KNOWLEDGE CAUSES INEVITABLE SUFFERING
In the case of both ‘Frankenstein’ and ‘The handmaid’s tale’ authors explore the
importance of knowledge, particularly as a tool for the attainment or removal of power
within hierarchal societies. Indeed, Shelley’s construction of Victor who takes advantage
of scientific knowledge has an arguably inevitably negative impact on both the narrator
and other characters within the novel, allowing the author to present a warning
contextual to the enlightenment period. In another sense, Atwood’s construction of the
commander with his extensive collection of knowledge in a society where women have
no access even to the written language parallels Victor’s construction as both men take
advantage of knowledge which has a detrimental effect on the individual.
Furthermore, it can be argued that Atwood utilises the first person narrator ‘Offred’ in
order to portray a warning to the reader about the issues of knowledge being censored
within modern society. Particularly, the author draws on the issues of modern patriarchy,
something prevalent in many of the Islamic groups and fundamental societies which had
influenced Atwood in her travels. For example, the precedent taken by these countries
from the Sharia Law found in the Quran such as the permissibility for women submitting
to male rule such as the submission of the queen of Sheba (Quran 27:44). Indeed,
something still prevalent within many Islamic societies is the distinct lack of education for
women, a notion which is hyperbolised throughout this text. It could also be argued that
the description of the bible as an ‘incendiary device’ parallels the notion of the Quran as
a source of precedent which uneducated women are not even able to interpret for
themselves. This is evident particularly through Offred’s shock as she sees the
Commander’s office, filled with ‘books and books and books right out in plain view’ in
which use of diacope repetition ‘books and books and books’ all the more emphasises
the emotive awe which Offred experiences and thus the lack of exposure she has had
even to the written word, particularly as even the ‘names of shops were too much
temptation’ for women to acquire knowledge, meaning that signs are instead
represented by simple symbols. The use of adjectives ‘dangerous’ and ‘forbidden’ are
associated with books as a source of knowledge, in this sense connoting perhaps the way
in which oppressive regimes make something so mundane as accessing knowledge
through words inaccessible to those of a lower position, hence why even the signs in
Gilead are pictures instead of words ‘the names of shops were too much temptation’ and
indeed this prevailing notion of ‘temptation’ an abstract noun and something which
Offred associates consistently with knowledge as the commander who has such power is
able to tempt her with his ‘oasis’ of books, which suggest perhaps how the commander
cruelly makes Offred suffer by exploiting his access to knowledge in order to make her
wish for what she cannot have, whilst also presenting an ingrained sense of hypocrisy.
The individual words of the commander also imply the way in which he not only takes
advantage of knowledge but also refuses to accept responsibility for the consequences of
its censorship through personification of ‘nature’ as he suggests that ‘nature demands
variety for men’ therefore justifying the oppression of women through restricting
knowledge.
In a similar way, Shelley’s construction of Victor as the central narrator within the text
can be paralleled to the commander in the sense that both men are unable to accept
responsibility for the consequences of their exploitation of knowledge; the difference
between the two being that whilst Victor has a ‘fervent longing to penetrate the secrets
of nature’, the commander and Gilead would much rather conceal this knowledge in
order to keep citizens in a repressed state. However, both men use personification to
transfer blame for their exploitation of knowledge as Victor personifies the abstract
In the case of both ‘Frankenstein’ and ‘The handmaid’s tale’ authors explore the
importance of knowledge, particularly as a tool for the attainment or removal of power
within hierarchal societies. Indeed, Shelley’s construction of Victor who takes advantage
of scientific knowledge has an arguably inevitably negative impact on both the narrator
and other characters within the novel, allowing the author to present a warning
contextual to the enlightenment period. In another sense, Atwood’s construction of the
commander with his extensive collection of knowledge in a society where women have
no access even to the written language parallels Victor’s construction as both men take
advantage of knowledge which has a detrimental effect on the individual.
Furthermore, it can be argued that Atwood utilises the first person narrator ‘Offred’ in
order to portray a warning to the reader about the issues of knowledge being censored
within modern society. Particularly, the author draws on the issues of modern patriarchy,
something prevalent in many of the Islamic groups and fundamental societies which had
influenced Atwood in her travels. For example, the precedent taken by these countries
from the Sharia Law found in the Quran such as the permissibility for women submitting
to male rule such as the submission of the queen of Sheba (Quran 27:44). Indeed,
something still prevalent within many Islamic societies is the distinct lack of education for
women, a notion which is hyperbolised throughout this text. It could also be argued that
the description of the bible as an ‘incendiary device’ parallels the notion of the Quran as
a source of precedent which uneducated women are not even able to interpret for
themselves. This is evident particularly through Offred’s shock as she sees the
Commander’s office, filled with ‘books and books and books right out in plain view’ in
which use of diacope repetition ‘books and books and books’ all the more emphasises
the emotive awe which Offred experiences and thus the lack of exposure she has had
even to the written word, particularly as even the ‘names of shops were too much
temptation’ for women to acquire knowledge, meaning that signs are instead
represented by simple symbols. The use of adjectives ‘dangerous’ and ‘forbidden’ are
associated with books as a source of knowledge, in this sense connoting perhaps the way
in which oppressive regimes make something so mundane as accessing knowledge
through words inaccessible to those of a lower position, hence why even the signs in
Gilead are pictures instead of words ‘the names of shops were too much temptation’ and
indeed this prevailing notion of ‘temptation’ an abstract noun and something which
Offred associates consistently with knowledge as the commander who has such power is
able to tempt her with his ‘oasis’ of books, which suggest perhaps how the commander
cruelly makes Offred suffer by exploiting his access to knowledge in order to make her
wish for what she cannot have, whilst also presenting an ingrained sense of hypocrisy.
The individual words of the commander also imply the way in which he not only takes
advantage of knowledge but also refuses to accept responsibility for the consequences of
its censorship through personification of ‘nature’ as he suggests that ‘nature demands
variety for men’ therefore justifying the oppression of women through restricting
knowledge.
In a similar way, Shelley’s construction of Victor as the central narrator within the text
can be paralleled to the commander in the sense that both men are unable to accept
responsibility for the consequences of their exploitation of knowledge; the difference
between the two being that whilst Victor has a ‘fervent longing to penetrate the secrets
of nature’, the commander and Gilead would much rather conceal this knowledge in
order to keep citizens in a repressed state. However, both men use personification to
transfer blame for their exploitation of knowledge as Victor personifies the abstract
