CANADA 150 FILMED

LE CANADA 150 AU CINÉMA

We acknowledge the support of the Canadian Embassy in Belgrade and the
Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic
of Serbia for the publication of the Proceedings

Cet ouvrage est publié avec le concours de l’Ambassade du Canada à Belgrade

et le Ministère de l’enseignement, de la science et du développement techno-
logique de la République de Serbie
UNIVERSITY OF BELGRADE, FACULTY OF PHILOLOGY
UNIVERSITÉ DE BELGRADE, FACULTÉ DE PHILOLOGIE

SERBIAN ASSOCIATION FOR CANADIAN STUDIES

ASSOCIATION SERBE D’ÉTUDES CANADIENNES

Canada 150 Filmed

Le Canada 150 au Cinéma

Editors / Sous la direction de

Jelena Novaković and / et Vesna Lopičić

Ministarstvu za nauku i tehnološki razvoj

Republike Srbije

Ambasadi Kanade
U Beogradu

Beograd
2019
 Publishers / Éditeurs
UNIVERSITY OF BELGRADE, FACULTY OF PHILOLOGY
UNIVERSITÉ DE BELGRADE, FACULTÉ DE PHILOLOGIE

SERBIAN ASSOCIATION FOR CANADIAN STUDIES

ASSOCIATION SERBE D’ÉTUDES CANADIENNES

Acting Publishers / Responsables

Ljiljana Marković
Sergej Macura

Editorial Board / Comité de rédaction

Jelena Novaković, Vesna Lopičić, Aleksandra Jovanović,
Sergej Macura, Tanja Cvetković, Marija Panić, Michael Keefer,
Tatjana Bijelić

The text approved at the meeting of the Editorial Board held

on 24th January 2019 following the report by the reviewers:
Accepté pour l’impression à la réunion du Comité de rédaction
du 24 janvier 2019 à la base des rapports de :

Radojka Vukčević
Mirjana Drndarski
Milica Spremić Končar
Maja Ćuk
Sergej Macura

Cover illustration / Illustration de la couverture

Nanook of the North (1922) – Robert Flaherty

ISBN 978-86-6153-571-0
Milena Nikolić
University of Belgrade, Serbia

BETWEEN FICTION AND FILM: MARGARET ATWOOD’S

THE HANDMAID’S TALE

Abstract
Five years after the publication of The Handmaid’s Tale (1985), Margaret Atwood’s dys-
topian novel that depicts the world in which freedom is only a word and language a mere
thought-restrictive tool, a 1990 film adaptation of the novel with the same name emerged,
raising the awareness of the social injustice and power of politics and politicians who ex-
ercised their rights to physically and psychologically control people. Although the film
successfully exibits a similar dry, satirical humor and the same bleak atmosphere that per-
meated through the novel, simultaneously evoking the feeling of fear and panic in the hearts
of its audience, it fails to detect a few vital ideas presented in the novel due to some major
alterations made in the screenplay. The aim of this paper is to identify and explore the main
deviations in the film that undermine the novel’s ambiguity and its open-endedness. The
particular attention will be paid to the visual imagery (actors’ clothing), (mis)naming of
the main heroine and a rather disappointing film’s ending. Finally, a few parallels will be
drawn between the book, its 1990 film adaptation, its 2017 Hulu TV series adaptation and
the present political situation in the USA, where the need for revisiting The Handmaid’s
Tale seems to be recognized again – this time by the Women’s March Protesters during the
inauguration ceremony of the newly-elected president of the US – Donald Trump.

Keywords
The Handmaid’s Tale, dystopia, novel vs. film adaptation, film alterations.
90 Milena Nikolić

1. Film and TV Series Adaptations of Atwood’s Novels

Despite the fact that Atwood’s novels have often been made into films more or
less faithful to the original texts, they failed to exibit the flamboyant experimen-
tation that marks Atwood’s writing style. Its very first but unsuccessful attempt
is a film adaptation of a novel published in 1972 with themes of Canadian
nationalism – Surfacing. The film was directed by Claude Jutra and released in
1981. It was criticised for casting Kathleen Beller and Joseph Bottoms, actors
from the United States, in a film celebrating Canadianism. Soon afterwards,
Harold Pinter wrote the screenplay for The Handmaid’s Tale, a dystopian novel
of the same name written in 1985. The film was directed by Volker Schlöndorff
and it was released in 1990. It stars Natasha Rishardson (Kate/Offred), Faye
Dunaway (Serena Joy) and Robert Duvall (The Commander, Fred). Excellent
acting was not enough to make up for many deviations from the main plotline
that affected the novel’s open-endedness and undermined its ambiguity.
A 2002 film adaptation of The Blind Assassin was released with mixed recep-
tion and in January 2007 a contemporary version of The Robber Bride with
altered plotline was aired on CBC Television. The screenwriter Tassie Cam-
eron omitted a large amount of source material so that the certain aspects of
the story turned out to be very confusing. Moreover, the film transforms into a
melodrama around its midsection, which is a far cry from the original text and
the author’s intention.
The scripts were also written for a television adaptation of Atwood’s trilogy
MaddAddam under the same working title. The project is being developed by
Darren Aronofsky’s company Protozoa Pictures. It was formerly being devel-
oped for HBO. In 2016 Aronofsky said that the network was no longer attached
but confirmed that the project was still underway.
Alias Grace, a Canadian-American television miniseries directed by Mary
Harron and starring Sarah Gadon, makes perhaps a more promising adapted
material. It is second of Atwood’s novels adapted by CBC television in 2017


The novel The Handmaid’s Tale has taken many forms: an opera (2000), a ballet (2013)
and a one-woman stage show (2015). In 2014, Canadian band Lakes of Canada released
their concept album Transgressions inspired by the novel. A graphic novel of The Hand-
maid’s Tale is also on its way – the artist Renee Nault has been working on it for a few
years. In 2017 Hulu has produced a successful TV series based on the novel, with Mar-
garet Atwood as a consulting producer. A dystopian thriller has received positive reviews
from critics since its first season premiered in April. It received thirteen Emmy nomina-
tions in categories that include best drama series, best lead actress in a drama series (for
Elisabeth Moss), and best supporting actress in a drama (for both Ann Dowd and Samira
Wiley).
 Between Fiction and Film: Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale 91

(the first being Wandering Wenda, an animated children’s TV series). Based

on Atwood’s 1996 novel of the same name and adapted by Sarah Polley, the
series will air on CBC Television in Canada and will stream on Netflix globally
starting from November 2017.
Due to the limited length of this paper, we will focus on a not very successful
1990 film adaptation of The Handmaid’s Tale and its main deviations from the
original text, its outstanding contemporary version in the form of a TV miniseries
released on April, 2017 and the renewed interest for the 1985 Atwood’s novel
in the light of a recent presidential election in the United States.

2. The Handmaid’s Tale – Novel vs. Film

Since its publication, the novel The Handmaid’s Tale has been translated into
forty or more languages. It has been nominated for the 1986 Booker Prize, the
1986 Nebula Award and the 1987 Prometheus Award. It won the 1985 Governor
General’s Award for English language fiction and the first Arthur C. Clarke
Award in 1987. The futuristic satire depicts the Republic of Gilead, a regressive
fundamentalist society located in today’s Cambridge, Massachusetts, home of
Harvard University that once used to be a Puritan theological seminary. Cruelty,
illiberal thinking of organized religion, birth control/abortion and the ease by
which open democracies slip into authoritarianism as a result of misogyny are
the key aspects of the Gileadian regime established in what was earlier called
the United States. Within its borders, a strict social structure is enforced.
Men are ranked according to prestige and merit (Commanders, Eyes, Angels,
Guardians, and businessmen and professionals), while women are grouped ac-
cording to social function, which is primarily determined by their reproductive
health (Aunts – linked to radical feminists/morality and they are repressive;
Wives and Daughters, Econowives, Handmaids, Marthas, and Unwomen).
While no Gileadian citizen is truly free they all suffer under the oppressive
thumb of the Republic of Gilead, it is the females who bear the brunt of Gilead-
ian religious tyranny.
It is in this context that we meet both Atwood’s main heroine and the film main
actress Offred, a handmaid who has been assigned to Commander Fredand his
wife, Serena Joy. The novel isorganized as a one-woman interior monologue, as
opposed to the film where it is rearranged into more of a constant timeline. In
the novel we are allowed to see through Offred’s eyes and reflect upon “the days
before”. We learn how the Sons of Jacob were able to destabilize the American

The 26 eight-minute episodes were based on a 2011 novel by M. Atwood entitled Wan-
dering Wenda and Widow Wallop’s Wunderground Washery. It debuted in the spring of
2017.
92 Milena Nikolić

government and institute their own patriarchal theocracy. We are also able to
see how daily life in the Republic looks like.The film retains the tone of the
original story and follows the basic plot of the novel: Offred’s re-education at
the Red Center, the Birthing Ceremony, Prayvaganza, Women’s Salvaging and
Particicution, trips to the gynecologist, illicit visits to the Commander’s office,
the night out at Jezebel’s and the monthly rape Ceremonies. However, there
is no jumping around from memory to memory as if the main heroine were
telling a story to the friend. Only a few passages with voice-over narration are
used, which makes it rather difficult for the audience to have any access to the
heroine’s psychological insight, her inner feelings and emotional drama.

3. Uniforms

The totalitarian regime evokes constant feelings of fear and suspense in the
hearts of its citizens. Religious rhetoric is used both in the novel and the film
to encourage the citizens of Gilead to follow strict and absurd rules without a
possibility of questioning them (e. g. “Blessed be the fruit” as a greeting and
“May the Lord open” as the answer). Power and control are further established
through forcing people to wear uniforms that reflect their place in the social
hierarchy. In the article entitled “What The Handmaid’s Tale Means in the Age
of Trump” published on March 10, 2017 in The New York Times, Atwood states
that “many totalitarianisms have used clothing, both forbidden and enforced,
to identify and control people and many have ruled behind a religious front”
(Atwood, 2017). In Gilead men have military-type uniforms, while women
wear dresses of various colors − brown for Aunts, blue for Wives, black for
Widows, and white for Daughters; the wives of men lower in the social scale
(Econowives) wear dresses striped red, blue, and green; red habits with white
headresses (“Wings”) are for Handmaids; green smocks for Marthas; grey
dresses for Unwomen. In the above mentioned article Atwood claims that the
costumes worn by Gileadian women are derived from Western religious ico-
nography. Namely, the wives wear blue as a symbol of purity, from the Virgin
Mary, while the handmaids wear red, from the blood of parturition, but also
from Mary Magdalene. The handmaid’s outfit resembles an Islamic burqa: it
covers the woman’s body from her wrists to her ankles. It is accompanied by
red gloves and stockings, a red veil and “wings”, a sort of a white headdress:


Kate’s/Offred’s voice-over was used at the very end of the film but it completely differs
from her last interior monologue in the novel, as it will be shown in the final section of
this paper.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/10/books/review/margaret-atwood-handmaids-tale-
age-of-trump.html?mcubz=1
 Between Fiction and Film: Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale 93

Everything except the wings around my face is red: the color of blood, which
defines us. The skirt is ankle-length, full, gathered to a flat yoke that extends
over the breasts, the sleeves are full. The white wings too are prescribed issue;
they are to keep us from seeing, but also from being seen. (Atwood 1999: 8)

Atwood reveals the origin of these “face-hiding bonnets” in her book review
for The New York Times. She explains that they “came not only from mid-Vic-
torian costume and from nuns, but from the Old Dutch Cleanser package of
the 1940s, which showed a woman with her face hidden” (Atwood 2017). The
headdress is an essential part of the handmaids’ uniform, because it conceals
their faces from the prying eyes of the world and vice versa and keeps them
ignorant and submissive.
This formal dress can be seen in the film, but it significantly differs from the
original outfit envisioned by Atwood. The uniform worn by the actress Natasha
Richardson is relatively immodest since it does not conceal the female form
properly: the hem of the dress ends mid-shin, revealing the handmaid’s legs to
hungry, sex-starved men, while the thin material gives an outline of the wom-
anly shape beneath (The Handmaid’s Tale, 1990, 00:34). Also, there are no
“wings”on Richardson’s head.The absence of the wings in the film may have
been the result of the fact that they make filming an actor’s facial expressions
very difficult. However, they are a symbol of women’s subjugation and present
a vital element of the handmaid’s narrative. Bearing in mind the fact that the
Republic of Gilead is a conservative society based on biblican purity with its
strict, anti-sex dress code, the functon of clothing has a tremenduous value
and requires the utmost attention. In altering the clothing, the filmmakers have
undermined its importance. Consequently, they have removed an especially
oppressive aspect of Gileadian regime.

4. Mis/naming

Naming of the central character is another important aspect of the novel that
should not be disregarded. In the novel readers are not familiar with the hand-
maid’s original name. Under a new regime she is simply referred to as Offred,
the name composed of a man’s first name, “Fred”, and a prefix denoting “be-
longing to”. However, many critics and scholars attach to it various symbolical
meanings. According to Roberta Rubenstein, her name “encodes her indentured


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/10/books/review/margaret-atwood-handmaids-tale-
age-of-trump.html?mcubz=1

The handmaid’s uniform is not the only one described as unfitiing. Serena Joy’s blue
dress, too, is much more revealing that the strict, Puriticanical, Gileadean regime would
ever allow (The Handmaid’s Tale, 1990, 00:57).
94 Milena Nikolić

sexuality: both “offered” and the property “of Fred” (VanSpanckeren and Castro
1988: 103). Also, her name symbolizes her position in other ways: she is off-
red, or not quite fully aligned with her role; she is offered up; she is off-read,
as in mis-read, and she is afraid (Kaler 1989: 47, Lacombe 1986: 5). Heidi S.
Macpherson points out that the lack of her original name is a sign of “another
stripping of her identity” (Macpherson 2010: 56). Some critics, however, argue
that Offred’s real name is “June” (Howells 2005: 98). In the beginning of the
novel the handmaids whisper their real names among themselves in the dormi-
tory: “Alma. Janine. Dolores. Moira. June.” (Atwood 1989: 4). “June” is the
only name in the novel that is not assigned to anyone and that never appears
again. However, in her book review Atwood admits that “[“June”] was not [her]
original thought but it fits” (Atwood 2017).When asked why we never learn
Offred’s real name, the author replies that there are “so many people throughout
history [that] have had their names changed, or have simply disappeared from
view” (Atwood 2017). It is clear that Atwood wanted to pay tribute to those
people whose voices have been silenced and who have survived earth-shattering
events. In a 1990 film adaption, however, we learn that the handmaid’s name
is “Kate”, which is a rather disappointing discovery, bearing in mind the fact
that not only it does not fit into the complex concept of the repressive world
Atwood has envisioned but it also misses some of the key points of the novel
regarding woman’s identity and subjectivity. In other words, mis/naming of the
main heroine diminishes the cruelties of the Gileadian regime, in the core of
which lies its urge to suppress the identity of women by forbidding them to use
their own names.The Handmaid’s Tale is a statement on behalf of all the women
throughout history deprived of their fundamental rights. Thus, the handmaid-
whose name remains unrevealed in the novel is a sort of an “Every(wo)man”
who suffers under the oppressive thumb of any fundamentalist society. As such,
she is more convincing and successful in her attempt to reconstruct her life as
a feminine subject who eludes her victim status – something that many women
before her had fought to obtain in vain.

5. The Film’s Ending

Perhaps the most striking deviation from the novel is a film’s rather happy end-
ing, which undermines the novel’s suggested open-endedness and shatters the
whole concept of the handmaid’s story to the core. In the novel, the handmaid’s
story ends with the black van waiting for her in front of the Commander’s house.
The two men are taking her by the elbows and helping her to enter the van,


“Offered” denotes a religious offering or a victim offered for sacrifice.

Thus, the use of name ”June” as the real Offred’s name in Hulu’s adaption of the novel is
meaningful.
 Between Fiction and Film: Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale 95

while the Commander, his wife and the two Marthas are in a state of stupefac-
tion. Meanwile, Offred contemplates:

Whether this is my end or a new beginning I have no way of knowing: I have

given myself over into the hands of strangers, because it can’t be helped. And
so I step up, into the darkness within; or else the light. (Atwood 1999: 399)

Atwood’s version though a bleaker one has a greater impact upon the read-
ers since it briskly evokes “it can happen here” scenario. Offred’s narrative
concludes with uncertainty as do the fates of the other women in the novel
(e. g. Offred’s friend Moira). What is to become of the main protagonist remains
unknown. Whether the men in the black van are “Eyes” who are taking her to
death due to her breaking of the established rules, or the members of the secret
organization “Mayday” who are helping her to escape and cross the border we
do not know for certain.
In the film, however, Kate’s future is anticipated. The most shocking scene in
the film is when she stabs the Commander and kills him (The Handmaid’s Tale,
1990, 1:39: 20). Afterwards, the black van comes for her and she gets in (The
Handmaid’s Tale, 1990, 1:41: 29). The next moment we hear the voice-over
that resembles the handmaid’s thoughts in the end of her story in the novel
but is supported by rather unexpected scenes. We see her safe and sound and
pregnant in the mountains, hoping to deliver a baby to “a different world” and
reunite with her daughter Jill:

I don’t know if this is my end or a new beginning for me, but I’m safe here in
the mountains held by the rebels. They bring me food and sometimes a message
from Nick. And so I wait. I wait for the baby to be born into a different world. I
still dream about Jill, about them telling her I don’t exist or that I never existed.
I know we’re going to find her. She will remember me. (The Handmaid’s Tale,
1990, 1:44: 23 – 1: 45: 07)

It is rather superfluous to point out futility of the act of killing the Commander.
Murder at this point is completely unconvincing and uncalled for. Moreover, it
does not make Offred a true heroine and does not help her to acquire a creative
non-victim position. She becomes a mere product of the predictable consumer
society and fails to fit into a tragic heroine pattern. The novel The Handmaid’s
Tale is, as is the case with other Atwood’s works written in the period between
1979 and 1987, an account of oppressions that “cut across national and gender
boundaries” and “were for Atwood bound to a sense of hope”, as one critic has
pointed out (Wynn-Davis, 2010, 41). The sense of hope does not only abide in the
hearts of the oppressed but it is also present in the hearts of the writers who can
ensure their protagonists a creative-non-victim status through imagination and
communication. The film’s ending, however, fails to exhibit and recognize the
96 Milena Nikolić

qualities of the novel open-endedness and is therefore a bland and unsuccessful

attempt of showing the heroine as a genuine survivor and creative ex-victim.

6. Hulu’s 2017 Adaptation

Hulu’s adaptation of the novel in 2017 contributed to a renewed interest for

the book and received a sudden and sustained boost in public discussion in the
period before and after the elections in the U.S. A set of ten TV-series presents
the events from the novel in a more convincing and realistic manner than its
1990 film adaptation.In an interview with Jennifer Vineyard for The New York
Times published on June 18, 2017, Bruce Miller, the showrunner for a televi-
sion adaptation of Atwood’s novel, talks about similarities between the show he
wrote, shot and edited at the time of the elections and the events presented on the
news at that time such as the pictures of the refugees trying to cross the border
into Canada and the various protests organized all over the country (Vineyard,
2017). Particularly interesting are the Women’s March protests that advocated
legislation and policies regarding human rights and other issues. Hundreds
of people protested against Donald Trump’s inauguration as President of the
United States, due to some of his statements he had made and positions he had
taken which were by many regarded as “anti-woman“. Posters entitled “Make
Margaret Atwood Fiction Again” and “The Handmaid’s Tale is Not an Instruc-
tion Manual” could be seen among the protesters on the streets of the capital of
the United States. Hulu’s adaptation of the novel explores the elements in the
American society at the present time that could lead to Gilead. These elements
are, according to Bruce Miller, “the same forces that won the election of Donald
Trump” (Vineyard, 2017). In other words, uncertainty and fear for the time to
come spread over people after the election. The same uncertainty and fear are
beautifully evoked in the final episode of the TV series that catches the perfect
dramatic moment of June getting in the van. Such ending triggers frustration
that at this point becomes real and burdensome – but it nevertheless captures
the audience’s attention and invites them to mentally engage in the social and
political issues tackled in the series as opposed to a rather bland and predictable
Happily Ever After ending of the 1990 film adaptation.
To conclude, a 1990 film adaptation of the Atwood’s novel failed to trigger
interest in the audience mainly due to the changes identified and analysed in
this paper. The inadequacy of uniforms and provision of various scenes in
which we see the handmaids talking, walking and plotting freely are very likely
toproblematise one of the central themes in the book – the denial of freedom
to all American citizens. Naming of the nameless protagonist robs the story

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/18/arts/television/the-handmaids-tale-finale-show-
runner-interview.html
 Between Fiction and Film: Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale 97

of its another layer of meaning – the quest for identity and woman’s struggle
to transform history into herstory. Finally, the murder of the Commander and
Kate’s escape to Canada provides a rather fairy tale ending and strikes a final
blow at a dystopian world Atwood had envisioned.

Works Cited
Atwood, Margaret. The Handmaid’s Tale. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart Ltd.,
1999.
Atwood, Margaret. Margaret Atwood on What The Handmaid’s Tale Means in the
Age of Trump. The New York Times. (March 10, 2017). Online: https://www.
nytimes.com/2017/03/10/books/review/margaret-atwood-handmaids-tale-
age-of-trump.html?mcubz=1
The Handmaid’s Tale. In Wikipedia. (April 17, 2017). Online: https://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/The_Handmaid%27s_Tale#In_other_media
Howells, Coral Ann. Margaret Atwood (2nd ed.). Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
Lacombe, M. “The Writing on the Wall: Amputated Speech in Margaret Atwood’s
The Handmaid’s Tale.” Wascana Review 21. 2, 1986, 3–12.
VanSpanckeren, K., Castro, J. G. Margaret Atwood: Visions and Forms. USA:
Southern Illinois University, 1988.
Vineyard, Jennifer. ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ Showrunner Bruce Miller on the Sea-
son 1 Finale. The New York Times. (June 18, 2017). Online: https://www.
nytimes.com/2017/06/18/arts/television/the-handmaids-tale-finale-showrun-
ner-interview.html
Wynn-Davis, Marion. Margaret Atwood. UK: Northcote House Publishers Ltd,
2010.