The Political in Margaret Atwood's Fiction: The Writing on the Wall of the Tent PDF Free Download
1 / 32/32
100%
The Political in
Margaret Atwood’s Fiction
Theodore F. Sheckels
The Writing on the
Wall of the Tent
THE POLITICAL IN MARGARET
ATWOOD’S FICTION
This page has been left blank intentionally
The Political in
Margaret Atwood’s Fiction
The Writing on the
Wall of the Tent
THEODORE F. SHECKELS
Randolph-Macon College, USA
First published 2012 by Ashgate Publishing
Published 2016 by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
Copyright © 2012 Theodore F. Sheckels
Theodore F. Sheckels has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act,
1988, to be identied as the author of this work.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any
form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented,
including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system,
without permission in writing from the publishers.
Notice:
Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only
for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Sheckels, Theodore F.
The political in Margaret Atwood’s ction: the writing on the wall of the tent.
1. Atwood, Margaret, 1939– – Political and social views. 2. Atwood, Margaret, 1939– –
Criticism and interpretation.
I. Title
813.5’4–dc23
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Sheckels, Theodore F.
The political in Margaret Atwood’s ction: the writing on the wall of the tent / by Theodore
F. Sheckels.
p. cm.
Includes index.
1. Atwood, Margaret, 1939– —Criticism and interpretation. 2. Politics in literature.
I. Title.
PR9199.3.A8Z88 2012
818’.5409—dc23
2012000558
ISBN 9781409433798 (hbk)
ISBN 9781315554471 (ebk)
Contents
Preface vii
Introduction 1
Part 1 Exteriority (I)
1 The Edible Woman 13
2 Surfacing 27
3 Lady Oracle 41
4 Life Before Man 53
Part 2 Politics Foregrounded
5 Bodily Harm 63
6 The Handmaid’s Tale 77
Part 3 Interiority
7 Cat’s Eye 97
8 The Robber Bride 109
Part 4 Exteriority (II)
9 Alias Grace 123
10 The Blind Assassin 133
11 Oryx and Crake 143
12 The Year of the Flood 153
13 Atwood Overall 163
Works Cited 169
Index 185
This page has been left blank intentionally
Preface
Margaret Atwood has always resisted labels, but, over the years, she has become
more comfortable with both the labels “feminist” and “political.” Her increased
comfort is perhaps related to her readers’ not interpreting those labels in a narrow
manner any longer. In the case of the term “political,” my primary concern in this
particular study, readers ceased assuming that “political” meant “of or pertaining
to elections,” realizing that a broad range of human relations that involve power
might properly be termed “political.” Without necessarily subscribing to the
“personal-is-political” mantra of second-wave feminism, readers began to grant that
how power played out in relationships, in an economy, in a nation, and in the world
was political. As Atwood’s concerns as a writer gradually expanded to embrace
all of these arenas of power, both she and her increasingly more sophisticated
readers no longer found the label “political” to be a problem. Atwood’s expanding
“political” concerns can, of course, be traced in her novels, but they can also be
traced in her published non-ction, with her 1981 address to Amnesty International
and her 2003 “Letter to America” being especially important global landmarks.
Her anti-NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) pamphlet turned her
in a more Canadian political direction; her Massey lecture on debt (published as
Payback in 2008) turned her toward the United States but in a manner that situated
her discussion of its nancial situations in references to an eclectic body of writing
spanning many centuries and many cultures. And then there is her more recent
political activism on behalf of environmental causes.1
So today, given all that she has written on various public matters, I posit that
Atwood would not resist being called “political.” In fact, she might try to claim
that all writing is political. Maybe so, but Atwood’s is not vaguely so the way all
writing might be. Several of her novels are overtly political: Surfacing from the
1970s, Bodily Harm and The Handmaid’s Tale from the next decade, and Oryx
and Crake and The Year of the Flood from the very early twenty-rst century.
Once one broadens one’s denition a small amount to admit the exploration (and
exploitation) of social class, Alias Grace (1996) and The Blind Assassin (2000) are
quickly added to the list; once one broadens one’s denition a small amount more
to admit the exploration (exploitation) of consumerism, Atwood’s rst novel, The
Edible Woman (1969), is quickly added, with Lady Oracle (1976) just a bit behind
(because, although about authors as producers of consumer goods, it is not just
about consumerism).
1 Atwood not only reects on political matters in numerous prose pieces, but she
early establishes “politics” and “power” as synonyms and, then, offers essentially the same
denition of power repeatedly. The denition focuses on who gets to do what to whom with
impunity and (later in the evolving denition) with what level of prot.
The Political in Margaret Atwood’s Fiction
viii
This process leaves us with the three novels that look inwardly at power
rather that outwardly, novels that consider the personal relationships composed
of couples, young girls, and adult women who have taken very different paths in
life, with an eye to how power operates in these relationships. These novels—Life
Before Man (1979), Cat’s Eye (1988), and The Robber Bride (1993)—perhaps
get added to the political list late, but they do get added. Elizabeth, Cordelia, and
Zenia have power and use it (and misuse it), even though none of them ever thinks
of pursuing a life “of or pertaining to elections.”
My focus in this study is going to be on the “political,” broadly dened, but I
will also keep circling back to the other label, “feminist,” because Atwood does,
rst, focus more on the political situation of women than that of men and, second,
bring a feminist attitude to how she sees power playing itself out in the world. By
that I mean she is sensitive to who is power-down, for whatever reason, in this
world. She wants us, her readers, to see who is power-down because these are
the victims in a political world that is depicted by Atwood in terms that are bleak,
although not without some hope. Atwood, then, is also an ironist, destabilizing
complacency no matter whether we are facing the relatively trivial matter of a
writer’s self-denition (Lady Oracle) or the very serious matter of the human
race’s apocalyptic end (Oryx and Crake and The Year of the Flood).
This study will often circle back to this ironic disposition. Furthermore, it
will, by necessity, treat Atwood’s unusual combination of formal realism and
postmodernism, which has her spinning the illusion of real characters and real
situations while playing with narrative voice and with form, often undermining
the latter. She also offers various degrees of indeterminacy. That may reect
postmodernism, or it may reect the fact that, as a “political” writer, she does
not want her readers to end a book thinking matters have been settled—and all is
“okay” once again. She wants readers to worry about environmental degradation
after reading Surfacing, about loveless lives after reading Life Before Man, and
about rapacious greed after reading The Blind Assassin, not to rest-assured that all
problems have been magically solved. One might argue that narrative indeterminacy
extends to her plots as well: that she creates ctive worlds, sometimes obscured
by the narrative perspective she chooses to use, not “real” ones that readers might
derive political commentary from. I do not believe her narrative indeterminacy
extends this far. One only needs to read her non-ction on political issues to know
that, although her stories are stories, the political issues they raise are quite “real”
to her.
So, although a number of topics—from feminism to irony to form—will recur
in this study, the focus will be the “political.” Thus, the book begins with a chapter
that offers a framework for discussing the depiction of power. Michel Foucault is
certainly this age’s foremost commentator on power as it plays itself out in contexts
such as prisons, asylums, hospitals, and—most provocatively—human sexuality.
Much of the framework presented in Chapter 1, particularly the propositions
that power is interior to society and that resistance is inherent within power, is
derived from Foucault. Supplementing Foucault will be an unlikely framework,
Preface ix
that supplied by economist Kenneth Boulding, who has outlined realms of human
activity and the balances of power normative in each. Boulding’s terms allow the
critic to see and articulate imbalances that may exist. And Atwood presents many
such imbalances. Boulding’s terms also allow the commentator to see that what one
might think to be abuses of power, such as threats, is really a normal manifestation
of power, especially in what Boulding refers to as the political realm (as opposed
to the economic and social). Using Boulding’s framework, then, compels one
who might want to declare Atwood’s work sensationalistic to see it as more
properly realistic.
The subsequent chapters proceed novel by novel through the Atwood canon.
There are some patterns evident in Atwood’s work that tempt the critic to present
her work in phases. For example, the rst four novels are not as explicitly political
as the next two (Bodily Harm and The Handmaid’s Tale); then, there seems to be a
turn inward, exploring the interiority of power (Cat’s Eye and The Robber Bride).
Then, there is a social turn, with a pronounced concern for class issues (Alias
Grace and The Blind Assassin). Then, Atwood addresses scientic issues, although
science is not an entirely new concern, and Atwood’s depiction of science run
amok in Oryx and Crake and The Year of the Flood is mixed with business, which,
of course, takes us back, full circle, to The Edible Woman. So, admitting that there
is something of a pattern, I also note that it is limiting to stress it unduly. So, I
group my chapter-by-chapter discussions under the section headings “Exteriority
I,” “Politics Foregrounded,” “Interiority,” and “Exteriority II.” Admittedly, I am
imitating the structure of some of Atwood’s novel in having a consecutive run of
chapters but section headings nonetheless.2
I deal only with Atwood’s novels, although there occasionally will be a
reference to her other work. In doing so, I join a fairly long list of critics who
have given primacy to Atwood’s novel-length ction in discussions of her work.
There seems to be a recognition—shared by Atwood—that her novels are her
major literary compositions. Yes, she began her writing career more as a poet; and
she did indeed take a stab at literary criticism in Survival: A Thematic Guide to
Canadian Literature (1971) before her reputation as a novelist had been established
by the serious attention paid to Surfacing. She has done more in that vein since,
both book-length studies and many reviews. Nonetheless, Atwood seems to have
quickly settled into a pattern where she uses poetry and short ction to experiment
with ideas before they take shape in a novel and, then, uses more journalistic
forums to comment on the issues the novels raise.3
After discussing Atwood’s 12 novels to date, the book concludes with a brief
chapter that attempts—a carefully chosen verb—to extract from the previous
2 I cannot imitate Atwood and offer a total of 15 chapters, something she does
repeatedly, for she has not written 13 novels yet (only 12).
3 Rigney’s fairly early (1987) study of Atwood reects this tendency in chapters that
bring together works from multiple genres while, overwhelmingly, stressing the novel in
the group.
The Political in Margaret Atwood’s Fiction
x
chapters generalizations about Atwood’s depictions of politics or power. All
generalizations admit exceptions, so these are cautiously offered. If we were to
have a candidate for public ofce before us, we would want to know where she
or he stands on the issues of the day. We would want to know the candidate’s
“platform.” Similarly, I think readers who pick up this book want to know where
Atwood might stand. Of course, her stands will not be on issues per se, but on the
larger matters that she believes face the public.
In offering this “platform” in the nal chapter, as well as in discussing Atwood’s
novels, I choose to use a style that I believe many readers will nd accessible.
Many have commented that, when they read Atwood, they hear her voice. I would
hope that a voice is heard in this study as well, not that of a stuffy scholar but,
rather, a more conversational one intent upon sharing, clearly, what Atwood has to
say about power in her accumulated body of novels.
In writing this book, I have been assisted rst and foremost by the community
of scholars who, through four decades, have devoted time to study her work. As
member (now, ofcer) of the Margaret Atwood Society and as editor of Margaret
Atwood Studies, I know many of them. So, I’m not thanking just a list of names,
but people—from all over the world—who share a passionate interest in Margaret
Atwood’s work. Very high on that list would be Atwood’s bibliographers, who
make studying Atwood easy: Judith McCombs and Carole Palmer, who compiled
the 1991 volume Margaret Atwood: A Reference Guide, and Ashley Thompson and
Shannon Hengen, who compiled the follow-up 2007 volume Margaret Atwood:
A Reference Guide, 1988–2005 based on the annual “checklist” they prepare
for what was The Newsletter of the Margaret Atwood Society and is now the
journal Margaret Atwood Studies. Also very high on the list would be the Atwood
scholars who commented on this book at the behest of Ashgate Press and at my
request. Their comments were quite useful in revising this book for publication.
Also invaluable was the editorial assistance of Ann Donahue and Kathy Bond
Borie at Ashgate, and all those involved with the production of the book .
Most of the work on this book was accomplished during sabbatical leave from
Randolph-Macon College during the spring semester of 2009. I would like to
thank the college for awarding me this leave and, more particularly, the Rashkind
Family Endowment, which provided funding for work at the University of Toronto
libraries, where the collection of material dealing with Atwood and Canadian
literature is voluminous and where boxes and boxes of Atwood’s papers are
archived in the Thomas Fisher Rare Book Room. I thank the staff in the Robarts
Library and the Fisher Rare Book Room, as well as those at E.J. Pratt Library
at Victoria University, Ivey Library at New College, John W. Graham Library
at Trinity College, and the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education Library.
Material relevant to Atwood is indeed scattered about the University of Toronto
campus, making that campus (as well as the city of Toronto) feel very much like
the place where one must go to study her work.
Introduction
Margaret Atwood long tried to avoid the label “political.” In her mind, writing that
raises such issues was propaganda, and true writers, such as herself, do not author
propaganda. Rather, they offer a vision of the world as they see it through their
imaginative creations. Margaret Atwood’s vision, however, rarely avoids matters
of power. This is so for perhaps three reasons: rst, Atwood, as her work on
behalf of fellow Canadian writers, her service to Amnesty International, her work
on behalf of the environment, and even her political cartooning suggest, has an
interest in such matters; second, Atwood is primarily a realistic writer who depicts
the world as it was, is, or possibly could be—with power, of course, guring
prominently; and, third, Atwood denes “power” very broadly. That denition,
offered very early in her career in 1972 and repeated with slight variations several
times since, makes it clear that she does not mean just “who you voted for in the
last election,” but, more broadly, “who is entitled to do what to whom, who prots
by it, and who therefore eats what.”1 Given such a broad denition, which entails
much of what a realistic writer would bring into ction, especially if interested
in matters of power, one should not be surprised that Margaret Atwood, although
certainly not a propagandist, is denitely a political writer.
Furthermore, Atwood’s politics—if you want to call them that—are reasonably
consistent from novel to novel. As one might expect, they do mature: as Atwood’s
vision of the world expands, so do the political concerns of her novels. The
political position she embraces, however, does not alter. It is neither conservative
nor liberal, although some political commentators might disagree; rather, it
is “humanist” in the sense that she believes in the dignity of her fellow human
beings and the importance of good relations among them as well as between
them and the rest of creation. Furthermore, because she is especially concerned
about those whose dignity is not being respected and because these people are
frequently gendered female, her “humanism” comes rather close to “feminism.”
Unfortunately, one of the consistencies in Atwood’s vision is that these noble goals
of dignity and respect are rarely achieved. Her vision of the world is often bleak;
her “politics” pessimistic.
Why Atwood Writes
But yet she writes. In the title piece in her collection The Tent, Atwood explains
why. The narrative voice describes the world:
1 This particular denition is from Atwood’s 1981 “Amnesty International: An
Address,” anthologized in Second Words. The quoted words are on p. 394.
The Political in Margaret Atwood’s Fiction
2
It’s a howling wilderness. There are rocks in it, and ice and sand, and deep boggy
pits you could sink into without a trace. There are ruins as well, many ruins; in
and around the ruins there are broken musical instruments, old bathtubs, bones
of extinct land mammals, shoes minus their feet, auto parts. There are thorny
shrubs, gnarled trees, high winds. (143)
It’s a world with a landscape reminiscent of that readers encounter in Oryx and
Crake and The Year of the Flood, but it is peopled in a way that futuristic landscape
is not:
Many things are howling out there, in the howling wilderness. Many people are
howling. Some howl in grief because those they love have died or been killed,
others howl in triumph because they have caused the loved ones of their enemies
to die or be killed. Some howl to summon help, some howl for revenge, others
howl for blood. The noise is deafening. (143–4)
Bleak, pessimistic, but yet she writes—on the thin paper walls of the tent:
You know you must write on the walls, on the paper walls, on the inside of
your tent. You must write upside down and backwards, you must cover every
available space in the paper with writing. Some of the writing has to describe the
howling that’s going on outside, night and day, among the sand dunes and the ice
chunks and the ruins and bones and so forth … (144)
Atwood describes the task of writing as difcult, not just because the vision is
bleak, but because, “not all of them hear the howling in the same way you do,
some of them think it sounds like a picnic out there in the wilderness, like a big
band, like a hot beach party …” (144–5). And therein lies the political writer’s
task, even that of writers who have tried to shy away from the title: to write on the
wall what you sadly hear and know.
It is the purpose of this critical study to illuminate what Atwood writes on
those tent walls—the vision of the political (broadly dened) world that might
be ameliorated by the very writing. One might simply proceed novel by novel,
summarizing plot and offering interpretation, letting the “politics” emerge. More
systematic, however, would be examining the novels with a theoretical framework
that could serve as a lens through which to see Atwood’s “take” on politics or
power. The lens would throw the politics into relief. One needs, of course, to be
careful that the chosen lens does not take over and direct what one sees instead of
framing it. At the same time one recognizes the value of a critical lens, one must
commit to its providing a loose guide.
Introduction 3
Power and Kenneth Boulding
When the word “power” is used with reference to a literary work, there is a
tendency among academic critics to turn quickly to Foucault.2 Although I will
get to Foucault, for he does offer insights into power that can be a very important
part of a useful framework, I want rst to turn to a theorist largely unknown to
those who study literature. This theorist, however, is not unknown to economists,
particularly those committed to studying leadership with an eye to understanding
power so as to prevent its abuses. This theorist is Kenneth Boulding, and, although
his accomplishments in a long career have been many, his 1989 book The Three
Faces of Power extends his thinking beyond economics per se and quietly (for his
style is unassuming) offers readers in the social sciences and beyond a framework
for understanding all of what we might lump under the broadly dened term
“politics.”
Boulding offers two different ways to categorize power. Based on how the
power operates interactively, there is threat power, exchange power, and love
power. Based on the power’s results, there is destructive power, productive power,
and integrative power. When Boulding maps these two schemes onto each other,
he observes that threat power is primarily destructive, but with lesser productive
and integrative components. Visualize the situation, if you will, as 50 percent
destructive, 25 percent productive, and 25 percent integrative. When, for example,
a government compels citizens to pay taxes, most obey because they fear what
nasty things the government will do to them if they do not. However, they also
might be motivated by their knowledge that they will receive services in exchange
as well as by love of country. Boulding furthermore observes that exchange power
is primarily productive, but with lesser destructive and integrative components.
When workers demand a just wage for a job, they are trying to strike a bargain
with an employer based upon economic concerns such as that employer’s costs
and prot. The workers, however, might also threaten a strike or even possible
damage to the employer’s property. But the workers are also hoping that the
employer will want to maintain good relations between labor and management so
that they can benet together; and some workers will even talk about the company
as a “family” and express a love-like loyalty to it. Boulding nally observes that
love power is primarily integrative, but with lesser destructive and productive
components. A couple may choose to cohabit because they are enamored with
each other. However, along with the desire to integrate into one household come
certain expectations (for example, good sex and an equitable sharing of household
duties) and certain possible negative actions (for example, kicking the partner out
the door in the case of indelity).
Two different schemes for categorizing power may well be confusing, especially
since the one is contained within the other. Because the latter set (destructive,
2 Several Atwood critics have indeed done so. Their work will be referred to where it
is relevant in the discussion of the 12 novels in the following chapters.
The Political in Margaret Atwood’s Fiction
4
productive, and integrative) seems closer to the actual actions of people, I will
refer to them as behaviors. About these behaviors, it is important to note that they
exist whether the actions are performed or incipient. The political leader can use
threat power by dropping a bomb, but he or she can also use threat power by just
proposing such a drop. The family leader can use love power by staging a reunion
or by just bringing others into the planning of such a gathering.
After discussing power as threat, exchange, or love and, then, power as
destructive, productive, and integrative, Boulding then talks about three realms—
the political, the economic, and the social. In the political, threat power dominates
over exchange and love. Therefore, destructive behavior outweighs productive
and integrative. In the economic, exchange power dominates over threat and love.
Therefore, productive behavior outweighs destructive and integrative. And in the
social, love power dominates over threat and exchange, and, therefore, integrative
behavior outweighs destructive and productive. Thus, within each realm, there is a
normal balance of power. Problems begin, in Boulding’s observations, when there
is an imbalance. In the political realm, for example, the problem is not that there
are threats or destruction; rather, the problem is that there are too many threats and
too much destruction. There needs to be a sense of exchange as well as a sense of
love for the political to work. Similar imbalances are possible in the economic and
social realms.
Atwood’s novels deal with all three of these realms: The Handmaid’s Tale
is primarily political; The Blind Assassin is heavily economic; and Life Before
Man is very social. But these novels—let alone others such as Surfacing or Oryx
and Crake—do not stay neatly in a realm. They can, nonetheless, be analyzed
in Boulding’s terms. Some will, however, require more complex analyses. For
The Edible Woman, for example, one need not say much about the political, but
one must say a great deal about the economic and the social, for, arguably, the
economic has too many threats and the social has too many exchanges.
Atwood’s ction, however, offers more than a surface description of the
power imbalances that characterize the world as she sees it. The ction, especially
the pair of novels written after The Handmaid’s Tale, probes the origin of those
imbalances. Atwood does not naively believe that power is imposed on the people
from a governing entity in Ottawa or elsewhere (although there are moments in
her writing when she does seem to question if there might not be a dehumanizing
power “beyond”). Rather, she believes that power simply is. In Surfacing, the
nameless narrator reects back on World War II. At that time, everybody thought
power—and its abuses—emanated from Hitler. But, as the narrator notes, Hitler
died but the power and the abuses remained. They were not invested in a single
political gure all could hate; rather, they were distributed among all in patterns
that were no longer easily detected. Atwood shares this belief—and others—with
Foucault. So, Foucault’s thoughts on power do indeed provide a lens to guide us as
we probe the origins of what Boulding’s system allows us to pinpoint.
Introduction 5
Power and Foucault
Foucault writes frequently on power, examining how society disciplines and
punishes those who step outside the socially constructed norm. Perhaps—and
oddly—his best formulation is to be found in his treatment of the history of
sexuality. In that study, Foucault insists that power is not acquired from some
exterior source but, rather, immanent or inherent in human relations. Like Atwood,
Foucault holds that power simply is.
Those relations, according to Foucault, are characterized by divisions,
inequalities, and disequilibriums. No matter whether the relations are economic,
intellectual, or sexual, these divisions, and so forth, exist. They produce power,
which, in turn, produces them. A circle—often vicious—thus characterizes the
production of power.
It is crucial to stress again that this power is not top-down. There are, therefore,
no inherent hierarchy in human relations and no necessary binary splits between
groups such as the rich and the poor or male and female. Power comes instead from
within, and its origin is to be found in society’s small units such as families and
what we might term peer groups (schools, churches, civic groups, work groups).
Therefore, if there is a hierarchy or if there is sexism, it exists because the basis for
it is found, in small, in these building blocks. If families, then, exhibit patriarchy,
then society at large will; if one’s work groups exhibit authoritarianism based on
the possession and control of knowledge, then society at large will. An analysis
of power in a work of ction—as well as in society at large—should then not
focus primarily on governmental entities on top but rather on the various smaller
groups at the bottom. Top and bottom are both part of the picture, but the bottom
is generative of power relations whereas the top simply reects.
Those in society are, according to Foucault, largely unaware of the power
allocations these small groups make. They are not only usually beyond
consciousness but beyond any individual’s control. People cannot readily articulate
the bases of power, and, when they do, they cannot point to any actors responsible
for what these bases are. Power simply is as far as those within power structures
can readily discern. Nonetheless, Foucault insists that power is intentional. Once
power is described, its goals are apparent. Rather paradoxically, the relations that
inform society continue pursuing clear goals without people being subjectively
aware of those goals—or the precise terms of those power relations. Thus, the
commentator—or the novelist—has a role in society exposing what is obscured
from people’s view.
People, even without awareness, do not accept these power relations without
question. There is, according to Foucault, always resistance. This resistance
also comes from within the society, and it emerges at many points in a random
pattern. This resistance also takes many forms from the benign to the violent.
If several points merge, revolution is incipient. But, short of revolution, there is
always dissent. Power seemingly cannot exist without dissent: it functions as an
interrogating opposite force.
The Political in Margaret Atwood’s Fiction
6
Elsewhere, Foucault talks about discourse, which is obviously a larger concept
than power. There is, however, a useful analogy to be struck. In Foucault’s view,
discourse produces an episteme, that being the dominant mode of thinking and
reasoning within an era. Once this episteme comes into being, it seems to produce
discourse with certain characteristics. However, the energy is always within the
discourse. Thus, there arises counter-discourse that challenges the episteme.
It arises at many points and in many forms, and, should the counter-discursive
coalesce, there will be something akin to a revolutionary movement, which, if
successful, could be productive of a new episteme.
Human relations, much like discourse, produce power, and, even though it may
seem to come from on high, it does not. There will emerge resistance—at many
points, in many forms—and that resistance might coalesce into a movement of
sort, which might, if sufciently broad-based, alter human relations and thus the
power they produce.
A Critical Caveat
I am not attempting to write a book about Boulding or a book about Foucault.
Others have, and such books are necessarily lengthy: rich theory does not lend
itself easily to synopses. However, wanting these theorists’ work to offer an
informing framework, I have offered just that: synopses, the limitations of which
I am well aware, but, since Boulding and Foucault are here a means to an end,
I posit that these summaries are sufcient to provide readers with a framework
for analyzing Atwood’s novels that extends beyond recapitulating her plots and
offering separate analyses of the many scenes she offers.
I am, however, quite consciously making a critical move here that might
strike some as unusual: I am merging the insights of an economist whose work
extends into the operations of power beyond economics with the insights of a
humanist (for lack of a better term for Foucault) whose work extends into the
operations of power in arenas the exploration of which we usually associate with
the social sciences. The merging produces few of the contradictions one might
think inevitable, for Boulding and Foucault have different foci. Boulding looks
outside power, Foucault within. Boulding considers broad categories of human
endeavor, Foucault human institutions. Although they most certainly present
their thoughts in different styles, they both know power and have a great deal to
say about the subject. That they come at the subject from different perspectives
gives a framework that merges their fundamental insights an unusual explanatory
power. Rather than offering a Bouldingian reading (if there were such a thing)
or a Foucauldian reading, this study offers the two perspectives combined, with
Boulding giving us a framework that critically describes and Foucault taking us
within those dynamics so that we might discern how they work.
Introduction 7
Prospectus
Let me use Foucault’s terms but with different, more ordinary meanings to discuss
how literary critics within academe often proceed. They resist the systematic
discourse more characteristic of the social sciences, sometimes declaring it
“overly explicit” or “mechanical.” Even though textbooks introducing critical
praxis often discuss approaches as proceeding step by step, the literary critic is
supposed to proceed more uidly through these steps. So be it: even though I
will use Boulding’s categories as an analytical tool, I do not intend to resist the
prevailing discourse of academic literary criticism. Thus, I will attempt to read
Atwood’s novels within that structure with a certain uidity.
Nonetheless, here in this introductory chapter, I wish to outline what the steps
are that I am taking in the remaining chapters in this book. They will be less visible
there, but, here, I feel I need to make my unique merger of Boulding and Foucault
explicit. I am, thus, bringing to the surface here what operates more beneath it in
the discussions that follow. Similarly, I (and other critics focusing on power) will
bring to the surface what is beneath it in ction and in the world realistic ction
tries to mirror.3
The rst step is to ascertain which of Boulding’s three realms a given Atwood
novel is relevant to. Rarely will an Atwood book be just political, just economic,
or just social, although some novels do tend to be more in one realm than in the
others. For each relevant realm, the next step is to determine if the power (and,
thus, the behaviors) exhibits the balance it should. If, for example, the realm is the
political, one would expect threat power (with its entailed potentially destructive
behavior) to be dominant; however, one would also expect there to be a measure
of exchange power (and potentially productive behavior) and love power (and
potentially integrative behavior). Is threat power too dominant? Is there too little
exchange power or too little love power? These are the kinds of questions a critic
would ask—for each relevant realm, with the presumed balances changing from
realm to realm—if following Boulding’s lead.
The task is primarily descriptive. However, the analysis implies what has
gone wrong. A novelist may, of course, offer a vision of the world in which all
is “normal”; however, much more common are ctive visions that suggest that
there is something “off.” Such is, of course, very much the case with Margaret
Atwood. Sometimes it is easy to see that something is “off”—for example, in the
apocalyptic Oryx and Crake and The Year of the Flood; sometimes it is easy to feel
that something is “off” but difcult to pinpoint what the problem is—for example,
in the incipiently apocalyptic Life Before Man. Pinpointing what has gone wrong
3 As already noted, many characteristics of Atwood’s writing are postmodern. In
addition, as numerous commentators have noted, quite a few characteristics are rooted in
the gothic romance tradition that Atwood, usually ironically, often follows. Neither the
postmodern nor the gothic romance, however, pull Atwood’s work away from a high degree
of formal realism. This almost double paradox is one of the reasons many nd Atwood’s
work so engaging.
The Political in Margaret Atwood’s Fiction
8
in some systematic way not only gets the critic closer to what we might term the
novel’s “theme,” but moves that critic closer and closer to an all-embracing sense
of what the novelist’s work is about as a political commentary—that is, what is
indeed written on the paper-thin wall of the tent. Is there too much threat power in
Atwood’s world? Is there not enough love power? Although these questions may
sound simplistic—as well as a bit out of the 1960s in the terms being used, they are
profound ones within the general theory of power articulated by Boulding, where
the key is the appropriate balance.
The second step is to ascertain the sources of power within a given novel.
Here, the critic must often deal with the illusion that the power is exclusively
top-down, revealing how Atwood consistently debunks that notion, although at
points entertaining it as at least a partial possibility. Then, the critic must ascertain
where the power—and the power imbalances—begin. This task is not easy, for,
although power is intentional, those intentions are rarely articulated. Given that
power emanates from below—from the smaller social groups, the critic needs
to examine not so much the superstructures of the world Atwood offers as the
dynamics of families and peer groups. For example, in analyzing The Robber Bride,
Toronto as a corporate, commercial, and academic center is largely irrelevant in an
examination of power. Rather, the critic needs to examine the family histories of the
novel’s three central characters and their present relationships, rst, to understand
how Zenia acquires and uses power over them and, second, to appreciate the
resistance they offer as an unlikely trio to her power. Atwood cannot resist offering
a satirical glance at academe in her depiction of Tony’s career as military historian
at the University of Toronto; however, that satire of academic power relations
(and how female academics are often disadvantaged by them) is a sideshow in the
novel. One must explore the smaller social groups to understand where power, as
dened in the novel, emanates from. If threat power is overly present, if exchange
power is overly present, and if love power seems lacking, the explanation is to
be found more in Tony’s “cold” childhood, Roz’s family’s emphasis on material,
nancial advancement, and Charis’s (Karen’s) sexual abuse as a child rather than
in anything inherent in the novel’s Toronto setting.
Because power is intentional but not often explicitly theorized, the critic will
often not nd simple answers. The power dynamics in Atwood’s novels cannot
be reduced to something formulaic. Although the description of them might
indeed sound formulaic (e.g., not enough love power), the exploration of them
will take the critic into a world of intentions without clear articulation. The critic
will, of course, endeavor to make these intentions clear; however, because they
are both incompletely articulated and entangled in human affairs, these intentions
quickly become “messy” once one abandons critical generalization for each
novel’s particulars. (And, after all, Atwood is offering stories and characters, not
systematic political philosophy.)
The third step is to identify the resistance to the prevailing dynamics of power.
Where is the resistance? On what basis do those resisting resist? Is the resistance
strong or weak, violently enacted or merely vocalized? Is there sufcient resistance
Introduction 9
for the prevailing power dynamics to, at least, be challenged? The Blind Assassin,
for example, is largely about resistance, but does it get the resisting characters—
primarily Alex and Iris—anywhere? The Handmaid’s Tale is, of course, also about
resistance. Is the resistance there less effective than that in The Blind Assassin? Is
the basis for resistance similar, or, because the earlier book is more about excesses
of threat and exchange power in the political realm and the later book more about
excesses of threat power in both the economic and social realms, does the resistance
have different qualities? Is there common ground in the resistance embodied by
Iris Griffen as she deantly writes the book we read and Offred as she records the
cassette tapes from which the book we read is supposedly assembled?
Related to the matter of resistance, of course, is how the prevailing power
relations resist resistance—or, put another way, reinforce the prevailing structure.
Atwood will increasingly probe this matter. Whereas in early novels Atwood
seems to assume that power “is” and looks minimally at how it disciplines, in
later novels, she explores three hallmarks in Foucault’s treatment of power: how
power relations are reinforced by disciplining the body, how power relations
are reinforced by making those in society participate (at least as spectators) in
the disciplining, and how power relations are reinforced by creating the illusion
of constant observation.4 These elements of disciplining—that is, resisting
resistance—will be discussed increasingly as the study proceeds.
This book will proceed novel by novel. Each chapter can then be read as a
separate essay on the novel under examination. However, patterns will emerge as
one reads. Those patterns will be traced in the study’s concluding chapter, which
attempts to sketch Atwood’s overall “take” on power as revealed in her novels.
One pattern, as explained in this book’s preface, is implied by the sections into
which the chapters are grouped. The book begins with “Exteriority I,” looking at
four very different novels that look at how power exhibits itself in different arenas.
Then, two chapters are collected under the heading “The Political Foregrounded.”
These chapters explore two of Atwood’s most explicitly political works. Then,
two chapters are collected under the heading “Interiority.” These novels examine
less the evidence of power in Boulding’s different realms and more how power
relations develop from within the small groups that characterize our society. Finally,
“Exteriority II” returns to four very different novels that look at the exhibition of
power. On the surface, one is an historical novel, one is a realistic novel set in a
slightly earlier time, and two are something akin to science ction. They seem
quite different, but they also depict power, advantaging some but disadvantaging
many. The last two, the “sci ” ones, are almost as explicitly political as Bodily
Harm and The Handmaid’s Tale.
Each and every novel by Atwood is rich—rich in meaning, rich in artistry. A
book could be written about each so as to cover all and also nod to the impressive
4 Atwood insists that she does not write with a critical theory in mind. Thus, I do not
wish to imply that she is using Foucault’s ideas. Rather, I would suggest that, in observing
the operation of power, she was drawn to some of the same dynamics that Foucault was.
The Political in Margaret Atwood’s Fiction
10
volume of scholarship that has accumulated on her work.5 This study, however,
had a narrower focus and, therefore, follows a critical process that will not
illuminate all aspects of her novels. It will especially neglect the artistry, although
there will be moments where that will be not only acknowledged but discussed as
the means by which she explores the power dynamics that characterize the world
that is “howling” out there beyond the tent’s paper-thin walls. This study will
also be somewhat selective in referring to previous studies: relevance will be the
guide, not a desire to provide something of a literature review before zeroing in
on my topic. I will try, directly in the text or in notes, to acknowledge the work on
Atwood my colleagues have done; however, I will also try to not go too far aeld
and bring into my discussion all previously voiced ideas.
The goal then is to illuminate what Atwood has written on the wall of the
tent, not simply by describing it but by doing so systematically. Then, the reader
will discern that, whether the writing is backwards or forwards, upside-down or
right-side-up, it points to a consistent—frighteningly consistent—understanding
of politics or power.
5 In fact, ECW Press published short studies devoted to the rst several Atwood
novels by way of guides to school or—more likely—university readers.
References
Adams, Carol J. “Feminism, the Great War, and Modern Vegetarianism.” In Arms and the
Woman: War, Gender, and Literary Representation. Ed. Helen M. Cooper , Adrienne Auslander
Munich , and Susan Merrill Squier . Chapel Hill: U of North Carolina P, 1989. 244–267.
Adams, Carol J. Neither Man nor Beast: Feminism and the Defense of Animals. New York:
Continuum, 1994.
Adams, Carol J. The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory. New York:
Continuum, 1990.
Adams, Carol J. , and Josephine Donovan , eds. Animals and Women: Feminist Theoretical
Speculations. Durham, NC: Duke UP, 1995.
Aguiar, Sarah Appleton . The Bitch is Back: Wicked Women in Literature. Carbondale: Southern
Illinois UP, 2001.
Ahern, Stephen . “‘Meat Like You Like It’: The Production of Identity in Atwood’s
Cat’s Eye
.”
Canadian Literature 137 (1993): 8–17.
Althuseer, Louis . On Ideology. London: Verso Books, 2008.
Ardener, Shirley , ed. Defining Females: The Nature of Women in Society. Basingstoke, UK:
Berg Publishers. 1993
Atwood, Margaret . Alias Grace. New York: Doubleday, 1996.
Atwood, Margaret . The Animals in That Country. New York: Oxford UP, 1968.
Atwood, Margaret . The Blind Assassin. New York: Doubleday, 2000.
Atwood, Margaret . Bodily Harm. New York: Bantam, 1983.
Atwood, Margaret . Cat’s Eye. New York: Doubleday, 1989.
Atwood, Margaret . The Edible Woman. New York: Bantam, 1991.
Atwood, Margaret . The Handmaid’s Tale. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1986.
Atwood, Margaret . Lady Oracle. New York: Ballantine, 1976.
Atwood, Margaret . Life Before Man. New York: Ballantine, 1979.
Atwood, Margaret . Morning in the Burned House. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1995.
Atwood, Margaret . Moving Targets: Writing with Intent, 1982–2004. Toronto: Anansi, 2004.
Atwood, Margaret . Oryx and Crake. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 2003.
Atwood, Margaret . Payback: Debt and the Shadow Side of Wealth. Toronto: Anansi, 2008.
Atwood, Margaret . Power Politics. Toronto: Anansi, 1971.
Atwood, Margaret . Procedures for Underground. New York: Oxford UP, 1970.
Atwood, Margaret . The Robber Bride. New York: Doubleday, 1993.
Atwood, Margaret . Second Words: Selected Critical Prose. Boston: Beacon P, 1984.
Atwood, Margaret . Surfacing. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1972.
Atwood, Margaret . Survival: A Thematic Guide to Canadian Literature. Toronto: Anansi, 1972.
Atwood, Margaret . The Tent. New York: Doubleday, 2006.
Atwood, Margaret . True Stories. New York: Oxford UP, 1981.
Atwood, Margaret . Two-Headed Poems. New York: Oxford UP, 1978.
Atwood, Margaret . You Are Happy. New York: Harper and Row, 1974.
Baccolini, Raffaella . “Gender and Genre in the Feminist Critical Dystopias of Katharine
Burdekin, Margaret Atwood, and Octavia Butler.” In Future Females, The Next Generation: New
Voices and Velocities in Feminist Science Fiction Criticism. Ed. Marleen S. Barr . Lanham, MD:
Rowman and Littlefield, 2000. 13–34.
Banerjee. Chinmoy . “Alice in Disneyland: Criticism as Commodity in
The Handmaid’s Tale
.”
Essays on Canadian Writing 41 (1990): 74–92.
Bannerji, Himani . “Geography Lessons: On Being an Insider-Outsider to the Canadian North.”
In Unhomely States: Theorizing English Canadian Postmodernism. Ed. Cynthia Sugars .
Peterborough: Broadview, 2004. 289–300.
Barr, Marleen S. Feminist Fabulation: Space/Postmodern Fiction. Iowa City: U of Iowa P, 1992.
Bartky, Sandra Lee . “The Body and the Reproduction of Femininity: A Feminism Appropriation
of Foucault.” In Gender/Body/Knowledge: Feminist Reconstructions of Being and Knowing. Ed.
Alison M. Jagger and Susan R. Bordo . New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers UP, 1989. 13–34.
Bartky, Sandra Lee . Femininity and Domination: Studies in the Phenomenology of Oppression.
New York: Routledge, 1990.
Bartky, Sandra Lee . “Foucault, Femininity, and the Modernization of Patriarchal Power.” In
Feminism and Foucault: Reflections of Resistance. Ed. Irene Diamond and Lee Quinby .
Boston: Northeastern UP, 1988.
Barzilai, Shuli . “‘Tell My Story’: Remembrance and Revenge in Atwood’s
Oryx and Crake
and
Shakespeare’s
Hamlet
.” Critique 50.1 (2008): 87–110.
Becker, Susanna . Gothic Forms of Feminine Fiction. Manchester, UK: Manchester UP, 1999.
Beer, Janet . “Doing It with Mirrors: Historical and Cultural Identity in
The Robber Bride
.” British
Journal of Canadian Studies 13.2 (2006): 308–316.
Belling, Michelle . “Big Brother Gets His Utopia.” Body Politic 127 (1986): 35.
Bemrose, John . “Margaret’s Museum.” Maclean’s Magazine 113.37 (September 11, 2000):
54–56.
Bennett, Donna . “English Canada’s Post-Colonial Complexities.” In Unhomely States:
Theorizing English Canada’s Post-Modernism. Ed. Cynthia Sugars . Peterborough: Broadview,
2004. 107–136.
Beran, Carol . “The End of the World and Other Things:
Life Before Man
and
The Handmaid’s
Tale
.” In Approaches to Teaching Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale and Other Words.
Ed. Sharon R. Wilson , Thomas B. Friedman , and Shannon Hengen . New York: MLA, 1996.
128–134.
Beran, Carol . “Images of Women’s Power in Contemporary Canadian Fiction by Women,”
Studies in Canadian Literature 15.2 (1990): 55–76.
Beran, Carol . Living Over the Abyss: Margaret Atwood’s Life Before Man. Toronto: ECW P,
1993.
Berry, Ann . Visual Intelligence: Perception, Image, and Manipulation in Visual Communication.
Albany: State U of New York P, 1967.
Beyer, Charlotte . “From Violent Duality to Multi-Culturalism: Margaret Atwood’s Post-Colonial
Cultural and Sexual Politics.” In O Canada: Essays on Canadian Literature and Culture. Ed.
Jorn Carlesen and Tim Caudery . Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus UP, 1995. 97–108.
Blaise, Clark . “Tale of Two Colonies.” Canadian Literature 95 (1982): 110–112.
Bloom, Lynn Z. , and Veronica Makowsky . “Zenia’s Paradoxes.” Literature, Interpretation,
Theory 6.3–4 (1995): 167–179.
Bordo, Susan R. “Anorexia Nervosa: Psychopathology as the Crystallization of Culture.” In
Feminism and Foucault: Reflections and Resistances. Ed. Irene Diamond and Lee Quinby .
Boston: Northeastern UP, 1988.
Bothwell, Robert . The Penguin History of Canada. New York: Penguin, 2006.
Bouson, J. Brooks . Brutal Choreographies: Oppositional Strategies and Narrative Design in the
Novels of Margaret Atwood. Amherst: U of Massachusetts P, 1993.
Bouson, J. Brooks . “A Commemoration of Wounds Endured and Resented: Margaret Atwood’s
The Blind Assassin
as Feminist Memoir.” Critique 44.3 (2003): 251–271.
Bouson, J. Brooks . “Slipping Sideways into the Dreams of Women: The Female Dream Work of
Power Feminism in Margaret Atwood’s
The Robber Bride
.” Literature, Interpretation, Theory 6.
3–4 (1995): 149–266.
Brady, Elizabeth . “Towards a Happier History: Women and Domination.” In Domination:
Essays. Ed. Alikis Kontos . Toronto: U of Toronto P, 1975. 17–31.
Brain, Tracy . “Figuring Anorexia: Margaret Atwood’s
The Edible Woman
.” Literature,
Interpretation, Theory 6.3–4 (1995): 299–311.
Broege, Valerie . “Margaret Atwood’s Americans and Canadians.” Essays on Canadian Writing
22 (1981): 111–135.
Brown, Lyn Mikel . “The Dangers of Time Travel: Revisioning the Landscape of Girls’
Relationships in Margaret Atwood’s
Cat’s Eye
.” Literature, Interpretation, Theory 6.3–4 (1995):
285–298.
Brownley, Martine Watson . Deferrals of Domain: Contemporary Women Novelists and the
State. New York: St. Martin’s P, 2000.
Bruns, Jo . “Using What You’re Given.” In Waltzing Again: New and Selected Conversations
with Margaret Atwood. Ed. Earl Ingersoll . Princeton, NJ: Ontario Review P, 2006. 79–89.
Brydon, Diana . “Atwood’s Global Ethic: The Open Eye, The Blinded Eye.” In Margaret Atwood:
An Open Eye. Ed. John Moss and Tobi Kozakewich . Ottawa: U of Ottawa P, 2006. 447–460.
Brydon, Diana . “Atwood’s Post-Colonial Imagination: Rereading
Bodily Harm
.” In Various
Atwoods. Ed. Lorraine M. York . Concord, Ontario: Anansi, 1995. 89–116.
Brydon, Diana . “Beyond Violent Dualities: Atwood in Postcolonial Contexts.” In Approaches to
Teaching Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale and Other Works. Ed. Sharon R. Wilson ,
Thomas B. Friedman , and Shannon Hengen . New York: MLA, 1996. 49–54.
Brydon, Diana . “Caribbean Revolution and Literary Conventions.” Canadian Literature 95
(1982): 181–185.
Burack, Cynthia . “Bringing Women’s Studies to Political Science:
The Handmaid’s Tale
in the
Classroom.” NWSA Journal 1.2 (1988–89): 274–283.
Buss, Helen . “Maternality and Narrative Strategies in the Novels of Margaret Atwood.” Atlantis
15.1 (1989): 76–83.
Butler, Judith . Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of “Sex.” London: Routledge, 1993.
Cameron, Elspeth . “Famininity, or Parody of Autonomy: Anorexia Nervosa and
The Edible
Woman
.” Journal of Canadian Studies 20.2 (1985): 45–69.
Cardinal, Harold . The Unjust Society. Seattle: U of Washington P, 2000.
Carrington, Ildiko de Papp . “Dreams, Doubles, and Dinosaurs: The Origin of Human
Consciousness and ‘The Ice Age’?” Essays on Canadian Writing 33 (1986): 68–88.
Caskey, Noelle . “Interpreting Anorexia Nervosa.” In The Female Body in Western Culture:
Contemporary Perspectives. Ed. Susan Rubin Suleiman . Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1985.
175–192.
Cavalcanti, Idlney . “Utopias of/f Language in Contemporary Feminist Dystopias.” Utopian
Studies 11.2 (2000): 152–180.
Caws, Mary Ann . “The Poetics of the Manifesto: Newisms and Newness.” In Manifesto: A
Century of Isms. Ed. Mary Ann Caws . Lincoln: U of Nebraska P, 2001.
Christ, Carol P. “Margaret Atwood: The Surfacing of Women’s Spiritual Quest and Vision.”
Signs 2.2 (1976): 316–330.
Clarke, Elizabeth . “How Feminist Can a Handmaid Be: Margaret Atwood’s
The Handmaid’s
Tale
.” In The Discerning Reader: Christian Perspectives on Literature and Theory. Ed. David
Barratt , Roger Pooley , and Leland Ryken . Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1995. 235–250.
Cline, Sally . Just Desserts: Women and Food. London: Deutsch, 1990.
Conboy, Sheila C. “Scripted, Conscripted, and Circumscribed: Body Language in Margaret
Atwood’s
The Handmaid’s Tale
.” In Anxious Power: Reading, Writing, and Ambivalence in
Narrative by Women. Ed. Carol J. Singley and Susan Elizabeth Sweeney . Albany: State U of
New York P, 1993. 349–362.
Cooper, Pamela . “Sexual Surveillance and Medical Authority in Two Versions of
The
Handmaid’s Tale
.” Journal of Popular Culture 28.4 (1995): 49–66.
Crowder, Dianne Griffin . “Separatism and Feminist Utopian Fiction.” In Sexual Practice/Textual
Theory: Lesbian Cultural Criticism. Ed. Susan J. Wolfe and Julia Penelope . Cambridge, MA:
Blackwell, 1993. 244–245.
Davey, Frank . “Atwood and Class:
Lady Oracle, Cat’s Eye
, and
Alias Grace
.” In Margaret
Atwood: An Open Eye. Ed. John Moss and Tobi Kozakewich . Ottawa: U of Ottawa P, 2006.
231–242.
Davidson, Arnold E. “Future Tense: Making History in
The Handmaid’s Tale
.” In Margaret
Atwood: Vision and Forms. Ed. Kathryn VanSpanckeren and Jan Garden Castro . Carbondale:
Southern Illinois UP, 1980. 113–121.
Davidson, Arnold E. “The Poetics of Pain in Margaret Atwood’s
Bodily Harm
.” American Review
of Canadian Studies 18.1 (1988): 1–10.
Davidson, Arnold E. , and Cathy N. Davidson . “The Anatomy of Margaret Atwood’s
Surfacing
.”
ARIEL 10.3 (1979): 38–54.
Davidson, Arnold E. , and Cathy N. Davidson . “Prospect and Retrospects in
Life Before Man
.”
In The Art of Margaret Atwood: Essays in Criticism. Ed. Arnold E. Davidson and Cathy N.
Davidson . Toronto: Anansi, 1981. 205–222.
Deer, Glenn . Postmodern Canadian Fiction and the Rhetoric of Authority. Montreal: McGill-
Queen’s UP, 1994.
DeLaurentis, Teresa . Alice Doesn’t: Feminism, Semiotics, Cinema. Bloomington: Indiana UP,
1984.
Deleuze, Gilles , and Felix Guattari . Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Trans.
Robert Hurley , Mark Seem , and Helen R. Lane . Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1993.
Deleuze, Gilles , and Claire Parnet . Dialogues. Trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara
Habberjam . New York: Columbia UP, 1987.
DiMarco, Danette . “Paradice Lost, Paradise Regained: Homo Faber and the Makings of a New
Beginning in
Oryx and Crake
.” Papers on Language and Literature 41.2 (2005): 170–195.
Dodson, Danita J. “‘We Lived in the Blank White Spaces’: Rewriting the Paradigm of Denials in
Atwood’s
The Handmaid’s Tale
.” Utopian Studies 8.2 (1997): 66–87.
Dooley, D. J. Moral Vision in the Canadian Novel. Toronto: Clarke, 1979.
Dopp. Jamie . “Subject-Position as Victim-Position in
The Handmaid’s Tale
.” Studies in
Canadian Literature 19.1 (1994): 43–57.
DuPlessis, Rachel Blau . Writing Beyond the Ending: Strategies of Twentieth-Century Women
Writers. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1985.
Dvorak, Marta . “The Right Hand Writing and The Left Hand Erasing in Margaret Atwood’s
The
Blind Assassin
.” Commonwealth Essays and Studies 25.1 (2002): 59–68.
Dvorak, Marta . “Subverting Utopia: Ambiguity in
The Handmaid’s Tale
.” In Lire Margaret
Atwood: The Handmaid’s Tale. Ed. Marta Dvorak . Rennes, France: Pes universitaires de
Rennes, 1999. 73–85.
Dworkin, Andrea . Pornography: Men Possessing Women. New York: Perigee, 1981.
Ehrenreich, Barbara . “Feminism’s Phantoms.” New Republic 17 (March 1986): 33–35.
Ehrenreich, Barbara , and J. Ehrenreich . “The Professional-Managerial Class.” Radical
America 2.2 (1999).
Epstein, Grace A. “
Bodily Harm
: Female Containment and Abuse in the Romance Narrative.”
Genders 16 (1993): 80–93.
Fand, Roxanne J. “Margaret Atwood’s
The Robber Bride
: The Dialogic Novel of a Nietschean
Fairy Tale.” Critique 45.1 (2003): 65–81.
Fee, Margery . The Fat Lady Dances: Margaret Atwood’s Lady Oracle. Toronto: ECW P, 1993.
Ferns, Chris . “The Value/s of Dystopia:
The Handmaid’s Tale
and the Anti-Utopian Tradition.”
Dalhousie Review 69.3 (1989): 373–382.
Feuer, Lois . “The Calculus of Love and Nightmare:
The Handmaid’s Tale
and the Dystopian
Tradition.” Critique: Studies in Contemporary Fiction 38.2 (1997): 83–95.
Fiamengo, Janice L. “‘It Looked at Me with Its Mashed Eye’: Animal and Human Suffering in
Surfacing
.” In Margaret Atwood: An Open Eye. Ed. John Moss and Tobi Kozabewich . Ottawa:
U of Ottawa P, 2006. 171–184.
Fiamengo, Janice L. “Postcolonial Guilt in Margaret Atwood’s
Surfacing
.” American Review of
Canadian Studies 29.1 (1999): 141–163.
Fiamengo, Janice L. “Under Whose Eye: Two Versions of the Disciplinary Society in
The
Handmaid’s Tale
.” In Lecture d’Une Oeuvre: The Handmaid’s Tale de Margaret Atwood. Ed.
Jean-Paul Gabilliet and Francois Gallix . Paris: Editions du temps, 1998. 27–42.
Finn, Geraldine . “Feminism and Fiction: In Praise of Praxis, beyond
Bodily Harm
.” Socialist
Studies 1 (1983): 51–78.
Foley, Michael . “‘Basic Victim Positions’ and the Women in Margaret Atwood’s
The Handmaid’s
Tale
.” Atlantis 15.2 (1990): 50–58.
Foucault, Michel . Discipline and Punish. Tr. Alan Sheridan . New York: Vintage, 1995.
Foucault, Michel . The History of Sexuality: An Introduction. Vol. 1. Tr. Robert Hurley . New
York: Vintage, 1990.
Fraser, Wayne . The Dominion of Women: The Personal and the Political in Canadian Women’s
Literature. Westport, CT: Greenwood P, 1991.
Freibert, Lucy M. “Control and Creativity: The Politics of Risk in Margaret Atwood’s
The
Handmaid’s Tale
.” In Critical Essays on Margaret Atwood. Ed. Judith McCombs . Boston: G.K.
Hall and Company, 1988. 280–291.
Fry, Nathalie . “The Representation of the Absent Mother in Margaret Atwood’s
Oryx and Crake
.” In Margaret Atwood: An Open Eye. Ed. John Moss and Tobi Kozakewich . Ottawa: U of
Ottawa P, 2006. 407–419.
Gabilliet, Jean-Paul . “Gilead, Canada, and the United States: Anti-Americanism and Colonial
Critique in
The Handmaid’s Tale
.” In Lectures d’Une Oeuvre: The Handmaid’s Tale de
Margaret Atwood. Ed. Jean-Paul Gabilliet and Francois Gallix . Paris: Editions du temps, 1998.
43–52.
Gault, Cynthia . “‘Not Even a Hospital’: Abortion and Identity Tension in Margaret Atwood’s
Surfacing
.” Atlantis 32.1 (2007): 14–24.
Godard, Barbara . “My (M)other, My Self: Strategies for Subversion in Atwood and Hebert.”
Essays on Canadian Writing 26 (1983): 13–44.
Gottleib, Erika . Dystopian Fiction East and West: Universe of Terror and Trial. Montreal: McGill-
Queen’s UP, 2001.
Grace, Sherrill E. “Quest for the Peaceable Kingdom: Urban/Rural Codes in Roy, Laurence, and
Atwood.” In Women Writers and the City: Essays in Feminist Literary Criticism. Ed. Susan
Merrill Squier . Knoxville: U of Tennessee P, 1984. 193–209.
Green, Andre . “The Dead Mother.” In On Private Madness. Ed. and trans. Katherine Aubertin .
Madison, CT: International Universities P, 1980.
Greene, Gayle . Changing the Story: Feminist Fiction and the Tradition. Chicago: U of Chicago
P, 1991.
Greene, Gayle . “Choice of Evils.” Women’s Review of Books 3.10 (1986): 14–15.
Greene, Gayle . “Margaret Atwood’s
The Edible Woman
: Rebelling Against the System.” In
Margaret Atwood: Reflection and Reality. Ed. Beatrice Mendez-Engle . Edinburg: TX: Pan
American U, 1987. 95–115.
Greene, Gayle . Review of
Cat’s Eye
. Women’s Studies 18 (1991): 445–455.
Griffiths, Anthony . “Genetics According to Margaret Atwood.” Canadian Literature 181 (2004):
192–195.
Hansen, Elaine Tuttle . “Fiction and (Post) Feminism in Atwood’s
Bodily Harm
.” Novel 19.1
(1985): 5–21.
Hansot, Elisabeth . “Selves, Survival, and Resistance in
The Handmaid’s Tale
.” Utopian
Studies 5.2 (1994): 56–69.
Harris, Jocelyn . “
The Handmaid’s Tale
as a Re-Visioning of
1984
.” In Transformations of
Utopia: Changing Views of the Perfect Society. Ed. George Slusser , et al. New York: AMS,
1999. 267–279.
Harting, Heike . “The Profusion of Meanings and the Female Experience of Colonization:
Inscriptions of the Body as Site of Difference in Tsitsi Dangarembga’s
Nervous Conditions
and
Margaret Atwood’s
The Edible Woman
.” In Fusion of Cultures. Ed. Peter O. Stummer and
Christopher Balme . Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1996. 236–246.
Heilmann, Ann . “The Devil Herself? Fantasy, Female Identity, and the Villainess Fatale in
The
Robber Bride
.” In The Devil Himself: Villainy in Detective Fiction and Film. Ed. Stacy Gillis and
Philippa Gates . Westport, CT: Greenwood P, 2002. 171–182.
Hengen, Shannon . “Margaret Atwood and Environmentalism.” In The Cambridge Companion to
Margaret Atwood. Ed. Coral Ann Howells . Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2006. 72–85.
Hengen, Shannon . Margaret Atwood’s Power: Mirrors, Reflections, and Images in Select
Fiction and Poetry. Toronto: Second Story P, 1993.
Hite, Molly . “An Eye for an I: The Disciplinary Society in
Cat’s Eye
.” In Various Atwoods:
Essays on the Later Poems, Short Fiction, and Novels. Ed. Lorraine M. York . Concord, Ontario:
Anansi, 1995. 191–206.
Hobgood, Jennifer . “Anti-Edibles: Capitalism and Schizophrenia in Margaret Atwood’s
The
Edible Woman
.” Style 36.1 (2002): 146–168.
Hooker, Deborah . “(Fl)orality, Gender, and the Environmental Ethos of Atwood’s
The
Handmaid’s Tale
.” Twentieth Century Literature 52.3 (2006): 275–305.
Horvitz, Deborah M. Literary Trauma: Sadism, Memory, and Sexual Violence in American
Women’s Fiction. Albany: State U of New York P, 2000.
Howells, Coral Ann . Margaret Atwood. 2nd ed. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
Howells, Coral Ann . “Margaret Atwood’s Discourse of Nation and National Identity in the
1990s.” In The Rhetoric of Canadian Writing. Ed. Conny Steenman-Marcusse . Amsterdam:
Rodopi, 2002. 199–216.
Howells, Coral Ann . “Margaret Atwood’s Dystopian Visions:
The Handmaid’s Tale
and
Oryx
and Crake
.” In The Cambridge Companion to Margaret Atwood. Ed. Coral Ann Howells .
Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2006. 161–175.
Howells, Coral Ann . Private and Fictional Worlds: Canadian Women Novelists of the 1970s and
1980s. London and New York: Methuen, 1987.
Howells, Coral Ann . “
The Robber Bride
; or Who Is a True Canadian?” In Margaret Atwood’s
Textual Assassinations: Recent Poetry and Fiction. Ed. Sharon R. Wilson . Columbus: Ohio
State UP, 2003. 88–101.
Howells, Coral Ann . “Worlds Alongside: Contradictory Discourses in the Fiction of Alice Munro
and Margaret Atwood.” In Gaining Ground: European Critics on Canadian Literature. Ed. Robert
Kroetsch and Reingard M. Nischik . Edmonton: NeWest P, 1985. 121–136.
Hyttinen, Helena . “The Dead Are in the Hands of the Living: Memory Haunting Storytelling in
Margaret Atwood’s
The Blind Assassin
. In Margaret Atwood: An Open Eye. Ed. John Moss and
Tobi Kozakewich . Ottawa: U of Ottawa P, 2006. 373–383.
Ingersoll, Earl G. “Engendering Metafiction: Textuality and Closure in Margaret Atwood’s
Alias
Grace
.” American Review of Canadian Studies 31.3 (2001): 385–401.
Ingersoll, Earl G. “Survival in Margaret Atwood’s Novel
Oryx and Crake
.” Extrapolation 45.2
(2004): 162–175.
Irvine, Lorna . “The Here and Now of
Bodily Harm
.” In Margaret Atwood: Vision and Forms. Ed.
Kathryn VanSpanckeren and Jan Garden Castro . Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1988.
85–100.
Jaidev . “‘How Did We Get Bad?’ The Lessons of
Surfacing
.” In Ambivalence: Studies in
Canadian Literature. Ed. Om P. Juneja and Chandra Mohan . New Delhi: Allied Publishers,
1990. 276–283.
Jameson, Frederic . “Postmodernism, or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism.” New Left
Review 146 (1984): 53–92.
Janeway, Elizabeth . Powers of the Weak. New York: Morrow, 1980.
Johnson, Brian . “Language, Power, and Responsibility in
The Handmaid’s Tale
: Towards a
Discourse of Literary Gossip.” Canadian Literature 148 (1996): 39–55.
Kelly, Darlene . “‘Either Way, I Stand Condemned’: A Woman’s Place in Margaret Atwood’s
The Edible Woman
and Margaret Drabble’s
The Waterfall
.” English Studies in Canada 21.3
(1995): 320–332.
Ketterer, David . “Margaret Atwood’s
The Handmaid’s Tale
: A Contextual Dystopia.” Science
Fiction Studies 16.2 (1989): 209–217.
Kirtz, Mary K. “The Thematic Imperative: Didactic Characterization in
Bodily Harm
.” In Margaret
Atwood: Reflection and Reality. Ed. Beatrice Mendez-Engle . Edinburg, TX: Pan American U,
1987. 116–130.
Klarer, Mario . “Orality and Literacy as Gender-Supporting Structures in Margaret Atwood’s
The
Handmaid’s Tale
.” Mosaic 28.4 (1995): 129–142.
Klawitter, Uwe . The Theme of Totalitarianism in “English” Fiction: Koestler, Orwell, Vonnegut,
Kosinski, Burgess, Atwood, Amis. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1997.
Kolodny, Annette . “Margaret Atwood and the Politics of Narrative.” In Studies on Canadian
Literature. Ed. Arnold E. Davidson . New York: MLA, 1990. 90–109.
Kristeva, Julia . Black Sun: Depression and Melancholia. Trans. Leon S. Rouding . New York:
Columbia UP, 1989.
Lacombe, Michelle . “Resistance in Futlity: The Cyborg Identities of Oryx and Crake.” In
Margaret Atwood: An Open Eye. Ed. John Moss and Tobi Kozakewich . Ottawa: U of Ottawa P,
2006. 421–432.
Lacombe, Michelle . “The Writing on the Walls: Amputated Speech in Margaret Atwood’s
The
Handmaid’s Tale
.” Wascana Review 21 (1986): 12–22.
Laflen, Angela . “‘From a Distance It Looks Like Peace’: Reading Beneath the Fascist Style of
Gilead in Margaret Atwood’s
The Handmaid’s Tale
.” Studies in Canadian Literature 32.1
(2007): 82–105.
Laing, R. D. The Divided Self. London: Routledge, 1998.
Lane, Richard J. “Anti-Panoptic Narrative Structures in Two Novels by Margaret Atwood.”
Commonwealth (Dijon) 16.1 (1993): 63–69.
Lane, Richard J. The Postcolonial Novel. Cambridge, MA: Polity, 2006.
Langer, Beryl Donaldson . “Class and Gender in Margaret Atwood’s Fiction.” Australian-
Canadian Studies 6.1 (1988): 73–101.
Lauret, Maria . Liberating Literature: Feminist Fiction in America. London: Routledge, 1994.
Lawn, Jennifer . “Our Bodies, Their Selves: Gender, Language, and Knowledge in Chapter
Seventeen of
Cat’s Eye
.” Literature, Interpretation, Theory 6.3–4 (1995): 269–283.
Lecker, Robert . “Janus through the Looking Glass: Atwood’s First Three Novels.” In The Art of
Margaret Atwood: Essays in Criticism. Ed. Arnold Davidson and Cathy N. Davidson . Toronto:
Anansi, 1981 177–203
Lefanu, Sarah . Feminist Science Fiction. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1989.
Lozar, Tom . “America in the Canadian Mind.” Cross-Cultural Studies: American, Canadian, and
European Literatures, 1945–1985. Ed. Mirko Jurak . Ljubljana: English Department, Edvard
Kardelj U of Ljubljana, 1988. 379–385.
Lyons, Bonnie . “Neither Victims not Executioners in Margaret Atwood’s Fiction.” World
Literature Written in English 17.1 (1978): 181–187.
MacDonald, Larry . “Psychologism and the Philosophy of Progress: The Recent Fiction of
MacLennan, Davies, and Atwood.” Studies in Canadian Literature 92 (1984): 121–143.
MacPherson, Heidi Slettedahl . “Prison, Passion, and the Female Gaze: Twentieth-Century
Representations of Nineteenth-Century Panopticons.” In In The Grip of the Law: Trials, Prisons,
and the Space Between. Ed. Monica Fluterniok and Greta Olson . Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2004.
205–221.
Mahoney, Elizabeth . “Writing So to Speak: The Feminist Dystopia.” In Image and Power:
Women in Fiction in the Twentieth Century. Ed. Sarah Sceats and Gail Cunningham . London:
Longman, 1996. 29–40.
Malak, Amin . “Margaret Atwood’s
The Handmaid’s Tale
and the Dystopian Tradition.” Canadian
Literature 112 (1987): 9–16.
Mandel, Eli . “Atwood’s Gothic.” Malahat Review 41 (1977): 165–177.
March, Christie . “Crimson Silks and New Potatoes: The Heteroglossic Power of the Object in
Margaret Atwood’s
Alias Grace
.” Studies in Canadian Literature 22.2 (1997): 66–82.
Marzec, Robert P. “Enclosure, Colonization, and the Robinson Crusoe Syndrome: A Genealogy
of Land in a Global Context.” Boundary 2: An International Journal of Literature and Culture 29
(2002): 129–136.
McElroy, Ruth . “Whose Body? Whose Nation? Surrogate Motherhood and its Representation.”
European Journal of Cultural Studies 5.3 (2002): 325–342.
McKay, Robert . “‘Identifying with the Animals’: Language, Subjectivity, and the Animal Politics
on Margaret Atwood’s
Surfacing
.” In Figuring Animals: Essays in Animal Images in Art,
Literature, Philosophy, and Popular Culture. Ed. Mary S. Pollock and Catherine Rainwater .
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. 207–227.
McMillan, Ann . “The Transforming Eye:
Lady Oracle
and the Gothic Tradition.” In Margaret
Atwood: Vision and Forms. Ed. Kathryn VanSpanckeren and Jan Garden Castro . Carbondale:
Southern Illinois UP, 1988. 48–64.
Meuse, Elizabeth . Interview with Margaret Atwood. Black Warrior Review 12.1 (1985): 96.
Meyers, Helene . Femicidal Fears: Narratives of the Female Gothic. Albany: State U of New
York P, 2001.
Michael, Magali Cornier . Feminism and the Postmodern Impulse: Post-World War II Fiction.
Albany: State U of New York P, 1996.
Miller, Kathy . “Cultural Geography: Nomadism, Friendship, and the War in Margaret Atwood’s
The Robber Bride
.” Dedalus: Revista Portuguesa de Literatura Comparada 6 (1996): 71–80.
Miner, Madonne . “Trust in Me’: A Reading of the Romance Plot in Margaret Atwood’s
The
Handmaid’s Tale
.” Current Canadian Literature 37.2 (1991): 148–168.
Mohr, Dunja . “Female Dystopia: Margaret Atwood’s
The Handmaid’s Tale
.” Ahornblatter 8
(1995): 62–80.
Mohr, Dunja . “Trangressive Utopian Dystopias: The Postmodern Reappearance of Utopia in
the Disguise of Dystopia.” Zeitschrift fur Anglustik und Amerikankistik 55.1b (2007): 5–24.
Morra, Linda . “Articulating Madness: The Foucauldian Notion of Madness and Margaret
Atwood’s
Alias Grace
.” West Virginia Philological Papers 45 (1999): 123–129.
Morin-Ollier, Priscilla . “
The Handmaid’s Tale
and American Protestant Fundamentalism:
Discipline and Submission.” In Lire Margaret Atwood: The Handmaid’s Tale. Ed. Marta Dvorak .
Rennes, France: Pes universitaires de Rennes, 1999. 33–45.
Morton, Stephen . “Postcolonial Gothic and the New World Disorder: Crossing Borders of
Space/Time in Margaret Atwood’s
The Robber Bride
.” British Journal of Canadian Studies 14.1
(1999): 99–114.
Moss, John . Sex and Violence in the Canadian Novel. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1977.
Mulvey, Laura . Visual and Other Pleasures. 2nd ed. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.
Mycak, Sonia . The Search of the Split Subject: Psychoanalysis, Phenomenology, and the
Novels of Margaret Atwood. Toronto: ECW P, 1997.
Myrsiades, Linda . “Law, Medicine, and the Sex Slave in Margaret Atwood’s
The Handmaid’s
Tale
.” In Un-Disciplining Literature: Literature, Law, and Culture. Ed. Kostas Myrsiades and
Linda Myrsiades . New York: Peter Lang, 1999. 219–245.
Navarro, Emilia . “Women and War: Gendered Destruction.” In ICLA ’91: Tokyo: The Force of
Vision, II: Visions in History; Visions of the Other. Ed. Earl Miner , et al. Tokyo: International
Comparative Literature Association, 1995. 261–267.
Nelson-Born, Katherine A. “Trace of a Woman: Narrative Voice and Decentered Power in the
Fiction of Toni Morrison, Margaret Atwood, and Louise Erdich.” Literature, Interpretation, Power
7.1 (1996): 1–12.
Neuman, Shirley . “Just a Backlash: Margaret Atwood, Feminism, and
The Handmaid’s Tale
.”
University of Toronto Quarterly 75.3 (2006): 857–868.
Nischik, Reingard M. Endering Genre: The Works of Margaret Atwood. Ottawa: U of Ottawa P,
2009.
Oltarzewska, Jagna . “Reflections on the Concept of Territory in the Work of Margaret Atwood:
Deconstructions and Reconstructions.” Etudes Canadiennes/Canadian Studies 47 (1999):
145–154.
Osbourne, Carol . “Constructing the Self through Memory:
Cat’s Eye
as a Novel of Self-
Development.” Frontiers 14.3 (1994): 104–109.
Özdemir, Erinç . “Power, Madness, and Gender Identity in Margaret Atwood’s
Surfacing
: A
Feminist Reading.” English Studies 84.1 (2003): 57–80.
Parker, Emma . “You Are What You Eat: The Politics of Eating in the Novels of Margaret
Atwood.” Twentieth Century Literature 41.3 (1995): 349–386.
Patton, Marilyn . “Tourists and Terrorists: The Creation of
Bodily Harm
.” Papers on Language
and Literature 28.2 (1992): 156–173.
Perrakis, Phyllis Sternberg . “Atwood’s
Robber Bride
: The Vampire as Intersubjective Catalyst.”
Mosaic 30.3 (1997): 151–168.
Perrakis, Phyllis Sternberg . “Negotiating with the Looking Glass: Atwood, Her Protagonists, and
the Journey to the Dead.” In Margaret Atwood: An Open Eye. Ed. John Moss and Tobi
Kozakewich . Ottawa: U of Ottawa P, 2006. 349–359.
Piercy, Marge . “Margaret Atwood: Beyond Victimhood.” American Poetry Review 2.6 (1973):
41–44.
Pratt, Annis . “
Surfacing
and the Rebirth Journey.” In The Art of Margaret Atwood: Essays in
Criticism. Ed. Arnold E. Davidson and Cathy N. Davidson . Toronto: Anansi, 1981. 139–157.
Radway, Janice . Reading the Romance: Women, Patriarchy, and Popular Literature. Chapel
Hill: U of North Carolina P, 1984.
Rao, Eleonora . “Home and Nation in Margaret Atwood’s Later Fiction.” In The Cambridge
Companion to Margaret Atwood. Ed. Coral Ann Howells . Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2006.
100–113.
Raschke, Deborah . “Margaret Atwood’s
The Handmaid’s Tale
: False Borders and Subtle
Subversions.” Literature, Interpretation, Theory 6.3–4 (1995): 257–268.
Restuccia, Frances L. Melancholics in Love: Representing Women’s Depression and Domestic
Abuse. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2001.
Rigney, Barbara Hill . Margaret Atwood: Works and Impact. Totowa, NJ: Barnes and Noble,
1987.
Rimstead, Roxanne . “Working-Class Intruders: Female Domestics in
Kamouraska
and
Alias
Grace
.” Canadian Literature 175 (2002): 44–67.
Rogerson, Margaret . “Reading the Patchworks in
Alias Grace
.” Journal of Commonwealth
Literature 33.1 (1998): 5–22.
Rooke, Constance . Fear of the Open Heart: Essays on Contemporary Canadian Writing.
Toronto: Coach House, 1989.
Roy, Wendy . “The Body of/as Evidence: Margaret Atwood,
The Blind Assassin
, and the
Feminist Literary Mystery.” In Margaret Atwood: An Open Eye. Ed. John Moss and Tobi
Kozakewich . Ottawa: U of Ottawa P, 2006. 361–371.
Rubenstein, Rebecca . “Pandora’s Box and Female Survival: Margaret Atwood’s
Bodily Harm
.”
In Critical Essays on Margaret Atwood. Ed. Judith McCombs . Boston: G.K. Hall, 1988.
259–275.
Sandler, Linda . Interview with Margaret Atwood. Malahat Review 41 (1977): 7–27.
Sargeant, Lyman Tower . “The Three Faces of Utopianism Revisited.” Utopian Studies 5.1
(1994): 1–37.
Sawicki, Jana . Disciplining Foucault: Feminism, Power, and the Body. New York: Routledge,
1991.
Schiesari, Juliana . The Gendering of Melancholia: Feminism, Psychoanalysis, and the
Symbolics of Loss in Renaissance Literature. Cornell, NY: Cornell UP, 1992.
Schilb, John . Rhetorical Refusals: Defying Audiences’ Expectations. Carbondale: Southern
Illinois UP, 2007.
Sheckels, Theodore F. The Island Motif in the Fiction of L. M. Montgomery, Margaret Laurence,
Margaret Atwood, and Other Women Canadian Novelists. New York: Peter Lang, 2003.
Sheckels, Theodore F. “No Princes Here: Male Characters in Margaret Atwood’s Fiction.” Once
Upon a Time: Myth, Fairy Tales and Legends in Margaret Atwood’s Writings. Ed. Sarah A.
Appleton . Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2008. 115–126.
Sheckels, Theodore F. , and Kathleen M. Sweeney . “Scene, Symbol, Subversion: The Evolving
Uses of Mapping in Margaret Atwood’s Fiction.” American Review of Canadian Studies 31.3
(2001): 403–421.
Showalter, Elaine . A Literature of Their Own. 2nd ed. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 1998.
Siddall, Gillian . “‘This Is What I Told Dr. Jordan …’: Public Constructions and Private
Disruptions in Margaret Atwood’s
Alias Grace
.” Essays on Canadian Writing 81 (2004):
84–102.
Singh, Sunaina . The Novels of Margaret Atwood and Anita Desai: A Comparative Study in
Feminist Perspectives. New Delhi: Creative Books, 1994.
Smith, Joan .
Malahat Review
. “Margaret Atwood: The Stoic Comedian.” Malahat Review 41
(1977): 134–144.
Smith-Rosenberg, Carroll . Disoderly Conduct: Visions of Gender in Victorian America. New
York: Oxford UP, 1986.
Snitow, Ann . “Mass Market Romance: Pornography for Women is Different.” In Powers of
Desire: The Politics of Sexuality. Ed. Ann Snitow , Christine Stansell , and Sharon Thompson .
New York: Monthly Review P, 1983. 295–363.
Somacarrera, Pilar . “Power Politics: Power and Identity.” In The Cambridge Companion to
Margaret Atwood. Ed. Coral Ann Howells . Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2006. 43–57.
Somacarrera, Pilar . “Power Politics/Power Politics: Atwood and Foucault.” In Margaret Atwood:
An Open Eye. Ed. John Moss and Tobi Kozakewich . Ottawa: U of Ottawa P, 2006. 291–303.
Spacks, Patricia Meyers . Gossip. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1986.
Staels, Hilde . “Margaret Atwood’s
The Handmaid’s Tale
: Resistance through Narrating.”
English Studies 76.5 (1995): 455–467.
Staels, Hilde . “
Oryx and Crake
: Atwood’s Ironic Inversion of
Frankenstein
.” In Margaret
Atwood: An Open Eye. Ed. John Moss and Tobi Kozakewich . Ottawa: U of Ottawa P, 2006.
433–446.
Stallybrass, Peter , and Allan White . The Politics and Poetics of Transgression. Ithaca, NY:
Cornell UP, 1986.
Stanley, Sandra Kumamoto . “The Eroticism of Class and the Enigma of Margaret Atwood’s
Alias Grace
.” Tulsa Studies in Women’s Literature 22.2 (2003): 371–386.
Stein, Karen . “Margaret Atwood’s Modest Proposal:
The Handmaid’s Tale
.” Canadian
Literature 148 (1996): 57–73.
Stillman, Peter , and Anne S. Johnson . “Identity, Complicity, and Resistance in
The
Handmaid’s Tale
.” Utopian Studies 5.2 (1994): 70–86.
Stimpson, Catherine R. “A Woman.” Nation 242.21 (1986): 764–767.
Strauss, Jennifer . “‘Everyone is in Politics’: Margaret Atwood’s
Bodily Harm
and Blanche
d’Alpuget’s
Turtle Beach
: Being There, Being Here.” In Australian/Canadian Literatures in
English: Comparative Perspectives. Ed. Russell McDougall and Gillian Whitlock . Melbourne:
Methuen Australia, 1987. 111–119.
Sturgess, Charlotte . “Female Dystopia in
The Handmaid’s Tale
: The Body, The Word, and
Transgressive Words.” In Lectured d’Une Oeuvre: The Handmaid’s Tale de Margaret Atwood.
Ed. Jean-Paul Gabilliet and Francois Gallix . Paris: Editions du temps, 1998. 71–80.
Sugars, Cynthia . “Noble Canadians, Ugly Americans: Anti-Americanism and the Canadian
Ideal in British Readings of Canadian Literature.” American Review of Canadian Studies 29.1
(1999): 93–118.
Sugars, Cynthia . “‘Saying Boo to Colonialism’:
Surfacing
, Tom Thomson, and the National
Ghost.” In Margaret Atwood: An Open Eye. Ed. John Moss and Tobi Kozabewich . Ottawa: U of
Ottawa P, 2006. 137–158.
Tiffin, Helen . “‘Everyone is in Politics’: Margaret Atwood’s
Bodily Harm
and Blanche d’Alpuget’s
Turtle Beach
: Voice and Form.” In Australian/Canadian Literatures in English: Comparative
Perspectives. Ed. Russell McDougall and Gillian Whitlock . Melbourne: Methuen Australia,
1987. 119–132.
Tolan, Fiona . “Feminist Utopias and Questions of Liberty: Margaret Atwood’s
The Handmaid’s
Tale
as a Critique of Second Wave Feminism.” Women 16.1 (2005): 18–32.
Tolan, Fiona . “Situating Canada: The Shifting Perspective of the Postcolonial Other in Margaret
Atwood’s
The Robber Bride
.” American Review of Canadian Studies 35.3 (2005): 453–470.
Tolan, Fiona . “Sucking the Blood out of Second-Wave Feminism: Postfeminist Vampirism in
Margaret Atwood’s
The Robber Bride
.” Gothic Studies 9.2 (2007): 45–57.
Tomc, Sandra . “‘The Missionary Position’: Feminism and Nationalism in Margaret Atwood’s
The Handmaid’s Tale
.” Canadian Literature 138–9 (1993): 73–87.
Tschachler, Heinz . “Janus, Hitler, the Devil, and Co.: On Myth, Ideology, and the Canadian
Postmodern.” In Postmodern Fiction in Canada. Ed. Theo D’haen and Hans Bertens .
Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1992. 27–66.
Walker, Nancy . The Disobedient Writer: Women and Narrative Tradition. Austin: U of Texas P,
1995.
Walker, Nancy . “Ironic Autobiography: From
The Waterfall
to
The Handmaid’s Tale
.” Women’s
Studies 15.1–3 (1988): 203–220.
Warkentin, Traci . “Dis/Integrating Animals: Ethical Dimensions of the Genetic Engineering of
Animals for Human Consumption.” AI and Society 20.1 (2006): 82–102.
Webb, Janeen . “Feminism and Science Fiction.” Meanjin 51.1 (1992): 185–198.
Wesseling, Lisa , and Jose Van Duck . “The Issue of Responsibility in Margaret Atwood’s
The
Handmaid’s Tale
.” In Against Patriarchal Thinking: Proceedings of the 6th Symposium of the
International Association of Women Philosophers. Ed. Maja Pellikaan-Engel . Amsterdam: VU
UP, 1992. 243–251.
Whalen-Bridge, John . Political Fiction and the American Self. Urbana: U of Illinois P, 1998.
Widmer, Kingsley . Counterings: Utopian Dialectics in Contemporary Contexts. Ann Arbor: U of
Michigan Research P, 1988.
Williamson, Judith . “Woman is an Island: Femininity and Colonization.” In Studies in
Entertainment: Critical Approaches to Mass Culture. Ed. Tania Medleski . Bloomington: Indiana
UP, 1986. 99–118.
Wilson, Sharon R. “Camera Images in Margaret Atwood’s Novels.” In Margaret Atwood:
Reflection and Reality. Ed. Beatrice Mendez-Engle . Edinburg, TX: Pan American U, 1987.
29–57.
Wilson, Sharon R. “Frankenstein’s Gaze and Atwood’s Sexual Politics in
Oryx and Crake
.” In
Margaret Atwood: An Open Eye. Ed. John Moss and Tobi Kozakewich . Ottawa: U of Ottawa P,
2006. 397–405.
Wilson, Sharon R. Margaret Atwood’s Fairy-Tale Sexual Politics. Jackson: U of Mississippi P,
1993.
Wilson, Sharon R. “Sexual Politics in Margaret Atwood’s Visual Art.” In Margaret Atwood: Vision
and Forms. Ed. Kathryn VanSpanckeren and Jan Garden Castro . Carbondale: Southern Illinois
UP, 1988. 205–214.
Wilson, Sharon R. “Turning Life into Popular Art:
Bodily Harm’s
Life-Tourist.” Studies in
Canadian Literature 10.1–2 (1985): 136–145.
Withim, Philip . “Arrival as Departure in Margaret Atwood’s
Surfacing
and
Bodily Harm
.”
Aspects of Commonwealth Literature 1 (1990): 76–84.
Wolmark, Jenny . Aliens and Others: Science Fiction, Feminism, and Postmodernism. Iowa
City: U of Iowa P, 1994.
Worth, Christopher . “Mapping the Boundaries: Margaret Atwood’s
Surfacing
.” World Literature
Written in English 25.1 (1985): 145–151.
Wyatt, Jean . Risking Difference: Identification, Race, and Community in Contemporary Fiction
and Feminism. Albany: State U of New York P, 2004.
York, Lorraine M. “Satire: The No-Woman’s Land of Literary Modes.” In Approaches to
Teaching Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale and Other Works. Ed. Sharon R. Wilson ,
Thomas B. Friedman , and Shannon Hengen . New York: MLA, 1996. 43–48.
