Margaret Atwood Research Paper

Feminine Rebellion Against Oppression in the Works of Margaret Atwood

            Through the span of history and across the reach of literature, the relationship between those who are oppressed and those who are responsible for their domination has teetered on a delicate balance. Whenever a dominant entity exerts excessive force to maintain or increase their power, regardless of the risk posed to themselves, those who are oppressed have a propensity toward rebellion and tend to exemplify an endless resistance. Traditionally, both literature and history communicate the tale of a hero overcoming all odds to repel injustice and overthrow oppressive regimes. Author Margaret Atwood, however, takes a contradictory approach in order to both demonstrate the capability of women in the face of oppression and to overthrow the dominant literary styles. In The Handmaid’s Tale and Oryx and Crake, Margaret Atwood rebels against traditional writing conventions by using non-linear structure, ambiguous endings, and fragmented language to parallel the rebellion of her characters. Her construction of the characters’ journeys contributes to the feminist argument against oppression. Atwood uses fragmented language to build a basis for her character’s resistance as well as to resist the traditional linear style of literature. Her use of ambiguous endings is a rebellion in the postmodern sense in itself and mimics the opposition of her characters. The fragmented language implemented throughout her novels embodies the rebellion of Atwood against traditional literature as well as portrays the characters’ disenchantment with the state of their societies. Each of these written components builds to the feminist themes of Atwood’s literature as her male character’s attempts at rebellion prove to be less effective than her female character’s, therefore making Atwood an advocate for women against oppression. 

            In an effort to rebuke the dominant literary conventions and archetypes, Atwood depicts her novels through non-conventional methods. While traditionally, literature has taken on a linear form—always promoting a single and continuous timeline—Atwood strategically takes a different approach. An act of rebellion itself, Atwood’s construction of her novels through the use of flashbacks mixed with present tense occurrences creates a multi-dimensional piece of literature which defies common convention. “The book alternates between flashbacks to this past, and the present” in order to fully develop the perspective of her characters, and therefore the basis of their resistance (Cooke 3). Her inclusion of past and present times, however, not only helps to build a foundation for the rebellion of her characters, but functions in itself as a rebellion against the typical linear formation of literature. As writing is historically a male-dominated trade, Atwood’s refusal to “revert to the ‘traditional’ values of a male-dominated system” by creating non-linear texts, proves her feminist views and parallels the defiance of her female characters (Johnson 69). In fact, Atwood’s bold contradiction of conventional writing styles goes as far as to challenge the archetypal hero’s journey. Instead of allowing men to continue their domination of romances and odysseys, Atwood constructs the journey of a heroine or even the failure of a man. In The Handmaid’s Tale, the main character, Offred, understands that the previous world “dealt in transformations” and held “an endless series of possibilities”, and it is these memories which inspire her drive toward renewed freedom (Atwood 157). Offred finds herself again through her rebellion as “self-fulfillment means incarnation within the archetype”; the archetype here having been built for a woman (Stevens 3). It is once she has found this self that she also finds “a basis for action within the world” (Stevens 6). This stands in stark contrast to the failure exhibited by her male character, Snowman, in Oryx and Crake. Here, Atwood utilizes a mixture of the past and present to demonstrate Snowman’s miserable failure as a man. While he remembers being told to “pull [himself] together. [He’s] the man around here”, he currently acknowledges that the “irony is lost on the trees” as he had failed to step up against corruption in the previous society (Atwood 162). Snowman merely accepted the previous repressive culture instead of speaking out against it. While Snowman represents a man who failed to make a difference, Atwood’s female characters, and Atwood herself, represent the women who are willing to take risks to fight oppression. Even in the face of potential repercussions from a male-dominated writing community, Atwood acknowledges that the “solution is not to accept and adapt…to repressive culturally-defined conventions, but to re-write them” (Sanchez-Grant 82). Atwood capitalizes on this belief as she literally re-writes the archetypal journey for women. By first building the credibility of her characters through their memories, shown by her non-linear structure, Atwood not only strengthens their claim to rebellion, but also strengthens her own credibility as a writer going against the grain.

            The fragmented language that Atwood incorporates throughout her texts works against all the writing done before the Modernism movement as well as signifies her characters’ disillusionment with their societies. As Atwood is a “feminist theorist of the postmodern” who is “concerned explicitly with dismantling” oppressive systems, her use of fragmented language represents the literal breakdown her characters’ faith in society (Caminero-Santangelo 1). Atwood embraces the use of fragmented language as a rebellion against literary forms which remained dominant until the Modernist era. As the goal of Modernist literature was to question authority and function as “a rebellion against the distinct forms and rules of traditional literature” through the use of fragmented language, the goal of Atwood’s texts is to rebel against the literary traditions created by men in order to demonstrate the value of women in literature (Colorado College). Atwood is able to successfully rebel against traditional uses of language by “recognizing the repressive cultural constructs”, which generally work to oppress alternative ideas, and then “finding the strength to dispel them” (Sanchez-Grant 83). Much in the same way, her character in The Handmaid’s Tale is able to rebel once she recognizes her restraints as a woman, and still decides to disregard the rules because the risk is worth it. Offred realizes “that if it’s a story [she’s] telling, then [she] has control over the ending”, which is a much better alternative to the life that her society has created for her (Atwood 39). It is through Offred’s narration of her journey that the fragmented language is able to be further incorporated as a symbol of Offred’s disenchantment with societal expectations. Offred’s memories of her life before the takeover of dystopian rulers prompt her bitter statement that she “want[s] everything back, the way it was” and fuel her rebellion against the society which has proven to be unsatisfactory (Atwood 122). In contrast to Offred’s rebellion, upon realizing her amount of control, stands Snowman’s reluctant compliance even after admitting that “he felt culpable” (Atwood 91). In this fragmented part of Snowman’s memory, he admits to his disillusionment with the behaviors of society as well as his involvement in them, but he continues to internalize his dissatisfaction—once again speaking to the value of femininity in the face of oppression.

In continuing with her message of the value of women and the general rebellion against conformity to a dominant system, the fragmented language present in Atwood’s literature becomes evermore profound. Atwood’s texts represent those “in which the function and value of language” cannot be underestimated (Cooke 1). Because Atwood chooses to use fragmented thoughts, her own rebellion against conventional literature is made clear. In fact, Atwood’s words are designed to “dismantle culturally-encoded concepts” by demonstrating the breakdown of faith in those concepts, hence her use of fragmentation (Sanchez-Grant 77). In her writings, even the form of narration is fragmented. Instead of conforming to tradition, Atwood portrays her texts from different points of view. While the main characters mix their past and present thoughts as part of a narration of their own story, Atwood also incorporates a third person narrator for even greater fragmentation. This works for Atwood in two ways: primarily, the fragmentation of Atwood’s texts are emphasized through a mélange of viewpoints, but also, such fragmentation builds the idea of disillusionment with society—or certain writing conventions—and heightens the credibility of her characters’ embitterment and, therefore, the reason for their rebellion. In fact, the fragmentation is so prominently foregrounded that even as the story is being told, the narrators are revising their thoughts. Offred admits that she “will have to revise that,” immediately following her original statement (Atwood 104). Similarly, in his process of telling his story, Snowman revises his statement, as he stipulates that “maybe she was tired of him. Or maybe she was sick” (Atwood 31). Either way, society was repressing his mother, and Snowman could see it, but his fragmented thoughts make it clear that he never acted against this repression. Clearly, Atwood’s writings exemplify a “postmodern feminist space for resistance”; her weapon of choice: fragmentation (Caminero-Santangelo 9).

The last act of rebellion in each of Atwood’s dystopian tales is exactly that: the end. It is through Atwood’s construction of the endings that the success of a heroine and the failure of a man become evident, yet maintain a sense of uncertainty. It is also through her endings that her resistance against conventional literary techniques is once again emphasized. Atwood understands that “the potential for resistance in such a presentation lies in the recognition” that it is “always open to challenge”, but continues to build on the rebellious inspiration from Modernism, to resist literary tradition through her ambiguous endings (Caminero-Santangelo 9). In Oryx and Crake, Atwood leaves the story with only: “zero hour, Snowman thinks. Time to go” (Atwood 374). The use of the phrase “zero hour” in itself expresses the concept of starting over, the concept of a new beginning, but also the lack of clarity as to what that new beginning entails. In doing so, Atwood defies the traditional style of literature. While maintaining its ambiguity, however, the ending also portrays Snowman’s continuing indecisiveness and his failure to rebel against what he knows is corrupt as he asks the empty air, “what do you want me to do?” and he answers himself with, “it’s hard to know” (Atwood 374). Clearly, Snowman’s rebellion is still internal and his course of future action unclear. On the other hand, the conclusion of The Handmaid’s Tale resonates with hope even through its ambiguity. Although Offred is faced with fear and uncertainty, she still shows her strength and her willingness to take risks in the name of resistance as she “step[s] up, into the darkness within” (Atwood 295). Even in the face of the unknown, Offred continues to resist the darkness of oppression as she hopes she is actually stepping into “the light” (Atwood 295). The uncertainty contained within each novel speaks to the untraditional construction of the work, but each remains clear enough to contrast the rebellions of each character. When faced with uncertainty, Snowman is feeble and fails to act, whereas Offred maintains her never-ending resistance to oppression. In this way, the endings work to further Atwood’s feminist argument against oppression. Her evidence: the resolve of women in the face of uncertainty; paralleled with the failure of men when faced by the same. Atwood designs her texts “to be understood as a direct extrapolation from, and thus critique of, contemporary society” and the inequality faced by women in said male-dominated society (Cooke 1). Her use of ambiguous endings as an untraditional writing tool only works to further her viewpoint. While ambiguous endings are characteristic of literature following the Modernist era, they also defy the traditional sense of a clean-cut and unmistakable ending. The use of ambiguous endings is a signature for Atwood and clearly outlines her resistance to conform. 

            To promote resistance to the oppression of women, Atwood creates a dystopian society, in The Handmaid’s Tale, known as the Republic of Gilead. Her novel “represents a particularly feminist sensibility in its conceptualizing of resistance to a dominant order” and it is through this feminist approach to resistance that Atwood is able to demonstrate the capability of women (Caminero-Santangelo 1). Atwood satirizes the oppressive conditions in which women live by establishing strict regulations regarding the rights of women within Gilead. In her dystopian society, women are valued only for their bodies. Their worth as an entire gender has been reduced from mother, daughter, and contributing citizen, in a previous time, to “the sum of child-bearing parts” (Sanchez-Grant 78). The rules of society prohibit women from being “allowed to read and write” and essentially “negate the rights of women” completely (Johnson 68, 74).  Gilead promotes an “oppressive ideology of contract and property” in which women are essentially possessed by men (Caminero-Santangelo 6). Even in the beginning of the takeover by the new governing system, Offred remembers that she and her lover were no longer equal, but “instead, [she is] his” (Atwood 182). And there began the oppressive society in which Offred was forced to start a new life. By creating such an “openly oppressive culture”, Atwood hopes such an unjust society will be “refuted by both her protagonist and her readers” (Sanchez-Grant 83). It is under such oppressive conditions that the main character’s subtle forms of resistance are able to be seen. It is because of such seemingly “helpless suffering” that internal opposition “changes into an urgent desire for liberaton” as evidenced by Offred’s actions which grow more and more risky and urgent as her journey progresses (Stevens 4). It is in spite of such repressive circumstances that the heroine fights back. And it is against such oppression that Offred rebels.

            The same devices Atwood rebels against conventional literature with are those that create Offred’s rebellion against the Republic of Gilead. Throughout the novel, Offred develops her past through a series of flashbacks which gives her rebellion weight. Offred builds her resistance on the foundation of her life before the Republic. She remembers that being able to dress the way she wanted, that “that was freedom” (Atwood 28) instead of having to wear red from head to toe with the exception of “white wings” over their faces to keep “from being seen” (Atwood 8). But it is through these memories, through this non-linear organization, that Offred is able to portray the extreme repression of women’s rights in the new governmental system. In fact, it is because of her memories that she still has “multiple contexts from which to produce…resistance”; it is because of her memories that her claims against oppression are given validity (Caminero-Santangelo 4). The use of fragmented thoughts in the novel act as “a sheer demonstration that [Offred] can still draw on multiple discourses” (Caminero-Santangelo 4) and is not confined solely to the status of child-bearer as a result of the “predicament of woment in the sexist society” of Gilead (Stevens 3), but rather that her thoughts are still her own. Throughout Offred’s journey as a handmaid—one who is forced to endure monthly impregnation ceremonies in an effort to repopulate the nation—she shows subtle internal signs of rebellion which eventually grow to be active resistance against the society which has chosen to oppress women. Offred capitalizes on even the smallest opportunity to resist feminist oppression. As a handmaid, Offred’s face is to remain hidden from all males; however, whenever she gets the chance, she tries to make the smallest amount of eye contact with others as it is “a small defiance of rule” which she thinks of as rewards (Atwood 21). Not only does this demonstrate that Offred is dissatisfied with the customs, created by a male-dominated society, to oppress women, but also that she will rebel against Gilead, regardless of the risk she poses to herself. Atwood depicts Offred’s journey through the strategic use of unconventional methods to create a rebellious piece of literature as well as develop Offred’s rebellion against the Republic. And it is Offred’s constant resistance and final leap of faith against oppression which demonstrates the value of the feminist argument against oppression.

            Atwood’s rebellion against traditional literature is consistent between both her novels The Handmaid’s Tale and Oryx and Crake and parallels that of her characters across all elements except for that of Snowman’s success. While Atwood’s defiance of conventional literature is quite effective, Snowman’s resistance against the oppression within his society is inconsistent, internalized, and therefore, rendered ineffective. Atwood “tell[s] the story, in flashback” in order to provide a basis for Snowman’s current situation and to demonstrate the failure of his journey (Cooke 2). Snowman’s entire life was “an archaic waste” of time and he did nothing to change that (Atwood 195). Although Snowman recognized a need for focus and resistance to the sloth of society, when he told himself to “get a handle on it…such positive slogans…would be less than useless” and his resistance would instantly falter (Atwood 260). At one point in the novel, Snowman admits that “it’s wrong, the whole organization is wrong, it’s a moral cesspool” in regards to a corrupt company that would soon bring about the destruction of humanity (Atwood 56). But what does Snowman do about it? Absolutely nothing. The most resistance he shows include his internal thoughts. So while he knows that the corporations which dominate every aspect of business and entertainment and socialization within society are corrupt, he fails to act. They create harmful “power plays”, which Snowman occasionally even takes part in (Cooke 6). He has his concerns, but he internalizes them rather than speaking out. Even when “he’d felt that what they’d been doing was wrong…he could barely get a word out” and was therefore unable to fight the oppression brought on by the omnificent corporations (Atwood 91). So while Snowman did resist internally and understand the immorality of the oppression within society, his weak rebellions would ultimately fail. Only after humanity is all but extinct does any of Snowman’s resistance comes to the surface, but at that point, “what it preserves no longer exists” (Cooke 8). By that time, Snowman is forced to accept the only available form of resistance to the complete destruction of humanity that is left—keeping the memory of the previous world alive. His memories, seen through flashbacks, are portrayed to the Crakers (version two of humans) in his feeble attempt to grasp any true power over his situation. The situation that, should he have resisted earlier, could have been prevented altogether. It is Snowman’s failed rebellion that emphasizes the value of women, which is developed by Atwood’s own rebellion.

            In each of Atwood’s novels, a heroine offers resistance and provides potential for change in the status quo while Snowman is unable to prevent catastrophe because of his conformation to the dominant powers of society. Snowman did nothing against this overreaching of power and the consequences were disastrous. But with Offred, there is hope in the end—she succeeds because rebels and is a woman, while some of Snowman’s rebellions did absolutely nothing. These rebellions, failed or successful, are effective only because of Atwood’s strategic design of her texts. Only by using non-linear structure, fragmented language, and ambiguous endings is Atwood able to parallel her own rebellion with that of her characters. And only through her genius literary strategies within her heroine’s journey is she able to contribute to the feminist argument against oppression.