I am going to discuss the expression of power in this novel. Now by expressing of power I primarily refer to Aunt Lydia being a bit of a complete ***** and certain other authoritative figures either abusing their power in some way or their controlling of it. I'm not sure whether conclusions can be drawn due to position and the fate of others of the same ranking and gender, or whether or not it's just due to character, but in the end it basically makes some solid statements about people and the absolutely corrupting substance known as power.
Aunt Lydia is absolutely drunk on power. There is no other word for it. (other than, of course, the omitted word from above that sounds like the bolded word before it) Considering her position, however, it is completely expected. She is one of the few women with unrestrained, unchecked power, and she enjoys using it. When Moira walked, or rather, strutted out of the Center with that air of authority, she was cleared without a moment's hesitation. She commands even the soldiers with nothing more than a stiff back and a dirty look. This gives an idea of how darn powerful the Aunts actually are. She now takes the position of training the women to become Handmaids and respectable ladies of Gilead. She can be quite cruel, though, and she likes to flaunt her power. She tortures Janine relentlessly, then takes advantage of her resulting want of acceptance and significance by offering her the position of lapdog. She takes her sweet time reading the Salvaging speech as well. She enjoys being in power, the sheer force she can exert on the rest of society. An oversight during the Janine meeting causes the young woman in question to understand that she was going to be sharing this power, and though Aunt Lydia did allot some authority to Janine, she was reluctant in doing so. She was quite surprised when Janine actually requested to sit before Her Pompousness. Whatever the reason, out of all the subservient women, she was of the few that gained power. As as result, she ended up corrupted by it when placed in a community of powerless women like her. It all went right to her head.
A stark contrast to this is Serena Joy. Yes, she was also not the nicest of people, but she had a reason for it. Besides, she really did not abuse her power. She could have made Offred absolutely miserable, but simply let her be. In fact, she even offered to help her in the middle of the novel. Th conspiring certainly did not demonstrate any use of power. She could have forced Offred to have sex with someone else if she really desired that baby, or if she just wanted to know that Offred was being brutally raped every few nights. Aside from that, she could have berated Offred every single day, or had the Marthas overcook her food. She could have kept her awake at night, or could have had her standing in a room somewhere holding something heavy pretending to need help moving something heavy. She could have done many things, but instead left her well alone. She does not take advantage of anyone in the household, but rather just exists with them all. In stark contrast to Lydia, who had no reason whatsoever to be so freakin' annoying, Serena Joy seems like one of the nicest women around. Both have power. Only one of them abuses it. Perhaps Serena is far kinder than Lydia, or is too exhausted to be a jerk. Perhaps her situation is less of a send-in-the-next-batch job than Lydia's, so she is nicer to the people she'll be living with until she's dead. Maybe she just needs some friends. Either way, she certainly hasn't been corrupted by power. Rather, she seems tired of it. Perhaps Lydia got drunk on power quickly, and never broke the addiction of indulging in it, while Serena gradually eased into it and found that it wasn't all that much better. Maybe it was just because Lydia can exercise power over many others.
The Commander is somewhat in between the two. I say in between because he does pull for some side "favors" from Offred, but doesn't really abuse his power all that much. Although we don't know whether he asked for these few favors from the other women and Handmaids, it can be inferred that Offred is the only one involved in this. I'll ignore Nick for this part, because he's simply willing to help his boss out. There isn't much pulled from him, other than the drive to Jezebel's. Now, of all the things that he could do, he ends up pulling Offred into his office to play Scrabble. As a treat to both of them. Regardless of his position as Commander, he's going to be in serious trouble if he gets caught. And all he does is ask for Scrabble and a kiss. He even gives a few things to Offred. However, this also abuses his position in the sense that he relies on his name as Commander to get all the black market stuff, and to coax Offred into joining him for the occasional game. He could be demanding much worse. In all, it's a measured indulgence; not passively floating through life by the book, also not being a complete son of a *****. (same word as above) He is a man; he has several other liberties and sources of power, yet he doesn't really flaunt them all that much. He knows what is just enough to get optimum enjoyment out of life. That being said, he did overindulge that one night in Jezebel's. If Offred is not the only Handmaid brought here for that reason, then he really does abuse his power significantly and is a little more of a jerkwad than I have given him credit for.
To analyze all three at once, several reasons can be offered. Perhaps gender can play a part in power corruption in this society. Lydia is one of the few women that can lord over the little authority granted to this gender, therefore she abuses it profusely. Serena Joy, while she does have power, does not have a whole whopping lot, and therefore will not impose her might on others because she really doesn't have all that much power to impose. The Commander has a good deal of power, but he is a man, and men are allotted significantly more power. Therefore, he is not as easily corrupted by it; it is almost second nature to him. Then again, another aspect is how freely you can impose that power on others. Serena Joy has very few people to impose power over, and the Commander can only impose power on his own household and those underlings that fear the position. Lydia has a whole lot of women under her command, and she gets fresh meat every once in a while. She has a lot of people to boss around and make miserable. Also, she has a significant level of command in the society because she read the Salvaging speech. Also, the position they are in can severely affect whether or not it's really worth it. The Commander can exert power to a certain degree; he can get in an awful lot of trouble if he's caught doing what he's doing. However, he has enough power to get away with it. Serena Joy is stuck with her underlings for the rest of her life, save the revolving position of Handmaid that will need to be broken in all over again at every changing. Lydia can basically do whatever she feels like doing, other than murder. She is in absolute control. Of course, this may all be due to personality and nothing more, meaning that all this is just coincidence. However, I believe that a combination of these factors have made these people the people they were in the novel, and their environment determined whether or not they would fall prey to the corrupting influence of power in their hands. In a world of restriction, power can do nothing other than corrupt.
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
We- Symbol/Theme
Something that I noticed in We was the large use of numbers and logic. Noticed, of course, is a little bit of an understatement. The references continue throughout the book. I personally think that it all refers to the summation speech by the Benefactor at the end of the novel, and how inhuman a "true love of society" is. What I believe is trying to be conveyed is the idea that logic and reason really cannot be applied to something that does not always function as predictably as a computer program, namely human beings.
The Table of Hours seems to be more than just a freakish way of setting up the lifestyle of the community. It dictates exactly what the people need to be doing exactly when. However, the entire process is much like a pre-programmed system that is able to operate autonomously. There really isn't anything the Benefactor and Guardians needed to do other than to remove any bugs in the system. The community of OneState is mechanized; it is no longer a community but a program or a machine. The life had been more or less sucked out of it. Considering this, D-503's remark about the system is that everything would be 100% perfection if the Table of Hours listed directions for every second of every hour of every day for all eternity. The system is idle for those free hours; it needs to be doing something. Otherwise, the system is dead until it awakes again. D-503 is talking from the perspective of a machine at this point. Now a complete mechanized society whose only objective is to continue existing actually IS SOMEWHAT UTOPIAN when it comes down to the technical stuff. Tell you what: program a computer with a short little schedule and tell it what happiness is, and it would tell you continually that it was happy. Is it really happy? Not really, because it has no idea what happiness is, besides whatever you said it was, but it is content with doing what it needs to do. What it thinks it must do. It assesses situations and responds with a technical answer. Thus, this community can be loosely called utopian only when mankind is completely mechanized.
Now, there's just one little problem with living beings: they think. Computers don't think, they compute. Machines just act. We think, and when we think we really explore many things that a computer might call absolutely pointless and stupid. They would explode trying to just accept the fact that we actually waste time living. Now, I'm going to say that this translates roughly to the fact that HUMANS ARE NOT PERFECT, and cannot achieve a status of perfect happiness. At least, not while being human. D-503 can still think about the square root of negative 1; a computer would just put it out of mind and only read ERROR if it saw it. But D-503 can think about it. This causes him to attempt to understand, find some answer to, explore further, get irritated over, rack his brain about, etc. etc. etc. until he snaps. As long as we can think, as long as we have free will, as long as we have a soul with preferences and emotions, we cannot achieve paradise on earth. There are too many, if one can call them, variables, to completely deduce the equation Happiness. As a result, we are doomed to the bad times as well as the good. We can't just have one without the other, because we exist on several planes of existence. Computers don't; either it is or it isn't, and this is how it's done. However, some people can waste their lives chasing perfection rather than living. D-503 spends most of his time in the novel fretting over why why why. He wants to be "happy." He doesn't care much about anything else. Thus, the Benefactor in the end of the novel gives him exactly what he wants. He extracts D-503's imagination (and free will) and makes him a mindless drone. The Benefactor has done this to the whole world, as far as we know. How "nice," giving the whole world the "happiness" they always wanted. See what I mean?
This is actually quite cruel. Humanity wants to exist and know they're existing. They do not want to simply perform task, compute result, begin next task, 1010010101010. (That's binary computer-talk, by the way.) However, society is going to pieces in the search for said perfection. The Benefactor has granted their wishes. In a sense, it is the best thing for the world. No hunger, no discrimination, no suffering, no unhappiness. All problems solved. Thus, it can be noted that society should really be glad they can live rather than wanting more, wanting constant bliss, wanting an easy life. Live how you'd like, but don't waste the time you've got. Just live. This society has already become mostly computer, and at this point knows of no other way to achieve happiness. If they already have all this granted to them, why not continue on and get the rest of the problem fixed, to never suffer again? Another thought D-503 had was about how happiness was always thought to be a plus. He often noted several other items as a plus or minus, to express his opinion. He later begins to wonder about the inherent opposite to that number, and how it must exist and must be included somewhere in the equation of life. The extraction of imagination solves the problem: set everything to zero. It isn't quite positive, but it sure isn't negative, and that's all that matters. D-503 also tries to make a function out of love and death. That he had quite a bit of difficulty with, because it isn't necessarily true. He was trying to mix both the logic of mathematics and the emotions of the soul he was experiencing. Those two really don't mix, accentuating how different the logical road to success is from the emotional and gut feeling road.
This novel seems to exaggerate the mathematical concept of perfection, and how inhuman it really is. But this, I think, is the purpose of that exaggeration. The logic behind perfection and paradise is highly inhuman and is not supposed to be applied to unpredictable humans. We cannot follow a system like a computer. We only know how to live by our own beliefs. As a result, it attempts to show how utopias are really impossible for us, and also not to worry about living as much as actually living. Logic cannot be applied to life to receive an all-powerful result. That result is somewhere near infinity, and the only beings that know of that number are the inhuman, soulless ones that live in the realm of probability, theorem, and instructions. They can determine how to live perfectly; only we can live, and we can only live by living, not computing.
The Table of Hours seems to be more than just a freakish way of setting up the lifestyle of the community. It dictates exactly what the people need to be doing exactly when. However, the entire process is much like a pre-programmed system that is able to operate autonomously. There really isn't anything the Benefactor and Guardians needed to do other than to remove any bugs in the system. The community of OneState is mechanized; it is no longer a community but a program or a machine. The life had been more or less sucked out of it. Considering this, D-503's remark about the system is that everything would be 100% perfection if the Table of Hours listed directions for every second of every hour of every day for all eternity. The system is idle for those free hours; it needs to be doing something. Otherwise, the system is dead until it awakes again. D-503 is talking from the perspective of a machine at this point. Now a complete mechanized society whose only objective is to continue existing actually IS SOMEWHAT UTOPIAN when it comes down to the technical stuff. Tell you what: program a computer with a short little schedule and tell it what happiness is, and it would tell you continually that it was happy. Is it really happy? Not really, because it has no idea what happiness is, besides whatever you said it was, but it is content with doing what it needs to do. What it thinks it must do. It assesses situations and responds with a technical answer. Thus, this community can be loosely called utopian only when mankind is completely mechanized.
Now, there's just one little problem with living beings: they think. Computers don't think, they compute. Machines just act. We think, and when we think we really explore many things that a computer might call absolutely pointless and stupid. They would explode trying to just accept the fact that we actually waste time living. Now, I'm going to say that this translates roughly to the fact that HUMANS ARE NOT PERFECT, and cannot achieve a status of perfect happiness. At least, not while being human. D-503 can still think about the square root of negative 1; a computer would just put it out of mind and only read ERROR if it saw it. But D-503 can think about it. This causes him to attempt to understand, find some answer to, explore further, get irritated over, rack his brain about, etc. etc. etc. until he snaps. As long as we can think, as long as we have free will, as long as we have a soul with preferences and emotions, we cannot achieve paradise on earth. There are too many, if one can call them, variables, to completely deduce the equation Happiness. As a result, we are doomed to the bad times as well as the good. We can't just have one without the other, because we exist on several planes of existence. Computers don't; either it is or it isn't, and this is how it's done. However, some people can waste their lives chasing perfection rather than living. D-503 spends most of his time in the novel fretting over why why why. He wants to be "happy." He doesn't care much about anything else. Thus, the Benefactor in the end of the novel gives him exactly what he wants. He extracts D-503's imagination (and free will) and makes him a mindless drone. The Benefactor has done this to the whole world, as far as we know. How "nice," giving the whole world the "happiness" they always wanted. See what I mean?
This is actually quite cruel. Humanity wants to exist and know they're existing. They do not want to simply perform task, compute result, begin next task, 1010010101010. (That's binary computer-talk, by the way.) However, society is going to pieces in the search for said perfection. The Benefactor has granted their wishes. In a sense, it is the best thing for the world. No hunger, no discrimination, no suffering, no unhappiness. All problems solved. Thus, it can be noted that society should really be glad they can live rather than wanting more, wanting constant bliss, wanting an easy life. Live how you'd like, but don't waste the time you've got. Just live. This society has already become mostly computer, and at this point knows of no other way to achieve happiness. If they already have all this granted to them, why not continue on and get the rest of the problem fixed, to never suffer again? Another thought D-503 had was about how happiness was always thought to be a plus. He often noted several other items as a plus or minus, to express his opinion. He later begins to wonder about the inherent opposite to that number, and how it must exist and must be included somewhere in the equation of life. The extraction of imagination solves the problem: set everything to zero. It isn't quite positive, but it sure isn't negative, and that's all that matters. D-503 also tries to make a function out of love and death. That he had quite a bit of difficulty with, because it isn't necessarily true. He was trying to mix both the logic of mathematics and the emotions of the soul he was experiencing. Those two really don't mix, accentuating how different the logical road to success is from the emotional and gut feeling road.
This novel seems to exaggerate the mathematical concept of perfection, and how inhuman it really is. But this, I think, is the purpose of that exaggeration. The logic behind perfection and paradise is highly inhuman and is not supposed to be applied to unpredictable humans. We cannot follow a system like a computer. We only know how to live by our own beliefs. As a result, it attempts to show how utopias are really impossible for us, and also not to worry about living as much as actually living. Logic cannot be applied to life to receive an all-powerful result. That result is somewhere near infinity, and the only beings that know of that number are the inhuman, soulless ones that live in the realm of probability, theorem, and instructions. They can determine how to live perfectly; only we can live, and we can only live by living, not computing.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Anthem- Symbol/Theme
One of the major noticeable characteristics of Anthem was the continual references to one large being of man. The names of the people, the daily schedule of events and how they are carried out, and the peculiar rules and mannerisms all seem to emphasize that the community is not a community, but rather a single group of people. One huge brotherhood of man, whose sole purpose is to simply exist and slave away for everybody else because individuals are as nothing. What is truly interesting is that the individuals of the society, though they work for the entirety of man, are truly fearful individuals whose prevailing thoughts reflected an idea that they are and have never been anything but evil, and that they owe their lives to their "brothers and sisters" for all the trouble they have caused.
Firstly, all the people in the community have names that are symbolic of unison and wholeness. Equality, Fraternity, Unity, etc...all stand for a united group of persons. However, these words have very little of their true meaning left. If they are now names, then there is a good chance that their meanings have lost value, and that to use them in this society would not get much of a reaction in return. Instead, it is assumed that the society is all these words, and that they are no longer needed. After all, that would only be stating the obvious. In the novel, Equality gets scolded for singing or whistling, I forget exactly what, and he states that he did so because he was happy. Then the elder tells him, in effect, well that's obvious, of course you're happy, everyone is. In losing their meaning, there is no real way for the citizens to confirm that there is, in fact, unity and equality. Equality should supposedly have known that he was happy, just as he should supposedly know the community abounded with continual expressions of unity. It was taken for granted. However, this hides (or rather, partly emphasizes) that there really is no unity. If there was, the people would be as one people gladly working together for the betterment of others. The unity is only skin deep; within, they do not know what else they could possibly be. They do not realize that the community's stressing of unity has devalued what unity actually is, and has torn them farther apart than ever. Equality also has a technical but really-not-there-fully existence in that everyone appears to be the same and therefore equal, but in reality the people set themselves lower than everyone else because of their own personal "sins." The community really isn't united any more than it is happy.
The daily schedule is also an emphasis that all people are as one. They all rise at the same time, go about their jobs, and travel to their respective eating quarters and recreational facilities with all the others of their specific kind. Now I'd like to point out the obvious fact that if everyone were that same it really shouldn't matter where you went with what people, so long as you followed a schedule. No, apparently, the people are equal, but not that equal. Anyway, everyone moves in the same way around their life with their section, all working in unison. Again, it only appears to be unison. Equality stresses the fact that he daydreams, and therefore is evil, unlike his brothers. Well, how does he know that, exactly? The idea that everyone could be dissenting secretly seems to stress that the society is meant to keep the people in apparent unison to dissuade any that feel like doing something else. The rampant fear of how anything that all do not think is evil prevents anyone from really expressing how they feel. This most likely causes everyone to withdraw from others, with a sense of fear of being recognized as evil. This, more than anything else, result is a society that focuses on the individual's struggle to blend in. It points out the fact that everyone is terrified of being different, so in pretending to be the same everyone fakes it and cautiously blends in, ever wary of and distant from others. No one can trust the other, and no one wants to be evil. Let the evil keep their distance from the holy.
The other little quirks of the society include strict separation of women and men, where neither can speak to or even really acknowledge the other. For a society of unity and equality, there really is a little bit of a required explanation for this. About the only reason that would count would be that they needed to separate them for sexual and competitive reasons. But if they've got that much control over the community, I really doubt that many problems would arise due to lust or competition. Besides, that is an evil that absolutely must be avoided. No one in the community would want to be evil. Therefore, the separation really stands against any idea of unity. Particularly when considering the security at the Palace of Corrective Detention. When Equality breaks out of the Palace, he just knocks a door down and then walks right out. No one ever disobeys society. If anything, that incident shows that the Elders go pretty much unchallenged, and that there really shouldn't be a fear about allowing others to mingle. Other than the fact that the two different genders are a difference that they cannot ever overcome. A weak solution to an unavoidable part of nature that only accentuates the disunity of the society. Curiosity also kicks in and makes people want to break the rules even more. Also, the peculiar practice that everyone had to go to an assembly with their group as recreation deserves some attention. Everyone is expected to want to watch the same thing, to appreciate the same form of art. Really, this isn't unity, this is just a ticking time bomb. Some will tire of the performance, then either express it and be rooted out or will become terrified that they are evil and do not think as their brothers really ought to be thinking. Others will most definitely show some great appreciation to it, and may whistle, bob heads, tap feet...do things that are different that will land them in trouble, like Equality's whistling or singing. Personally, I think that subjecting everyone to a play is just passing them through another sieve or an obvious negligence that will point out that the entire community is not 100% united in all thought, all the time.
As as result, the many aspects of the community that seem to hint to unity only point out how far from unity the society is. It reminds us that perhaps the more one attempts to achieve total unity and conformity, the more nature will rage against it and express itself in defiance. The people end up becoming paranoid and self-deprecatory. Equality's escape was bound to happen at some time, and is bound to happen again. Eventually, in a world that points out how different everyone is and teaches them that these differences are evil, someone will get to the point where, believing they can't get any lower, they will strike out and act for themselves, doing as their different minds dictate.
Firstly, all the people in the community have names that are symbolic of unison and wholeness. Equality, Fraternity, Unity, etc...all stand for a united group of persons. However, these words have very little of their true meaning left. If they are now names, then there is a good chance that their meanings have lost value, and that to use them in this society would not get much of a reaction in return. Instead, it is assumed that the society is all these words, and that they are no longer needed. After all, that would only be stating the obvious. In the novel, Equality gets scolded for singing or whistling, I forget exactly what, and he states that he did so because he was happy. Then the elder tells him, in effect, well that's obvious, of course you're happy, everyone is. In losing their meaning, there is no real way for the citizens to confirm that there is, in fact, unity and equality. Equality should supposedly have known that he was happy, just as he should supposedly know the community abounded with continual expressions of unity. It was taken for granted. However, this hides (or rather, partly emphasizes) that there really is no unity. If there was, the people would be as one people gladly working together for the betterment of others. The unity is only skin deep; within, they do not know what else they could possibly be. They do not realize that the community's stressing of unity has devalued what unity actually is, and has torn them farther apart than ever. Equality also has a technical but really-not-there-fully existence in that everyone appears to be the same and therefore equal, but in reality the people set themselves lower than everyone else because of their own personal "sins." The community really isn't united any more than it is happy.
The daily schedule is also an emphasis that all people are as one. They all rise at the same time, go about their jobs, and travel to their respective eating quarters and recreational facilities with all the others of their specific kind. Now I'd like to point out the obvious fact that if everyone were that same it really shouldn't matter where you went with what people, so long as you followed a schedule. No, apparently, the people are equal, but not that equal. Anyway, everyone moves in the same way around their life with their section, all working in unison. Again, it only appears to be unison. Equality stresses the fact that he daydreams, and therefore is evil, unlike his brothers. Well, how does he know that, exactly? The idea that everyone could be dissenting secretly seems to stress that the society is meant to keep the people in apparent unison to dissuade any that feel like doing something else. The rampant fear of how anything that all do not think is evil prevents anyone from really expressing how they feel. This most likely causes everyone to withdraw from others, with a sense of fear of being recognized as evil. This, more than anything else, result is a society that focuses on the individual's struggle to blend in. It points out the fact that everyone is terrified of being different, so in pretending to be the same everyone fakes it and cautiously blends in, ever wary of and distant from others. No one can trust the other, and no one wants to be evil. Let the evil keep their distance from the holy.
The other little quirks of the society include strict separation of women and men, where neither can speak to or even really acknowledge the other. For a society of unity and equality, there really is a little bit of a required explanation for this. About the only reason that would count would be that they needed to separate them for sexual and competitive reasons. But if they've got that much control over the community, I really doubt that many problems would arise due to lust or competition. Besides, that is an evil that absolutely must be avoided. No one in the community would want to be evil. Therefore, the separation really stands against any idea of unity. Particularly when considering the security at the Palace of Corrective Detention. When Equality breaks out of the Palace, he just knocks a door down and then walks right out. No one ever disobeys society. If anything, that incident shows that the Elders go pretty much unchallenged, and that there really shouldn't be a fear about allowing others to mingle. Other than the fact that the two different genders are a difference that they cannot ever overcome. A weak solution to an unavoidable part of nature that only accentuates the disunity of the society. Curiosity also kicks in and makes people want to break the rules even more. Also, the peculiar practice that everyone had to go to an assembly with their group as recreation deserves some attention. Everyone is expected to want to watch the same thing, to appreciate the same form of art. Really, this isn't unity, this is just a ticking time bomb. Some will tire of the performance, then either express it and be rooted out or will become terrified that they are evil and do not think as their brothers really ought to be thinking. Others will most definitely show some great appreciation to it, and may whistle, bob heads, tap feet...do things that are different that will land them in trouble, like Equality's whistling or singing. Personally, I think that subjecting everyone to a play is just passing them through another sieve or an obvious negligence that will point out that the entire community is not 100% united in all thought, all the time.
As as result, the many aspects of the community that seem to hint to unity only point out how far from unity the society is. It reminds us that perhaps the more one attempts to achieve total unity and conformity, the more nature will rage against it and express itself in defiance. The people end up becoming paranoid and self-deprecatory. Equality's escape was bound to happen at some time, and is bound to happen again. Eventually, in a world that points out how different everyone is and teaches them that these differences are evil, someone will get to the point where, believing they can't get any lower, they will strike out and act for themselves, doing as their different minds dictate.
Monday, November 5, 2007
The Handmaid's Tale- Analysis
What to analyze, what to analyze...so much to choose from... ... How about the Ceremony? Well, not quite the actual Ceremony, and by that I mean the...well, THAT part, but...more of the stuff leading up to it, and the reasoning behind it. Surely there's some special meaning to the reasoning and not just the act. That act definitely has a large reason, but I overwhelmingly see it as a part of society that just about everyone hates, which accomplishes a purpose that really was meant to be reached through other means.
Well, beginning with the fact that everyone has to gather for the prayer part of the Ceremony, it is apparent that it is exactly that, a prayer service, as much as it is another chore that everyone's got to go through. Everyone gathers in the room and waits for the Commander to read from the Bible. Perhaps it stands symbolic for the church service. This is the new religion of procreation through handmaids, which Gilead in the name of God commands due to the rising infertility of women. He is the one that reads, for the purpose that the women do not have the right to read. However, it is kept in a box, locked up tight. It is referred to as an incendiary device. Only the Commander has the key. This reemphasizes the fact that the only people who are allowed to speak religion are the ones that have been told what to say, the ones that dare not say anything that would conflict with the twists of law the women have been taught. As is stated offhandedly, who knows what the women would think if they ever managed to get ahold of it. Perhaps this is emphasis on the fact that the truth is kept under lock and key, along with the freedoms that it now imprisons. The Bible itself, which does not actually command any of this, which stands for the warping of the pinnacle of holiness and goodness, is also the freedom of speech which no longer belongs to the women. Moving on, the Commander reads only the bookmarked pages. They do not skim through the books, looking for the correct page and possibly seeing something that defied Gilead's iron regime, contradicted their orders. Even the men do not have freedom of speech, but rather the responsibility of keeping the women away from the very thing that gives them that right.
As he reads, he reads only that parts that dictate to be fruitful and to replenish the earth. There really is no main message here, other than that women are vessels that are meant to make babies and then more babies after that. The Bible is meant to give more important messages than that, and God's main focus was not to just make more humans. He could do that Himself with little effort. The Bible is merely being used as a tool to fit the purpose Gilead intended for it. As the readings continue, the story of Rachel and Leah is read. The novel only mentions the part where the wives offer their handmaids as substitutes for birthing. Now there's a whole lot more than that to the story. Rachel was the wife that was supposed to be married off to Jacob, but due to some trickery he married Leah instead. He then works and eventually married Rachel as well, but then neglects Leah. As a result, God, who was not very happy with Jacob nor Rachel for this treatment of Leah, made Rachel barren. Rachel, if anything, did this to get around God's curse, and then the handmaids were used in a sort of competition to see who could make more babies. Really, it's not as if God commanded that the handmaids be used to make more babies. In this way, the Bible is cut and pasted into a different version that allows Gilead to enforce a practice that would otherwise have gotten an overwhelming response to go shove it where the sun don't shine. It seems to reemphasize the fact that the government had used a holy writ to achieve its own evil ends, to show a destruction of a good religion into something that completely warps the original message in the opposite direction. In this light, the almighty Republic of Gilead is nothing more than a gigantic hypocritical fake.
With the false command from God, the Commander then concludes and asks for a moment of silence, at which Serena Joy ends up crying. This "good news" doesn't exactly make people happy, or result in any large level of goodness. Rather it does the opposite and creates much hatred and sadness. Serena's crying seems to emphasize the fact that the new version of the old story is more of a reminder that she's worthless to Gilead, that a replacement is necessary because she's nowhere good enough. Women again are depicted to be nothing more than decoration, and this shows that really no woman has a purpose except for that sole reason stated in the forbidden Bible. Also, it seems to be an omen of bad things to come, where a silence for hopeful prayer results in some dread of what is to come. In the end, the Bible ends up being the exact opposite of what it should really be. Gilead has completely changed the meaning behind it, and has made it into a weapon against the people rather than the saving word. The interruption Offred mentions reminds that even the Beatitudes had been changed to ensure that the women followed orders as expected, and that there was a justification for the rule. This passage points out primarily the hypocrisy of the holy society of Gilead and what the Bible has become as a result of the new powers in charge. And the new Bible is as effective as the old one, albeit the effect opposite from what it should be.
Well, beginning with the fact that everyone has to gather for the prayer part of the Ceremony, it is apparent that it is exactly that, a prayer service, as much as it is another chore that everyone's got to go through. Everyone gathers in the room and waits for the Commander to read from the Bible. Perhaps it stands symbolic for the church service. This is the new religion of procreation through handmaids, which Gilead in the name of God commands due to the rising infertility of women. He is the one that reads, for the purpose that the women do not have the right to read. However, it is kept in a box, locked up tight. It is referred to as an incendiary device. Only the Commander has the key. This reemphasizes the fact that the only people who are allowed to speak religion are the ones that have been told what to say, the ones that dare not say anything that would conflict with the twists of law the women have been taught. As is stated offhandedly, who knows what the women would think if they ever managed to get ahold of it. Perhaps this is emphasis on the fact that the truth is kept under lock and key, along with the freedoms that it now imprisons. The Bible itself, which does not actually command any of this, which stands for the warping of the pinnacle of holiness and goodness, is also the freedom of speech which no longer belongs to the women. Moving on, the Commander reads only the bookmarked pages. They do not skim through the books, looking for the correct page and possibly seeing something that defied Gilead's iron regime, contradicted their orders. Even the men do not have freedom of speech, but rather the responsibility of keeping the women away from the very thing that gives them that right.
As he reads, he reads only that parts that dictate to be fruitful and to replenish the earth. There really is no main message here, other than that women are vessels that are meant to make babies and then more babies after that. The Bible is meant to give more important messages than that, and God's main focus was not to just make more humans. He could do that Himself with little effort. The Bible is merely being used as a tool to fit the purpose Gilead intended for it. As the readings continue, the story of Rachel and Leah is read. The novel only mentions the part where the wives offer their handmaids as substitutes for birthing. Now there's a whole lot more than that to the story. Rachel was the wife that was supposed to be married off to Jacob, but due to some trickery he married Leah instead. He then works and eventually married Rachel as well, but then neglects Leah. As a result, God, who was not very happy with Jacob nor Rachel for this treatment of Leah, made Rachel barren. Rachel, if anything, did this to get around God's curse, and then the handmaids were used in a sort of competition to see who could make more babies. Really, it's not as if God commanded that the handmaids be used to make more babies. In this way, the Bible is cut and pasted into a different version that allows Gilead to enforce a practice that would otherwise have gotten an overwhelming response to go shove it where the sun don't shine. It seems to reemphasize the fact that the government had used a holy writ to achieve its own evil ends, to show a destruction of a good religion into something that completely warps the original message in the opposite direction. In this light, the almighty Republic of Gilead is nothing more than a gigantic hypocritical fake.
With the false command from God, the Commander then concludes and asks for a moment of silence, at which Serena Joy ends up crying. This "good news" doesn't exactly make people happy, or result in any large level of goodness. Rather it does the opposite and creates much hatred and sadness. Serena's crying seems to emphasize the fact that the new version of the old story is more of a reminder that she's worthless to Gilead, that a replacement is necessary because she's nowhere good enough. Women again are depicted to be nothing more than decoration, and this shows that really no woman has a purpose except for that sole reason stated in the forbidden Bible. Also, it seems to be an omen of bad things to come, where a silence for hopeful prayer results in some dread of what is to come. In the end, the Bible ends up being the exact opposite of what it should really be. Gilead has completely changed the meaning behind it, and has made it into a weapon against the people rather than the saving word. The interruption Offred mentions reminds that even the Beatitudes had been changed to ensure that the women followed orders as expected, and that there was a justification for the rule. This passage points out primarily the hypocrisy of the holy society of Gilead and what the Bible has become as a result of the new powers in charge. And the new Bible is as effective as the old one, albeit the effect opposite from what it should be.
We- Analysis
One of the interesting aspects of We was the final chapter. In this chapter, the book is spontaneously resolved by making D-503 a mindless computer-like drone of OneState. Also, I-330 and the rebels are tortured and later liquified. Sort of a let-down, a tad bit of a bummer of an ending. Not quite all too fulfilling when the main character, troubled for all his time in the novel, perhaps even from chapter 1, suddenly loses all free will and is reborn a walking corpse. That and betrayal by the one person he really loved. Or thought he loved. Either way, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that, despite all logic, the ending of the novel WAS a happy ending in a highly technical and disturbing manner. NOTE TO THE READER: if you haven't caught my drift yet, I introduce you to my method of sarcastic understatement. I do NOT like the ending of the novel, nor do I support OneState. However, thinking in the computer logic that the Benefactor discusses a few chapters prior, technically this is a happy end to a troubling tale.
Throughout the novel, D-503 fights to discover what he really wants. He suddenly begins suffering from the sickness known to OneState as "soul." Well, that is a good thing in reality, to have a soul, but as the Benefactor may have put it, depending on context, soul is what prevents society from attaining a utopian society. The closest we can get to Heaven is only attainable if we sacrifice our souls. Only computers can really be happy without being unhappy. Note that this happiness and unhappiness is in theoretical terms. Without one, there cannot be the other. D-503 mentioned somewhere that society always thought of happiness as a plus sign, but never considered the opposite that mathematically had to exist, and realized that one could not have a free floating positive without negative. Continuing with this, the troubled D-503 now obtains, at the conclusion of the novel, his perfect happiness as a computerized human. He never really warmed up to the idea of the soul, and its removal from him allows him to attain some higher level of peace and fulfillment that is very similar to...well, I won't mince words, it's really no better than dying. However, he gets his impossible happiness without a negative. Zero is referred to as a nonnegative number, meaning it isn't negative. (hence the non) However, zero has no negative equivalent. Hence, the conclusion of a mathematical utopia, ending in perfection, in lack of want or unhappiness, the lack of a negative: the impartial, nonnegative number 0. Besides, a book that begins with inhuman math and logic really can't end in anything other than math and logic, can it?
But why did the Benefactor see D-503 soon afterward? Why have him witness the torture of I-330 which he did not remember and treat him to a dinner? Well, I wrote earlier that perhaps the Benefactor is trying to bring humanity to the utopian end they've been begging to reach, to end their pointless suffering in the search for perfection and paradise. It's disturbing, but in a way he may be attempting to act as the fatherly omnipresent higher being that looks to ensure that he's happy. If D-503 suddenly woke up without an imagination and thought that he'd done all this weird stuff, (weird to him in his new form) he might be a little unsettled. Maybe the Benefactor merely wanted to ensure that the whole business that had occurred was over, all in the past, and welcome in a new friendship with D-503 and an acceptance into the community. Since D-503 didn't react to the torture of the others, especially I-330, the Benefactor could relax and know that D-503 had finally found peace. Consider it a mercy killing, like when the Benefactor told D-503 that he was just being used. In fact, D-503 himself stated that his shouting was like trying to stop a bullet that was still being fired into him. Maybe all this was to forgive D-503 and double check that he's not going to go back into the suffering that he desperately wanted to be rid of, yet at the same time desperately wanted to be part of. The Benefactor put him down to end his suffering, and then granted him forgiveness. Perhaps the dinner was even analogous to the Last Supper, and would therefore be yet another symbol of friendship and new life.
So there you have it. A twisted logic that puts a happy face on the ending. The Benefactor puts on the fatherly guise, forgives D-503, and welcomes him into a community that never suffers, that is always at peace. One heck of a funny looking smiley face, but it can be made. Perhaps the crazy mathematical approach actually applies to the end of the novel, and this is somewhat right. If not, I can only state that the Benefactor was being a real jerkwad by having I-330 tortured in front of D-503, in an attempt to flaunt that D-503's one of the inhuman utopians, and really this signals the demise of all humanity and the rise of the zombie humans of OneState. This makes the ending a complete bummer and reminds us that not everything will always turn out the way we like it. It can still say that true perfection is not attainable by humans with souls and that in reality even true paradise isn't all we think it to be. I just prefer to think that there's SOME positive outcome to this story and not that everyone just up and (spiritually) dies.
I assure you I still am human and do not support crazy utopias such as these. I would sooner live in the deepest hole in the Netherworld. I am just finding some way to be really technical/argue semantics/analyze this book.
Throughout the novel, D-503 fights to discover what he really wants. He suddenly begins suffering from the sickness known to OneState as "soul." Well, that is a good thing in reality, to have a soul, but as the Benefactor may have put it, depending on context, soul is what prevents society from attaining a utopian society. The closest we can get to Heaven is only attainable if we sacrifice our souls. Only computers can really be happy without being unhappy. Note that this happiness and unhappiness is in theoretical terms. Without one, there cannot be the other. D-503 mentioned somewhere that society always thought of happiness as a plus sign, but never considered the opposite that mathematically had to exist, and realized that one could not have a free floating positive without negative. Continuing with this, the troubled D-503 now obtains, at the conclusion of the novel, his perfect happiness as a computerized human. He never really warmed up to the idea of the soul, and its removal from him allows him to attain some higher level of peace and fulfillment that is very similar to...well, I won't mince words, it's really no better than dying. However, he gets his impossible happiness without a negative. Zero is referred to as a nonnegative number, meaning it isn't negative. (hence the non) However, zero has no negative equivalent. Hence, the conclusion of a mathematical utopia, ending in perfection, in lack of want or unhappiness, the lack of a negative: the impartial, nonnegative number 0. Besides, a book that begins with inhuman math and logic really can't end in anything other than math and logic, can it?
But why did the Benefactor see D-503 soon afterward? Why have him witness the torture of I-330 which he did not remember and treat him to a dinner? Well, I wrote earlier that perhaps the Benefactor is trying to bring humanity to the utopian end they've been begging to reach, to end their pointless suffering in the search for perfection and paradise. It's disturbing, but in a way he may be attempting to act as the fatherly omnipresent higher being that looks to ensure that he's happy. If D-503 suddenly woke up without an imagination and thought that he'd done all this weird stuff, (weird to him in his new form) he might be a little unsettled. Maybe the Benefactor merely wanted to ensure that the whole business that had occurred was over, all in the past, and welcome in a new friendship with D-503 and an acceptance into the community. Since D-503 didn't react to the torture of the others, especially I-330, the Benefactor could relax and know that D-503 had finally found peace. Consider it a mercy killing, like when the Benefactor told D-503 that he was just being used. In fact, D-503 himself stated that his shouting was like trying to stop a bullet that was still being fired into him. Maybe all this was to forgive D-503 and double check that he's not going to go back into the suffering that he desperately wanted to be rid of, yet at the same time desperately wanted to be part of. The Benefactor put him down to end his suffering, and then granted him forgiveness. Perhaps the dinner was even analogous to the Last Supper, and would therefore be yet another symbol of friendship and new life.
So there you have it. A twisted logic that puts a happy face on the ending. The Benefactor puts on the fatherly guise, forgives D-503, and welcomes him into a community that never suffers, that is always at peace. One heck of a funny looking smiley face, but it can be made. Perhaps the crazy mathematical approach actually applies to the end of the novel, and this is somewhat right. If not, I can only state that the Benefactor was being a real jerkwad by having I-330 tortured in front of D-503, in an attempt to flaunt that D-503's one of the inhuman utopians, and really this signals the demise of all humanity and the rise of the zombie humans of OneState. This makes the ending a complete bummer and reminds us that not everything will always turn out the way we like it. It can still say that true perfection is not attainable by humans with souls and that in reality even true paradise isn't all we think it to be. I just prefer to think that there's SOME positive outcome to this story and not that everyone just up and (spiritually) dies.
I assure you I still am human and do not support crazy utopias such as these. I would sooner live in the deepest hole in the Netherworld. I am just finding some way to be really technical/argue semantics/analyze this book.
Anthem- Analysis
The reactions of the Scholars when Equality brings them his invention is actually quite interesting. To me, at least. As recap, Equality brings them the creation that he had made in the hopes of showing it to the world, and even possibly for the betterment of mankind. The Scholars react a little differently than he thought they would, though. First they cower in fear of it. Then they rage and demand the most excruciating deaths imaginable. They then tell Equality that what he had made is evil on several technicalities: he made it alone, so it is evil; no one else knows of it, therefore cannot believe in it, therefore it is evil; and even if it is going to help mankind, it is evil solely for that reason, and that humanity should toil because to work hard and unnecessarily is good. At this, Equality curses them and flees.
Now this is laden with a few small significances. Firstly, the fear that the Scholars expressed towards the glass box is obviously connected with the other references to the unknown. The society is afraid of the unknown; or rather, the people are afraid of the unknown because of what they have been told by the elders. The uncharted forest is a source of fear that no one dares to approach, because it is all uncharted, unknown. The people never state what they are thinking, because anything different is evil, and what goes on in the heads of others is unknown. Likewise, the new invention is unknown. There is a glaring fear of the unknown present. It signifies that, because the elders say that the unknown is evil, the people of the society are too afraid to know anything. They don't want to know. It's as if Adam and Eve bit the Apple of Knowledge, but in knowing then curling up in fear of thinking. Technically, knowledge is bad, so we'll just sit here and not know anything other than what is told to us, because only that is what we should know. That is what has happened to this community. They are afraid of difference, and of knowledge of unknown things, because everything is different when you get down to it. Therefore, all things are evil if they are different, and one cannot know difference if one has no knowledge of anything else to COMPARE IT TO. (Sorry, I'm taking my comparison theory too far in my rants, aren't I?) This is why the Scholars are afraid of the invention: they are afraid of the difference, the new knowledge. It is something that is out of the ordinary, something inherently evil. Also, the strong mention of evil signifies the religious grip on the community. The fear of evil alone causes the people to not rise against those in charge.
As for the signs of evil, the Scholars show themselves to be jealous. More than anything, they are jealous. Jealousy is what brings judgment to any "sinners" in the community. Anyone different might be better than others; therefore, there must be some level of jealousy in the community. The Scholars have been clearly outdone by some ordinary Joe off the streets. Naturally, besides the whole evil thing, they are a tad irked at being shown up by a street sweeper. Their uncontrollable fury displayed before one of them reminds them that it is the Council's job to determine punishment, not theirs, shows that, for a moment, they let their emotions and personal, individual, different thoughts get the better of them. Their extremist demands to have Equality "whipped until there is nothing left under the lash" show that these guys really don't like being bested. They're sore losers, and if they can't be the best, they'll just destroy whatever's better than them.
The signs of evil themselves also tell a bit of info. The fact that they call it evil solely on the basis that it was not developed with others is a telltale sign of hysteria. What, does that mean that if they now make it with others, it becomes good and they get the glory? Again, jealousy. Hypocrites. The notion that the number of people present determines good and evil demonstrates a lack of importance as to the idea itself and its purpose, and instead emphasis on whether or not any one person is better than another. Also, the other notion that its making life easier proves its evil shows a severe demand for mindless dronage. If they don't work, then they think. If they think, they become even more afraid of difference, or tolerant of it, and things begin to break down. Heaven forbid people actually thinking for themselves and not the fifty people standing around them. The mentioning that it would put the Department of Candles out of commission is another big signal that change and unknown is unsettling. It took fifty years to show everyone that candles are better than torches, and were unknown and different but still good. Fifty years. That long to let everyone know that there was a better way of making light. People in this society really like their personal bubble, don't they? No change, no difference, just the same beautiful world around them 24/7. Meanwhile, a light bulb would make things so much better and easier. The purpose was for the betterment of humanity. (I bet, though, since plural is evil, it actually would take a lot of people to change a light bulb in this world.) However, better or not, the people are not important. A single form of existence with a single, mindless collective thought is.
The fear expressed emphasizes more than anything how afraid of change people are, and how terrified they are of the unknown just because it's called evil. Words have no meaning other than to be tags. Even the names have lost their real meaning, and are just a form of telling one "they" from another. Rather, simple conditions decide whether something is good or bad, beneficial or not. A web of technicalities for the hypocrites that advance society by keeping it back for fear of the unknown. Even if it's not progress, knowledge is always a step forward.
Now this is laden with a few small significances. Firstly, the fear that the Scholars expressed towards the glass box is obviously connected with the other references to the unknown. The society is afraid of the unknown; or rather, the people are afraid of the unknown because of what they have been told by the elders. The uncharted forest is a source of fear that no one dares to approach, because it is all uncharted, unknown. The people never state what they are thinking, because anything different is evil, and what goes on in the heads of others is unknown. Likewise, the new invention is unknown. There is a glaring fear of the unknown present. It signifies that, because the elders say that the unknown is evil, the people of the society are too afraid to know anything. They don't want to know. It's as if Adam and Eve bit the Apple of Knowledge, but in knowing then curling up in fear of thinking. Technically, knowledge is bad, so we'll just sit here and not know anything other than what is told to us, because only that is what we should know. That is what has happened to this community. They are afraid of difference, and of knowledge of unknown things, because everything is different when you get down to it. Therefore, all things are evil if they are different, and one cannot know difference if one has no knowledge of anything else to COMPARE IT TO. (Sorry, I'm taking my comparison theory too far in my rants, aren't I?) This is why the Scholars are afraid of the invention: they are afraid of the difference, the new knowledge. It is something that is out of the ordinary, something inherently evil. Also, the strong mention of evil signifies the religious grip on the community. The fear of evil alone causes the people to not rise against those in charge.
As for the signs of evil, the Scholars show themselves to be jealous. More than anything, they are jealous. Jealousy is what brings judgment to any "sinners" in the community. Anyone different might be better than others; therefore, there must be some level of jealousy in the community. The Scholars have been clearly outdone by some ordinary Joe off the streets. Naturally, besides the whole evil thing, they are a tad irked at being shown up by a street sweeper. Their uncontrollable fury displayed before one of them reminds them that it is the Council's job to determine punishment, not theirs, shows that, for a moment, they let their emotions and personal, individual, different thoughts get the better of them. Their extremist demands to have Equality "whipped until there is nothing left under the lash" show that these guys really don't like being bested. They're sore losers, and if they can't be the best, they'll just destroy whatever's better than them.
The signs of evil themselves also tell a bit of info. The fact that they call it evil solely on the basis that it was not developed with others is a telltale sign of hysteria. What, does that mean that if they now make it with others, it becomes good and they get the glory? Again, jealousy. Hypocrites. The notion that the number of people present determines good and evil demonstrates a lack of importance as to the idea itself and its purpose, and instead emphasis on whether or not any one person is better than another. Also, the other notion that its making life easier proves its evil shows a severe demand for mindless dronage. If they don't work, then they think. If they think, they become even more afraid of difference, or tolerant of it, and things begin to break down. Heaven forbid people actually thinking for themselves and not the fifty people standing around them. The mentioning that it would put the Department of Candles out of commission is another big signal that change and unknown is unsettling. It took fifty years to show everyone that candles are better than torches, and were unknown and different but still good. Fifty years. That long to let everyone know that there was a better way of making light. People in this society really like their personal bubble, don't they? No change, no difference, just the same beautiful world around them 24/7. Meanwhile, a light bulb would make things so much better and easier. The purpose was for the betterment of humanity. (I bet, though, since plural is evil, it actually would take a lot of people to change a light bulb in this world.) However, better or not, the people are not important. A single form of existence with a single, mindless collective thought is.
The fear expressed emphasizes more than anything how afraid of change people are, and how terrified they are of the unknown just because it's called evil. Words have no meaning other than to be tags. Even the names have lost their real meaning, and are just a form of telling one "they" from another. Rather, simple conditions decide whether something is good or bad, beneficial or not. A web of technicalities for the hypocrites that advance society by keeping it back for fear of the unknown. Even if it's not progress, knowledge is always a step forward.
The Handmaid's Tale- Response to the Novel
Now this is exactly the opposite of what I think of when I try to imagine a religious fanatic society. Well, perhaps I'm imagining the wrong thing, as this isn't quite a religious fanatic society. My idea of religious fanaticism is a world that lives inside a monastery. This world of Gilead merely says, "well we're God's community and we're in charge and if you don't think we are the rulers of the universe then you can (quite literally) go to hell. We fund the travel expenses!" Religion is simply a justification. Though that's probably why it's so freakin' creepy, because today's world has religious justifications out the wazoo. Islamic radicals purging the land of infidels as Heaven wills, us trying to spread Christianity to those same people because Heaven wills, and then both trying to impose religious-centered rules and regulations in their own lands because Heaven wills...It's all about what our respective Gods may have or may have not subtly implied. Quite frankly, if anyone ever willingly rejected any specific form of salvation, I'd say it's their own choice. Religion and respective salvation is a choice that someone's gotta make on their own. I've never known anyone to try and drag someone to Heaven with them, although quite a few threats for an excursion in the opposite direction have been made. The trick is to understand that not everyone believes in the same exact thing you do.
Now I mention rules and regulations. What could I possibly be referring to...Ah yes, the frequent demands to ban gay marriage and abortion. I personally am a Catholic, and I do understand why these things are against God's will, but I really don't think that there's any need to go around on a crusade. Firstly, the Constitution hasn't said bubkus (I hope that's spelled right) about either, so those powers go to the people. Therefore, why the church is bugging the government is beyond me. If anything, it's a state right, and they can more than willingly decide on their own. Secondly, America was founded to escape any restrictions the people would ever be bound with due to religion. The great forefathers would be turning in their graves if they thought that religion is causing restriction of rights, after they spent so much time and blood getting that freedom. Put in Aunt Lydia's words, they fought for freedom FROM religion, not freedom TO place your religious beliefs on somebody else. At this time I do acknowledge that several of the forefathers could be very opinionated, and maybe would have pushed for the prevention of gay marriage, but I'm sure you all get the point that I'm attempting to make.
Getting off that rant a little, a militarized takeover and impression of biblical passages and rules actually is somewhat prevalent in today's world. Many extremists believe in the Bible or respective religious novel to such an extent that they would follow it unswervingly, believing it to be the only path to salvation. The militarized utopia of Gilead is in its own way becoming utopian in their minds. If the will of God is followed, and God is all good, then they must be perfect holiness themselves and should then be happy. Now, besides the fact that a great deal of the Bible is historical text and figures of speech, I really don't think much of it was meant to be followed to a T. It was merely a guideline, if you will, with only a few "if I were you I really wouldn't do this or I might have to smite you" clauses. The notion of following one's religion this closely can almost be described as valorous and pious, being as they technically are the pinnacle of goodness by their rules. However, this religion is twisted. Much of the religious messages have been adapted for the purposes of the Gilead army and government. When one molds religion to fit their own needs, it destroys whatever goodness and purpose that may have been in the actions and thoughts. As a result, it creates only evil.
Now one can't deny that religion is used as an argumentative point in today's world. It is a quality we look for in government officials (wait, what about the separation of church and state?); we often use religion to justify wrong actions that we may have taken, taking it out of context to make us appear to be in the right; some people use religion as an aid to sell their own ideas and supplies. Religion is being used to a large extent in today's world as a form of justification and rationalization. It is the will of the greater powers, and you cannot hope to oppose me, or you oppose an unstoppable force. Well, aren't you so impressive? NOT! All that makes it is an excuse, and nothing more than a bargaining chip. To make God nothing more than an excuse for you to do as you please is not only insulting to said higher powers, under your own definition it is, in fact, sacrilege. To put yourself in the shoes of God and give orders is something only done by those drunk on power. You are free to express your beliefs, but you really shouldn't impose them on others. I think this novel is a good reminder of what corruption happens when people bring religion into governing, and a warning that we should keep them at opposite points of the spectrum as much as possible. Guide yourself, not others, along whatever path you believe in. Walk it yourself, and if you walk it alone, then so be it.
Now I mention rules and regulations. What could I possibly be referring to...Ah yes, the frequent demands to ban gay marriage and abortion. I personally am a Catholic, and I do understand why these things are against God's will, but I really don't think that there's any need to go around on a crusade. Firstly, the Constitution hasn't said bubkus (I hope that's spelled right) about either, so those powers go to the people. Therefore, why the church is bugging the government is beyond me. If anything, it's a state right, and they can more than willingly decide on their own. Secondly, America was founded to escape any restrictions the people would ever be bound with due to religion. The great forefathers would be turning in their graves if they thought that religion is causing restriction of rights, after they spent so much time and blood getting that freedom. Put in Aunt Lydia's words, they fought for freedom FROM religion, not freedom TO place your religious beliefs on somebody else. At this time I do acknowledge that several of the forefathers could be very opinionated, and maybe would have pushed for the prevention of gay marriage, but I'm sure you all get the point that I'm attempting to make.
Getting off that rant a little, a militarized takeover and impression of biblical passages and rules actually is somewhat prevalent in today's world. Many extremists believe in the Bible or respective religious novel to such an extent that they would follow it unswervingly, believing it to be the only path to salvation. The militarized utopia of Gilead is in its own way becoming utopian in their minds. If the will of God is followed, and God is all good, then they must be perfect holiness themselves and should then be happy. Now, besides the fact that a great deal of the Bible is historical text and figures of speech, I really don't think much of it was meant to be followed to a T. It was merely a guideline, if you will, with only a few "if I were you I really wouldn't do this or I might have to smite you" clauses. The notion of following one's religion this closely can almost be described as valorous and pious, being as they technically are the pinnacle of goodness by their rules. However, this religion is twisted. Much of the religious messages have been adapted for the purposes of the Gilead army and government. When one molds religion to fit their own needs, it destroys whatever goodness and purpose that may have been in the actions and thoughts. As a result, it creates only evil.
Now one can't deny that religion is used as an argumentative point in today's world. It is a quality we look for in government officials (wait, what about the separation of church and state?); we often use religion to justify wrong actions that we may have taken, taking it out of context to make us appear to be in the right; some people use religion as an aid to sell their own ideas and supplies. Religion is being used to a large extent in today's world as a form of justification and rationalization. It is the will of the greater powers, and you cannot hope to oppose me, or you oppose an unstoppable force. Well, aren't you so impressive? NOT! All that makes it is an excuse, and nothing more than a bargaining chip. To make God nothing more than an excuse for you to do as you please is not only insulting to said higher powers, under your own definition it is, in fact, sacrilege. To put yourself in the shoes of God and give orders is something only done by those drunk on power. You are free to express your beliefs, but you really shouldn't impose them on others. I think this novel is a good reminder of what corruption happens when people bring religion into governing, and a warning that we should keep them at opposite points of the spectrum as much as possible. Guide yourself, not others, along whatever path you believe in. Walk it yourself, and if you walk it alone, then so be it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)