Im a fan of the handmaids tale but this analysis forgot to mention that Margaret Atwood was heavily influenced by the Iranian Islamic revolution at the time and more than anything Gilead reflects Islamic dominated countries more than anything.
Really? The idea of having a hand maid that give the wife a child is from Bible, considered by Muslims as a man made book with shards of truth. A baby belongs to its biological mother and father. Women are not enslaved in Iran, although the adherence to certain extrinsic practices of religion including dress code is upheld by public edict. People marry and have children freely. There is no caste system in Iran. Elites don’t enslave workers or women. Your Bible is the source of Atwood’s fantastical world. Patriarchy as practiced in Europe in the Middle Ages is oppressive and enslaved women and the poor. And cast out non Christians. Islamic history was very different. Women owned property and businesses in their own right, there was no primogeniture in Islamic countries; all children and wives and sisters and mothers and even aunts had a share of the estate. Non Muslims ram businesses practiced freely many were elevated to positions of political power, many intermarried with Muslim families, none were ghettoized like they were in post 1492 Spain and the rest of Europe. It is sad that western education has ignored 1400 years of history that dominated all of North Africa, Asia Minor, parts of Eastern Europe, Spain, extended to Afghanistan, Indian subcontinent, Malaya and Indonesia. So very sad that there is so much ignorance about Islam
The second question that comes up frequently: Is “The Handmaid’s Tale” antireligion? Again, it depends what you may mean by that. True, a group of authoritarian men seize control and attempt to restore an extreme version of the patriarchy, in which women (like 19th-century American slaves) are forbidden to read. Further, they can’t control money or have jobs outside the home, unlike some women in the Bible. The regime uses biblical symbols, as any authoritarian regime taking over America doubtless would: They wouldn’t be Communists or Muslims. - Margaret Atwood
Well as I've said I already read the book when I was about 22 and I had read 1984 when I was 20 I used to read constantly in my spare time but I like learning history too so why not learn about the Indigenous residential schools in Canada or the Homes for unwed Mother's in Ireland or Sharia Law in the Middle East or legalized domestic abuse now in Russia etc? Fictitious characters are not nearly as interesting imo. Atwood herself has said this metoo era is shifting perceptions of how realistic the situation is.
3:47 While that is true I feel like no one is taking into acount why that is in the story. In the story itself the US didn't just one day decided to become a tyranical misoginist country it happen because of an Apocaliptic epidemic of infertility. That part of her flesh being more valuable didn't just happen randomly it happen because in the story is literally that or the extinction of the human species as I understand in the Universe of Handmaids Tale very few women are capable of given birth which is a literal apocaliptic treath to humanity some drastic measures would be taken. To pretend they would not is like saying in a story of mass nuclear war or an alien invasion aboslutly no social norms or cultural atituds would change in the human cultures. What happen is distopian and Misoginistic but is not all that real in the sence that a great part of the reason it happens is because of an apocaliptic treath to the existence of humanity.
the way i see it. dystopian books take aspect(s) to the extreme and forge a horrifying story exploring the consequences of extremism. while they can build of events or ideas from our world, it is not to be taken as an ounce of truth, at most it should be taken as a warning or a precursor.
I thought the book clearly states that Offreds name is June?
Very helpful analysis, thanks for sharing!
Im a fan of the handmaids tale but this analysis forgot to mention that Margaret Atwood was heavily influenced by the Iranian Islamic revolution at the time and more than anything Gilead reflects Islamic dominated countries more than anything.
Thanks for adding this to the analysis - such a rich text! Thanks for watching!
@@MissHannaLovesGrammar you're welcome
Really? The idea of having a hand maid that give the wife a child is from Bible, considered by Muslims as a man made book with shards of truth. A baby belongs to its biological mother and father. Women are not enslaved in Iran, although the adherence to certain extrinsic practices of religion including dress code is upheld by public edict. People marry and have children freely. There is no caste system in Iran. Elites don’t enslave workers or women. Your Bible is the source of Atwood’s fantastical world. Patriarchy as practiced in Europe in the Middle Ages is oppressive and enslaved women and the poor. And cast out non Christians. Islamic history was very different. Women owned property and businesses in their own right, there was no primogeniture in Islamic countries; all children and wives and sisters and mothers and even aunts had a share of the estate. Non Muslims ram businesses practiced freely many were elevated to positions of political power, many intermarried with Muslim families, none were ghettoized like they were in post 1492 Spain and the rest of Europe. It is sad that western education has ignored 1400 years of history that dominated all of North Africa, Asia Minor, parts of Eastern Europe, Spain, extended to Afghanistan, Indian subcontinent, Malaya and Indonesia. So very sad that there is so much ignorance about Islam
The second question that comes up frequently: Is “The Handmaid’s Tale” antireligion? Again, it depends what you may mean by that. True, a group of authoritarian men seize control and attempt to restore an extreme version of the patriarchy, in which women (like 19th-century American slaves) are forbidden to read. Further, they can’t control money or have jobs outside the home, unlike some women in the Bible. The regime uses biblical symbols, as any authoritarian regime taking over America doubtless would: They wouldn’t be Communists or Muslims. - Margaret Atwood
Nope. Sorry. Its literally just “what if christianity went wild”
Very helpful, thank you!
Lamp shades yo.
Well as I've said I already read the book when I was about 22 and I had read 1984 when I was 20 I used to read constantly in my spare time but I like learning history too so why not learn about the Indigenous residential schools in Canada or the Homes for unwed Mother's in Ireland or Sharia Law in the Middle East or legalized domestic abuse now in Russia etc? Fictitious characters are not nearly as interesting imo. Atwood herself has said this metoo era is shifting perceptions of how realistic the situation is.
3:47 While that is true I feel like no one is taking into acount why that is in the story. In the story itself the US didn't just one day decided to become a tyranical misoginist country it happen because of an Apocaliptic epidemic of infertility. That part of her flesh being more valuable didn't just happen randomly it happen because in the story is literally that or the extinction of the human species as I understand in the Universe of Handmaids Tale very few women are capable of given birth which is a literal apocaliptic treath to humanity some drastic measures would be taken.
To pretend they would not is like saying in a story of mass nuclear war or an alien invasion aboslutly no social norms or cultural atituds would change in the human cultures.
What happen is distopian and Misoginistic but is not all that real in the sence that a great part of the reason it happens is because of an apocaliptic treath to the existence of humanity.
the way i see it. dystopian books take aspect(s) to the extreme and forge a horrifying story exploring the consequences of extremism. while they can build of events or ideas from our world, it is not to be taken as an ounce of truth, at most it should be taken as a warning or a precursor.
So you think if there wasn't mass infertility, women and their bodies wouldn't be subjugated in the book?
This is boring 😴