Dystopianissm In The Handmaid's Tale
The doctrine that all societies have a fear of social breakdown has led to the common desire in Literature to construct idyllic and prosperous societies. Manifestly, these ideas have also been of great interest to Atwood and Huxley as seen with their novels The Handmaid's Tale and Brave New Word. This is closely related to concepts of utopia and dystopia. Utopianism, coined by Thomas More in 1551 etymologically equates to nowhere; this was semantically ameliorated however, to any perfect place by 1610s. Dystopianism, coined by J.S. Mill in 1868 refers to an antithesis of utopia, usually characterised by oppressive social control such as an authoritarian or totalitarian government. These concepts are omnipresent in both novels.
On the surface, …show more content…
there seems to be greater differences within the texts mainly because Atwood's dystopia has significant elements of feminism. Arguably, this stems from the powerful wave of religious conservatism after the elections of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher throughout the 1980s; inevitably augmenting the view that achievements in women's rights would be eliminated. Similarly, the prevalence of second-wave feminism; characterised by reclamation of female identity and addressing patriarchy was hugely influential in Atwood’s novel. Contrastingly, Huxley's amalgamation of free will and individuality have been sacrificed for complete social stability, in light of World-War I, the Wall Street Crash and a flu virus that had claimed millions of lives. Yet, both texts critique different aspects of dystopian societies.
Through the use of setting, Atwood and Huxley communicate their ideas about the nature of society. Fundamentally these are the absence of choice and freedom in the Handmaid's Tale and the absolute destructive power of technology in Brave New World.
Central in conveying the leading philosophy of the Brave New World, is the opening depiction of the World State. Huxley’s construction of a sterile, ‘cold’, and cynical environment serve to demonstrate the philosophy of the novel; the creation of a mechanised society based upon the principle of full rigid control of human reproduction. Often, the language is technical, whereas, the descriptions of the buildings are consistently simplistic, precise and robotic; reflecting the way in which it is completely denuded of humanity and dynamic. This can be seen with the description of “A squat grey building”, indoctrinating a sense of bleakness and brutality, similar to the reduced quality of life the population of the World State face. Moreover, “The light was frozen, dead, a ghost” conveys that light, as a symbol of rationality, is also nonexistent in the World Sate. This suggest that although the Centre represent the triumph of technology, Huxley subverts this notion by using it as a means to reveal the way in which technology can be dehumanising as it means abdication of rationality. Ultimately, setting is symbolic in the killing of a natural world in support of a controlled environment, void of civilisation.
Similarly, Atwood also uses setting as a mechanism to enforce the imperiling philosophy upheld by Gilead, whilst conveying the existence of an obliterated society through the monotonous and immutable tasks and objects.
Atwood also critically conveys the over-simplified and minimalistic lifestyle enforced upon women through the use of symbolic functional objects such as the “chair, table, and lamp”. Correspondingly, Atwood utilises setting to a large degree to explore women’s role in society. This can be seen with the artificial description of the street "like a museum, or a street in a model town". Here, the use of short sentences and abrupt punctuation conveys the removal of emotion and function of women from society. Supporting this view, is the descriptions of the “lawns tidy and façades are gracious”, which amplify the eerily homogeneous appearance and behavior women were expected to aspire …show more content…
to.
An extension of this notion, can also be seen with the setting symbolising the retraction of women from civilisation. For example, the “balcony”, which “runs down the room” is representative of the blurring of the domestic and public sphere; the space in which women are completely abject. Moreover, the “bell that measures time” amplifies the view that society in the Handmaid’s Tale is regressive. Contextually, bells were associated with religious activity, because they’re often ordained for spiritual purposes, as it is with the Republic of Gilead with the dominance of theocrasy.
In summation, setting in the Brave New World and Handmaid’s Tale is an epitome of the notion that universal happiness is impossible under excessively static, efficient, and totalitarian welfare-states.
Although Atwood’s use of setting serves to present a marginalisation of women, both texts invert the reduction of every aspect of life in order to critique the desire to maintain social utility.
The erosion of social responsibility and the rise of separationism, inevitably leads to alienation, a motif equally prominent in the Handmaid’s Tale and Brave New World.
Atwood states that the Handmaid’s Tale ‘is a study of power and how it operates and deforms or shapes the people who are living within the regime’. This particularly upholds the view that Handmaids become removed from the movement of society, as the walks are the only instruments enabling their escape to the public sphere. Under the Republic of Gilead, the Handmaid’s are not “allowed out except for our walks, twice, two by two”, extending alienation from the public sphere right through to the domestic sphere. Moreover, a direct religious connotation is apparent, emphasising the use of conventional use of religious fundamentalism in dystopia to repress women. Here, the use of fragmented sentences and abrupt punctuation can be seen to illustrate the fracturing identity of the Handmaid's. Overall, this supports the view that women were forced to lead monotonous lifestyles; alienated both from society and from one another.
Through exploring the negative consequences of eliminating women's rights, Atwood suggests that the absence of women’s identity, has a detrimental effect on how society operates, particularly shifting towards a dystopian environment void of communications and interactions, which inevitably leads to isolation.
The motif of alienation in the Brave New World is expressed with John ‘the Savage's’ claim that "If one's different, one's bound to be lonely", conveying that every character is ‘othered’, as they are all different. Huxley’s use of alienation can be categorized in three distinct areas; appearance, intellect, and morals, which is explored through three characters, Bernard Marx, Helmholtz Watson, and John the Savage. The reason in alienating Marx’s was his unusual shortness and ugliness as an Alpha Plus.Watson however, is alienated as a result of being stronger and smarter compared to other Alphas. Similarly, John was a victim of alienation from society but also himself, which ultimately leads to his suicide. Huxley ensures that the characters escape their alienation only through their exiles or death, which exasperates the view that the bleak resolve is a critical commentary on the way in which shunning others often leads to a paradox between the utopia projected by the World State to the reality being complete dystopia.
Further dissatisfaction with the utopian present becomes apparent with the quote “History is bunk” infused with the absence of historical dynamic within the setting. The quote implies that the State is alienated from the past, giving it no base by completely removing culture in creating a new civilisation. Overall, this serves to highlight how social decay is a gathering, unstoppable force, permeating each level of society.
A key similarity between the two novels is societal oppression through control; adhering to the notion that both Huxley and Atwood use dystopia as a means to critique society.
The control of knowledge in order to limit freedom of expression, is overtly exercised in the Handmaid’s Tale. The Handmaid's have been denied the ability to express and communicate ideas as a result of the reduction of language; largely this is due to language being deemed synonymous with power. For example, Atwood exploits the empowering nature of language, by dooming its virtues to be “forbidden …. dangerous” and “indecent” in the Republic. Likewise, the control over education is strict, with books and magazines are banned and women are not supposed to read or write.
Most significantly, Gilead creates a system of titles, stripping women away from their individuality by assigning names for Handmaid and class system, such as “Angels”, “Martha's”, and “Guardians”, whereby they are categorised on their ability to reproduce; the order being Wives, Daughters, Handmaids, Aunts, Martha's, and lastly Econowives. Moreover, feminists are demoted, being defined as ‘Unwoman’ – which amplifies the power of language as this depicts women as subhuman and deprives them of their identity. This adheres to Stein’s argument that Atwood projects the ‘desire to steal language from patriarchy through narrator's growing resistance’. This is seen with Offred, who regularly interrupts the narrative flow of the text to contemplate the meaning of certain words and phrases, for example “Nolite te Bastardes Carborundorum”, translating to ‘don't let the bastards grind you down’ Similarly, lexical references to the Bible dominate the novel, such as “Loaves and Fishes”. It can be argued that this reinforces and amplifies the use of monotonous and predetermined conversations, for example “May the Lord open” and “Praise be”; which is often seen as a means to grant government greater control through the use of theocracy. This can be seen as a microcosm of the exercised patriarchy within Gilead, an element of society which Atwood seemingly rejects through dystopia. Overall, this adheres to the traditional dystopic convention that women are ‘banned’ of their individuality.
Correspondingly, Huxley ensures the complete abdication of art, science and all forms of literature in order to maintain the Wold State’s fascination with the doctrine of social stability. This has been weaved into the novel with the symbolism of Shakespeare. The noble aspects of humanity, including the power of emotion, passion, love and beauty projected through Shakespeare's plays have been sacrificed, as evinced through the quote, “You’ve got to choose between happiness and what people used to call high art. We’ve sacrificed the high art”. The use of “sacrifice” reveals the way in which the World State is void of the utopian elements such as emotions and civil liberties.
Similar to Atwood, Huxley amplifies the power of “words” by aligning them with “X-rays” in stating that “if you use them properly — they’ll go through anything”.
The exploration of the impact of scientific advancement on humanity is explicitly prevalent in the Brave New World.
Huxley satirizes the significance of science within the World State, through humanities indiscriminate belief in progress and science being under heavy scrutiny. In essence, Huxley measures how far science can stretch without being immoral and comes to the conclusion that science does not have the power to save humanity successfully. This seen through the supremacy and emphasis placed on eugenics, whereby “everyone belongs to everyone”. It therefore becomes clear that the cost of the World State's motto, ‘Community, Identity, Stability’ is clearly a society devoid of emotions, love, beauty and real relationships. The impact of 2,000 million standardised citizens being “hatched” to their predestined roles, is essentially enabling social decay to be an unstoppable force. Here, Huxley’s uses scientific extremism as an element of dystopia, which he discretely
criticises.
The fundamental difference between the Handmaid's Tale and Brave New World is the clash between a patriarchal society and a society dominated by technology. Arguably, this lies with the political discontent and hostility both writers encountered during the epoch in which both novels were published. In many ways, the Brave New World prophesizes struggles and fears encountered by the majority of the population and generated debate in the second half of the twentieth century. A major element of this can be seen to be the Great Depression and the rise of consumerism, as evinced through the leading doctrine imposed by the World State that “Ending is better than mending”. This enables the sculpting of the argument that the Brave New World is a poignant warning against the dangers of a totalitarian society based on scientific principles.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, Coral Ann Howells plausibly argues that Atwood's novel ‘Turns traditional dystopia upside down, engaging in the debate about gender and genre.” Central to the Handmaid’s Tale, is the dangers of sexual harassment, political ignorance, religious discrimination and fundamentalism, which reflect the fears of infertility as a result of the declining birth rates during the this period. Overall, Atwood explores the consequence of reversing women’s rights and the intersection of politics and sexuality. Inevitably, this gave way for the Handmaid’s Tale to be a reflection of a dystopia in which women are subjugated through the use of extreme policies indoctrinated by a Christian government.
Overall, Huxley and Atwood convey that etymologically, a’ utopia’ is inherently paradoxical; as seen through the reality of the World State and the Republic of Gilead being dystopic. The divide between two novels, however, is the blurring of a "Fordist" dystopia based on production and consumption, and “Feminist” dystopia. Thus, it becomes clear that both authors create and use dystopian societies as instruments to critique differing controversial issues critical to the periods they were constructed. In some respects, both novels were received critically upon publication, however they remain relevant today; with increasing political attempts to limit women of abortion rights in the USA and technological advancements and consumerism.
On the surface, …show more content…
there seems to be greater differences within the texts mainly because Atwood's dystopia has significant elements of feminism. Arguably, this stems from the powerful wave of religious conservatism after the elections of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher throughout the 1980s; inevitably augmenting the view that achievements in women's rights would be eliminated. Similarly, the prevalence of second-wave feminism; characterised by reclamation of female identity and addressing patriarchy was hugely influential in Atwood’s novel. Contrastingly, Huxley's amalgamation of free will and individuality have been sacrificed for complete social stability, in light of World-War I, the Wall Street Crash and a flu virus that had claimed millions of lives. Yet, both texts critique different aspects of dystopian societies.
Through the use of setting, Atwood and Huxley communicate their ideas about the nature of society. Fundamentally these are the absence of choice and freedom in the Handmaid's Tale and the absolute destructive power of technology in Brave New World.
Central in conveying the leading philosophy of the Brave New World, is the opening depiction of the World State. Huxley’s construction of a sterile, ‘cold’, and cynical environment serve to demonstrate the philosophy of the novel; the creation of a mechanised society based upon the principle of full rigid control of human reproduction. Often, the language is technical, whereas, the descriptions of the buildings are consistently simplistic, precise and robotic; reflecting the way in which it is completely denuded of humanity and dynamic. This can be seen with the description of “A squat grey building”, indoctrinating a sense of bleakness and brutality, similar to the reduced quality of life the population of the World State face. Moreover, “The light was frozen, dead, a ghost” conveys that light, as a symbol of rationality, is also nonexistent in the World Sate. This suggest that although the Centre represent the triumph of technology, Huxley subverts this notion by using it as a means to reveal the way in which technology can be dehumanising as it means abdication of rationality. Ultimately, setting is symbolic in the killing of a natural world in support of a controlled environment, void of civilisation.
Similarly, Atwood also uses setting as a mechanism to enforce the imperiling philosophy upheld by Gilead, whilst conveying the existence of an obliterated society through the monotonous and immutable tasks and objects.
Atwood also critically conveys the over-simplified and minimalistic lifestyle enforced upon women through the use of symbolic functional objects such as the “chair, table, and lamp”. Correspondingly, Atwood utilises setting to a large degree to explore women’s role in society. This can be seen with the artificial description of the street "like a museum, or a street in a model town". Here, the use of short sentences and abrupt punctuation conveys the removal of emotion and function of women from society. Supporting this view, is the descriptions of the “lawns tidy and façades are gracious”, which amplify the eerily homogeneous appearance and behavior women were expected to aspire …show more content…
to.
An extension of this notion, can also be seen with the setting symbolising the retraction of women from civilisation. For example, the “balcony”, which “runs down the room” is representative of the blurring of the domestic and public sphere; the space in which women are completely abject. Moreover, the “bell that measures time” amplifies the view that society in the Handmaid’s Tale is regressive. Contextually, bells were associated with religious activity, because they’re often ordained for spiritual purposes, as it is with the Republic of Gilead with the dominance of theocrasy.
In summation, setting in the Brave New World and Handmaid’s Tale is an epitome of the notion that universal happiness is impossible under excessively static, efficient, and totalitarian welfare-states.
Although Atwood’s use of setting serves to present a marginalisation of women, both texts invert the reduction of every aspect of life in order to critique the desire to maintain social utility.
The erosion of social responsibility and the rise of separationism, inevitably leads to alienation, a motif equally prominent in the Handmaid’s Tale and Brave New World.
Atwood states that the Handmaid’s Tale ‘is a study of power and how it operates and deforms or shapes the people who are living within the regime’. This particularly upholds the view that Handmaids become removed from the movement of society, as the walks are the only instruments enabling their escape to the public sphere. Under the Republic of Gilead, the Handmaid’s are not “allowed out except for our walks, twice, two by two”, extending alienation from the public sphere right through to the domestic sphere. Moreover, a direct religious connotation is apparent, emphasising the use of conventional use of religious fundamentalism in dystopia to repress women. Here, the use of fragmented sentences and abrupt punctuation can be seen to illustrate the fracturing identity of the Handmaid's. Overall, this supports the view that women were forced to lead monotonous lifestyles; alienated both from society and from one another.
Through exploring the negative consequences of eliminating women's rights, Atwood suggests that the absence of women’s identity, has a detrimental effect on how society operates, particularly shifting towards a dystopian environment void of communications and interactions, which inevitably leads to isolation.
The motif of alienation in the Brave New World is expressed with John ‘the Savage's’ claim that "If one's different, one's bound to be lonely", conveying that every character is ‘othered’, as they are all different. Huxley’s use of alienation can be categorized in three distinct areas; appearance, intellect, and morals, which is explored through three characters, Bernard Marx, Helmholtz Watson, and John the Savage. The reason in alienating Marx’s was his unusual shortness and ugliness as an Alpha Plus.Watson however, is alienated as a result of being stronger and smarter compared to other Alphas. Similarly, John was a victim of alienation from society but also himself, which ultimately leads to his suicide. Huxley ensures that the characters escape their alienation only through their exiles or death, which exasperates the view that the bleak resolve is a critical commentary on the way in which shunning others often leads to a paradox between the utopia projected by the World State to the reality being complete dystopia.
Further dissatisfaction with the utopian present becomes apparent with the quote “History is bunk” infused with the absence of historical dynamic within the setting. The quote implies that the State is alienated from the past, giving it no base by completely removing culture in creating a new civilisation. Overall, this serves to highlight how social decay is a gathering, unstoppable force, permeating each level of society.
A key similarity between the two novels is societal oppression through control; adhering to the notion that both Huxley and Atwood use dystopia as a means to critique society.
The control of knowledge in order to limit freedom of expression, is overtly exercised in the Handmaid’s Tale. The Handmaid's have been denied the ability to express and communicate ideas as a result of the reduction of language; largely this is due to language being deemed synonymous with power. For example, Atwood exploits the empowering nature of language, by dooming its virtues to be “forbidden …. dangerous” and “indecent” in the Republic. Likewise, the control over education is strict, with books and magazines are banned and women are not supposed to read or write.
Most significantly, Gilead creates a system of titles, stripping women away from their individuality by assigning names for Handmaid and class system, such as “Angels”, “Martha's”, and “Guardians”, whereby they are categorised on their ability to reproduce; the order being Wives, Daughters, Handmaids, Aunts, Martha's, and lastly Econowives. Moreover, feminists are demoted, being defined as ‘Unwoman’ – which amplifies the power of language as this depicts women as subhuman and deprives them of their identity. This adheres to Stein’s argument that Atwood projects the ‘desire to steal language from patriarchy through narrator's growing resistance’. This is seen with Offred, who regularly interrupts the narrative flow of the text to contemplate the meaning of certain words and phrases, for example “Nolite te Bastardes Carborundorum”, translating to ‘don't let the bastards grind you down’ Similarly, lexical references to the Bible dominate the novel, such as “Loaves and Fishes”. It can be argued that this reinforces and amplifies the use of monotonous and predetermined conversations, for example “May the Lord open” and “Praise be”; which is often seen as a means to grant government greater control through the use of theocracy. This can be seen as a microcosm of the exercised patriarchy within Gilead, an element of society which Atwood seemingly rejects through dystopia. Overall, this adheres to the traditional dystopic convention that women are ‘banned’ of their individuality.
Correspondingly, Huxley ensures the complete abdication of art, science and all forms of literature in order to maintain the Wold State’s fascination with the doctrine of social stability. This has been weaved into the novel with the symbolism of Shakespeare. The noble aspects of humanity, including the power of emotion, passion, love and beauty projected through Shakespeare's plays have been sacrificed, as evinced through the quote, “You’ve got to choose between happiness and what people used to call high art. We’ve sacrificed the high art”. The use of “sacrifice” reveals the way in which the World State is void of the utopian elements such as emotions and civil liberties.
Similar to Atwood, Huxley amplifies the power of “words” by aligning them with “X-rays” in stating that “if you use them properly — they’ll go through anything”.
The exploration of the impact of scientific advancement on humanity is explicitly prevalent in the Brave New World.
Huxley satirizes the significance of science within the World State, through humanities indiscriminate belief in progress and science being under heavy scrutiny. In essence, Huxley measures how far science can stretch without being immoral and comes to the conclusion that science does not have the power to save humanity successfully. This seen through the supremacy and emphasis placed on eugenics, whereby “everyone belongs to everyone”. It therefore becomes clear that the cost of the World State's motto, ‘Community, Identity, Stability’ is clearly a society devoid of emotions, love, beauty and real relationships. The impact of 2,000 million standardised citizens being “hatched” to their predestined roles, is essentially enabling social decay to be an unstoppable force. Here, Huxley’s uses scientific extremism as an element of dystopia, which he discretely
criticises.
The fundamental difference between the Handmaid's Tale and Brave New World is the clash between a patriarchal society and a society dominated by technology. Arguably, this lies with the political discontent and hostility both writers encountered during the epoch in which both novels were published. In many ways, the Brave New World prophesizes struggles and fears encountered by the majority of the population and generated debate in the second half of the twentieth century. A major element of this can be seen to be the Great Depression and the rise of consumerism, as evinced through the leading doctrine imposed by the World State that “Ending is better than mending”. This enables the sculpting of the argument that the Brave New World is a poignant warning against the dangers of a totalitarian society based on scientific principles.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, Coral Ann Howells plausibly argues that Atwood's novel ‘Turns traditional dystopia upside down, engaging in the debate about gender and genre.” Central to the Handmaid’s Tale, is the dangers of sexual harassment, political ignorance, religious discrimination and fundamentalism, which reflect the fears of infertility as a result of the declining birth rates during the this period. Overall, Atwood explores the consequence of reversing women’s rights and the intersection of politics and sexuality. Inevitably, this gave way for the Handmaid’s Tale to be a reflection of a dystopia in which women are subjugated through the use of extreme policies indoctrinated by a Christian government.
Overall, Huxley and Atwood convey that etymologically, a’ utopia’ is inherently paradoxical; as seen through the reality of the World State and the Republic of Gilead being dystopic. The divide between two novels, however, is the blurring of a "Fordist" dystopia based on production and consumption, and “Feminist” dystopia. Thus, it becomes clear that both authors create and use dystopian societies as instruments to critique differing controversial issues critical to the periods they were constructed. In some respects, both novels were received critically upon publication, however they remain relevant today; with increasing political attempts to limit women of abortion rights in the USA and technological advancements and consumerism.