Our Shared Shelf discussion

Given the Bible belt in the US, where they have "natural history" museum with humans and Dinosaurs, is where Trump made great in roads. Seems Margret Atwood's and George Orwell (1984) are both making an appearance unfortunately...

Now this is the context I love. Thank you so much Keith for researching and putting it together.

This is really interesting Keith! I have read up around it being a reaction to a resurgence of conservatism with the elections of Thatcher and Reagan but I didn't know about these specific incidents.

I think it is very interesting that it has once again surged in popularity during a time where politics seems to have swung to the right, with the election of Trump and the UK having the most right wing Gov since Thatcher.

I recently saw a study of sci-fi and dystopian novels which looked at subject matter correlating with global threats of the period, ie nuclear, bio-weapons, terrorism, climate change. I think a similar study looking at the correlation between dystopian novels and notable political leanings of the time (ie centrist, liberal, conservative) would be fascinating.

Really interesting to hear your personal take on some of these events - it's the kind of thing that isn't outlined in the history books per say but you can make the connections when you see it.

I definitely agree about the Bush/Blair administrations, as it coincided with a rise in extremist terrorism and resulted in a war that nobody wanted - I have studied a lot of UK and US lit from this period and it shows the same kind of trends. Despite representing the Labour party I would certainly put Blair further right here (if not right of centre to be honest!)

I'm really interested in why we are now returning to old dystopians - is this something we have always done or is it because we have no quality contemporary dystopians for this period as yet? (if there is one good thing to come out of Trumps presidency I believe it will be the dystopians and satires it inspires)

Keith wrote: "She has also stated that everything described has already happened in one form or another. You will need some understanding of world history to decipher this statement. No doubt these points will c..."

Thank you SO MUCH for posting this - I have read The Handmaid's Tale so many times and never thought to read more into contemporary events that may have fed some of the ideas.

It's sad that now in 2017 it takes on even more resonance under Trump... clearly we're not so good at progress :(

Ellen wrote: "Really interesting to hear your personal take on some of these events - it's the kind of thing that isn't outlined in the history books per say but you can make the connections when you see it.

I..."

I think returning to old dystopians is interesting because they continue to take on new resonance under various regimes (Trump, etc)... so it's kind of curious (and depressing, ha) that Atwood's nightmare vision from the 80s still feels so highly pertinent now.

You're so right that if any good comes of Trump's presidency, it will be more dystopian fiction! :)

Saw this link pop up on my feed this morning, thought I would share with this group. Real laws that are straight out of the Handmaid's Take.
- living together before marriage
- the parental rights of rapists
- Denying permeant birth control based off of the age and number of children a woman has
- requiring fetuses to have funerals
Are more of the sinister ones in my opinion. Then the next two...
- permits for high heels
- being fired for sexually arousing your boss

But the whole list just twists my stomach. Read more here: http://io9.gizmodo.com/10-real-laws-s...

And this is why this thread is so important to me. I was born during the Regan / Thatcher years. Their words / actions influenced my life but in means that I could not directly pin point. Nor the Romanian birth requirements nor the AIDS scare. In one aspect my ignorance and blind acceptance of "that's just how things are" is exactly how these movements become ideologies

Keith wrote "In all three cases, the decision to choose a name is initially taken out of the hands of the person affected. We then get situations, as in point three, where it is enforced by the very people affected. Is this the patriarchy in action"

I'm not married to my SO (significant other) and I receive letters stating Mr. And Mrs. John Smith. I laugh while I throw it into the trash.

I used to work in development where you send out massive annual appeals for donations. We had a donor list hundreds strong. It became a process to go through and rearrange those who specifically identified differently. Those that needed the wives to be listed first bc she was the main contributor or making sure you that the separate last names were correct and that you didn't miss it up to Mary Smith and John Sue instead of Mary Sue and John Smith. So very time consuming!

And that's the point. It's conveinant to establish a way of doing things. It's easy. It shows exactly where the priorities lie. ( And thus more meaningful when asking for donations when you correctly align your message to what your donor wants)

The latter points you listed in today's world may not be as sinister as Offred naming traditions, but they all have a common root of ownership and censorship to some points.

But Is it wrong? Can we still have a letter addressed to Mr and Mrs John Smith? Can we still allow a father giving away his daughter to a new husband in a wedding ceremony? Sure...But you're not going to see me to it or bat an eye lid if others do it too. ( I just have to reign in feelings about whatever the next generation thinks up)

What is interesting in a lot of dystopian fiction is that when a country experiences an ‘economic crisis', governments tend to revert back to 'tradition'. These traditions tend to claim that they are restoring order and prosperity in the name of the people and for the good of the country. These governments see this responsibility of ‘fixing issues’ as theirs, which often result in the individual loosing their identity.
Reproduction seems to be the agenda of these governments. This is reproduction of product and life. If this reproduction line is compromised then the system will become unstable and collapse, which will no longer be able to support anyone in that system. This is fear mongering.

It seems silly that these politicians claim that they are going to reclaim their country and make it great again. Trump stated that he ‘wanted to make America great again’, and he has done this by trying to segregate America from the rest of the world to make it ‘safe again’. Politics can no longer afford to be national, they have to become global in order to keep up with this vastly expanding world. Why can’t we think forward instead of backwards when it comes to ‘making our countries great again’? This is why dystopian novels are so appealing…they offer an alternative to this ‘cycle of tradition’.

Lauren wrote: "What is interesting in a lot of dystopian fiction is that when a country experiences an ‘economic crisis', governments tend to revert back to 'tradition'..."

More scary is that in real world it doesn't always follow that pattern. I.e. President Trump was elected after President Obama and his staff (and the fed and ...) worked to end The Great Recession.

Reagan created a problems with fighting the Cold War. Etc.

I also want to keep an eye on Japan via your second point. They are currently dealing with a population bust, I.e the younger generation aren't occupied with marrying and having children. I am curious what the government is doing to do to manage the situation.

Keith I could talk about this with you for hours! So to anyone out there who is visiting this page, please, please please add your thoughts, too, before I monopolize it all!

Keith wrote; We in the UK cannot wave our so-called superiority flag either"... link to the guardian: "A controversial proposal to ask new mothers who have been raped for verification if they wish to claim tax credits for more than two children has become law without any debate or vote in parliament" shudders That's awful!

I am watching what Ireland is doing on this debate intently. Especially given the religious connotations.

Keith wrote: One of the other themes in the novel is damage to the environment and how ultimately this affected birth rates and birth defects. It is one of the background themes that ultimately led to the creation of Gilead. .."

Darn you're good! So many wonderful ideas to chew on here.

Bhopal Gas Tragedy December 1984: Have not heard of before! I am seeing traction on two items here in the US: Clean Air Act - specifically as it's on the chopping block and then with Urban Tree Canopy.

And it's really an interesting issue, right? Because we can measure this. Things have become so visible now with Smog especially. Beijing Summer Olympics in 2008 comes to mind. The smog was so bad that athletes feared for their health competing in the area. To answer it, the government shut down factories and only allowed driving on even/odd days! And low and behold they say a 50% reduction in air pollution. Such a large percentage to me means that we all know what is causing this and affecting it to such a degree. http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf...

And that the solution is rather simple! Plant more trees! Having trees within 100 ft can help to filter and clean the area. So planting more trees by highways and by around the city can dramatically help people suffering from asthma or other respiratory issues.

Nuclear - yes. A good resource, dangerous, but a good one.
Oil Spills... yes...the Gulf of Mexico is still cleaning up after the Event Horizon BP oil spill...
Pesticides: yup, yup. Good news is that there is a push for a) organic aka grown without pesticides and b) top soil revival. (Great podcast on it: https://www.cityclub.org/events/why-a...). Othernote... I saw a push for soil conservation (cover crops, etc) on a Chipotle bag the other day... so movement is happening!

Drugs: thalidomide - this is on my to-research list. Thanks!

Keith this is brilliant! Thank you very much for putting it together.

Keith wrote: "Melodramatic? - maybe, but if you remove a woman's name, her identity can soon follow and she can then be removed from history. "

So very true. I turn to Iran or Afghanistan for details on that.

Thanks Keith, for posting this - very interesting indeed to have some more historical context!

Briana wrote: Thank you SO MUCH for posting this - I have read The Handmaid's Tale so many times and never thought to read more into contemporary events that may have fed some of the ideas.

It's sad that now in 2017 it takes on even more resonance under Trump... clearly we're not so good at progress :( "

It's my first time reading this book, but I'm pretty sure I'll be rereading it some time later on this year. I hadn't thought of researching the contemporary events either, but I'm very glad Keith did and shared them with us.

I definitely think Trump's rule will inspire more dystopian novel of this sort. Like Keith wrote: "As far as a dystopian novel on Trump's presidency is concerned, the author certainly wouldn't need too much imagination - just writing the facts would be enough to scare anyone silly!

The historical context makes a lot of sense. I just found this article, it talks about The Handmaid's Tale and its context today...
http://www.sbs.com.au/guide/article/2...

Erin wrote: "The historical context makes a lot of sense. I just found this article, it talks about The Handmaid's Tale and its context today...
http://www.sbs.com.au/guide/article/2......"

Thank you for sharing this article, Erin. I'm glad I read it because it reminded me again of the issues that exist in other parts of the world, because let's face it: in France we may not have total gender equality, but as women, we're pretty much free to do as we wish. But, like Keith says, "It may be OK where you live, but somebody, somewhere, is suffering."

The article makes me feel so sad and powerless, however. I don't feel that things are going to change for these women anytime soon. It must be so frustrating to be a woman and be in any of the situations mentioned. This frustration is something I feel when reading The Handmaid's Tale as well (I haven't had time to finish it yet, unfortunately) and thinking about it really frightens me. :(

Thanks very much for this thread - I've just discovered it and read it in one go, so my apologies for now referencing anyone's comments and thoughts above.

One thing I find interesting when talking about the laws is the resistance to change, even when the social and cultural acceptability and context is changed.

Two recent examples in New Zealand (where I am) come to mind:
1. Abortion law - abortion is reasonably culturally accepted in a lot of ways, but the law still states that it can only be done in specific conditions. The main one used is where the pregnancy will be detrimental to a woman's mental health (my understanding, not the legal words). As such, to have an abortion you need two doctors to sign a legal declaration that you will suffer severe mental damage by continuing the pregnancy. And while it may work in practice, this means that women who require an abortion for any reason then forever more have this on their medical record. Yet, a recent petition to amend the law to reflect the social practice has created a whole lot of resistance, not against the idea of abortion but that 'it seems to work in practice, there isn't a problem'.
2. It recently came out in the media that NZ still has an anti-blasphemy law on the books, even though it isn't enforced, as a society we aren't overly religious (a lot are but it's treated as a personal thing), and we are multi-cultural and thus multi-religion - so a law reflecting one religion doesn't really fit. Yet, there are still a number of people who don't believe it should be repealed or replaced with something more appropriate, again because it is fine in practice because it isn't enforced

Yet, to link it back to this thread, the existence of these laws leaves the door open for them to be enforced as an initial step to a more restrictive society, where government takes control of enforcing moral values. These are just two examples that have been topical lately, and not actually a considered or researched point. No doubt most countries have something similar.

Kelly wrote: "As such, to have an abortion you need two doctors to sign a legal declaration that you will suffer severe mental damage by continuing the pregnancy. this means that women who require an abortion for any reason then forever more have this on their medical record.."

Oh wow. That... that is... mmmhmm. I thought it was bad here where you need an ultrasound and the birth father's approval. I had no idea. Thank you for sharing.

the existence of these laws leaves the door open for them to be enforced as an initial step to a more restrictive society

To be sure. But, I am hopeful, that as we peer behind these open doors to see how far they can really open, the more we will push back to narrow the gap.

Which leads to Britt's comment. Yes the world is scary. It is like a dark place that we are fumbling around in and getting scared about the noises we here. But books like Handmaid's tale, organizations like OSS, or just the push of feminism do create light by which we can see.

For example;
- Malala- working all over the world to promote education for women and girls
- Kiva Fund / World Bank - with their microloans specifically targeted to help women in entrepreneurial roles. https://www.kiva.org/
- Work by countless organizations like Thorn that helps end child sexual exploitation or child prostitution rings

The point is, that it may seem like a lot of bad things are going on right now - and there are - but that's because we are finally seeing the awful truth. We are finally able to see what is happening in the dark because we have feminism, this book club, and countless other areas that affords us the opportunity and visibility to constantly review "the way things have always been."

This thread is like my History class in high school, only better probably. <3 Thanks for your contribution, Keith!

A society that forgets its own past is doomed to repeat it.

This is such an interesting threaad! I can think of a couple of examples where Handmaid's Tale echoes historical and contemporary examples of women's suppression:

In the coda at the end, they reference an academic paper 'Iran and Gilead: Two Late 20th Century monotheocracies', drawing a parallel between the forced hijab and morality laws of Iran and the costumes and laws of Gilead. Here are Iranian women protesting the hijab when it was first made compulsory: that protest looks huge, but it had no effect at all.



In the book Offred muses about the young daughters of the commanders and how they'll never know anything other than wearing compulsory modesty and veils, and I guess that's true now for a whole generation of Iranian women, and for others where conservative Islam has been replaced by wahabi and salafi extremists.



Later in the coda, it mentions that 'birth services' existed prior to the establishment of Gilead. Here's a really painful article about Indian women who act as surrogates for rich westerners, and one that explicitly draws parallels with Handmaid's Tale.

Surrogate 'Hosts'

The debate on surrogate mothers is rather hot topic right now in Spain, at least in certain circles. One in which, at the beginning, you think, oh come on, there can't be no harm in people wanting to have childr...until you start reading a bit more of what truly goes on. This is one of those threads where pages and pages of discussion are a good sign.

I can't believe I've missed loads of this discussion - catching up was fascinating.

I had a few thoughts:

1) Keith your acknowledgement of the environmental factors causing declining birth-rates. The historical inspirations for this are interesting but for me it is the way it is used in the novel which is troubling - it is pretty explicitly acknowledged that it would be blasphemous/treacherous to suggest a man be infertile, so once again ALL of the weight of ability to reproduce is placed on women and if you can't you are considered 'unwoman' - unless you are privileged enough to be a wife and have a handmaiden who can give you a baby (huge capitalism element here!). There is just no possibility of a man being 'unman' - it doesn't exist and is only mentioned once in an acknowledgement that such a thought is forbidden. The TV show deals with this in an incredibly interesting way which adds yet another layer to it.

2) The discussions have highlighted abortion laws which made me think about a discussion I recently had with a friend on abortion. She pointed out that for very pious Catholics, it is not only abortion which is forbidden but any artificial intervention which prevents conception of a human life – this gives slightly more reality and context to the ‘Ceremony’ as a duty to procreate. There isn't a far leap from saying it is a sin to artificially prevent conception to saying it is therefore a duty to try to conceive at every opportunity. This isn't far removed from some areas today where people see having children as a duty (I recently read Bailey's Prize nominee Stay with Me on this topic - however its not just African countries, some people in the US and UK hold not dissimilar views.)

3) I was also thinking about the significance of Gilead as a place - possibly to symbolise an idealised Biblical utopia, but also on further research I found that the plants attributed to being the Balm of Gilead which has been associated with being a seductive perfume and having abortive properties - is this a satirical joke and a bit of irony on Atwood's part? Trying to find other info on Gilead but struggling to make links.

Would appreciate it if anyone has thoughts!

Keith wrote: "Men, of course, were expected to ‘do their duty"

Further reinforcing the male ability to leave a marriage if their wife couldn't produce a child or specifically a male child. Looking at you Henry!

Right now I'm reading a book on ancient Rome. Here, the children in a divorce would stay with the father. Similar to Gilead, regardless of the birth mother. Times have changed, sure, but not for the better (imho).

No interpretation can be wrong Keith! There appears to be so little info on Gilead that I don't think there's a right or wrong.

But actually the info you provided was really helpful in terms of giving it a bit more context and explaining why Gilead was specifically chosen.

And in terms of your personal reflections on the roles in reproduction, the fact that these attitudes have still been prevalent within recent memory is worrying! And these attitudes still exist - I saw someone on social media who genuinely argued that women shouldn't be having sex if we are not intending to procreate! This was used to argue that women who don't want to accidentally become pregnant should just abstain, rather than have sex, fall pregnant and then get an abortion - which is obviously incredibly problematic as there are many other complex issues involved. And again, the onus was placed on the women to take responsibility for pregnancy, not men.

Really interesting thread! Thank you all!

One thing I've been thinking about but haven't looked up, is that somewhere in the book it's mentioned that Aunties are leading the centers because the most efficient way to get women to conform is through other women. I feel there is a lot of truth to this but I don't know why :-) Does anyone know of historical or current parallels?

Some examples that spring to mind are Chinese foot-binding was done to little girls by their mothers; currently FGM is done by mothers and midwives.

The Romans gave positions of power to the locals in order to control populations too. And have you seen the newish TV programme 'Colony'? They use the same tactic.

In terms of women controlling other women, unfortunately we are often the worst offenders against our own kind. Both 'Half the Sky' and 'Sex and World Peace' go into this phenomenon with plenty of real life examples such as women only giving their male children medical care, education and decent food when resources are scarce and neglecting the girls. We are also the main perpetrators of the killing of female babies in countries where males are more important.

In western countries we often turn on each other in jealousy, being nasty about successful or beautiful ladies and of course 'slut shaming'. We need to point out to people when we see it happening as I don't think people are aware they are doing it half the time!

I loved this book. Been my favourite so far!

Keith wrote: "So far we have discussed political issues and touched upon female suppression. One of the other themes in the novel is damage to the environment and how ultimately this affected birth rates and bir..."

Yes to everything you listed. I would add...

Toxic Waste--The Love Canal tragedy. In Niagara, New York, Hooker Chemical stored over 20,000 tons of wastes including chlorinated hydrocarbon residues, process sludge, fly ash and municipal wastes in an abandoned canal (Love's Canal) from 1942-1953. The canal and it's waste was capped in 1953. The neighborhood and school built around the canal. In the late 1970s a series of wet seasons caused the wastes to leak through the cap into the town. As people became incredibly sick a public health emergency was declared in 1978 and pregnant women and young children were told to evacuate. The issue persisted until the EPA convinced President Carter to evacuate the remaining residents (over 700 families) and purchase their homes in 1980. This event along with other tragedies of toxic waste at the time helped create CERCLA or the Superfund program at the EPA to deal with environmental tragedies.

For more stories regarding drugs, toxic waste, reproductive health, and environmental justice check out:
-Sandra Steingraber "Living Downstream"
-Terry Tempest Williams "Refuge"
-Colborn, Dumanoski, & Myers, "Our Stolen Futures"
-the toxic comedy documentary "Blue Vinyl"

The most striking notion I am left with after reading "The Handmaid's Tale" is society's complacency and how quickly we allow our freedoms and liberties to be overrun in the name of security. This take is a poignant example that too easily we can be the frog in the heating pot that slowly boils to death. With this in mind, I am unsure how I feel about the ending. The story ending with a calm intellectual discussion reflecting on this sordid past without knowing how we got from point A to point B makes me wonder if this contributes to complacency by giving the feeling that "it will all work out in the end." I know that something drastic had to happen to trigger the change and that people ultimately are agents of change but glossing over all that in the story gives a sense of inevitability to me which again feeds complacency...

Thank you for the examples of women controlling women!

The intellectual end also scared me, in that they refused to be critical to this society as they were only acting as they best knew to solve the problem.. In our expectations of human society, are all our values allowed to fluctuate with the current economic trends and other problems? Are we ever going to get to a point where some things are non-negotiable like equality? And how will future generations view us?

when was this story written? There is a scene where there are japanese tourists twittering

really? I wonder how she foresaw the job of a person who numerized books into cds
the clothes of the characters look like the 19th century but the technology is like the 80s

Keith wrote: The idea of digitizing books goes back to the 1940's, with some being produced in the sixties and seventies. CD's first came to the mass market in 1984, but where first produced in the sixties." "

Wow. Today I learned (TIL) moment. Thanks for sharing that Keith. I was not aware

Kelly wrote: "Thanks very much for this thread - I've just discovered it and read it in one go, so my apologies for now referencing anyone's comments and thoughts above.

One thing I find interesting when talki..."

Shakespeare's Measure for Measure is a classic piece about what can happen when unenforced laws remain on the books until someone decides to enforce them.

Mel wrote: "The Romans gave positions of power to the locals in order to control populations too. And have you seen the newish TV programme 'Colony'? They use the same tactic.

In terms of women controlling ot..."

I have lived in the NYC homeless shelter system for five years, and large numbers of the staff are people who have been homeless, but are totally lacking in compassion for those who reside in the shelter.

Keith wrote: "santerro wrote: "really? I wonder how she foresaw the job of a person who numerized books into cds
the clothes of the characters look like the 19th century but the technology is like the 80s"

The ..."
the cds that look like mirrors that can be read by computers were invented in the 90's

as long as i could remember the first cds were in the mid 90's
but then i was a child so it could be wrong memories

is this book updated with amazon kindle in real time

If you're interested in more historical/authorial context, Margaret Atwood herself wrote a New Yourk Times piece called "Margaret Atwood on What "The Handmaid's Tale" Means in the Time of Trump". She details a lot of political and personal contexts she incorporated into writing the book.

Thank you for the link to the Atwood article!! Fascinating.

One thing I haven't seen discussed in this thread is when women lost access to their bank accounts.

It amazes so many people to learn just how recently women could be denied credit, property or a bank account without a male sharing the asset with her.

Screen saving now because I loved this thread so much. Sad to see it go, but thankful that you told us.