COMPARING FRANKENSTEIN AND THE HANDMAID’S TALE

When I first started studying these texts, I was honestly bemused. What does a monster made of human remains have to do with a dystopian theocracy? Quite a lot, it turns out.

We’ve had a few emails from other students, asking if we can help them compare these two seemingly very different texts. I’ve decided that since this is such a widespread question (and rightly so!) I’d put together a few ideas to help you get started. Largely, I’ll be framing this post as questions which you can ask yourself when you revising, perhaps in mindmaps or bullet lists. This is a new way of organising a post, but I hope that it will be helpful!

The body:
In both books, the body and agency over the body are key themes. Think about who owns Offred’s body. There’s more than one argument here. Is it the society she lives in? Is it the Commander? Can we argue that it’s actually still hers? If you have a strong opinion on this already, think about who owns the Creature’s body. It’s arguably harder. Some people will think it is him, but some people will think that it’s Frankenstein. Once you’ve considered the role of the body in both texts, it is then useful to apply this to the context in which they were written. When Atwood was writing, there was widespread protest against abortion, which demonised women who sought control over their own bodies. When Shelley was writing, there was widespread fear towards processes like Galvanism, which sought to restore life to a dead body through electrical currents. What opinions do you think the writers are trying to present?
Birth and motherhood:
Both of these books are corrupting ideas of motherhood, birth, and mother/child relations. Consider the dream Victor has about kissing his mum. A lot of people would argue that Victor has an Oedipus complex – a repressed sexual desire towards his mother. We might go as far as to say that he then projects this onto Elizabeth instead, who is effectively his sister as well as lover, and who assumes the role of mother in his family. Knowing the complexity of mother/son relationships in the book, think about the Creature’s mother (or lack thereof.) Does Victor channel his dead mother’s absence into the way he disowns the creature? Perhaps his incestuous desires are symbolic of how is corrupting the natural order, and trying to play God through his creations? In THMT, think about pregnancy as a means of control and a way of defining a woman’s value. Would you consider Offred the mother of any child she produced for Gilead? Does Serena Joy show any maternal instinct? Atwood is corrupting our view of family relationships the same way as Shelley, redefining “mother” in an uncomfortable and thought provoking fashion.
Language:
Why is language restricted in Gilead? Think about the ways that Atwood plays with language, pulling apart multiple meanings of words. If we imagine a society where reading and writing are forbidden, it’s likely that our internal relationship with words and thought processes would become far more important. Why does Offred describe her Scrabble games so sensually? Is there a link between language and gender? In Frankenstein, language is most important when considering the Creature. Why is it significant that the Creature can’t speak at first, and what changes when he adopts language? Think about how eloquently he learns to express himself, and how this changes the way we feel towards him. Could you argue that language is what makes us human, or is it something else? (The link between language and oppression permeates so much literature. 1984 is another great example of a book which explores this theme.)
Structure:
Think about the way Offred tells her tale. Why does she skip back and forth so often? Consider the use of analepsis and dreams sequences: this book is ordered by days, nights and naps. A lot of it exists inside Offred’s head rather than the world around her. Atwood is using a meta-fictive narrative, meaning that her story is essentially self aware. Offred knows that she is recounting a story, hence her emphasis that “this is a reconstruction.” Why is it effective that we are constantly aware that we are reading? Does it make it eerier, and how? In Frankenstein, remember this is a framed narrative, told in an epistolary form by Walton. What is the effect of Walton’s voice tying this story together? Do you find it more believable because Walton believes it, or do you think the story would be better without him?
Science and religion:
Both of the books demonise science in some sense. Gilead is regressive because this makes it easier to control women. Doctors and scientists end up hung on the wall, because the search for knowledge threatens the foundations which the society is based on. An extreme theocratic regime takes the place of science because it works on historic principles and doesn’t welcome change. What Gilead frames as “religion” is an extremist version of Christianity, and a lot of people would argue that it isn’t about religion at all. Do you think that the people in charge believe in what they are saying? Is extremism merely their way of controlling people beneath them? Victor’s overstretch in scientific practice is what leads to his downfall. He is trying to play god, and he is punished for it, linking into Shelley’s own beliefs that God is all powerful, and that nature cannot be reined in. Do you think that Victor has a right to perform his experiments? If this was happening now, how would your react to it?
We hope this is useful! If you have any questions, email us via the contact page 🙂 If there’s anything else you’d like to see on the blog, let us know!