The Handmaid's Tale is a dystopian novel by Canadian author Margaret Atwood, published in 1985. It is set in a near-future New England, in a strongly patriarchal, totalitarian theonomic state, known as Republic of Gilead, that has overthrown the United States government. The central character and narrator is a woman named Offred, one of the group known as "handmaids", who are forcibly assigned to produce children for the "commanders" – the ruling class of men.
The novel explores themes of subjugated women in a patriarchal society and the various means by which they resist and attempt to gain individuality and independence. The novel's title echoes the component parts of Geoffrey Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales, which is a series of connected stories (such as "The Merchant's Tale" and "The Parson's Tale").The Handmaid's Tale won the 1985 Governor General's Award and the first Arthur C. Clarke Award in 1987; it was also …
The Handmaid's Tale is a dystopian novel by Canadian author Margaret Atwood, published in 1985. It is set in a near-future New England, in a strongly patriarchal, totalitarian theonomic state, known as Republic of Gilead, that has overthrown the United States government. The central character and narrator is a woman named Offred, one of the group known as "handmaids", who are forcibly assigned to produce children for the "commanders" – the ruling class of men.
The novel explores themes of subjugated women in a patriarchal society and the various means by which they resist and attempt to gain individuality and independence. The novel's title echoes the component parts of Geoffrey Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales, which is a series of connected stories (such as "The Merchant's Tale" and "The Parson's Tale").The Handmaid's Tale won the 1985 Governor General's Award and the first Arthur C. Clarke Award in 1987; it was also nominated for the 1986 Nebula Award, the 1986 Booker Prize, and the 1987 Prometheus Award. The book has been adapted into a 1990 film, a 2000 opera, a 2017 television series, and other media.
The ebook version was published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.A sequel novel, The Testaments, was published in 2019.
I know that The Handmaid's Tale is renowned and well loved by many.
I know that many are using it as an example of some of the potential slippery slope politics of today.
However, I have read a Margaret Atwood book before. I did not like it, and I do not like this one either. I don't like the way she writes and tells a story. I don't find her stories engaging. I just wanted the story to hurry up and end after awhile. They go nowhere for ages and then stop. They don't end, they just stop.
This book gave me a jolt out of it every time "recent" cultural touchstones were so clearly 1980s. And much of the back story was not well-formed.
I realize I am in the minority for my dislike of this book, but I'm just not a Margaret Atwood fan.
I already knew I liked Margaret Atwood. The whole MaddAdam trilogy was brilliant, thought provoking and fun. So I went into the Handmaid's Tale ready to find more of her very strong, direct and raw storytelling. I wasn't disappointed. The Handmaid's Tale paints a picture of a very distopian possible future, where (Chrsitian) religious zeal has taken over government, morality and politics. It centers on the situation women find themselves in as part of this overly puritanical and totalitarian regime. They are divided in what you could call "castes", and they fear and control each other. Through this Tale, Atwood reflects about the realities of power, control, fear, and agency. The women are forbidden to access knowledge. The men are separated from them and the isolation and loneliness rules this world. It felt a little bit like a woman-centric 1984 (and I think that's a good thing) and it really …
I already knew I liked Margaret Atwood. The whole MaddAdam trilogy was brilliant, thought provoking and fun. So I went into the Handmaid's Tale ready to find more of her very strong, direct and raw storytelling. I wasn't disappointed. The Handmaid's Tale paints a picture of a very distopian possible future, where (Chrsitian) religious zeal has taken over government, morality and politics. It centers on the situation women find themselves in as part of this overly puritanical and totalitarian regime. They are divided in what you could call "castes", and they fear and control each other. Through this Tale, Atwood reflects about the realities of power, control, fear, and agency. The women are forbidden to access knowledge. The men are separated from them and the isolation and loneliness rules this world. It felt a little bit like a woman-centric 1984 (and I think that's a good thing) and it really brought home the impotence brought about by ignorance and disconnection from others. It is also mysterious in its own way, and, no spoilers, the epilogue makes a really important contribution to the context of the story. It felt a very relevant read in these times of religious intolerance and huge discussions about human (and particularly women's) rights. I also hear that a TV series is being cast and will be filmed soon, based on this book. I suspect it is going to become very popular soon. So join the cool kids and give it a read! :)
La servante écarlate, c’est le Petit chaperon rouge sous l’Inquisition, plus ou moins. La narratrice ne nous explique pas grand-chose de ce qui a conduit à l’avènement d’une société patriarcale et totalitaire, dominée par la religion. Ses allusions, ses souvenirs sont les seuls indices dont le lecteur dispose.[...] [La suite sur mon blog, merci :)]
Most people would be familiar with Margaret Atwood’s novel The Handmaid’s Tale; a Christian totalitarian theocracy has overthrown the US government and are controlling reproduction. Set in the not so distant future, this dystopian society serves as a platform for Margaret Atwood to explore some real issues. Written in 1985, it is surprising to think that these themes and issues are still relevant thirty years later.
When I read this novel about four years ago, I think I missed the point, saying “I felt like Margaret Atwood spent too much time trying to explain the dystopian world in which The Handmaid’s Tale is set rather than the story itself.” I obviously was reading this book for its plot rather than trying to understand what Atwood wanted to say. To be fair I recognised this, citing “I understand she was trying to create a world that was a metaphor of a …
Most people would be familiar with Margaret Atwood’s novel The Handmaid’s Tale; a Christian totalitarian theocracy has overthrown the US government and are controlling reproduction. Set in the not so distant future, this dystopian society serves as a platform for Margaret Atwood to explore some real issues. Written in 1985, it is surprising to think that these themes and issues are still relevant thirty years later.
When I read this novel about four years ago, I think I missed the point, saying “I felt like Margaret Atwood spent too much time trying to explain the dystopian world in which The Handmaid’s Tale is set rather than the story itself.” I obviously was reading this book for its plot rather than trying to understand what Atwood wanted to say. To be fair I recognised this, citing “I understand she was trying to create a world that was a metaphor of a totalitarian society and explore the issue of women’s right” but even that makes me sound naive or stupid. One reason I like rereading books is for the fact that it shows me how much I have improved as a reader. I gave The Handmaid’s Tale three stars when I read it in 2011, but it is now clear to me that this is a brilliant novel and needs a much higher rating.
Looking at this dystopian society; the government wants control over reproduction. To do this, women become a political tool, rather than humans. This government was created due to a dramatic decrease in birth rates. Women become the property of their husband or the state. Women are not allowed to vote, have jobs, read or anything else that might make them have individual thoughts.
“There is no such thing as a sterile man anymore, not officially. There are only women who are fruitful and women who are barren, that’s the law.”
This one quote really summed up this novel for me; the whole idea that women are only useful for one thing. Women are considered subhuman and their only use involves their ovaries and womb. Even the main character, Offred reflects in one scene that her body was an instrument of passion and desire but now she has only one purpose; reproduction. She does not consider it rape, because she signed up to be a Handmaid; but what other choice did she have? In fact rape is severely punished and the government believes the women are protected. Yet would it not be considered rape if we take away the women’s rights, including their right to give consent?
There are many layers that could be explored within The Handmaid’s Tale, I would like to explore the novel deeper. I think looking at this book from a religious angle would be interesting as well, and I think I will need to give it a reread before considering that. I am glad to give this book another go; rereading this was eye opening and really highlighted just how much I have grown. One thing I found humorous was that Margaret Atwood set this book in the United States of America and references escaping to safety in Canada. This is an iconic novel and Atwood is an author well worth exploring; having said that, I have only read The Handmaid’s Tale and the MaddAddam trilogy. Lucky for me, I have so many more Margaret Atwood novels to explore.
Atwood's exploration of language, her use of symbolism and structuring of this book makes it a classic worth study, from a technical perspective. The issues she tackles might seem to be appropriate for 1985 — when the book was published — but the topics are truly enduring. Totalitarianism not only dominates politics and religion, but also gender. As Atwood shows, subjects lose of control of even their bodies.
This is my first Atwood and I want more.
The audiobook is narrated by Claire Danes, who does an EXCELLENT job. I look forward to listening to more of her work.
take two on this review because Marc objected to the original
This is a beautifully written book with a highly empathetic narrator in a world that I found a bit over dramatized. I would have appreciated the story more if it was a bit more nuanced.
Review of "The Handmaid's Tale (The Handmaid's Tale, #1)" on 'Goodreads'
3 stars
Atwood truly has an interesting way of deriving ideas and presenting them with potentially intriguing characters. Bundle that with her erudite prose and it's not surprising she's had a successful career. In this novel, Just as you reconcile yourself with the idea that the nature of the narrative might be to disguise it's true intentions - just like all the major protagonists do - it breaks down into the simplistic reacquaintance with referred characters. I guess I shouldn't have been surprised that the (welcome) ending was spoiled by the superfluous historical note.
Review of "The Handmaid's Tale (The Handmaid's Tale, #1)" on 'Goodreads'
3 stars
It took forever for this book to get going, but it turned out to be a pretty gripping paranoid journey through a newly totalitarian state. The 1980s writing perspective adds a Cold War-era flavor to the cultural references.
I find myself often thinking we'll soon have this dystopian future, given the struggle to maintain women's access to reproductive health and self-determination.
I just don't have words to describe what a phenomenal book this is. Margaret Atwood is one of (if not THE) best living authors today. This book sucked me in from the beginning and pulled me along, voyeuristicly through Offred's story, to a conclusion that had me wanting more.
A scary look at a possibly future (especially in America) that everyone should read.
