"We lived as usual, by ignoring. Ignoring isn't the same as ignorance, you have to work at it... in a gradually heating bathtub, you'd be boiled to death before you knew it"(56, The Handmaid's Tale).
In this quote, Offred reflects on the fact that, in her previous life, even though she knew that the world was changing, she chose to ignore it. She chose to pretend that realistic events weren't occurring, simply because "they had a dimension that was not the dimension of her life," and it wasn't personally affecting her. However, Offred, in stating that she "had to work at it," suggests that ignoring is a conscious decision and that, especially as a situation seems to affect the individual on a more personal level, it becomes an excessively harder choice to make. At first, she asserts that ignorance is more peaceful, as it is only a naiveness attained from being unaware, sheltered, or youthful. Consequently, as demonstrated within the bathtub metaphor, ignorance also suggests a dangerous sense of comfort with the "usual". As the bathtub water gets hotter, or as the chaos in Offred's life gets worse, she has to choose to be unobservant, but the water and her life will reach a level of discomfort of which she cannot turn away from. At this point in a person's life, she must step away from denial and move towards change and making a difference. However, if the individual is ignorant to the environment around her, she will not pick up on any of the stimuli until it is too late. She will not assume anything is out of the ordinary, and will therefore never even possess the opportunity to strive for alteration or salvation. Therefore, I believe that even though ignoring is the more difficult road to take, it should not be traded for ignorance, because the latter is not bliss but rather a death by monotonous stupidity.
Thursday, March 7, 2013
Wednesday, February 20, 2013
"The Handmaid's Mayday" Game
Last week, in an effort to gain some empathy for Offred, the main character in Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale my AP English Literature class attempted to replicate the Republic of Gilead through an extensive role-playing activity. My class, consisting of approximately 20 students, was divided into the following characters: 4 Eyes, 4 Rebels, and 12 Handmaids. The Eyes were the government's spies, employing cunning and sleuthing to expose and dispose of all Rebels. The Rebels were enemies of the government, attempting to liberate all Handmaids and ruin the Republic. The Handmaids were the coveted, enslaved citizens, doomed to to a life in fear of the Eyes and desperate to be freed by the Rebels. However, there was one really big catch: none of us knew what character any of the others were. This is where the rules come in and the game gets interesting.
Each stage of the game was divided into two phases: daytime and nighttime. In the daytime phase, we were allowed to converse with the other players, attempting to feel them out and discover their identities without directly revealing anything. In the nighttime phase, all players put their heads down on their desks and closed their eyes. Then, the Rebels rose, and, after discussion and contemplation, chose an individual who they perceived to be a Handmaid to liberate. If the individual was a Handmaid, he or she could choose to take their freedom or join the Rebel force. If the individual was an Eye, the Rebel who did the liberating would die (be expelled from the game and exit the room). Next, the Eyes rose, and, after discussion and contemplation, chose an individual who they perceived to be a Rebel to execute. If the individual was a Rebel, he or she would die (be expelled from the game and exit the room). If the individual was an unjustly executed Handmaid, both he or she and the Eye who did the executing would die (be expelled from the game and exit the room). Finally, the day phase would begin again, and the cycle continued until either all of the Eyes or all of the Rebels were eliminated from the classroom.
Now, strategy came into play when we realized what we were actually playing for. At the end of the game, project points (which are a test grade) were reward as follows:
Each stage of the game was divided into two phases: daytime and nighttime. In the daytime phase, we were allowed to converse with the other players, attempting to feel them out and discover their identities without directly revealing anything. In the nighttime phase, all players put their heads down on their desks and closed their eyes. Then, the Rebels rose, and, after discussion and contemplation, chose an individual who they perceived to be a Handmaid to liberate. If the individual was a Handmaid, he or she could choose to take their freedom or join the Rebel force. If the individual was an Eye, the Rebel who did the liberating would die (be expelled from the game and exit the room). Next, the Eyes rose, and, after discussion and contemplation, chose an individual who they perceived to be a Rebel to execute. If the individual was a Rebel, he or she would die (be expelled from the game and exit the room). If the individual was an unjustly executed Handmaid, both he or she and the Eye who did the executing would die (be expelled from the game and exit the room). Finally, the day phase would begin again, and the cycle continued until either all of the Eyes or all of the Rebels were eliminated from the classroom.
Now, strategy came into play when we realized what we were actually playing for. At the end of the game, project points (which are a test grade) were reward as follows:
- 20 points to all liberated Handmaids
- 10 points to all surviving, non-liberated Handmaids
- 40 points to all surviving, liberated Handmaids who joined the Rebel forces
- 20 points to all surviving Rebels
- 20 points to all surviving Eyes
- NO POINTS to executed Handmaids, Eyes, or Rebels
For the game, I was dealt the role of a Rebel, and faced many issues and contemplated many questions in acting out my character. Firstly, how could I convince the other players that I was a Handmaid? Secondly, how could I differentiate between which of the other characters were Rebels and which were Eyes? Thirdly, should I be the one to liberate a potential Handmaid, risking sudden death but possibly gaining a member for our Rebel forces or coming closer to winning the game? Fourthly, should I make alliances, or do probable risks outweigh probable benefits?
Though I was exposed and eliminated from the game early on, I witnessed enough of the chaos that ensued to confirm strong correlations between the feelings that we as role players felt and what the Handmaids and Rebels must feel in The Handmaid's Tale. Composure and a sense of confidence and security were lost in a sea of uncertainty, confusion, anxiety, and fear. At the beginning of each day, there was no way of knowing whether it would end in death, liberation, or further repression. Similarly, Atwood's characters must constantly contemplate their actions and how they are interpreted by others, and must decide whether the oblique quality of life is finally amplified enough to make the risks associated with breaking free worth taking. Altogether, the "Handmaid's Mayday" was definitely worth experiencing, as it helped me to interpret what kinds of attitudes and experiences I would have if I were to live in a world similar to Offred's. Even though I didn't literally gain anything (project points) from the game, it helped me to accept Offred's justification of her own actions, for I'm not sure if I would be able to escape and disobey if it put my life and the lives of others at stake.
"Waste not, want not. I am not being wasted. Why do I want?"
In the above quote, from Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale, the narrator contemplates a common cliche, which insinuates that if all available resources are being correctly utilized then a person should be lacking in nothing. The speaker, Offred, can acknowledge that she has a defined sense of purpose in life. However, despite her certainty in usefulness, she seems to be quite unhappy with her situation in life. Offred is a Handmaid, or designated child-bearer, in the Republic of Gilead, which is supposed to be a futuristic, Dystopic version of the United States after some big, unknown disaster. Due to this mysterious event, most of the nation's women are left barren, and the few who are still fertile are leached from their families and doomed to a sort of sexual slavery in which they can only earn their marginal freedom through pregnancy.
In questioning "why [she] wants," Offred conveys that she possesses a functional quality that the wives of the men she sleeps with, Marthas (servants), and Aunts (her caretakers) lack, and that they envy her for. Although, because of the unpleasant, sexual demands required of women in her position, and the social and civil boundaries her responsibilities impose on her life, Offred suggests that she would rather have an existence of freedom and passion than a position of so-called honor. She "want[s]" because she cannot have friends, as most women either find her degrading, are superior to her, or too afraid for their own positions to risk companionship. She "want[s]" because she is not permitted to communicate in any way with the opposite sex, unless it is the Commander to which she has been assigned to have children for. She "want[s]" because she cannot eat what she pleases, go where she likes, wear clothes of her own choosing, or speak her own mind. In conclusion, Offred "want[s]" because, by her standards, she has no life of her own, and no control over her personal being.
What would you do if everything you knew and every value your society held were distorted in such a way as to render your life full of "want"? For instance, safety is important, and the gift of life is a beautiful thing, but when Offred's world became exceedingly paranoid, posting Guardians around every corner and rendering Handmaids incapable of any sort of activity that could inhibit any future, healthful pregnancies, the quality of her life became quite degraded. Think about what aspects of your life are important, such as protection or organization, and imagine how your world would change if these values were warped and amplified into something essentially dehumanizing. Consider the implications...
In questioning "why [she] wants," Offred conveys that she possesses a functional quality that the wives of the men she sleeps with, Marthas (servants), and Aunts (her caretakers) lack, and that they envy her for. Although, because of the unpleasant, sexual demands required of women in her position, and the social and civil boundaries her responsibilities impose on her life, Offred suggests that she would rather have an existence of freedom and passion than a position of so-called honor. She "want[s]" because she cannot have friends, as most women either find her degrading, are superior to her, or too afraid for their own positions to risk companionship. She "want[s]" because she is not permitted to communicate in any way with the opposite sex, unless it is the Commander to which she has been assigned to have children for. She "want[s]" because she cannot eat what she pleases, go where she likes, wear clothes of her own choosing, or speak her own mind. In conclusion, Offred "want[s]" because, by her standards, she has no life of her own, and no control over her personal being.
Monday, February 4, 2013
To Be Free
Is it to hold the mind or let it go?
Cast away knowledge and as the birds
Soar: float irrational, unplagued by words,
Undaunted by a life instinct owned.
Or is it to sit upon a throne,
In a realm beyond dearth and desire,
To bestow a command, to watch the ants tire;
Omniscient, capable, alone.
A reason lies behind our state,
Neither free nor shackles innate
Voices beautiful with limited range.
For here all glory belongs to Him,
In which we can revel, in which we can swim,
The answer in paradise: redemption attained.
Cast away knowledge and as the birds
Soar: float irrational, unplagued by words,
Undaunted by a life instinct owned.
Or is it to sit upon a throne,
In a realm beyond dearth and desire,
To bestow a command, to watch the ants tire;
Omniscient, capable, alone.
A reason lies behind our state,
Neither free nor shackles innate
Voices beautiful with limited range.
For here all glory belongs to Him,
In which we can revel, in which we can swim,
The answer in paradise: redemption attained.
Lions and Serpents and Lambs... Oh My!
Within our society, there are multitudes of different kinds of people. There are criminals, politicians, businessmen, lawyers, nuns, writers, musicians, doctors, artists, teachers, and so many more. With each role comes a different stereotype and a different perceived personality. For instance, we expect criminals to be lying, dangerous individuals and doctors to be passive and truthful people. However, what if the criminal only stole a loaf of bread to feed a starving child, such as Jean Valjean in Les Misérables? What if the doctor is running an insurance scam, or is performing invasive procedures unnecessarily just for the extra cash? Thus, for this analysis, we need to look beyond the boundaries of labels towards the deeper character traits of the individuals themselves. We shall associate these qualities with the lion, the lamb, the serpent and the angel.
The lion is a symbol associated with with power and the capacity for violence, which can be put towards good or evil. For instance, both military men and murders possess lionlike features, but one will only resort to violence in the service of his country while the other will resort to killing or abuse as means of hatred and crime. Star Wars' Darth Vader and Anakin Skywalker serve as supreme examples of the maned beast, for they utilize their capacity for violence to destroy the jedi and to protect the galaxy (and they represent the same individual, just at different times in his life, which adds an interesting twist).
The lamb resides on the opposite end of the spectrum from the lion, and represents the most passive, gentile, and pacifistic of creatures. Individuals with lamblike qualities are extremely resistant to violence against any other human beings; however, this can be as a result of both kindliness and cowardice. Ghandi avoided brutality simply because he did not believe it to be a solution to his people's woes, while many young men avoided the Vietnam War military draft because they were too afraid of what the fight might bring.
On another range, there is the serpent and the angel. The serpent represents humanity's potential to lie, while the angel stands for the commitment to honesty in the face of all circumstance. While guardians often mislead with the sole purpose of protecting a child, thieves and adulterers represent deceit in its most debasing form. Angels are the only characters who are not multifaceted beings, for their integrity is deeply weighted in the depths of their moral beings. These winged creatures are just as perceived: the purest of the pure.
In conclusion, there are 4 different types of people in the world, and they vary in their tendency for violence and their capacity for telling untruths. We have our venomous lambs, our winged sheep, our haloed lions, and our scaly felines. Where do you belong? How high or low are your limits for ferocity and fraudulence? Would you murder for the last muffin at Starbucks, or would you only kill out of self defense or familial protection? Would you cheat on a test, or simply lie to protect someone you love from a harmful truth? What kind of person are you?
The lion is a symbol associated with with power and the capacity for violence, which can be put towards good or evil. For instance, both military men and murders possess lionlike features, but one will only resort to violence in the service of his country while the other will resort to killing or abuse as means of hatred and crime. Star Wars' Darth Vader and Anakin Skywalker serve as supreme examples of the maned beast, for they utilize their capacity for violence to destroy the jedi and to protect the galaxy (and they represent the same individual, just at different times in his life, which adds an interesting twist).
The lamb resides on the opposite end of the spectrum from the lion, and represents the most passive, gentile, and pacifistic of creatures. Individuals with lamblike qualities are extremely resistant to violence against any other human beings; however, this can be as a result of both kindliness and cowardice. Ghandi avoided brutality simply because he did not believe it to be a solution to his people's woes, while many young men avoided the Vietnam War military draft because they were too afraid of what the fight might bring.
On another range, there is the serpent and the angel. The serpent represents humanity's potential to lie, while the angel stands for the commitment to honesty in the face of all circumstance. While guardians often mislead with the sole purpose of protecting a child, thieves and adulterers represent deceit in its most debasing form. Angels are the only characters who are not multifaceted beings, for their integrity is deeply weighted in the depths of their moral beings. These winged creatures are just as perceived: the purest of the pure.
In conclusion, there are 4 different types of people in the world, and they vary in their tendency for violence and their capacity for telling untruths. We have our venomous lambs, our winged sheep, our haloed lions, and our scaly felines. Where do you belong? How high or low are your limits for ferocity and fraudulence? Would you murder for the last muffin at Starbucks, or would you only kill out of self defense or familial protection? Would you cheat on a test, or simply lie to protect someone you love from a harmful truth? What kind of person are you?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)