He discusses the identity of the narrator. They tried to discover it using a variety of methods, but failed. Pieixoto notes that historical details are scanty because so many records were destroyed in purges and civil war. Some tapes, however, were smuggled to Save the Women societies in England. He says the names Offred used to describe her relatives were likely pseudonyms employed to protect the identities of her loved ones. The Commander was likely either Frederick Waterford or B. Frederick Judd. Both men were leaders in the early years of Gilead, and both were probably instrumental in building the basic structure of Gilead. Judd devised the Particicution, realizing that it would release the pent-up anger of the Handmaids.
Pieixoto says that Particicutions became so popular that in Gilead's “Middle Period” they occurred four times a year. Judd also came up with the notion that women should control other women. Pieixoto says that no empire lacks this “control of the indigenous by members of their own group.” Pieixoto explains that both Waterford and Judd likely came into contact with a virus that caused sterility in men. He says the evidence suggests that Waterford was the Commander of Offred's story; records show that in “one of the earliest purges” Waterford was killed for owning pictures and books, and for indulging “liberal tendencies.” Pieixoto remarks that many early Commanders felt themselves above the rules, safe from any attack, and that in the Middle Period Commanders behaved more cautiously.
The professor says the final fate of Offred is unknown. She may have been recaptured. If she escaped to England or Canada, it is puzzling that she did not make her story public, as many women did. However, she might have wanted to protect others who were left behind, or she may have feared repercussions against her family. Punishing the relatives of escaped Handmaids was done secretly to minimize bad publicity in foreign lands. He says Nick's motivation cannot be understood fully; he reveals that Nick was a member both of the Eyes and of Mayday, and that the men he called were sent to rescue Offred. In the end, Pieixoto says, they will probably never know the real ending of Offred's story. The novel ends with the line, “'Are there any questions?'”
Style…
-
“Iran and Gilead: Two Late Twentieth Century Monotheocracies, as Seen Through Diaries” Professor Pieixoto's talk is prefaced with a list of the studies he is famous for. One is a comparison of the Iranian government of the late twentieth century to the Republic of Gilead. Iran's conservative Islamic revolution involved demodernisation and severe restrictions on the freedoms of women.
-
Claiming Biblical precedent, Gilead "replaced the serial polygamy common in the pre-Gilead period with the older form of simultaneous polygamy practiced in the Old Testament times." Pieixoto notes that Gilead incorporated polygamous and racist practices of the society that preceded it into its tenants.
-
“When power is scarce, a little of it is tempting” This quote summarises the drive behind every character in the book, all the characters actions can ultimately be traced back to their desire for power.
Themes…
Analysis… After this ending, with its leap into the unknown, the epilogue follows. It is simultaneously a welcome objective explication of Gileadean society, a parody of academic conferences, and offensive to the reader. We have just suffered through Offred's torments with her, and it is shocking, as Atwood means it to be, to hear her life discussed in front of an amused audience, joked about, and treated as a quaint relic.
Professor Pieixoto makes references to Gilead's clever synthesis of ancient customs and modern beliefs, he discusses the use of biblical narratives to justify the institution of the Handmaids, and he mentions the similarities between the “Particicution” and ancient fertility rites. None of these things will have escaped the notice of an alert reader, but this marks the first time we have heard them explained clearly and analytically. The epilogue also reveals information beyond Offred's experience—the identity of Offred's Commander, the purges that took place frequently under the regime, and the success of the underground resistance at infiltrating the command structure.
By telling us that The Handmaid's Tale was transcribed from tapes found in an “Underground Femaleroad” safe house, the epilogue undercuts the powerful ambiguity of the novel's ending, letting us know that Nick was a member of Mayday, and he did attempt to get Offred out of the country. Offred's final fate remains a mystery, but the faithfulness of Nick does not.
In the epilogue, Atwood inverts Gilead, overthrowing the terrible world that she created. In opposition to the Gilead's white, male-dominated patriarchy, in the new world the whites are the subjects of study, not the scholars and rulers. Professors have names like Johnny Running Dog and Maryann Crescent Moon, which suggest that Native Americans dominate the academy. The great universities are in Nunavit, in northern Canada, and the map of the world, we are assured, has been remade. Once, white people studied the Third World; now the chair of the conference announces a speech from Professor Gopal Chatterjee, from the Department of Western Philosophy at the University of Baroda, India.
Pieixoto's comment that Gilead should not be judged too harshly because all such judgments are culturally conditioned echoes and calls into question the moral relativism common among academics today. The novel has asked us to sympathize with Offred, and to judge Gilead evil, tyrannical, and soul-destroying. In that case, Pieixoto's appeal for understanding, and the applause that follows it, suggests that such moral ambivalence sows the seeds for future evils. Furthermore, the professor and the conference attendees seem insufficiently moved by Offred's plight. They discuss her as a chip in a reproductive game, belittling her tale as the crumbs of history, and openly prizing a few printed pages from the Commander's computer over her master tale of suffering. This belittling of a woman's life and glorification of a man's computer suggests the patriarchal leanings of this new society. Offred and her trauma seem remote to this group, but Atwood's novel urges us to think that such a fate is not far off, but imaginable, for societies like ours and like Professor Pieixoto's, which fancy themselves progressive but hold seeds of patriarchal oppression. The academics' complacency and self-satisfaction seems dangerous. The closing line—“Are there any questions?”—Gives the story a deliberately open-ended conclusion. The end of The Handmaid's Tale only marks the beginning of a discussion of the issues the story raises.
How do we as reader feel about the events/ people… The Historical Notes change the readers’ whole perception of the book. They also provide the novel a definite sense of realism, a sense that Gilead could in fact exist…a testament to this would be a cult which exists in middle America which has adopted strong Christian beliefs and coupled them with the notion that a wife must pander to every whim and need of her husband, perhaps a phenomenon that Atwood was aware of when she was writing the novel.
