Compare the ways in which the writers of your two chosen texts

(Frankenstein - Mary Shelley and A Handmaid’s Tale - Margaret Atwood)

Both writers use the openings of their novels to establish not only the views of the
character, but the background behind them through which they project a political and
therefore personal agenda. The Handmaid’s Tale begins en media res, as though we
as the the reader have suddenly entered Offred’s stream of consciousness rather
then being told a story. Shelley in contrast to this uses the epistolary form to present
the character of Walton, exemplifying this foil of victor in that his account is
controlled, but also giving a faux-documentary realism showing male dominance
over literature not only in the novel but at the time of writing too.

In the openings of both Frankenstein and A Handmaid’s tale both Atwood and
Shelley present the freedom of their respective narrators in a way that exemplifies
the controlling or liberating nature of gender in society. Frankenstein is pieced
together by the narratives of different men, each portrayed by Shelley in a way that
implies they want to be “more than men”, as Victor puts it. Walton, the first male
character, proves this early on as he has left his role as a gentleman in London to
undertake a voyage to the North Pole. As justification for this he asks his sister “Do i
not deserve to accomplish some great purpose?”. The way in which Shelley has
framed this question is ironic in that it’s rhetorical; his sister can’t reply and so it turns
into an assertation, purely self confirming his own masculine freedom to aspire. This
arrogance is something Shelley wishes to dismantle in Frankenstein, through the
male characters such as Walton and Victor who each congratulate the other on their
pride. Having the likes of Percey Shelley, Lord Byron and William Godwin as role
models, Shelley was no stranger to the ‘heroic romantic male’, and it is this
expectation to “deserve” “some great purpose” in the romantic masculinity that
Shelley mocks. Atwood independently evidences this critique in A Handmaid’s Tale ,
as whilst Walton utilities his autonomy to escape confort in some noble pursuit,
Offred merely longs for the life that she had, that was taken from her to be replaced
with one deemed necessary for her sex. Offred ponders this with a rehtorical
question of her own, only this time there is no recipient silent or otherwise. She
reminds the reader ‘Waste not want not’, before asking “I am not being wasted. Why
do I want?” Atwood has inverted this familiar proverbial saying to show the
surrealness of Gilead, the chremamorphism of Offred as something to be wasted
within the saying showing just how much her liberty has been restricted. Offred is
now no less an object than something typically wasted, like food scraps. As Offred
has no one to ask, the question seems directed at the reader; Why is it that the role
of women has been decided for so many years, and yet women rebel against it?
Atwood introduces this critique in the opening to give insight into the motivation
behind the microcosm for second wave feminism that is Gilead, and was most likely
influenced by the revolutionary book by Betty Friedan, the Feminist Mystique.
Frieden writes about this “problem that has no name” that Offred seems to be
experiencing, a dissatisfaction with the role, despite it being objectively sufficient,
that society has given to her. However this ‘question’ is ironic, as we know women
don’t want domestic security, they want the freedom to choose. The freedom of
female characters as restricted is again shown in the character of “Mrs Saville”, the
sister of Walton, able only to listen in silence as her brother goes on about his
“welfare” and the ‘success” of his “undertaking”, the hyperbole serving to show the
exaggerated manner of the author of the letters in contrast to the silence of his sister.
This passive female character is representive of the wider readership of Shelley, as
Mrs Saville is tied by her marriage and her sex to England, whereas Walton has all
the freedom. These readers would have read Shelley as “Margaret” read her
brother’s letters; having thoughts but remaining unheard. Atwood also shows the
‘owned’ status of Offfred through her name, literally ‘of Fred” tying her to Gilead in a
more desperate manner than Mrs Saville ; Offred doesn’t even have anyone to send
her letters. Her storytelling in contrast to that of Walton’s is seemingly only for her
own sanity, as she repeats like an incantation “ I need to believe it. I must believe it”,
in regards to the “story” she is telling. So whereas in the opening of Frankenstein
Shelley seeks to show us the strength and authority of her male characters, Atwood
shows us the vulnerability of hers. When speaking to Rita and Cora Offred tells us
that “I used to despise such talk, but now I long for it At least it was talk. An
exchange of sorts”. The trivialisation of “such talk” shows how much Offred realises
she took her freedom for granted, and Atwood invites us to also think about this and
to enter this world of restricted liberty in order to engage with the rest of the novel.
Shelley also does this, but instead of restricted liberty she presents us with a world of
men for whom liberty is not only a right but an expectation.

Both Atwood and Shelley develop the world view of their character for the reader to
see it through their eyes, their identity is developed to show the reader how the
protagonists fit into the world they have created. For example, Atwood shows
through the interaction between Handmaids how the lines between the individual and
the collective are blurred, and this will continue to be a defining theme throughout the
book. When Offred meets her walking partner to go to the shops she is “doubled”,
this specific choice of verb chosen by Atwood to show Offred’s witty humour as part
of her individual identity, but also her acknowledgement of the loss of it in the climate
of Gilead; Offred is not a person of whom there can never be a copy - she is merely
a number, able to be multiplied. This is evidenced by the almost automatic “blessed
be the fruit’ reguritated by Offred upon meeting thre other Handmaid. As ‘heil Hitler’
was to the Nazis, this is a constant reminder of the central doctrine of Gilead;
Evyerone operates around these women for who having children is their primary
objective. The ‘blessed’ is irrelevant, almost farcical, a bitter irony from Atowood to
show the meaningless rhetoric around supposedly caring for these women. Instead
they are the ‘fruit’ in this thinly veiled metaphor, simply being cultivated. Establishing
these habits in the opening not only establishes the ‘rules’ of Gilead, but also hints at
how Offred responds to them and so gives the reader an idea of her character early
on. Shelley also does this, but the environment, and indeed character of Victor
contrasts greatly with that of Offred. Instead from an early age Victor sees himsellf
as above others telling Walton that “My family is one of the most distinguished of that
republic’ Here the clear hubris of Victor shows istelef in his first sentence - not only is
his family high up in the social hierarchy, he literally sets himself apart from others.
Even his beloved adopted sister can’t be seen as an equal she is, as Victor says ‘a
possession of my own’ - a dangerous precedent to set so early on, as Victor’s
concept of and attitudes towards relationships will feature prominently in the
countenance of the monster later on. Shelley refers to this when he says to Victor
that “my form is a filthy type of yours” later on in the novel, showing that all the
terrible things the monster has done stem from Victor, and so it is important to
establish his identity in the opening. We also see this view changing as the
environment of the characters influences them. In Handmaid’s Tale when Offred
sees the political dissidents hanging on the wall she thinks that “the heads are the
heads of snowmen”. With this metaphor Atwood again takes a familiar comforting
idea and attaches a disturbing meaning to it, creating the unsettling world of Gilead
for the reader. It also lacks her usual cynicism and wit , exemplified when talking
about the sparseness of her room as being defined by the fact that her hosts had
“removed anything you could tie a rope to”. This shows Offred almost shrinking back
into a childlike state in response to the horror, her commentary becoming simple as if
dazed. She takes “a look at the one red smile” characterising it as such because
Atwood wants to show Offred’s failure to acknowledge the corpses for what they are.
For Offred the blood stain ceases to become even metaphorical, it is for her actually
a snowman, with a bright red smile. Shelley also shows the influential nature of
Victor’s environment, particularly in the way his parents acted towards him. He was
their ‘plaything and their idol’, these metaphors showing Victor as something at once
trivial and transcendent. However Shelley uses the extent to which they are besotted
with Victor to emphasise his innocent nature that he was born with, as her father
William Godwin would have seen it. Victor was “bestowed on them by heaven”,
which is important as it personfifies heaven to allow it to ‘bestow’ a living thing. Victor
later usurps his place as a human to fufil his role as the modern Promethius and
‘bestow’ a living thing on the world, which has less than favourable consequences.

In Conclusion, Shelley and Atwood develop the identity of the protagonists, as