Overall, Atwood utilized Gilead’s oppressive manipulation of language in "The Handmaid’s Tale" to reveal the hierarchical dynamics of power in the theocratic state. Therefore, it is vital to determine in how far Gilead’s discourse is used to maintain the existing power structures, but also whether, and if so, in how far it is used to offer resistance against the state’s rigid hierarchy.
Therefore, it will first be analyzed what Gilead’s social structure looks like, before the highly original thoughts of Pierre Bourdieu on the relations among language, power and politics will be introduced to facilitate a real understanding of the correlation of language and power. After that, a closer look at the concrete content of the novel and particular text passages will give an insight into how the Gileadean power structures are maintained through the use of language. Following this, it will then be analyzed how language also enables Gilead’s opponents, in general, but mainly, the novel’s first-person narrator Offred, in particular, to offer resistance. Therefore, it will first be described how the coexistence of two discourses can be a threat to the system, before it will be dealt with Offred’s main means of resistance: her storytelling.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. The social hierarchy in the dystopian state of Gilead
3. Language and power in Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of power
4. Language as a means of power in Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale
4.1. Language and governmental control
4.1.1. The Red-Center, a brainwashing institution
4.1.2. Restricted literacy
4.1.3. Restricted oral communication: Forbidden words, fixed expressions, silence
4.1.4. Taking names
4.1.5. Psychological split
4.2. Language as a means of resistance
4.2.1. Reflections on words and meanings
4.2.2. The coexistence of two discourses and its impact on the power relationship between Offred and the Commander
4.2.3. The power of words and naming
4.2.4. A compromised resistance
4.2.5. Resistance through storytelling
5. Conclusion
6. Bibliography
Objectives and Topics
This paper examines how the totalitarian regime of Gilead utilizes language as a tool for oppression and societal control, while simultaneously analyzing how the protagonist, Offred, employs language and storytelling as a means of personal and political resistance. The core research question addresses the duality of language in the novel: its function as an instrument of state power and its potential for subverting that same power.
- The role of linguistic manipulation in maintaining a theocratic hierarchy.
- Application of Pierre Bourdieu’s sociological theories on language and symbolic violence.
- The impact of restricted literacy and censored communication on individual identity.
- Offred's storytelling as a subversion of official discourse and a preservation of sanity.
- The significance of dual linguistic codes in facilitating rebellion.
Excerpt from the Book
Reflections on words and meanings
It’s strange, now, to think about having a job. Job. It’s a funny word. It’s a job for a man. Do a jobbie, they’d say to children, when they were being toilet-trained. Or of dogs: he did a job on the carpet. You were supposed to hit them with rolled-up newspapers, my mother said. I can remember when there were newspapers. […] All those women having jobs: hard to imagine, now. […] It was considered the normal thing.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: This chapter outlines the dystopian nature of Gilead and establishes the research focus on how the manipulation of language serves as a core mechanism for maintaining totalitarian power.
2. The social hierarchy in the dystopian state of Gilead: This section details the rigid, patriarchal social structure of Gilead, focusing on the segregation and dehumanization of citizens based on gender and social function.
3. Language and power in Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of power: This chapter introduces Bourdieu’s concepts of linguistic capital, symbolic violence, and the linguistic market to provide a theoretical framework for analyzing language as an instrument of domination.
4. Language as a means of power in Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale: This comprehensive section analyzes how the regime of Gilead enforces control through restricted literacy, indoctrination, and the renaming of subjects to strip them of their identities.
4.1. Language and governmental control: This sub-chapter explains the deliberate construction of a monosemous, Biblical-based discourse designed to replace polysemous language and eliminate independent thought.
4.1.1. The Red-Center, a brainwashing institution: This section examines how re-education centers force Handmaids to internalize state ideologies through repetitive rituals and public confessions.
4.1.2. Restricted literacy: This part highlights how the criminalization of reading and writing for women serves to isolate them and prevent the formation of independent education.
4.1.3. Restricted oral communication: Forbidden words, fixed expressions, silence: This section discusses the codification of everyday interactions and the enforcement of silence to limit the linguistic power of the oppressed.
4.1.4. Taking names: This sub-chapter explores how the state-enforced renaming of Handmaids serves to destroy individual self-identity and cement the role of women as mere property.
4.1.5. Psychological split: This part analyzes the mental fragmentation caused by the internalization of the state’s misogynist ideology.
4.2. Language as a means of resistance: This chapter shifts the focus to how language, paradoxically, can be reclaimed to resist the state’s oppressive structures.
4.2.1. Reflections on words and meanings: This section illustrates how Offred’s internal narration and etymological reflections allow her to maintain a connection to her pre-Gilead identity.
4.2.2. The coexistence of two discourses and its impact on the power relationship between Offred and the Commander: This part investigates how the presence of both current and past linguistic codes in the minds of the citizens provides opportunities for subtle defiance.
4.2.3. The power of words and naming: This sub-chapter addresses the symbolic importance of reclaiming one's original name and how subversively using words can challenge the logocentric power of Gilead.
4.2.4. A compromised resistance: This section acknowledges the limitations of Offred’s resistance, noting that she remains constrained by the very language she uses to criticize the system.
4.2.5. Resistance through storytelling: This chapter concludes the analytical part by demonstrating how Offred’s storytelling functions as a successful, discreet form of rebellion that preserves her sanity and voice.
5. Conclusion: The conclusion synthesizes the findings, affirming that while the state uses language to suppress, the individual can use language to resist, thereby breaking the imposed silence.
6. Bibliography: This section lists the primary and secondary sources used in the analysis of the novel.
Keywords
The Handmaid's Tale, Margaret Atwood, Gilead, Language, Power, Symbolic Violence, Pierre Bourdieu, Resistance, Storytelling, Dystopia, Totalitarianism, Literacy, Identity, Discourse, Oppression.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research paper?
The paper examines the dual role of language in Margaret Atwood's "The Handmaid's Tale," analyzing it both as a tool of totalitarian oppression and a vehicle for personal resistance.
Which theoretical framework does the author apply?
The paper primarily utilizes Pierre Bourdieu’s theories on language, specifically focusing on the concepts of linguistic capital, symbolic violence, and the linguistic market.
What is the main goal of the research?
The goal is to determine how Gilead’s discourse maintains existing power structures and to evaluate if and how language is used by the oppressed to counter the state's rigid hierarchy.
Which primary methodology is used in the study?
The study uses a qualitative, analytical approach, examining specific text passages from the novel and applying sociological theories to interpret the power dynamics within the dystopian state.
What themes are covered in the main body of the paper?
The main body covers state-imposed linguistic control, the restriction of literacy, the renaming of individuals, the psychological impact of oppressive discourse, and the efficacy of storytelling as resistance.
How would you summarize the central arguments using key terms?
The paper argues that language is a site of struggle in Gilead; while the state employs symbolic violence to ensure compliance, the narrator’s storytelling creates a "heterogeneous inner space" that challenges this control.
How does Offred's relationship with the Commander reflect linguistic power?
Their relationship is fluid; because they both have access to forbidden linguistic codes from the past, the Commander occasionally relinquishes his power during secret encounters, allowing Offred to reclaim some symbolic authority.
Why is storytelling considered Offred's most effective form of resistance?
Storytelling allows Offred to maintain her sanity by providing a creative, subjective voice that resists the monolithic, monosemous discourse of the state, even when physical rebellion fails.
What does the "psychological split" refer to in the context of Gilead?
It refers to the mental fragmentation and destabilization that occurs when women internalize the state’s patriarchal ideology, leading them to view themselves and other females as interchangeable, objectified entities.
Why is Offred's resistance described as "compromised"?
It is described as compromised because, despite her attempts to rebel, she remains deeply dependent on the language of the regime she is criticizing, making her resistance context-specific and incomplete.
- Quote paper
- Ronja Thiede (Author), 2018, Language’s influence on control and rebellion in Margaret Atwood’s "The Handmaid’s Tale", Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/469959
