Thursday, November 17, 2011

Threats Keeping Gilead Alive


The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood is a novel that made me realize how lucky we are to live in the United States today. We are entitled to so many freedoms that we take for granted. Walking down the street is a right we are allowed that other societies do not permit, especially the one depicted in this book. The Handmaid’s Tale is set in the Republic of Gilead, formerly the United States. The society is kept in place because there are so many threats that keep people from rebelling. While 1984 by George Orwell is set back thirty years from now, this novel is set a lot closer to our time. Atwood makes many references to styles and trends that are similar to those we agree with today, such as the use of cars and televisions.  It is hard to believe that a society so similar to ours could be so quickly transformed into a metropolis ruled by threats and isolation, as depicted in this novel. Atwood shares the power of threats and the role of dehumanization in The Handmaid’s Tale by showing how threats prevent the demoralized handmaids from rebelling and keep the society in general running smoothly, however, there are many flaws in the system that could have potentially led to the downfall of the republic of Gilead.

Almost every day that Offred and Ofglen go into town to run errands, they stop at the Wall for reflection. This Wall is old and unattractive and serves as place for bodies after they have been hanged. Even though you would think that no one would want to visit this spectacle, the handmaids stop by it because it is an excuse for them to be away from home for longer. Offred remarks that, “sometimes [the bodies] will be there for days, until there’s a new batch, so as many people as possible will have the chance to see them” (42). The bodies are there as an example of what happens to rebels in Gilead. There is no tolerance for acting out and if you are caught, you are executed for all to see. 

Although in 1984, everything from the past is erased and forgotten, there is a faint memory of it in The Handmaid’s Tale. Even if they had jobs that were legal before the regime took over, it still haunts them. Offred acknowledges this by stating, “These men, we’ve been told, are like war criminals. It’s no excuse that what they did was legal at the time: their crimes are retroactive” (43). How are men and women supposed to move forward with their lives if their past haunts them? In a society like Gilead, everything from the past is supposed to be forgotten, yet it is impossible when individuals can be prosecuted for what they did before the regime was in place. The wall is a successful way for the regime to keep power over the handmaids and other citizens who may be considering rebelling against society. There is a constant reminder of what could happen if you get caught that keeps many men and women in line.

As I read The Handmaid’s Tale, I was especially interested in the differences between Orwell’s novel and Atwood’s. While both novels made it clear that people not of wealthiest class or highest social standing were supposed to be isolated and only have business relationships, the handmaids were forced to travel in pairs for their own protection. Although they were only supposed to say things like, “Blessed be the fruit,” minor communication turned into much more as the handmaids became closer with their partners (19). Offred and Ofglen quickly formed a relationship that, had Ofglen not been relocated, could have made both handmaids rebel from their positions and have put them both in a dangerous position in society. Although it seems that partnerships of women could not have gathered together and rebelled, I think their potential power cannot be underestimated, especially if other women were feeling the same about their positions as handmaids.

Throughout the text, Offred refers to the fact that she is not using her real name, yet never shares it with the audience. I understand that the handmaids must have their names changed because then it is much more difficult for them to find anyone from their past life, but I think this is cruel. They are separated from their friends, families, and now, the only thing left is their identity. The women are taken from their homes and are forced to have sex with strangers.

The back cover of The Handmaid’s Tale makes note of the dehumanization of the handmaids by describing their sole task as, “[lying] on [their] backs once a month and pray[ing] that the Commander makes her pregnant, because in an age of declining births, Offred and the other Handmaids are valued only if their ovaries are viable.” They are seen as less than human, as incubators, in fact. This dehumanization is just a part of society that no one else seems to have a problem with.

When Offred first meets Serena Joy, the commander’s wife, she acknowledges their situation and remarks, “As for my husband, he’s just that. My husband. I want that to be perfectly clear. Till death do us part. It’s final” (23). Serena Joy knows that Offred and her husband will be engaging in a previously intimate act that is now just a task that must be completed. Nonetheless, she treats Offred like a child who does not understand the sanctity of marriage or a commitment. I find it shocking how except for Moira and a few other characters, no one attempts to take a stand against society. This is a testament to the fear the regime has placed in the handmaids as a result of threats.

The Handmaid’s Tale shows how powerful threats can be, especially in a society as structured as Gilead. The fear that the regime instilled in the already insecure handmaids kept them from even attempting to rebel. By reducing the once self-sustaining women to the dehumanizing role as incubators, very few handmaids had the confidence to escape the regime. This novel makes the reader feel sorry for Offred and the other handmaids, and makes me take a step back and enjoy the various freedoms that I am entitled to that many of the characters of this book had taken away from them.

Monday, November 14, 2011

Final Research Paper Idea


For my final research paper, I want to discuss how the media has change American’s perspective on such a catastrophic event such as September 11th. While reading True Enough, I realized how jaded some perspectives of 9/11 are as a result of the medias response, even a decade later. My starting question is, why can we never be satisfied with accepting the facts of what happened? People feel the need to keep digging, as if they will find more information when the facts are right in front of them. From reading True Enough, I learned a little bit more information on the conspiracy theories surrounding September 11th. I am looking forward to watching the documentary Loose Change and hearing more about Dylan Avery’s thoughts.

From a simple Google search of “9/11 conspiracy theories,” I received over four million links. One of the first ones I found was titled, “The 11 Most Compelling Conspiracy Theories of 9/11.” The fact that there are eleven widely accepted conspiracy theories surrounding the devastating event is shocking to me. Scrolling through the website, I watched a link from Loose Change that made a very compelling argument about how it would have been almost impossible for so many phone calls to have been made from 32,000 feet in the air, the usual cruising altitude for commercial airlines. Avery makes claims that seem legitimate, but in the context of September 11th, just could not be possible.

I am interested in finding out if there is a large group of people who believe in these conspiracy theories and if there are more legitimate articles with facts proving that 9/11 was not just a random terrorist attack. This topic personally interests me because I live an hour outside of New York City and know many families who were affected by this horrible tragedy. I think it is incredibly rude and inappropriate for Americans to think the American government could have executed that 9/11. I think it is especially inappropriate that people think that the phone calls from the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center were pre recorded or made up. I am really looking forward to finding out more information about the conspiracy theories and how the media has changed our perception of this catastrophic event.

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

The Hidden Costs of Flying

Flying on airplanes is already expensive and now passengers are discovering that, “even the cheap seats on airplanes come with a fee.” In an article found on the Wall Street Journal online, Scott McCartney describes how airlines are now tricking passengers into thinking that the only seats for purchase are in bad locations on the plane. As a result, they are paying extra money for first class and seats with extra legroom that cost extra. McCartney rightfully points out that, “Overall, airlines look at seat fees as another way to generate revenue in low-margin industry. These days, checked baggage, meals, early boarding and flight changes on standby all come at a price.” Especially for those who fly often for business, these little charges can definitely add up. A seemingly all inclusive package may not be within reach anymore, but one thing is for sure, the earlier you book a flight, the better deal you can get!

Kardashian Wedding- Just for the Money?


This week, celebrity Kim Kardashian filed for divorce with her husband of 72 days, Kris Humphries. While this may not seem to be a pressing issue in the public sphere, I think it fits in perfectly with my ambassadorship because it deals with the presence of money in pop culture. There is much speculation that the marriage between Kardashian and Humphries was all a publicity stunt, their wedding video was sold to E and this NY Times article even mentions that she earned millions of dollars for the television episodes. Even this article’s title tells a lot about the business side of their relationship; “Kardashian Divorce forces the E! Network to Scramble.” The first information that readers get from this heading shows that their separation is a problem for the media, not for Kardashian or Humphries themselves. From this example, it seems that Kim and Kris have completely lost sight of the sanctity of marriage and are instead exploiting it for publicity. Although we don’t know exactly what happened in their relationship, it is difficult not to speculate that this wedding was a publicity statement that had no real love involved. Hopefully viewers will see how ridiculous this pair looks after their “fairy tale wedding” has gone to shambles in less than three months.