Writing and Sexual Difference - Book Report/Review Example

Critical Approaches Background Feminist ideology and the feminist movement is not only pervasive but also present in society be it politics, or law, schools, and churches, the world of business people and particularly women are becoming aware of their rights and exercising them. It is thus necessary to understand what this philosophy is about and what it tries to achieve. Modern feminists like to argue that there is no one "women's movement, but from an analysis of the key feminist writers until the late decade of this century it is apparent that there is a common nucleus and a unity to modern feminism. It is asserted that contemporary late 20th century feminism has originated from the movements for women's political and civil rights in America and Britain during the 19th century. Among its chief objectives is the idea of women's empowerment, is the notion that women are proficient in doing and should be permitted to do everything men can do. Feminists consider that neither sex is obviously better and thus superior. They stand behind the idea that women are essentially just as tough and clever as the alleged stronger sex. Many writers have taken up the struggle of feminism in their work. Sexism is the term that was invented by feminists for erroneous belief or deeds with respect to women that appeared to them similar to the wrongs of conviction and action signified by racism. While racists may be reasonably said to have erred in seeing noteworthy genetic dissimilarity between human races, there are real questions, and progressively increasing proof, about whether human sexual variation of actions and psychology have a genetic basis. Three books were fundamental to the gradual appearance of modern feminism during the 1960s. They were Betty Freidan's The Feminine Mystique which was first available in 1963, and Kate Millett's Sexual Politics and Germaine Greer's The Female Eunuch, which both appeared on the bookshelves for the first time in 1970. Countless following feminists and their writings have not added appreciably to the core ideas originally put forward by Freidan, Millet and Greer. (Causus, 1997) Specific issues which were added to the feminist criticism of male dominance and masculinity during the late 1970s and through the 1980s included pornography, divorce law, rape , marital violence, child neglect, and patriarchy and prejudice against women in the church, sexual persecution and various face of inequity in the workplace this included the police and armed forces. Thousands of feminist works on these concerns were published in the 70s and 80s. During the 1980s new issues were recognized and subjected to feminist scrutiny in perpetually 'successful' attempts to find evidence of patriarchal oppression. Yet no additions or alterations were prepared to the essential feminist framework which had been customary by Friedan, Millett and Greer in the previous two decades. This framework contain of two essential parts. Firstly, the hypothesis that there are no essential differences between the sexes, And secondly, the view that women's supposedly inferior status and position in society could only be owing to an oppressive, evil patriarchy which men consciously constructed. (Causus, 1997) During the 1980s feminist activists pushed for getting rid off fault-based divorce laws and the classification of rape, marital violence, and child abuse as most important problem. They continued to inspire young women to postpone marriage and try to become a professional, liberating career woman. Less mainstream problems which were also used to further the feminist evaluation of patriarchy and masculinity included prostitution and abortion. Feminist literary criticism became scholarly with the advent of the new women's movement commence in the early 1960s. In fact, feminist criticism started as part of the international women's liberation movement. The first major book of significant importance, in this respect, was Betty Freidan's The Feminine Mystique (1963) which played an important role in bring out the feminist movement in the mainstream. In her book Friedan criticised "the dominant cultural image of the successful and happy American woman as a housewife and mother" (Leitch, 1988, 308). According to Friedan, in the 1950s women had gone back to the house abandoned their jobs for men who came back from the war to claim their positions, and a feminine mystique was formed in the media making the housewife and mother the ideal paradigm for all women. (Oppermann, 1994) Modem critical theory asserts that understanding a text with the intent of interpreting its meaning is a reductive act, and it leads to some kind of restraint on the text. Feminist literary criticism should attempt to avoid if it wants to have a serious place within the theoretical field of literature. There has to be an aesthetic effect, without which there will be no political impact. Feminist critics can no longer assert that they work from marginalised situation. A re-reading of important theories and methods of the literary convention is likely only if those theories and techniques are confronted from within their own assumptions. (Oppermann, 1994) According to Oppermann (1994) feminist criticism is particularly notable as regards to its mixture of aims and methods. As Elizabeth Abel (1982), notes in her "Introduction to Writing and Sexual Difference" deciphering the relationship of writing and sexual inequality necessitates a variety of critical approaches. Feminist critics are pluralistic in their literary theories and techniques. Annette Kolodny also affirms "that only by employing a variety of methods will we defend ourselves from the temptations of oversimplifying any text" (1989, 161). But, as Kolodny also points out, there is a fundamental principle that unites feminist literary critics under one roof despite their plurality of methods: What unites and repeatedly invigorates feminist literary criticism... is neither dogma nor method but an acute and impassioned attentiveness to the ways in which primarily male structures of power are inscribed (or encoded) within our literary inheritance: the consequences of that encoding for women - as characters, as readers, and as writers; and, with that, a shared analytic concern for the implications of that encoding not only for a better understanding of the past but also for an improved reordering of the present and future (Kolodny 1989, 162). As Oppermann (1994) observes feminist literary criticism has been very successful principally in regaining the lost literary women and in text the sources. In this way, feminist criticism has fruitfully directed attention to the female academic tradition. Many early works on women writers before the 1960s usually focus on the female literary tradition. At this point it is crucial to point out the difference between "female" and "feminist" positions in literary studies. According to Toril Moi in Feminist Literary Criticism: "Feminist criticism...is a specific kind of political discourse, a critical and theoretical practice committed to the struggle against patriarchy and sexism..." (1982, 204) Thus the term "feminist" involve a political position. On the other hand Sharon Spencer asserts, feminist criticism "attempts to set standards for a literature that is as free as possible from biased portraits of individuals because of their class, race or sex"(1982, 158). Methodology The Handmaid's Tale (1985) by Margaret Atwood appears to be feminist in its intent. The main character and narrator is a woman and as a result the world is seen through a woman's eyes. There is a great deal more to the story than that. Atwood does not show this world instead she shows a newly created world in which women do not have the liberty that they presently accept. This dystopian society is completely controlled by men. The Handmaid's Tale illustrates a theoretically organized United States of America at the end of the Twentieth century. The female protagonist's first-person narrative in the form of a diary informs the reader principally about everyday life in this fundamentalist nation state called "Gilead. "In their limited perspective reflect the narrator's own perspective, offering little to no information about the overall political organization or functioning of this dystopian state. Details are in general given in the short "frame narrative" at the end of the novel, which shows a symposium of historians taking place in the year 2195, about 200 years after the proceedings of main tale. These "Historical Notes on The Handmaid's Tale" (1985, 379-95) identify the previous first-person narrative of the Handmaid as a characters of an historical tape recording, which is being examined by historians. Atwood's interest in The Handmaid's Tale is overtly political. The Handmaid's Tale is obviously in the tradition of American dystopia with its well-known themes of totalitarian control, use of military and secret police, manipulation through prepared use of media, re-writing of history, re-education and terror. The author envisages a dystopian fable in which gender politics occupies the centre of attention. In response to the 1980s backlash against women's rights in the United States, Atwood contemplates on the nature and consequences of a male, tyrannous and puritanical occupation. In this very conservative neo Christian administration, all women are slaves of the system. Women's wombs are state-owned, personal liberty for women have been abolished and strict divisions according to gender are valued. Atwood's nightmare is possible when to be a master, it is necessary to be a man, and when women are two-legged wombs, slaves of their reproductive organs. The Handmaid's Tale also picks the tradition of a prohibition on literature and modifies it, according to the trend of the 1980s, for feminine and feminist justification. For Gilead's women, reading and writing is a crime that is persecuted with extremely harsh punishment, including the amputation of hands (1985, 354). Women from all classes of society--the wives of the Commanders, followed by the "Aunts" used for re-education purposes, the "Marthas" for housework, the "Jezebels" used for prostitution, the "Handmaids" and definitely also the "Unwomen," who are kept in concentration camps--are excluded from any kind of written discourse. These measures aspire at giving the male leadership all the advantages of a highly developed text-processing culture and of using these advantages purposefully against the women who are fated to this treatment. The Handmaid's own account focus on the fate of women in Gilead who are seen and used as mere means of breeding. For this rationale, the first-person narrator has been designate as a so-called "Handmaid" to a leading official and his aging wife in order to substitute for the infertile wife. Handmaids are measured "two-legged wombs" (1985, 176) or unintelligent matter in the reproductive process which is, like everything else in this dystopia, dominated by men. Although based on Old Testament precedent, such events also mirrors patriarchal scientific theory--"Aristotle's theory that the female provided only the matter, while the active principle was attributed to the male semen...the theory of man as parent and the woman as incubator" (Merchant, 1980, 157). In her lecture "An End to Audience," Atwood asserted her thoughts which were a forerunner to the thoughts in The Handmaid's Tale: "In any totalitarian take-over, whether from the left or the right, writers, singers and journalists are the first to be suppressed....The aim of all such suppression is to calm the voice, abolish the word, so that the only voices and words left are those of the ones in power. Elsewhere, the word itself is thought to have power; that's why so much trouble is taken to silence it" (Atwood, 1980, 427). Although this watching is still quite neutral, the topic of censorship moves into a gender-specific context in the novel. The ban on reading and writing in The Handmaid's Tale is one of the measures to turn aside the freedom of independence from getting into the hands of women. The conversation between the Handmaid and the Commander reflects this masculine arrogance: Women can't add, he once said, jokingly. When I asked him what he meant, he said, for them, one and one and one and one don't make four. What do they make I said, expecting five or three. Just one and one and one and one, he said....What the Commander said is true. One and one and one and one don't equal four. Each one remains unique; there is no way of joining them together. (1985, 240-48) The discrimination is that women's basic independence does not allow them to make Judgements; they can, or rather have to, add evidence linearly, without being able to draw conclusions. Booker (1994) analysed Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale by stating that the novel describes "A dystopia projecting a nightmare future where religious fundamentalism is imposed by brute force on a stupefied populace" (Booker, 1994, 78). By and large, the victims of this brute force are women. Atwood's (1985) Handmaids are sexually objectified. In the Republic of Gilead, where infertility has become the rule rather than the exception, the possibly fertile Handmaids are a politically charged commodity, and are raised as such. They are taught to think of themselves as "seeds" (25) "ovens" (211) "chalices" (211) and "cradles" (353). Even their names are taken away, as described in the epilogue: She does not sec fit to supply us with her original name, and indeed all records of it would have been destroyed upon her entry into the Rachel and Leah Reduction Centre. "Offred" gives no clue, since, like "Ofglen" and "Ofwarrcn," it was a patronymic, composed of the possessive preposition and the first name of the gentleman in question, (1985, 387) Controlled accesses to spare time strengthen the Handmaids' enslavement. They are not allowed to read, to play or to even talk without restraint. Offered, the heroine, ponders, "How I used to despise such talk. Now I long for it. At least it was talk. An exchange of sorts." (1985, 14) According to Daniel and Bowen (2003) the fitness they obtain through regimented exercise and daily walks to marketplace is enforced as a way to keep their reproductive systems operational and firmly monitored, as Offred reflects, "We aren't allowed to go there except in twos. This is supposed to be for our protection, though the notion is ridiculous: we are well protected already. The truth is that she is my spy, as I am hers" (1985, 26). According to Daniel and Bowen (2003) Friendships, then, are firmly forbidden, this mandate taken to the degree that the Handmaids can only talk to one another in dictated overviews and are not permitted to look at one another directly. Mandatory group freedom also supports their status as portrayed in the rituals of Birth Days and Salvagings. The excitement of Birth Days is obvious, during which the Handmaids are sanctioned to see and allowed to help one of their Sisters in the definitive of accomplishments, giving birth. During Birth Days, freedom of interaction constraints are revoked to a degree as recommended in the following passage where Offred and another Handmaid rejoice in Ofglen's good fortune: Impulsively she grabs my hand, squeezes it, as we lurch around the corner; she turns to me and I see her face, there are tears running down her cheeks, but tears of what Envy, disappointment But no, she's laughing, she throws her arms around me, I've never seen her before, she hugs me, she has large breasts, under the red habit, she wipes her sleeve across her face. On this day we can do anything we want. I revise that: within limits, (1985, 142-143) Daniel and Bowen (2003) further explore the limitations on the freedom of women in contrast to the time off for Birth Days, Salvagings are obligatory bloodbaths. An arena of spectators watches, with "the television camera discreetly off to the side" (p. 351), while some dissenters of the Republic are executed by hanging and others plainly torn to pieces by the Handmaids. The "Particicution" (1985, 357) is a perverse gift, a monstrous game in which the Handmaids must contribute or else be perceived as dissidents themselves. When the whistle blows, the Handmaids can do as they please to a select offender until the whistle blows again. Offered describes the performance: There is a surge forward. . . The air is bright with adrenaline, we are permitted anything and this is freedom. . .Now there are sounds, gasps, a low noise like growling, yells, and the red bodies tumble forward and I can no longer see, he's obscured by arms, fists, feet. . .I see the Wives and daughters leaning forward in their chairs, the Aunts on the platform gazing down with interest. They must have a better view from up there, (1985, 359-360) Offered despises the circumstances into which she has been forced, but comprehends the pointlessness of resistance, "I want everything back, the way it was. But there is no point to it, this wanting" (1985, 157). Throughout the novel, however, she persist an inward battle to retain her sense of self: "I want to be valued, in ways that I am not; I want to be more than valuable. I repeat my former name, remind myself of what I once could do, how others saw me" (1985, 126). According to Daniel and Bowen (2003) Atwood's Handmaids are an intense example of almost complete loss of personal freedom and liberty. They have no option regarding the treatment of their bodies; no authorization to select the individuals with whom they pass time; no control over their lives. According to Coad (2001) the characters of The Handmaid's Tale tend to fall into cleanly recognizable groups based on sexual distinctions. As all men are identical, Atwood depicts them in uniform: the Commanders wear a black uniform, the Eyes and Angels are also dressed in military fashion. According to their status, women are forced to wear a uniform indicating their particular function in society. The general references to the 1970s and 1980s, let the reader compare women's dress before the occupation with the new regimented and controlled state uniforms. The mother of the protagonist and central narrator of The Handmaid's Tale, Offered, is shown in an old film to wear overall jeans, a green and mauve plaid shirt and sneakers. Moira, the lesbian activist, used to dress in purple overalls, a denim jacket and one dangly earring.. Wives and Aunts are soberly dressed and Handmaids are forced to wear a red nun-like uniform jointly with 'wings' and a veil as head-dress. Only the prostitutes in the State-owned brothel at Jezebel's continue to wear makeup and what can be described as a male fantasy of feminine attire. (Coad, 2001) Coad (2001) carries on the same line of thought as he asserts that An item of clothing common to Wives, Marthas and Handmaid's in Gilead is the veil. Serena Joy, the Commander's wife, wears a light blue veil, Rita, one of the Marthas, puts on a veil to go outside, and all the Handmaids have to wear a long red dress, gloves and white wings which surround and cover the face, as well as a red veil. The compulsory wearing of a veil in Atwood's dystopian society where women are silenced, subjugated and disempowered--- allows one to understand the veil as an instrument in the subjection of women and to judge how it is linked to a politics of dress. As only women wear a veil in The Handmaid's Tale, Atwood links the veil with femininity. As these women are under the control and power of men, the veil takes on ethical, spiritual and political aspects. Its purpose in the novel is double: To help conceal and hide women as well as to prevent women from seeing. It helps make the Handmaids anonymous, it makes them nun-like, pure, chaste, and virginal and it aids their effacement, aggressively disempowering them. Many feminist critics are sensitive to the political implication of Offred's narration. Lucy Freibert commends Atwood's communal, political, and historical analysis of "Western patriarchal teleology that views woman's biology as destiny and exposes the complicity of women in perpetuating that view" (1988, 280). But Atwood does not represent only the oppressive destruction, domination, and suppression reached at the conclusion of such a male dominated narration, as Freibert points out, even in a politically tyrannical regime, women may be able to regain their individuality, choice, and sexuality: "Atwood demonstrates through Offred that women, able to take risks and to tell stories, may transcend their conditioning, establish their identity, joyfully reclaim their bodies, find their voices, and reconstruct the social order" (1988, 285). Linda Kauffman observes, "She [Offred] first has to reclaim herself, retrieve her voice; once she does so, she turns to reinscribe the voices of other women" (1989, 227). Conclusion Through this analysis it becomes evident that women are the victims of the dystopian society. This paper has analyzed three main aspects of this oppression and male dominance: first is the mind control, second is the lack of freedom and third is the clothing, all these act as symbols of the feminine plight. Thus The Handmaid's Tale comes out as a narration of a despotic authoritarian society when women are subjected to oppression, dominance and restrictions. This dystopia is such that the male oppressors even try to control their mind. The females are prisoner with no freedom not even allowed to talk with other females. Even their clothing is chosen to show their status in society. But there is always hope also, as becomes evident at the end. Feminist literary criticism has been helpful in understanding the novel to a great degree especially the subtle illusions and depictions which are not very obvious. As a result the analysis has been an in-depth examination of the novel keeping in mind the status of women in the society. A limitation that can be seen is that the general statement on the message of the political dystopia of the neo-conservative takeover has been neglected as the novel has been analyzed from one perspective only-that of feministic ideology. The novel has a deeper and much more universal meaning of the struggle of an underclass which always remains subjugated. References Abel, E. (1982). Writing and Sexual Difference, University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Atwood, Margaret. (1980). "An End to Audience" Dalhousie Review. 60: 415-34. Atwood, M. (1985). The handmaid's tale. Ballantinc Books, New York. Booker, M. K. (1994). Dystopian literature: A theory and research guide. Greenwood Press Westport, CT. Causus J. (1997). Modern Feminism: A Guide to the Ideology and the Literature. [online] http://www.cycad.com/cgi-bin/pinc/apr97/justus.html Coad. David. (2001). Hymens, lips and masks: The veil in Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale. Literature and Psychology.47 (1/2);pg.54-68 Daniels, M J and Bowen, H E.(2003). Feminist Implications of Anti-leisure in Dystopian Fiction Journal of Leisure Research..35(4);pg.423-441 Freibert, L M. (1988). "Control and Creativity: The Politics of Risk in Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale," Critical Essays on Margaret Atwood. Ed. Judith McCombs. Hall, Boston: 280-291. Kauffman, L. (1989). "Special Delivery: Twenty-first Century Epistolarity in The Handmaid's Tale." Writing the Female Body: Essays on Epistolary Literature. Ed. Elizabeth C. Goldsmith. North Eastern UP, Boston: 221-244. Kolodny, A. (1989). "Dancing through the minefield: some observations on the theory, practice and politics of a feminist literary criticism" in Gilbert, Sandra M., and Gubar, Susan, The New Feminist Criticism: Essays on Women, Literature and Theory, Virago Press. Leitch, Vincent B. (1988) American Literary Criticism from the thirties to the eighties, Columbia University Press, Merchant, C. (1980). The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution. San Francisco: Harper. Moi, T. (1982) "Feminist Literary Criticism", in Ann Jefferson and Donald Robey (eds.), Modern Literary Theory, B.T. Batsford Ltd. Oppermann S T. (1994). Feminist Literary Criticism: Expanding the Canon as Regards the Novel. [Online] http://members.tripod.com/warlight/OPPERMANN.html Spencer, S. (1982) "Feminist Criticism and Literature", in Richard Kostelanetz (ed.), American Writing Today, Forum Series 2, Washington D.C. Read More