SAMPLE CONTEXT PAPER ON ‘THE HANDMAID’S TALE’
The 1980s were a time of revolutionary ideas: the decade saw a power struggle between
traditional values and increasing social change; they were a time when the third wave of
feminism began to take hold, yet The Moral Majority had an iron grip over America.
Through the ever-popular mediums of music, television and literature, the state of the
country was depicted with sharp accuracy. Many authors emerged to send warnings and
social criticisms into the future, hoping for change. Margaret Atwood used The
Handmaid's Tale in 1986 not only as a social critique of the 1980s, but a warning to
future generations. Atwood's novel was written in response to the political chaos of the
1980s-the AIDS crisis, homophobia, and the lack of equal rights for women. The
Historical Notes serve as a comparison of her futuristic society, Gilead, and the next
generation. In The Handmaid's Tale, Atwood desperately tries to warn her readers that
while historical perspective is the only way to change the future, continually ignoring it
will only cause history to repeat itself. The creation of Gilead and the post-Gilead time
period, demonstrated through The Historical Notes, are Atwood's prime examples of
what ignoring history causes. If the past includes genocide, inequality, persecution and
patriarchal structures, ignoring its warnings will only let the future mimic those faults
instead of mending and avoiding them.
Atwood's fears are unambiguous in The Historical Notes: the narrative by a male
professor who discredits Offred's story demonstrates the popular social and political
attitudes of the 1980s. As Amin Malak in "Margaret Atwood's 'The Handmaid's Tale' and
the Dystopian Tradition," noted, "Gilead prescribes a pattern of life based on frugality,
conformity, censorship, corruption, and fear" (Malak 127). The Historical Notes,
Atwood's extension of The Handmaid's Tale, is a satire of a scholarly symposium,
narrated by a keynote speaker named Professor James Darcy Pieixoto in the year 2195 about 200 years after Offred would have been alive. Professor Pieixoto makes a speech
about his research on Gileadean history, which includes his discovery of Offred's story,
which he then goes on to retell. However, Professor Pieixoto is, to say the least, without
the passion nor neutrality that Offred's story requires-he speaks as though he knows
Offred better than she knew herself. He criticizes and belittles her for attempting to
survive in Gilead, saying: "Many gaps remain. Some of them could have been filled by
our anonymous author, had she a different turn of mind"(Atwood, 310)-as if Offred could
have known more than she was allowed. Professor Pieixoto demonstrates a misogynist
attitude that was not uncommon in the 1980s and in Gilead, in which he undermines a
woman's life story to retell his own version of it.
Atwood's first critique is the state of feminism during the 1980s, more specifically the
attitudes towards it. A good example is Professor Pieixoto's sexist demeanor, in The
Historical Notes as he describes the feminist rebellion in Gilead:
This item - I hesitate to use the word document - was unearthed on the site of
what was once the city of Bangor, in what...would have been the state of Maine.
We know that this city was a prominent way station on what our author refers to
as "The Underground Femaleroad," since dubbed by some of our historical wags,
"The Underground Frailroad" (Laughter, groans.) [Atwood 301]
Here Atwood portrays an attitude that mirrors The Moral Majority leader Jerry Falwell,
who attempted to convince women that feminism was a result of being bored with their
feminine duties. At this point in the book, Atwood has just switched from one narrative to
a very different one; the Professor is such a strong contrast to Offred, in that he tries to
overpower her own personal narrative with his interpretation. In this, he is quite a parallel
to the right-wing conservative thinking of The Moral Majority, which believed that a
woman's rightful place was under her husband. As Falwell said in his 1980 book, "Listen
America":
I believe that at the foundation of the women's liberation movement there is a
minority core of women who were once bored with life, whose real problems are
spiritual problems. Many women have never accepted their God-given roles. Not
all the women involved in the feminist movement are radicals. Some are
misinformed, and some are lonely women...whose husbands spend little time at
home. [Falwell]
Falwell's desire was to eliminate the 'alternative' beliefs and morals of American society
in the 1980s, which Atwood clearly imitates through the morals and politics of Gilead.
For example, there are some social taboos that Gilead punishes - homosexuality, rebellion
against the Gileadean system, feminism - that have all been quite familiar to American
society, especially in the 1980s.
In 1986, the Supreme Court of the United States decided one of the most important cases
in American history: Bowers v. Hardwick. This case was the epitome of the United
States' opinion on homosexuality, in the form of legalized discrimination. The Court
found that the Constitution did not protect sodomy, after a police officer observed
Michael Hardwick engaging in oral sex with another man. It also upheld a previously
overturned Georgia sodomy law, citing that nothing in the Constitution "would extend a
fundamental right to homosexuals to engage in acts of consensual sodomy." (Bowers v.
Hardwick, 1986). From then until 2003, when Bowers was overturned, homosexuality
was practically a crime. Margaret Atwood would have been aware of the case as she was
writing The Handmaid's Tale, and clearly includes the anti-homosexuality themes
because of America's discrimination. "There are three new bodies on the wall. The two
others have purple placards hung around their necks: Gender Treachery" (Atwood 43).
Here, Offred casually mentions that homosexuality - called Gender Treachery in Gileadis punishable by death. What is most frightening about this passage is the fact that
Atwood is speculating on the similarities between American society and Gilead.
The Handmaid's Tale does not include anything new to American society; rather, it
brings the already well-known issues to attention by placing them out of a familiar
context. Offred herself is completely nonchalant about the entire situation-gender
treachery is nothing new to her. However, once readers understand the reference, they are
shocked by the death penalty for homosexuality. But this is Atwood's point: the reader is
shocked, but only because of the belief that he or she lives in an infallible society where
things like that do not happen. The truth is quite contrary, that America has its share of
hate crimes: the murders of Matthew Shepard and Brandon Teena/Teena Brandon are
only prime examples of a long list. Atwood wants her readers to be shocked, because
their feeling of disgust allows them to pass judgment upon Gilead, and later, their own
society.
Homosexuality is only one of the potential victims of The Moral Majority's control that
Jerry Falwell attempted to enact. The censorship of voices that Professor Pieixoto
encourages is Margaret Atwood's dire warning for the future; Gilead is a representation
of The Moral Majority's ideal society. Jerry Falwell wished for a United States filled with
passive women, hardworking men, and "Christian values." Through Gilead and The
Historical Notes, Atwood gives her readers a picture of what that society would be like:
"Men highly placed in the regime were thus able to pick and choose among women who
had demonstrated their reproductive fitness by having produced...healthy children, a
desirable characteristic..." (Atwood 304). Women are "national resources" and men hold
all power that is not distributed to the regime.
In the 1980s, the United States was not far from it-since Ronald Reagan was president,
and The Moral Majority held a great deal of political power, Gilead was not a far-fetched
idea. "Also, Gileadean society was under a good deal of pressure, demographic and
otherwise, and was subject to factors from which we ourselves are happily more free"
(Atwood 302). In this, Atwood criticizes the lack of protest on the part of American
women, and their acceptance of Jerry Falwell's ideas. Women in Gilead have absolutely
no rights - they have no choice in reproduction, they cannot own property, they have no
jobs, nor are they allowed to be educated - at least, beyond what their role in life
demands. They are, in essence, second class citizens - and Falwell's ideal woman - they
are victims of their own gender.
Falwell believed that when America returned to a traditional family structure, its
problems would be solved: there would be no drug abuse, homosexuality, sexual
promiscuity, or AIDS. However, Falwell's beliefs were laced with racism, oppression and
homophobia, against which Atwood rebels constantly in her writing. According to
Atwood, The Handmaid's Tale is:
…about what happens at the intersection of several trends, all of which are with
us today: the rise of right-wing fundamentalism as a political force, the decline of
the Caucasian birth rate in North America and northern Europe... [Atwood]
The Historical Notes truly show the long lasting effects of a departure from equal rights
and individuality that began in the 1980s. Not only were women unequal to men, it was
socially acceptable for misogyny to occur. For example, in The Historical Notes,
Professor Pieixoto forgives the Handmaids for their horrific actions in the Particicution
ceremony:
Scapegoats have been notoriously useful throughout history, and it must have
been most gratifying for these Handmaids...to be able to tear a man apart with
their bare hands every once in a while. [Atwood 308]
The professor says this as if the Handmaids were savage, wild beasts who could not help
but release their aggression upon some poor, innocent man who had done them no harm.
It is clear why Atwood wrote The Historical Notes as a warning, since Falwell's resolute
want for a traditional America is frightening, to say the least. Atwood's 'Historical Notes'
contain nothing new to American society: while AIDS, STDs, drug culture, and
homosexuality are eradicated, the negative aspects of society have only been replaced by
those which are even worse: violent punishment, persecution, victimization, and
perpetual witch-hunts. "There is more than one kind of freedom...freedom to, and
freedom from. Now you are being given freedom from. Don't underrate it" (Atwood 24).
Atwood argues that the freedom to choose-to vote, to have control over reproduction-is
much more valuable than a totalitarian regime that dictates what people are free from.
Life is admittedly safer for women in some ways, but the positive aspects do not
outweigh then negative ones. Women are forced into their roles, ignored by history and
the rest of society. The Professor identifies scapegoats in Gilead, but he does so in a way
that is so technical and void of any emotion that it becomes one-sided. He fails to
mention how horrific Gilead was for most involved, and even praises it for its techniques.
Again, this comes as a shock to Atwood's audience, though it shouldn't: this is all a part
of her critique of America, whose media and historians have distorted the truth to suit
their own purposes. This shock allows the readers to pass judgement, which in turn might
allow them to change history.
Atwood also criticizes America's lack of equal rights in the 1980s, the state of which
were miserable. The Historical Notes Critical Approach reads:
[Professor Pieixoto] establishes a historical context for Offred's narrative, just as
he gives a detailed account of how her story was recovered...but for all his mass
of social data, he is not concerned with Offred as an individual...He does not seem
to be as interested in finding out her identity as he is in establishing the identity of
her Commander. [York 58]
In essence, the professor does exactly what Offred predicted would happen to the story of
the Handmaids: "From the point of view of future history, we'll be invisible" (Atwood
57). He abuses Offred as Gilead abused her, removing her authority over her own story
and renaming it in a similar way to Gilead's suppression of a woman's identity. The
change in tone from Offred's personal account-of which Professor Pieixoto says to have
"a whiff of emotion recollected, if not in tranquility, at least post facto" (Atwood 303)-to
the professor's generalized academic jargon forces the reader to take up a position: this is
what Atwood intends. Professor Pieixoto's character purposefully-or at least by the will
of Atwood-ignores the pain and suffering that Offred experiences, and that he too has
been exposed to. Offred's narrative is not emotional, per se, but what gives it emotion is
the level of personal thoughts and feelings she shares. Readers know everything that she
knows, they know only what she is allowed to know-they become pulled into this world
of being a Handmaid, and experience almost first-hand the effects of Gilead. This too,
forces the readers to take sides, and decide what is right and wrong. Atwood's readers
initially do not realize that The Historical Notes are a parallel to their lives-the reader
only understands the consequences of his or her actions after careful consideration.
Atwood wants the reader to realize how those same actions unfold in The Handmaid's
Tale, and how imminent Gilead is. At this point that Atwood's novel moves beyond just
the seemingly imagined world to serve as a warning of a future to be avoided in real life.
If we, as a society, continue to ignore history's lessons, we will be doomed to repeat its
mistakes over and over again.
Readers in the 1980s would have more context than the readers of today, who are slightly
mislead in their belief that equal rights exist. In 1923, the Equal Rights Amendment was
written by Alice Paul, suffragist leader and founder of the National Woman's Party. The
ERA was introduced into every session of Congress between 1923 and 1972, when it was
passed and sent to the states for ratification. The seven-year time limit in the ERA's
proposing clause was extended by Congress to 1982, but at the deadline, the ERA had
been ratified by 35 states, leaving it three states short of the 38 required for ratification.
Since then, it has been reintroduced into every Congress without luck. It boggles the
mind why, in a society as advanced as America, the guarantee of equal rights for women
has yet to be achieved. Perhaps it is because, just as Margaret Atwood predicted, America
has not learned from its history. Jerry Falwell was one of the biggest oppositions to the
Equal Rights Amendment, as demonstrated in "Listen America":
The Equal Rights Amendment is a delusion. The Equal Rights Amendment strikes
at the foundation of our entire social structure. If passed, this amendment would
accomplish exactly the opposite of its outward claims. By mandating an absolute
equality under the law, it will actually take away many of the special rights
women now enjoy. [Falwell]
The state of equal rights in the 1980s was generally quite lacking because of this attitude
- America could not wrap its mind around the fact that men and women should be equal
under the eyes of the law. Atwood protested loudly against America's lack of foresight,
and The Handmaid's Tale, including The Historical Notes is a clear indication of her
doubt that society would change.
Currently, America continues to ignore the fact that women are second class citizens,
without the same rights as men. Almost twenty years later, we have not heeded Margaret
Atwood's warnings for the future - and her predictions have become frighteningly
accurate. The Historical Notes was a complex, hidden analysis of feminism and equal
rights. Atwood wrote The Handmaid's Tale to analyze America, but The Historical Notes
went further; instead of simply criticizing America's actions, they make a clear warning
to future generations of the damage they are causing. Through a parody of a scholarly
symposium set centuries later, Atwood uses her text to mirror the 1980s culture of moral
dominance and lack of foresight. As an influential country, America needs to realize the
important role history plays in the future, and start learning from its mistakes - before it
becomes too late to fix them.
Works Cited
Atwood, Margaret. The Handmaid's Tale. Anchor Books, USA. 1986.
Atwood, Margaret. "The Handmaid's Tale - Before and After". Unpublished.
Bowers V. Hardwick. No. 478 U.S. 186. Supreme Court of the United States. 30 June
1986. 21 Nov. 2006 <http://laws.findlaw.com/us/478/186.html>.
Falwell, Jerry. Listen America. Bantam Doubleday Dell Group. 8 Dec. 2006.
<http://www.wwnorton.com/college/history/archive/resources/documents/ch36_02
.htm>.
Malak, Amin. Novels for Students, Volume 4. Gale Press, USA. 1998.
Wharton, Linda J., comp. Equal Rights Amendment. 15 July 2006. 8 Dec. 2006
<http://www.equalrightsamendment.org/>.
Whitley, Peggy, comp. American Cultural History. Sept. 2006. Kingwood College. 10
Dec. 2006 <http://kclibrary.nhmccd.edu/decade80.html>.
York Notes. "Critical Approaches." York Press, USA. 1992.