User:Obaggott06/sandbox

Comparison of Handmaid's Tale and Fun Home articles
The Handmaid's Tale article has way more subsections and acts as more of a glossary, while the Fun Home article is more analytical and has sections less focused on vocab specific to the book and more on the book itself, public opinions of the book, review, critiques, controversies, etc.

Evaluation The Handmaid's Tale
The article has many subtitles and sections that could be condensed into fewer, more general sections or taken out all together. The entire article is a summary and glossary specific to the book. Majority is the more detailed explanation on characters, politics of Gilead,

Lead section
The article has a strong lead section that does a good job with providing a general summary of the book and hinting at what is to come in the rest of the article.

Background
The article doesn't give a lot of background about the book or about Atwood herself. The lead section mentions the year the book was published, and a later section entitled "Setting" provides where Atwood went to college, making a connection between the setting of the book and personal experiences of Atwood. There is mention of what genre Atwood thinks the book should fall into. She emphasized her book is speculative fiction rather than science fiction. She argues that science fiction focuses on things that don't exist and are not yet attainable while speculative fiction talks about things that are definitely plausible. In the "Historical Context" section, the article talks about an interview Atwood gave where she explained that she didn't incorporate anything into the book that the U.S. hasn't already done or is currently doing.

Summary
This article does not have a concise summary. The article is long and the majority of it is summary and definitions of topics related to the book-- very specific. The article did grab the information straight from the book, but it mentioned almost every possible thing you need to know about the book. The article is so specific you could have a detailed understanding of the plot, characters, and terms without actually opening the book.

Handmaid's Tale general observation -> concrete point
General observation: There are a lot of poorly labeled subsections

Concrete point: There is a section that talks about the book's legacy in other forms of media: film, radio, stage. television, and audio. This section talks about adaptations which would fit into an "Others" section, but it is poorly labeled and doesn't clearly convey what the purpose of the section is.

Feminism section (Changing "Feminist Reading" to "Feminist Reading and Analysis") (my additions are in bold)
Much of the discussion about The Handmaid's Tale has centered on its categorization as feminist literature. Atwood does not see the Republic of Gilead as a purely feminist dystopia, as not all men have greater rights than women. Instead, this society presents a typical dictatorship: "shaped like a pyramid, with the powerful of both sexes at the apex, the men generally outranking the women at the same level; then descending levels of power and status with men and women in each, all the way down to the bottom, where the unmarried men must serve in the ranks before being awarded an Econowife". '''Econowives are women married to men that don't belong to the elite and who are expected to carry out child-bearing, domestic duties, and traditional companionship. [this is where a quick decription of econowife will go instead of giving it its own section] When asked about where she believed the status of her novel was in feminist reading, Atwood explained that her book falls into the aisle of feminism that asserts what happens to the women in the book and the women themselves are important to the structure and theme of the book, which also, by default, makes a lot of books feminist. However, she was adamant in her stance that her book did not represent the aspect of feminism that victimizes or strips women of moral choice.' Additionally, Atwood has argued that while some of the observations that informed the content of The Handmaid's Tale may be feminist, her novel is not meant to say "one thing to one person" or serve as a political message—instead, The Handmaid's Tale'' is "a study of power, and how it operates and how it deforms or shapes the people who are living within that kind of regime".

Some scholars have offered such a feminist interpretation, however, connecting Atwood's use of religious fundamentalism in the pages of The Handmaid's Tale to a condemnation of their presence in current American society. [may or may not get rid of/re-word the previous sentence] Atwood goes on to describe her book as not a critique of religion, but a critique of the use of religion as a "front for tyranny." Yet others have argued that The Handmaid's Tale critiques typical notions of feminism, as Atwood's novel appears to subvert the traditional "women helping women" ideals of the movement and turn toward the possibility of "the matriarchal network ... and a new form of misogyny: women's hatred of women". '[incorporating somehow in this paragraph->>] Scholars have analyzed and made connections to patriarchal oppression in The Handmaid's Tale'' and oppression of women today. Aisha Matthews tackles the affects of institutional structures that oppress woman and womanhood and connects those to the themes present in The Handmaid's Tale. She first asserts that structures and social frameworks, such as the patriarchy and societal role of traditional Christian values, are inherently detrimental to the liberation of womanhood. She then makes the connection to the relationship between Offred, Serena Joy, and their Commander, explaining that through this "perversion of traditional marriage, the Biblical story of Rachel, Jacob, and Bilhah is taken too literally." Their relationship and other similar relationships in The Handmaid's Tale mirror the effects of patriarchal standards of womanliness.'''

Adjusting the Setting section
(my additions are in bold, sections that are unchanged but rearranged are underlines) (most of my edits are focused on the subsections that focus on women so a lot of the subsections, and there are A LOT, will be left pretty much unchanged)

Caste and class->>>>>> move this section under "Race" section ("Analysis" subsections: Race Analysis and Feminist Analysis)
''African Americans, the main non-white ethnic group in this society, are called the Children of Ham. A state TV broadcast mentions they have been relocated en masse to "National Homelands" in the Midwest, which are suggestive of the Apartheid-era homelands set up by South Africa. It is implied that Native Americans living in territories under the rule of Gilead are exterminated. Jews are given a choice between converting to the state religion or being “repatriated” to Israel. However, converts who were subsequently discovered with any symbolic representations or artifacts of Judaism were executed, and the repatriation scheme was privatized “with the result that more than one boatload of Jews was simply dumped into the Atlantic to maximize profits.” [delete that quote unless i can find a source to back it up]''

Sex and occupation->>>>>>>>>move under feminist analysis section
''The sexes are strictly divided. Gilead's society values reproduction by white women most highly. Women are categorised "hierarchically according to class status and reproductive capacity" as well as "metonymically colour-coded according to their function and their labour" (Kauffman 232). The Commander expresses his personal opinion that women are considered inferior to men, as the men are in a position where they have power to control society.''

''Women are segregated by clothing, as are men. With rare exception, men wear military or paramilitary uniforms. All classes of men and women are defined by the colours they wear, drawing on colour symbolism and psychology. All lower-status individuals are regulated by this dress code. All "non-persons" are banished to the "Colonies". Sterile, unmarried women are considered to be non-persons. Both men and women sent there wear grey dresses.''

''The women, particularly the handmaids, are stripped of their individual identities as they lack formal names, taking on their assigned commander's first name in most cases. This hierarchical society has forced women to come to terms with their inability to make decisions about their own bodies and lives.''


 * Unwomen->>>> move to feminist analysis
 * Sterile women, the unmarried, some widows, feminists, lesbians, nuns, and politically dissident women: all women who are incapable of social integration within the Republic's strict gender divisions. Gilead exiles Unwomen to "the Colonies", areas both of agricultural production and deadly pollution. Joining them are handmaids who fail to bear a child after three two-year assignments.
 * Jezebels->>> split up and move to feminist analysis and race (Jezebel is also a Black caricature that was used to justify the rape of Black women so I feel like that should be included in the Race section)
 * Women forced to become prostitutes and entertainers. They are available only to the Commanders and to their guests. Offred portrays Jezebels as attractive and educated; they may be unsuitable as handmaids due to temperament. They have been sterilized, a surgery that is forbidden to other women. They operate in unofficial but state-sanctioned brothels, unknown to most women. Jezebels, whose title also comes from the Bible (note Queen Jezebel in the Books of Kings), dress in the remnants of sexualized costumes from "the time before", such as cheerleaders' costumes, school uniforms, and Playboy Bunny costumes. Jezebels can wear make-up, drink alcohol and socialize with men, but are tightly controlled by the Aunts. When they pass their sexual prime and/or their looks fade, they are discarded without any precision as to whether they are killed or sent to the Colonies in the novel.

Feminism section (Changing "Feminist Reading" to "Feminist Reading and Analysis") (my additions are in bold)
Much of the discussion about The Handmaid's Tale has centered on its categorization as feminist literature. Atwood does not see the Republic of Gilead as a purely feminist dystopia, as not all men have greater rights than women. Instead, this society presents a typical dictatorship: "shaped like a pyramid, with the powerful of both sexes at the apex, the men generally outranking the women at the same level; then descending levels of power and status with men and women in each, all the way down to the bottom, where the unmarried men must serve in the ranks before being awarded an Econowife". '''Econowives are women married to men that don't belong to the elite and who are expected to carry out child-bearing, domestic duties, and traditional companionship. When asked about whether her book was feminist, Atwood stated that the presence of women and what happens to them are important to the structure and theme of the book. This aisle of feminism, by default, would make a lot of books feminist. However, she was adamant in her stance that her book did not represent the brand of feminism that victimizes or strips women of moral choice.'''

Additionally, Atwood has argued that while some of the observations that informed the content of The Handmaid's Tale may be feminist, her novel is not meant to say "one thing to one person" or serve as a political message—instead, The Handmaid's Tale is "a study of power, and how it operates and how it deforms or shapes the people who are living within that kind of regime".

Some scholars have offered such a feminist interpretation, however, connecting Atwood's use of religious fundamentalism in the pages of The Handmaid's Tale to a condemnation of their presence in current American society. [may or may not get rid of/re-word the previous sentence] Atwood goes on to describe her book as not a critique of religion, but a critique of the use of religion as a "front for tyranny." Yet others have argued that The Handmaid's Tale critiques typical notions of feminism, as Atwood's novel appears to subvert the traditional "women helping women" ideals of the movement and turn toward the possibility of "the matriarchal network ... and a new form of misogyny: women's hatred of women". '[incorporating somehow in this paragraph->>] Scholars have analyzed and made connections to patriarchal oppression in The Handmaid's Tale'' and oppression of women today. Aisha Matthews tackles the affects of institutional structures that oppress woman and womanhood and connects those to the themes present in The Handmaid's Tale. She first asserts that structures and social frameworks, such as the patriarchy and societal role of traditional Christian values, are inherently detrimental to the liberation of womanhood. She then makes the connection to the relationship between Offred, Serena Joy, and their Commander, explaining that through this "perversion of traditional marriage, the Biblical story of Rachel, Jacob, and Bilhah is taken too literally." Their relationship and other similar relationships in The Handmaid's Tale mirror the effects of patriarchal standards of womanliness.'''