Miller 1

Dara Miller
Dr. Laura Dawkins
ENG 615
21 March 2011
Satisfaction and Subersion! "he #$bi%uit& of Loe Laws in The Handmaids Tale and The
God of Small Things
"hrou%hout the annals of literar& histor&' loe has been hailed as the %reat ideal as the
ulti$ate source of rede$(tion and unification. )oweer' in Mar%aret #twood*s The Handmaids
Tale and #rundhati +o&*s The God of Small Things, loe is (ortra&ed as a$bi%uous force. ,t
both enriches and destro&s- it both (ro(els $ankind forward and &et holds hi$ back. ,n the
futuristic societ& of The Handmaids Tale' loe is a re%ulated co$$odit& that is onl& to be
en.o&ed b& the elite few' and onl& within the boundaries of carefull& $onitored fa$ilial
structures. "he )and$aids of Gilead are e/(ected to lie a life without loe or e$otion' $erel&
serin% as essels for the children of the countr&*s future- accordin% to the noel*s (rota%onist'
0ffred' this e/(ected denial of hu$an affection recreates the )and$aids as 1$issin% (erson2s34
b& re$oin% the associatie identit& hu$anit& for$s throu%h bonds of loe. Si$ilarl&' in The
God of Small Things' loe is restricted b& the intricacies of caste and co$$unit&. #s Esta and
+ahel notice throu%h their childish e&es' life is %oerned b& the 1Loe Laws4 of who one can
loe and how $uch- it is throu%h their fa$il&*s subersion of these 1Loe Laws4 that the& are
both fulfilled and torn a(art. ,n both noels' the co$(le/it& of the ro$ance (lot creates a
$ultifaceted iew of loe as force that can be si$ultaneousl& sociall& subersie and (ersonall&
destructie.
Miller 2
,n #twood*s work' 0ffred states that 1, wish this stor& were different..., wish it were
about loe' or about sudden reali5ations i$(ortant to one*s life4 6#twood 2789- howeer' in
$an& wa&s it is e/actl& that. "hrou%hout the noel' 0ffred is bolstered throu%h the $undane
trau$as of her new e/istence as a )and$aid b& the $e$or& of her loe for her dau%hter and
husband. )er inters(ersed $e$ories of Luke (roide so$e of her onl& co$forts' een as she
beliees he is $ost likel& dead' and her desire for her dau%hter leads her to the onl& thin% she can
re:uest ; .ust a (hoto of her ; when Serena <o& offers her a faor. ,n 0ffred*s conersation with
the =o$$ander' she cites loe' fallin% in loe' as what has been 1oerlooked4 in the creation of
Gilead 6#twood 2209. ,ndeed' she finds her onl& ha((iness in the noel throu%h her affair with
Nick' as she is able to tell hi$ her 1real na$e' and feel therefore that 2she is3 known4 6#twood
2809. #ccordin% to a $ore (ositie inter(retation of the ro$ance (lot' loe is the subersie
force that ins(ires 0ffred to eentual self;recla$ation and rebellion! 1...loe is indeed the (oint
for 0ffred...it is throu%h 0ffred*s affair with Nick' as throu%h her friendshi(s with other
)and$aids' that her re;created self desires and rebels4 6>euer ?69.
)oweer' for 0ffred loe is not entirel& 1the (oint.4 #lthou%h she finds s$all ha((iness
in her affair with Nick' her relationshi( with hi$ also is the cause for her al$ost acce(tance of
her role in the Gilead societ&. >urther$ore' it is this er& relationshi( that deteriorates her
1friendshi( with other )and$aids4 to the (oint where she 1hardl& listens4 and 1no lon%er
credits4 her subersie relationshi( with 0fl%en 6#twood 2809. "hrou%h this ro$ance' 0ffred
beco$es co$(lacent with s$all ha((iness' so $uch so that she states that 1"he fact is that , no
lon%er want to leae' esca(e' cross the border to freedo$. , want to be here with Nick' where ,
can %et at hi$4 6#twood 2819. "his rationali5ation of the life she has $ade for herself not onl&
under$ines an& inclination towards actie rebellion that she had harbored in her friendshi( with
Miller @
0f%len' but also inherentl& under$ines her relationshi( with Nick as well- althou%h her fate is
left a$bi%uous at the noel*s end' the i$(lication that Nick is also an undercoer $e$ber of
Ma&da& (ro$(ts the reader to :uestion whether or not he could re$ain satisfied in a relationshi(
with a wo$an who was not willin% to fi%ht for herself.
"his (ers(ectie of the ro$ance (lot as both enli%htenin% and da$a%in% is echoed in the
1s$all thin%s4 of +o&*s noel as well. "hrou%hout the work' it is the loe woen throu%h the
$inor differences between caste and social status that brin% about the $a.or conflicts of the
noel. ,n the fra%$ented ti$efra$e of the noel' the strains of loe %one wron% be%an not onl&
when So(hie Mol arried' but also at the er& be%innin% of ti$e' 1...when the Loe Laws were
$ade. "he laws that la& down who should be loed' and how. #nd how $uch'4 6+o& @@9. "his
the$e of who, how, and how much runs throu%hout the troubled fa$il& histor&' and is es(eciall&
eident in the 1un$i/able $i/4 of the $other' #$$u.
#s an act of rebellion a%ainst her traditional fa$il& life' #$$u be%ins her e/(loration in
loe b& $arr&in% outside of her co$$unit&. #lthou%h her actual $arria%e is short;lied' the
effects of this loe last throu%hout her life- what she initiall& saw as a ste( towards freedo$
beco$es' after her diorce' an added sti%$a that onl& kee(s her further entrenched in the
clutches of the co$$unit& she so des(eratel& tries to break free fro$' leain% her an outcast in
the onl& (lace that will still een acce(t her. "he %eneral o(inion of the co$$unit& is echoed in
Aab& Bocha$$a*s thou%hts! 1#s for a divorced dau%hter fro$ an intercommunity love marriage
- Aab& Bocha$$a chose to re$ain :uierin%l& silent on the sub.ect4 6+o& 759. ,n this (la& for
the freedo$ of loe' howeer' #$$u establishes herself as an indiidual in her own ri%ht' and as
one of the few characters who is not afraid to (ursue her (assions. "he rede$(tie (ower of her
loe also $anifests itself throu%h her relationshi( with Celutha' the %od of s$all thin%s' who
Miller 7
throu%hout the noels stands as the one character who trul& e(ito$i5es the healin% and affir$in%
(ower of loe. Een in the wake of the ineitable tra%ed& of a relationshi( their societ& could not
handle' #$$u and Celutha end the noel on loe*s ho(e for 1to$orrow4 6+o& @219.
,n her relationshi( with her children' howeer' #$$u uses loe al$ost as a wea(on-
althou%h her children' (articularl& +ahel' crae their $other*s affection' #$$u*s treat$ent of
the$ acillates between (assionate tenderness and scathin% honest&. ,n one of her $ost
$e$orable interactions with +ahel' #$$u uns(arin%l& warns her! 1D*&ou know what ha((ened
when &ou hurt (eo(leD Ehen &ou hurt (eo(le' the& be%in to hurt &ou a little less. "hat*s what
careless words do. "he& $ake (eo(le loe &ou a little less'4 6+o& 1089. Des(ite this warnin%' it
is #$$u that ulti$atel& dries +ahel and Esta awa& with her own 1careless words4 as she
bla$es the children for her ca(tiit& after her affair with Celutha is discoered. Flti$atel&' the
1cost of liin%'4 or in #$$u*s case' loin%' was hardl& a 1S$all Grice to Ga&'4 as it not onl& led
to Celutha*s death' but also the loss of 1"wo children*s childhoods4 6+o& @1?9. )er 1two;e%%
twins'4 were left in the after$ath of her loe*s destructie (ower. >or +ahel' the trau$a of this
deastatin% e(isode left her to %row u( (ri$aril& friendless' and to re(eat the (attern of her
$other*s failed loe $arria%e' while Esta*s scars ran een dee(er. >orced to choose between his
loe for his $other and his loe for Celutha' Esta chooses to sae #$$u- a choice she re(a&s b&
1+eturnin%4 hi$ to his father' where he suffers lifeti$e of %uilt $asked in silence. #$$u*s
rebellion a%ainst the Loe Laws' while ins(irin% ho(e for the future of inter;caste loe
relationshi(s in the after$ath of Celutha*s $art&rdo$' ulti$atel& leads to an abru(t and
$iserable end of her own life. ,n addition to her own fate' her actions also add to a (ersonal
trau$a for her two children that is so intense it $anifests itself in their own breakin% of the Loe
Laws in sharin% what 1was not ha((iness' but hideous %rief4 6+o& @119.
Miller 5
,n both The Handmaids Tale and The God of Small Things, the e/tre$e (ower of loe is
eident. "he ro$ance (lots conceied in both noels are not contried lessons of loe
oerco$in% all obstacles' but rather an e/(loration of loe as a $utable and often destructie
force. #lthou%h it can sere as an i$(etus for chan%e' the nature of loe is olatile and
contin%ent u(on not onl& (assions of the (eo(le inoled' but also often the (assions of an entire
societ&. "hus' 0ffred*s loe for Nick is dulled b& her co$(lacenc& with a s$all ha((iness' and
#$$u*s loe for Celutha is not (owerful enou%h to withstand the (re.udice of #&e$ene$ or
(ure enou%h to e/tend to her own children*s well;bein%. "he force of loe is not a stable or
stationar& thin%- it is rather a .ourne&' as 0ffred states' 1into the darkness within- or else the
li%ht4 6#twood 2H59.
Miller 6
Eorks =ited
#twood' Mar%aret. The Handmaids Tale. New Iork! #nchor Aooks' 1H?6. Grint.
>euer' Lois. 1"he =alculus of Loe and Ni%ht$are! The Handmaids Tale and D&sto(ian
"radition.4 Critique @? 61HH89! ?6. Eeb. 1? Ma& 2011.
+o&' #rundhati. The God of Small Things. New Iork! +ando$ )ouse' 200?. Grint.