I started reading this book without even knowing what it was about and - because of the title - I foolishly expected it to be a historical novel. In fact, I found out it's a dystopic novel set in the 22nd century United States. This story was definitely mindblowing. Because of the open ending, part of me is begging to part a sequel as soon as possible, but thinking more rationally I understand the author's choice of leaving space for the readers' personal interpretation....Continua
Meglio la libertà di o da? Quale prezzo è accettabile pagare?
Se le scelte di una società la portano all'autodustruzione come realmente biasimare una nuova società con regole prima inaccettabili?
una trama in bilico, nella quale la profondità della coscienza dell'autrice riesce a mettere in dubbio nel cuore del lettore certezze "etiche" senza che ne' il lettore ne' l'autrice si schierino. Le crepe sono forse la salvezza. la prova che comunque l'umanità si deve esprimere, pur se in forme non convenzionalmente accettabili.
Qui si collocano la ex-figlia, nick, le piume ma anche le riviste.
un mondo strutturato in maniera coerente e credibile fatto di Mogli Marte Ancelle senza nome.
un mondo distopico alla 1984 ma con un ingrediente diverso: la femminilità, il punto di vista femminile di una narratrice (l'autrice prima ancora della protagonista) in cui le conquiste del femminismo sono molto chiare e in virtù di ciò riesce a negarle nel modo più doloroso.
Narrato al tempo presente in prima persona, offre così in presa diretta the daily life in an all-controlling sociey, regressed to the strictest puritanism, born of an un told civil strife (SF readers will recognize a setting similar to the one in The lovers by PJFarmer). Flashback by flashback, the narrating I tells us of her daughter’s abduction (just three years before, when she was 5), and constantly of her training as a handmaid.
Handmaiden are a sort of fertile concubines for the Commanders, the ruling class, whose wives have not proved able to beget.
The story is female and feminist, centered as it is on meaningful details of daily routine, the petty disputes (which might become anyway fatal) between the women in the household (the Wife, the Handmaid, the laborious Marthas); the longing for the past; suppressed desire.
Tellingly, nothing is told us directly of her relation with the Commander, whom she can’t neither love nor hate; nor about what actually led to this state of things.
With double-edged sarcasm more than irony, she recalls the times when women’s lives were dangerous, because they were not protected. Violence is ubiquitous, but subdued from her point of view: Doctors practising abortions are hanged; Handmaiden not conceiving are eventually taken “elsewhere”, maybe “to the Colonies, or with the Unwomen”; even a condiscipule who wets herself during lessons is taken elsewhere, punished and then will spend the night moaning in her army cot, but her roommates will not know what was inflicted to her.
Comparison with 1984 is correct, in that we are shown a society where control is capillar: everybody could be an Eye. Though small-scale corruption is often present, and the protagonist wonders what did they trade for those cigarettes..
This society is modeled after Biblical tenets, though warped (the Beatitudes are mentioned, but the narrator acknowledges that “those who are silent” is an addition; elsewhere she suspects alterations, though cannot be sure); references are quite sophisticated, i.e. the grotesque ceremonies of making love and giving birth, where the Handmaid is “replicated” by the Wife, are inspired by the story of Jacob, Rachel and her maid in the Genesis: not by the far better known episode of Abraham, Sara and her maid Agar.
看完The handmaid's tale 後接著看東野圭吾的解憂雜貨店，兩本都分別在文壇（一個國外的一個日本的）讚譽有加的作品，我卻深刻地感覺到，水準怎麼差這麼多？！！