]

I've just read this book for my final year of college, and I found it absolutely engrossing.
It was required reading, but I'm glad it was, as it isn't something I'd decide to read independently.

[Komala]

I read it in year 11 (I was 15) and loved it. It made an impact that has stayed with me all that time. I re-read it last year (about 17 years later) and loved it all over again.

[Rebecca K-G]

Probably around 11th or 12th grade highschool or older for a literature class. For personal reading about 14 or 15 yrs or older. I don't think younger kids will really get it.

[Kim]

Melanie wrote: " would place it a the senior level of high school due to the political climate we recently witnessed in the U.S.regarding women's rights. The term women's rights once seemed outdated as clearly it was largely assumed that our society had already crossed. . ."

I couldn't agree with you more, and I think this is exactly why a classroom is the best place to discuss this novel. I have students who read this book and think it's talking about a part of the world far, far away from where they live; talking about the setting opens up their ability to be critical of the political life and media representations of such in the country in which they live.

I don't think the sex is really why people object to this novel being included in high school reading lists; I think it's the message about how sex operates politically, and who should control access to women's bodies, that gets people riled up about this book, because it is so countered to the way the political system/mainstream media in North America tells us about the way women's bodies should be used, and who should control them.

And to the comment a while back about kids at this age needing to be exposed to "classic" literature so that their literary sensiblilities develop properly: there are practically NO female voices in classic literature, and where there are they are most often written by men. We need to make room in the curriculum for authors who represent the actual makeup of the student bodies we teach. (Plus, I'm from Canada. Atwood IS classic literature up here -- she's the closest thing we've got to a living legend!)

[Tony]

Appropriate I think for high school juniors & seniors. Certainly not too young to understand that extremist ideology is as much a threat here at home as anywhere else. For a number of years now I've even been saying it should be required reading (before finding out how widely banned it is).
It isn't any more age inappropriate than so many other books high schools are requiring students to read.

Best of luck on that paper!

[Emilie]

It depends more on the individual rather than the grade level. It should be presented as an option to students in junior high onward. If most junior high students are still reading something that is considered more "their level", but one in the corner is reading something more mature, possibly considered adult, material, why should that student be penalized? If someone is mature enough, despite their age, why shouldn't they read it?

[Mary]

Emilie wrote: "It depends more on the individual rather than the grade level. It should be presented as an option to students in junior high onward. If most junior high students are still reading something that i..."

I agree Emilie.

[Mimi]

Although I read 'The Handmaid's Tale when it was first published, and was an adult, I would assign the book in the 11th or 12th grade. I feel the message of the book would not be understood until a level of maturity was reached in the readers.

[Paul]

i really hated this book. it has been a long, long time since I've seen a book so full of itself. Christ, I would almost prefer a fundamentalists version.

[Kirby]

Stephanie wrote: "Hi,

I'm writing a paper on The Handmaid's Tale and its censorship history. I would like some outside opinions on its age-appropriateness.

If you were to place the novel in a curriculum, which ye..."

I didn't read this book until I was in college. It was part of a women's literature course I took as an English major. I think I would probably leave it in college. I taught high school English and honestly don't see the male students I taught being interested or the female students understanding the nuances of this book. I think - when it comes to curriculum - that teaching this novel as part of a women's or feminist literature course is probably most appropriate.

I would say it affected me most when I read it in college. Had I not taken that course, I probably never would have read this novel, but I'm very glad now that I did. I definitely don't think it's appropriate for children. The reader has to be mature enough to understand the implications of such a society as the one depicted in the book.

If my child want to read this book, I would hate to stop them at any age. However, if my child was not yet in high school at the time, I would want to be able to supervise their reading - not necessarily by literally watching them read but by being available and hands-on so that I could explain any subtleties they didn't understand.

[Matt]

i like turtles.

[Lisa]

This was a horrible book and I hope that it would never be required reading. It would have to be a college level book.

[Oncemshi]

Emilie wrote: "It depends more on the individual rather than the grade level. It should be presented as an option to students in junior high onward. If most junior high students are still reading something that i..."

Agree. Glad I found you before I posted anything.

[Emma]

Emilie wrote: "It depends more on the individual rather than the grade level. It should be presented as an option to students in junior high onward."

I agree.

[Mochaspresso]

I read the book as an adult, but I think that it would be appropriate reading for a high school student. However, I also agree that the best time to read this would probably be in college as part of a course on feminist or women's literature. Regardless of how advanced a reader a child is, to get the full impact of the novel, a reader would also have to have an understanding of the roles of women in society in comparison to the roles women were assigned to in The Handmaid's Tale and some perspective on what it would be like to have that choice taken away from you in such a manner.

I've also found this to be the case with younger kids reading The Hunger Games. It's true that advanced younger readers can certainly read the story, understand the basics of the plot and enjoy it, but certain core themes, such as the political and social implications of a dystopian society, is often lost on them. Their focus is often on the simpler themes like love triangles and whether Katniss should have chosen Gale or Peeta.

[Samantha]

I would say high school would be appropriate for a mature class, but you would have to gauge the students first.

[Jason]

I read the book when it first came out and I just finished rereading it. I think it depends on the maturity and sophistication of the young person as a reader. I think it's important for a parent to preview this book before giving it to their young / middle teen, for this book does pack quite a punch. However, I think that high school juniors and seniors, particularly those taking AP or honors classes can handle this book. I think this would be a fine book to read in a AP English Lit class where students are being introduced to various approaches in literary criticism.

This book was written in 1985, so the reader needs to be familiar with the social trends going on at the time, especially Second Wave feminism, LBGTQ issues, Protestant Fundamentalism, etc. This book needs to be placed in context of the times it was written in. If I was teaching an introduction to literary criticism class, I would consider using this book, because this book yields interesting insights when you look at it from many different approaches (psychoanalysis, reader response theory, feminist reading, formalist, sociological, mythological etc.) and is a fairly quick, uncomplicated read. It packs a punch without being excessively graphic (akin to Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery")

[Eric]

Many of the issues you adduce above, e.g. feminism, LGBGTQ issues, Christian fundamentalism, and a right-wing hostility to "otherness" and difference, are as topical today as they were 32 years ago, perhaps unfortunately so. As it turns out, people don't change much. Perhaps not a good thing for living, but a great thing for literature.