In class we discussed whether or not we were satisfied with
The Handmaid’s Tale ending and if we thought the historical notes were a
good addition. I liked the final section, as it gave us hope for Gilead to fall and
it closely resembled how we discuss similar real-life tragedies—somewhat coldly,
but also informatively. Not as personally affecting as the emotional personal
recount, but it filled in some informational gaps. Then again, it did take away
from the narrative by dulling the ambiguity that Offred left us as the end of
her story. The addition made it strange to have Offred end on the note she did
in the first place. That doesn’t mean there wasn’t ambiguity at all—we don’t
know Offred’s ultimate fate, for example—but it was a weird structural choice.
I haven’t watched the Hulu series yet (I probably will over
break), but from what I understand, it expands on characters and even continues
the story, going further than the book did. Does this imply that the characters
are going to cause big change within the regime? I didn't think it was important that the
characters we meet quickly cause a revolution, so I’m a bit worried that the show
could go in that direction. I could be wrong, though.
Margaret Atwood announced a sequel to her novel, called The
Testaments, but has given few details besides it being set fifteen years later
and there being three narrators. After reading The Handmaid’s Tale, I’m curious
about the sequel, but part of me also wonders how necessary it is. Atwood said
that on top of readers’ questions about Gilead’s “inner workings,” her “other
inspiration is the world we've been living in.” I want to see what else Atwood
will have to say about politics and women’s rights, especially since attitudes
about certain things may have changed since The Handmaid’s Tale was published.
What’s odd is that the new book is even further away in time from the
original takeover, further from a world we are more familiar with. How will
that allow her to incorporate the problems we are facing now?
At the end of Offred's narrative, I was very curious as to what would happen to her. Did Nick sell her out to The Eyes or was he a rebel and trying to help Offred escape? The ending made me feel like there would be a sequel, and I am happy to hear that there will be one!
ReplyDeleteMy initial discontent from not knowing what happened to Offred was somewhat appeased by the historical notes since it tried to explain the fall of Gilead and gave us enough info to where we could try and guess what had happened to Offred.
I'm a bit fearful about the sequel because while the end of the Handmaiden's Tale leaves us with some burning what next/what happened questions, a sequel could radically change our understanding of the Handmaiden's Tale. I just don't want a repeat of what happened when Go set a Watchman was published. I am perfectly content with ending and I think the historical note was an amazing way to close the book because it reminded us that no one society will ever last forever.
ReplyDeleteAlthough a sequel isn't necessary, I see "The Testaments" as being a guide to "The Handmaid's Tale" rather than a continuation of the plot. "The Handmaid's Tale" is very vague in describing the situation our narrator, Offred, is in as it begins and ends within the domains of the same house. We are only given hints of how life exists outside of Commander Fred's house, which never really elaborated on how Gileadean society works. We hear of unwomen, ecowomen, and the colonies, but are restricted to the narrative of a handmaid. As a result, most of the questions asked in class pertained to the inner workings/structure of Gilead. If a sequel could expand on these aspects, we could focus more on society and character development rather than these superficial details.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the ending was a bit confusing I thought it was good in the sense that it wasn't a happy ending where Offred takes down Gilead but there was hope that she was free. I wonder if since this book draws some parallels to modern life the sequel would attempt to provide solutions for these issues?
ReplyDeleteI actually really liked the ending because of how it left you to imagine what happened afterwards. I think I would have preferred not having the historical notes because it ruined the mystery of the ending. I liked the idea of it though. I don't feel like a sequel is really necessary but it would be cool if it gave the perspectives of other people in the society like an aunt, an econowife, or an unwomen.
ReplyDeleteI feel like the Handmaids Tale is a book that’s best left as a stand alone. Specifically, I like that there is a sort of open ended ness to the conclusion. We don’t know exactly how Gilead fell but that’s precisely why Offreds fate and the way it fell is so open to discussion. I’m worried that Atwood in writing the second book is going to detract from the success of the first. Personally, I think she’s running a high risk of providing way too much information about Gilead than is really needed and end up ruining the mystery in the end of the book.
ReplyDeleteI also think that the book is fine as it is. The historical notes that Atwood left provide enough context on the how society got on after the Republic of Gilead. To be honest, I don't really see what a sequel would add to the storyline. It could provide a bit more narration, but the historical notes still told the reader all they needed to know.
ReplyDeleteI think that the ending of The Handmaids Tale is fine, historical notes and a bit of mystery and all. I'm still a little confused as to how Offred recorded everything on cassettes, and why she didn't fill us in on where she was, but the ending, in my eyes, still works. I wouldn't call the new book a sequel; it sounds like a book that's set in the same world. Although I could be wrong, it doesn't sound like this book will be centered around Offred at all, which I would be very open to reading.
ReplyDeleteI am also curious to see what the Testaments will be about. With the ambiguous ending of the Handmaid's Tale, there are so many different ways to go about writing a sequel. However, the Historical notes provide somewhat of a "spoiler", in the sense that readers already know that Gilead eventually does fall and will probably keep that in the back of their minds even while reading the sequel. Still, I will most likely check out the sequel as I am curious to see what it is about.
ReplyDeleteI'm firmly in the camp of not having a sequel. The ending is so fitting. Although there isn't necessarily a conclusion, the point is the finality of death or freedom. Whether she was killed or not would not matter, as she would be "free" either way. I hope the sequel finds a way to answer some questions about the book while still preserving the beauty of the ending.
ReplyDeleteIm particularly interested in the sequel considering she has already made some decisive choiced in the historical notes, i wonder how she will use those
ReplyDeleteI like the historical notes! They're a wildly different tone, and the zany names made me wonder what that new society was like. I also liked how they discussed the characters as historical figures-- the Commander is all sweet and breaking little rules and playing scrabble, then you realize he's a terrible and manipulative person who completely engineered this world. It gives a perspective outside of Offred, who is just seeing him as a regular dude. We forget who the Commanders are.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the historical notes were really needed at the end. I think it is pretty interesting to have the book end in mystery.
ReplyDeleteI am also looking forward to the sequel. It's going to be really interesting to see what else Atwood has in store for us. As others have mentioned, it would be cool to see the story from the perspective of some of the other, more overlooked characters in the book.
I really enjoyed the ambiguity of the ending, it made for an interesting thing to discus and think about. The adding of the historical notes didn't really add anything for me except for maybe a slight commentary on how callous historians can be about the past and human suffering that occurred. I would have much preferred the ending stay with the up in the air question of did Nick sell her out or is she really going to join the opposition.
ReplyDelete