Margaret
Atwood Reflects on ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’
April 16, 2017
Next
week, in a fortuitous bit of timing, Hulu presents a new series starring
Elizabeth Moss, adapted from Margaret Atwood’s classic dystopian novel The
Handmaid’s Tale. When they greenlit the series, producers could not have
predicted the election outcome that has given many readers reason to return to
books like Atwood’s, Orwell’ [3]s
and Huxley’s. In fact, both 1984 [4] and The Handmaid’s Tale have
topped Amazon’s best-sellers list in recent months.
The
Handmaid’s Tale arrived like an earthquake in the dialogue between faith and
reason in 1985 — and since has become a curriculum staple in many women’s
studies courses. In it, Atwood describes a woman’s fight to escape God-quoting
oppressors who have turned America into a theocracy where women are stripped of
their rights and torture is justified in the name of national security.
In
this week’s New Yorker, Atwood tells writer Rebecca Mead [5] that
“she intended not just to pose the essential question of dystopian fiction —
could it happen here? — but also to suggest ways that it had already happened,
here or elsewhere.”
Growing
up in Canada, Atwood knew members of the Polish resistance from World War II
who had fled there during the war. She recalls, “I remember one person saying a
very telling thing: ‘Pray you will never have occasion to be a hero.'”
Mead
writes that “what does feel familiar” in rereading the book “is the blunt
misogyny of the society Atwood portrays, and which Trump’s vocal repudiation of
‘political correctness’ has loosed into common parlance today.
Trump’s
vilification of Hillary Clinton, Atwood believes, is more explicable when seen
through the lens of the Puritan witch hunts. “You can find websites that say
Hillary was actually a Satanist with demonic powers,” she said. “It is so
17th-century that you can hardly believe it. It’s right out of the subconscious
— just lying there, waiting to be applied to people.”
During
a 2006 interview with Bill Moyers for the Faith & Reason series,
Atwood tells Bill she believes the Salem witch trials and the hysteria that
erupted in that community is “one of the foundation events of American
history.” She tells Mead, “The legacy of witch hunting, and the sense of shame
that it engendered is an enduring American blight.”
In
talking about The Handmaid’s Tale, which she likes to call
speculative fiction, Atwood explains that she didn’t write it as a possible
prophecy. She tells Bill, “It’s a blueprint of the kind of thing that human
beings do when they’re put under a certain sort of pressure. And I made it a
rule for the writing of this book that I would not put anything into it that
human societies have not already done.”
Watch
her conversation with Bill Moyers.
TRANSCRIPT
[Movie
Clip] “I was asleep before, that’s how it happened. When they slaughtered
Congress, we didn’t wake up. When they blamed terrorists and suspended the
Constitution, we didn’t wake up either. Now I’m awake.”
BILL
MOYERS: As Margaret Atwood moved among the writers here for the PEN
conference on faith and reason, naturally, the subject of fundamentalism and
theocracy came up often.
BILL
MOYERS: When you look back on it, was The Handmaid’s Tale true?
MARGARET
ATWOOD: Was it true? Well, I had a man in an audience once who
during question period said to me, “Well, this story must be autobiographical.”
And I said, “How could it be autobiographical? It’s set in the future.”
BILL
MOYERS: I took it as a prophetic possibility —
MARGARET
ATWOOD: I don’t do prophecy.
BILL
MOYERS: I know you don’t.
MARGARET
ATWOOD: But it’s a blueprint of the kind of thing that human beings
do when they’re put under a certain sort of pressure. And I made it a rule for
the writing of this book that I would not put anything into it that human
societies have not already done.
BILL
MOYERS: People have said when they read The Handmaid’s Tale it
could never happen here. But the fact of the matter is it had happened here.
Under the Puritans —
MARGARET
ATWOOD: Oh, yes.
BILL
MOYERS: — the witch —
MARGARET
ATWOOD: It happened —
BILL
MOYERS: — the Salem — witches trial, for example.
MARGARET
ATWOOD: Well, the Salem witchcraft trial is in my opinion one of the
foundation events of American history. And it was an event where you can call
it a clash between mythology and politics if you like. Because it depended very
much on a belief in the invisible world. Cotton Mather, who was a very
prominent divine at the time, wrote a book called The Wonders of the
Invisible World, which was all about the behavior of witches.
And
the devil. And this is what people believed. They weren’t being hypocrites when
they did these things. They were actually scared of witchcraft and the devil.
And they believed that the devil could work his way into their community
through witches, so it was serious business. But it was also a hysteria. The
surprise to me has been all of the stuff I learned long ago. I thought,
“Nobody’s going to be interested in this again. You know what good is knowing
17th-century theology ever going to be to me? Or anybody else. Surely nobody’s
interested.” And now suddenly it’s all come back. Because things do go around in
cycles.
BILL
MOYERS: Seventeenth-century theology? How would you sum it up?
MARGARET
ATWOOD: The argument about predestination.
BILL
MOYERS: Being the elect or the not elected.
MARGARET
ATWOOD: Being the elect or the nonelect. There is a heresy called
the antinomian heresy. And somebody says that Tony Blair’s a member, but never
mind that. Under antinomianism you’re convinced that you are one of the elect,
alright that you are one of the elect, that you are destined to be elect from
birth. That you’re going to be saved no matter what, and therefore you can do
anything, because you’re already marked as one of the elect. So that of course
just let’s you do all the most atrocious things you might be inclined to do,
while still believing that you are justified.
I
think it’s the kind of event that replays itself throughout history when
cultures come under stress. When societies come under stress these kinds of
things happen. People start looking around for essentially human sacrifices.
They start looking around for somebody they can blame. And they feel if only
they can demolish that person, then everything’s going be okay. And it’s of
course never true, but there are these periods in history. If things aren’t
going well, it must be the Communists. Let’s have Joe McCarthy. You know things
aren’t going well. It must be them liberals. Whoever it may be.
BILL
MOYERS: Well, what The Handmaid’s Tale illustrates
so vividly is that society can give up its ideals. Its freedom. Its values. In
an almost frighteningly normal way.
MARGARET
ATWOOD: In an almost frighteningly rapid way. Conditions change.
There’s too much turmoil or fear of some kind than people can handle. And
that’s the point at which they will trade their liberties for somebody who
comes along and says, “I’m a strong leader. I’ll take care of it. The trains
will run on time.”
BILL
MOYERS: If you wanted to take over the United States government
today and set up your government, how would you do it?
MARGARET
ATWOOD: Well, that is more or less how. And The Handmaid’s
Tale is the answer to the question. If you were going to change the
United States from a democracy into a totalitarianism, how would you go about
doing it? Well, you wouldn’t say, “Let’s all be communists.” You wouldn’t get
any takers for that. You might say a rather twisted sort of thing that would
say, “In order to preserve our freedoms we have to give them up for now.” You
might say something like that. Which is kind of, I think, what’s been floating
in the breeze this last little while. In order to preserve freedom we have to
demolish freedom. Something like that. But you’re more likely to say, “This is
the true religion. Follow our flag.” That kind of thing.
BILL
MOYERS: I keep in my notebook something you said once. You wrote,
“What is needed for really good tyranny is an unquestionable idea or authority.
Political disagreement is political disagreement. But political disagreement
with a theocracy is heresy.”
MARGARET
ATWOOD: That’s exactly right. If your government says, “Not only am
I your government, but I represent the true religion,” if you disagree with it
you’re not just of another faction. You’re evil.
BILL
MOYERS: But you don’t imagine that could happen here?
MARGARET
ATWOOD: Want to bet? Want to lay some bets as to that?
BILL
MOYERS: I would never bet against Margaret Atwood.
MARGARET
ATWOOD: You’d have to have quite a lot of uproar first. But it’s
amazing how quickly people rolled over for the Patriot Act. You know they were scared
enough so that they just said, “Oh, okay. If that’s how we solve it, fine. Just
don’t tell me. You know I don’t want to know. Don’t tell me.”
BILL
MOYERS: Did you anticipate that you would be so vilified for
suggesting in The Handmaid’s Tale that theocracy could happen
in America?
MARGARET
ATWOOD: Well, what has amazed me is the theocracy that I’ve put
in Handmaid’s Tale never calls itself Christian. And in fact
it never says anything about Christianity whatsoever. Its slogans, etc., etc.,
are all from the Old Testament. So what has amazed me was the rapidity with
which a number of Christians put up their hands and said, “This is an insult to
us.” What did it mean? It meant they hadn’t read the book. You know they hadn’t
read the book.
Because
in the book the regime does what all such regimes immediately do. It eliminates
the opposition. The Bolsheviks got rid of their nearest ideological neighbors,
the Mensheviks, as soon as they had the power. They killed the lot. You know?
Too close to them. They got rid of any other socialists. They wanted to be the
only true church brand of socialists. So any theocracy in this country would
immediately eliminate all other competing religions if they could. So the
Quakers in my book have gone underground.
BILL
MOYERS: Right.
MARGARET
ATWOOD: And the regime is wiping out little pockets of resistant
Baptists here and there. And stringing up nuns, etc. Which is exactly how they
would operate, because that’s what happens under those kinds of arrangements.
You want to be the power, the only power. Anybody who could be a rival power,
you’d get rid of them. So I am one of those people who does believe in the
America of Thoreau, for instance.
BILL
MOYERS: Of —
MARGARET
ATWOOD: Thoreau the conscientious objector. Thoreau the man who
stood upon his principles. Who refused, for instance, to pay taxes to a
government that was waging a war he considered to be unjust. Went to jail for
it. That is the sort of essence of the kind of American that we evolved– looked
up to for many years.
BILL
MOYERS: It’s also Henry David Thoreau who said, “To affect the
quality of the day is the highest of the arts.”
MARGARET
ATWOOD: Well, there you are. Yes.
[7]
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/theresa-riley
[2] http://billmoyers.com
[3] http://billmoyers.com/story/revisiting-orwells-1984-trumps-america/
[4] http://people.com/books/1984-is-back-on-the-best-seller-list-after-kellyanne-conways-alternative-facts-comment/
[5] http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/04/17/margaret-atwood-the-prophet-of-dystopia
[6] mailto:corrections@alternet.org?Subject=Typo on Margaret Atwood Reflects on ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’
[7] http://www.alternet.org/
[8] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
[2] http://billmoyers.com
[3] http://billmoyers.com/story/revisiting-orwells-1984-trumps-america/
[4] http://people.com/books/1984-is-back-on-the-best-seller-list-after-kellyanne-conways-alternative-facts-comment/
[5] http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/04/17/margaret-atwood-the-prophet-of-dystopia
[6] mailto:corrections@alternet.org?Subject=Typo on Margaret Atwood Reflects on ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’
[7] http://www.alternet.org/
[8] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
Donations can be sent
to the Baltimore Nonviolence Center, 325 E. 25th St., Baltimore, MD
21218. Ph: 410-323-1607; Email: mobuszewski [at] verizon.net. Go to http://baltimorenonviolencecenter.blogspot.com/
"The master class
has always declared the wars; the subject class has always fought the battles.
The master class has had all to gain and nothing to lose, while the subject
class has had nothing to gain and everything to lose--especially their lives."
Eugene Victor Debs
No comments:
Post a Comment