Posted on 04/12/2006 11:44:39 AM PDT by Racehorse
An open letter to the Judson Independent School District:
First, I would like to thank those who have dedicated themselves so energetically to banning my novel, "The Handmaid's Tale." It's encouraging to know the written word is still taken so seriously.
That thought aside, I would like to congratulate the students, parents and teachers who have supported the use of my book in Advanced Placement courses. They have aligned themselves against the censors, book-banners and book-burners throughout the ages and have stood up for open discussion and a free expression of opinion which, last time I looked, was still the American way, though that way is under pressure.
I would also like the comment on the objections to the book that have been made. The remark "offensive to Christians" amazes me why are some Christians so quick to see themselves in this mirror?
Nowhere in the book is the regime identified as Christian. It puts into literal practice some passages from the Bible, but these passages are not from the New Testament. In fact, the regime is busily exterminating nuns, Baptists, Quakers and so forth in the same way the Bolsheviks exterminated the Mensheviks. The only person who says anything Christian is the heroine herself. You will find her own version of the Lord's Prayer at the end of Chapter 30.
As for sexual explicitness, "The Handmaid's Tale" is a good deal less interested in sex than is much of the Bible. Leaving aside the Song of Solomon, there's quite a bit of sex rape, incest of various kinds, seduction, lust, prostitution, public intercourse on a rooftop with one's father's concubines and more. One of the things that makes the Bible such a necessary book is its refusal to throw a lace tablecloth over this kind of behavior.
The sexual point in my book would seem to be that all totalitarianisms try to control sex and reproduction one way or another. Many have forbidden interracial and interclass unions. Some have tried to limit childbirth; others have tried to enforce it. It was a common practice for slave owners to rape their slaves for the simple purpose of making more slaves. And so on.
The other point would be that the free choice of a loved one when denied by a regime or a culture is going to happen anyway, though under such conditions it will be both brave and dangerous. I give you Romeo and Juliet. Also, when marriage itself has been made into a travesty, talk of sex within the bonds of marriage becomes simply fatuous.
Two last thoughts. First, I put nothing into my book that human beings have not already done. It's not a pretty picture, but it's our picture, or part of it. Second, if you see a person heading toward a huge hole in the ground, is it not a friendly act to warn him?
Again, I congratulate you and wish you well. Your thoughtfulness and courage have set an example well worth following.
I believe it was also made into a movie that nobody went to see.
I was actually in the crowd of people who didn't go see it.
You ever read this one? Sounds like one of those bad Tepper or Kingsolver screeds.
}:-)4
The issue is not about 'banning' the novel, it's about whether or not it should be REQUIRED reading or even RECOMMENDED reading (presumably it would be one or the other, probably the former, if it's included on the syllabus of an AP course). Leftist trash always gets into a lather about any attempt to review a syllabus, yet they would never accept that all the good/great conservative books are 'banned' if they are not included on some course syllabus.
1)Set in a Fascistic future America, The Handmaid's Tale tells the story of Kate, a handmaid. In this America, the religious right has taken over and gone hog-wild. Kate is a criminal, guilty of the crime of trying to escape from the US, and is sentenced to become a Handmaid. The job of a Handmaid is to bear the children of the man to whom she is assigned. After ruthless group training by Serena Joy in the proper way to behave, Kate is assigned as Handmaid to the Commander. Kate is attracted to Nick, the Commander's chauffeur. At the same time, a resistance movement begins to challenge the regime.
2) Following a coup, America is a country still at war with itself and ruled by a repressive Bible-inspired regime. Past pollution means only 1% of women can bear children, and anyone committing a crime and found to be a potential mother is put into an institution run by 'Aunt Lydia' to be indoctrinated ready for this. One such is Kate, who then goes on to Fred, a high-up in the security forces, to attempt to procreate. Fred's wife Serena is jealous and vicious, and the State's grip seems to be tightening. But Kate still has her own mind, and is finding that some other people are prepared to resist.
I have not read the book or seen the movie.
It might have been helpful to tell us why you feel that way...
The novel is a colossal, hate-filled bore, IMHO. Let the kiddies read it and make up their own minds.
"I think there are many better choices."
I agree!! What ever happened to teaching the classics, i.e., Shakespeare, Dickens, Bronte, Austen, Hardy, Eliot?? These are more suited to an AP English class than any of the 20th Century crapola that tries to pass itself off as great literature!
As far as being offered to AP classes, I agree with others on the thread--there are much better examples of good literature out there. This book qualifies as tripe.
I rented the movie and enjoyed it. (because it had nudity)
Box Office Mojo: The Handmaid's Tale Cinc Week of March 9, 1990 Gross sales: $738,578 - ranking: 117 - Per Theater: $6,312 (Its first and last week it made $738,000 gross)
It's worth 99 cents at a flea market, a six pack, and a few hours to laugh at one of the worst feminist rants in the past 25 years.
I would submit that Steven King's "The Stand" has far more literary and political relevance than "The Handmaid's Tale".
This has nothing to do with "free speech." No one is saying that she can't publish this tripe. No one is saying that anyone who wants to read this tripe can't.
Morons.
If it reads anything like the movie, I would not have finished it anyway.
I have not read the book or seen the movie. It might have been helpful to tell us why you feel that way...
I flipped the remote about half way through the movie. It was a bore.
I made the comment following the open letter to indicate I have no personal basis from which to criticize the novel or Atwood. That Atwood took the time to write an open letter concerning a dead issue I found highly interesting. I thought others would find it similarly interesting.
This is just more "Let's Read Banned Books!" sanctimony from schoolmarmish librarian-types.
What the flock is that?! Sounds like some dadgum romance novel but written by a lesbian!
I keep getting this book confused in my mind with P.D. James, "The Children of Men," which also sucked, but not as bad as Atwood's Oreck of a novel.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.