Identity Stripped, Spirit Unbroken

The gloomy book ¨The Handmaid’s Tale¨ by Margaret Atwood´s explore themes of rule, control, and resistance in a society personal freedom are heavily restricted. Despite, it being a fiction, the story make important comparisons to the historical background of slavery in the United States. Both stories examine how people are degraded, how their power as individuals are undermined, and how resilience develops in the face of oppressive regimes. I will explore the comparison of a single passage from “The Handmaid’s Tale” with the background of slavery in historical times, showing how both versions reveal the relationships of power and resistance.

In “The Handmaid’s Tale,” Gilead’s society cruelly devalues its people, treating them as nothing more than objects for reproduction. Offred, the main character of the book, struggles with her identity after understanding that the government only sees her as a “I am a national resource” (Atwood, 65). This direct statement explains how the government views women as little more than machines for reproducing, a belief that oddly echoes a dark period in American history.

During the era of slavery in the United States, a similar dehumanization process took place. People who were in slavery were treated like property, had their identities eventually taken away from them, and were then made into products that could be purchased and sold. They were denied basic human rights and treated as mere “slaves,” much like the women of Gilead, who are only valued as reproductive organs.

The author also effectively examines how language and storytelling may be used as instruments of tyranny. The government effectively censors any challenge by limiting words and thoughts that throw doubt on its authority. The phrase “Nolite te bastardes carborundorum” (Atwood, 92), which can be translated as “Don’t let the bastards grind you down,” is used by Offred as a representation of resistance in language.

Similar to today, those who were oppressed throughout the time of slavery came up with creative strategies to fight back and claim their humanity. To speak secretly and away from the ears of their masters, they frequently invented their own languages, such as Gullah or Creole. In Frederick Douglass’s autobiographies, they used the power of storytelling to expose lies about slavery that were spread by those in power.

As Offred and other characters in “The Handmaid’s Tale” discovered means to resist, historical examples of enslaved people also displayed incredible strength and resistance. In order to express their humanity and autonomy, they staged revolts, studied reading and writing secretly, and passed down their culture and traditions. This resistance can be seen by the words of escaped slave and abolitionist Frederick Douglass, who said the following: “I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong.”

In both cases, I see the idea of names and identity is a significant issue. In “The Handmaid’s Tale,” the Handmaids are given new names as a representation of their identity loss and submission to the state. Their lack of uniqueness is made much more clear by the removal of their real names. This idea is demonstrated by Offred’s quote: ¨My name isn’t Offred, I have another name, which nobody uses now because it’s forbidden. I tell myself it doesn’t matter, your name is like your telephone number, useful only to others; but what I tell myself is wrong, it does matter. I keep the knowledge of this name like something hidden, some treasure I’ll come back to dig up, one day. I think of this name as buried.¨ Similar identity loss occurred in the context of historical slavery. Names and cultural identities were forcibly taken away from enslaved people. Their new names, given by their owners, served as a reminder of their objectification and transformation into property.

There are significant similarities between “The Handmaid’s Tale” and the history of slavery in how they portray oppression, resistance, and the tenacity of people. We have examined the dehumanization of people, the control of reproduction and familial separation, the theme of resistance, the manipulation of language, and the fight for autonomy through close reading and direct takes from the book. Both stories act as humbling examples of the dangers of unequal authority and the spirit of people who fight for freedom and choice against the most terrible of systems. By establishing these comparisons, we are better able to grasp the common experiences that persons who stood up to oppressive systems and sought to regain control of their lives have had.