Book Review - The Handmaid's Tale.

Title: The Handmaid's Tale
Author: Margaret Atwood
Published: 1985
Dates read: 13th-18th September
Rating: 9/10. 

The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood is one of those novels that the moment you turn the last page, you shut the back cover, you put the book down and you just stare at it in awe. I finished this book at about midnight, and I was laying in bed wide awake after finishing it with my mind just reeling.  Even a week later, and trying to focus on Nabokov's Lolita, I keep finding my mind wandering back to Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale. 

Atwood's novel is set in the dystopian future of the Republic of Gilead, (I think I read somewhere its allegedly set in 2005) and depicts the radical takeover of the US government by Christian organisation . Within the strict regiments of this totalitarian patriarchal government, women not only have no rights, but are not allowed to work, nor have money or ownership. Lack of ownership extends not only to property or physical belongings but to their bodies too. In particular, this subordination of female bodily ownership is explored through the figure of the handmaid's and the main protagonist Offred. In the novel, the handmaid's role (and Offred's) in society is to provide offspring on account of the fact that the population has been rendered infertile due to radiation and allegedly the spread sexually transmitted diseases. The novel follows Offred's experiences of her handmaid duties, as well as the ordeals of her past and her struggled to come to term with it, during the state process of dehumanising the women. 

As a woman in the twenty-first century, I've definitely struggled with my position within feminism. Whilst I definitely know I am a feminist, I wasn't for a long time sure why. I spent a lot of my third and final year of university exploring women and actually ended up writing my dissertation on female sexuality in the inter-war period. I think this particular focus gave me a lot to consider and definitely solidified my views and opinions as a feminist . I spent a lot of my time researching female sexuality before the First World War and its changing nature within society, and moreover, the changing role of women in society. How female sexuality wasn't intrinsically tied in with motherhood, or her role as a wife domineered by men and that surprisingly enough, women are autonomous sexual beings in their own right who are in fact capable of orgasm. Of course, The Handmaids Tale examines this exact idea which is perhaps why it appealed to me. The novel reverts women back to a pre-War society. One in which their sexuality is placed precisely back into their roles as mothers and even more extreme than that, it removes their sexual autonomy completely. Sex is a means to an end, a way to procreate and nothing more. Women are not even allowed to show their bodies in public or private. They are forced to wear loose, long gowns and facial veils which means they cannot look nor be looked at.

In this way, women then lose control of their bodies. They are not allowed to dress as they please, experience their body, look at others, nor be looked at and are forbidden from participating in sexual enjoyment in any form which in Gilead punishable by death. I felt like in our current 21st century world the idea of losing control of our bodies was such a relevant topic. In a world of consumerism and expectation, as a young woman both in education and the workplace, and growing up in our technological world there seems to be so much pressure to look and behave a certain way. We feel we have to adhere to societal expectations of the 'female', and in a similar way we lose control of our bodies. I know that Gilead is a complete hyperbolic and extremist version but in the same way that Offred loses control of her body because she is not allowed to experience her body in any form, she has to hide it away because that is what her society demands, young women in this century hide their body and change their body so it adheres to our societal demands. I thought The Handmaid's Tale explored this issue so well and was really very thought provoking.

Another really interesting dimension I found to the book was the idea of removal of one's identity. I also did some work in this in regard to another dystopian novel which was Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four. I explored the idea of Foucault's theories of selfhood in Nineteen Eighty Four and how the construction of Big Brother denies sexuality, individuality and history as a control technique in order to strip someone of one's identity. For more than one reason, I saw a similar trend in Atwood's work, not only in the denial and restriction of sexuality but also within the depravation of the women's history. In some parts of the book Atwood conveyed the state as convoluting certain parts of the past, such as videos of feminist marches in the 1960's and erotica to seem destructive, and I suppose to change women's memory of their past, from positive and empowering to negative and evil. Furthermore, I took particular interest in the issue of names. Offred means literally Of Fred, alluding to the property of Fred, the man with whom she is expected to procreate with. She frequently refers to her 'real' name as forbidden or secret and indeed, we never do learn of it. The idea that the state are denying Offred her individuality through the dispossession of her name, arguably the one thing that helps us to identify ourselves physically from others is incredibly interesting.

I feel like this has been less a book review and more of a massive feminist rant, and I feel like I haven't even said half of what I want to say for fear of ruining the whole plot! However, Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale is such an interesting, important and relevant piece of literature. It depicts every woman's worst nightmare. I found myself actually afraid and scared at points of this book. Whilst I sit comfortably in my 21st century British bedroom, where I enjoy relative equality and respect, where I have access to education and work, my mind can't help wandering to those women who in this century, in less fortunate area's of the world are subject to the realities of this novel. The Handmaid's Tale just made me firstly thankful for my fortunate upbringing to be a strong and independent woman, who should pursue personal, sexual, professional and vocational autonomy. But secondly, made me realise that I should never stop being thankful for it and we as women should never apologise for it, or stop fighting for it. There are still women who are forced to hide their bodies and are under the subjugation of men and societies warped reality of the feminine position within humanity.
Furthermore, the novel forced me to think about extremism. Whilst I don't think the book was an attack on religion in any way, I think it serves more as a warning. I feel that it conveyed the message that anything taken too literally and too far can be a very dangerous thing. In light of the current political climate, particularly in the Middle East, I felt this added another incredibly relevant and interesting dimension to the book, particularly as it was written in 1985. 

In regard to the storyline and writing of the novel, I couldn't put the book down. Putting all of the above issues aside and taking the book at face value, it is a fantastic read in its own right, but I feel like if you come away not feeling or picking up on any of the points I have made you haven't understood the point or the significance of the novel. The character development and the way the novel sucks you into the world from the first page is fantastic. The emotions that ran through me, complete and utter fear, to abhorrence to sometimes humour, are the mark of a true masterpiece. Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale will definitely be up on my favourite books list!

As a final note, I wanted to quote one of my favourite quotes from the novel;
"Nolite te bastardes carborundorum"
"Dont let the bastards grind you down"

Theatre - Breakfast at Tiffanys

Performance: Breakfast at Tiffanys

Date: August 25th 2016
Location: Haymarket Theatre, London
Seat: C19 Upper Circle
Rating: 8/10

Being a massive fan of Audrey Hepburn in Breakfast at Tiffany's, I was so super excited when I found out that Truman Capote's novel was being transferred to the stage! I read the novel while sat in an airport in Italy, and it took me about an hour, and subsequently got passed around the whole group of friends I was with.

Breakfast at Tiffany's tells the story through the narration of the neighbour upstairs, of the eccentric Holly Golightly and her New York Life, pursuing the richest men and surviving off of trips to the powder room (Quel Rats!). Holly is trying to find her way through life, waiting to find somewhere she belongs so she can buy some furniture and give the cat a name. Anyone who has read the novel will know that the 1960's film starring Audrey Hepburn is quite a bit different from Capote's novel. The stage production did market itself as an adaption of Capote's novel, however, it did merge elements from the film into it. It would be a hard feat to not be influenced by the film as a theatre director due to its enormous popularity and indeed hard to set the Holly Golightly Hepburn plays away from the Holly Golightly Capote portrayed.
The hollywood Breakfast at Tiffanys romanticised Golightly as a character. Hepburn was an anglicised, endearing, romantic character and Fred (Paul) was entirely in love with her, and indeed at the end of the film they are iconically kissing in the rain seemingly in love. Capote's version is entirely different. Aside from the fact that at the end of the novel, Holly does not return to the arms of Fred as she flees the country to Buenos Aires after her indictment and Fred is insinuated to be homosexual.
The play then, followed more closely to the novel than the film, and indeed Pixie Lott portrayed the Capote Golightly as opposed to the Hepburn one. And she was absolutley incredible. Unfortunately, I didnt' think much of her rendition of Puccini's Moon River. This may have had something to do with the fact that in 2015, boyfriend took me to see a live music performance play along of the film at the Royal Albert Hall and we actually got to see Puccini's daughter sing Moon River and it was really amazing. Lott has a very nice voice, I just didn't think the way she sung Moon River was particularly good. That said, everything else about her performance was amazing. She was an absolutely amazing Holly Golightly and she portrayed Capote's character the way she is envisioned in the novel. Capote's Golightly is more unattainable, more mysterious and quite frankly more fickle.
In conclusion, I really really enjoyed Breakfast at Tiffanys. Unfortunately it has now left London, but is going on tour around the UK. I urge all that love the film/book to go and see it!

Book Review: The Girl on the Train

Title: The Girl On The Train
Author: Paula Hawkins
Published: 13th January 2015
Dates read: 1st-2nd June 2016
Rating: 8/10


For the first time ever, I had been sat alone in an airport. On every other occasion I have travelled it has always been with someone else, and my natural anxiety set in when faced with the very large departures board of Heathrow Terminal Three alone. And so my natural survival instinct led me to the abundance of bookstores in Heathrow departures lounge to try and soothe my nerves, (despite the book already stowed in my bag in anticipation). So naturally I sought solace in a violent psychological thriller which once I started I didn't put down the entire journey across the North Atlantic.
Anybody who knows me well, knows my love for Hitchcock and more specifically his 1954 film Rear Window, and therefore my interest in the concept of voyeurism or the voyeur. If you tell me, you don't enjoy people watching, you're seriously missing something in your life. It is an indulgence all of us participate in, whether consciously or not. Unfortunately, I am the least conspicuous person in the world, so whilst I love to people watch, I won't be making a career as a successful voyeur any time soon.
The Girl on the Train then is every murder mystery, voyeur-obsessed bookworm's dream come true. It depicts the life of Rachel, a troubled alcoholic London commuter, who takes the same train every day to and from work, which stops at the same red signal, at the back of a row of houses every day. During these short pauses, Rachel gazes longingly into the lives of the people in the house, creating names, personalities and a life for the individuals who inhabit such houses, in a desperate attempt at escapism from her own failures and alcoholism. However, one day Rachel witnesses something in one of the houses which sets in motion a rollercoaster of events, which left me devouring page after page after page in an almost frenzied manner to unravel the mystery. Never in my life have I so wanted to have Doctor Who's reading gift!
For me, the whole idea of somebody watching someone else from afar, and constructing a life for them is a fascinating concept, and something which The Girl on the Train captured perfectly. Too many times, have I studied somebody and imagined who they are and what their life is like. On top of that, there was the added excitement of a possible mystery, the excitement of maybe witnessing something important, something valuable as an invisible entity. The alternate viewpoints of the book adds an interesting dimension of viewing both within and without. You see from the point of view of the watcher and the watched, which added a rich dimension of interest for me. I loved the idea that whilst in one chapter Rachel was witnessing something, in the next we could read the same scenario, with completely different connotations or conclusions.
Whilst I felt The Girl on the Train didn't have the most unique mystery plotline to it and I was pretty sure by the end of the book, I had it figured out, I feel like the mystery is the most obvious dimension to focus on, but by no means the most important. The book explores more interesting themes than just the simplicity of the plot. The focus on small details, such as the clothes on the side of the train line, in the opening chapters of the book, appealed to me as an individual as it seemed a thought process that I would too, take on and adds to the image of the voyeur
In conclusion, I devoured this book in the space of about nine consecutive hours. It takes an interesting dimension on the genre of psychological thriller, and it left me wanting for more. I await in eager anticipation Paula Hawkins next novel, and I can only hope that the upcoming film due for release in October lives up to the novel!

(Dissertation Procrastination), Theatre - Billy Elliot.

Sorry its been so long since my las blog post. I've actually seen an opera and a play since the last Ballet I reviewed the opera called The Mikado and the play Dealers Choice. I will review those in due course, university got the better of me, and to be frank I have had enough of typing words to last me a lifetime. However, in order to prolong the pain of my dissertation even longer, and to add a bit more procrastination to my list of things to do to avoid doing my dissertation! Anyway without further ado....

Performance: Billy Elliot The Musical
Performed by:
Date: 5th April 2016
Location: Victoria Palace Theatre, Victoria, London.
Seat: Stalls, Row M, Seat 8.
Rating: 9/10.


So this was a rather nice surprise from the boyfriend, I had no idea we were going until I was steered into the foyer of the Victoria Palace Theatre and he was asking to pick up tickets! It was lovely. We haven't seen anything in a while, and although I have already seen Billy Elliot before when I was about fourteen, he hadn't seen it. The musical was closing and in its last week in London, after running for eleven years, so were very lucky to catch it in its closing days (though we missed Elton!).
The story is based on a young boy in 1984 Britain -(a very different 1984 to the one we saw last June! Thank God!)- living in a small mining village in County Durham, suffering throughout the tyranny of Margaret Thatcher, the strike against the closure of the coal pits and the repercussions that faced the miners who refused to support such closures by working. It is a very clever exploration of the controversy surrounding Thatchers policies, through the eyes of the children. The main story revolves around Billy's love of ballet instead of boxing, his journey through learning the craft of ballet and his ultimate dream of dancing at the Royal Ballet School; all encouraged by his eccentric teacher Mrs Wilkinson. However, the strike, Thatcher and the pit closures, I feel also play an incredibly important role in the construction of the musical. A lot of the musical comically satirizes Thatcher, and the hardships of strike and job loss. Particularly for the likes of the generations who were young adults or teenagers in the 80's (such as my dad) there was a lot of enjoyment as they were reliving their teenage years through comical means. Boyfriend is an avid anti-Thatcher so I think he particularly enjoyed the song 'Merry Christmas Maggie Thatcher' in which the words 'Merry Christmas Maggie Thatcher, We all celebrate today, cause it's one day closer to your death!' accompanied by a giant oafish puppet Thatcher playing the piano. For me, I got a lot more enjoyment from the musical (particularly since the first time I saw it) since studying Thatcher in my last year of school and my first year of university. Having this prior historical context of Thatchers terms in government, made me understand the humour that little bit more.

Other issues that are scrutinized by the musical are Billy's families difficulty in accepting his passion for dancing, which in turn lead to some interesting gender issues. Despite it only being thirty years ago, Billy's love of ballet is seen by his family as 'poofish' and homosexual in origin. Whilst in our enlightened and arguably more liberated society of today this is obviously ridiculous, it is an controversy very well portrayed by Billy Elliot through the character of Micheal. Micheal is Billy's cross-dressing friend, who takes pleasure in dressing his mothers clothes with the justification 'me dad does it all the time!'. Personally, I believe this issue is epitomized in the song 'Expressing Yourself' in which the boys dance around in dresses, with giant dresses and essentially the moral being that there is nothing wrong with expressing yourself, being yourself, and doing this in the way you want. I feel like this is a perfect way of putting this issue to bed. It is an entertaining and whimsical way of portraying a moral, that we should accept everyone for who they are, and we can express ourselves in any way without it being anything other than exactly that, no compromises. Obviously, the musical ends with Billy's dad and brother supporting Billy, which further adds to this moral. But it is a fantastic, topical and relevant controversy to address and only adds to the brilliance of the musical.

Of course, I cannot talk about Billy Elliot without devoting some of this review to the fantastic music of Elton John and Lee Hall. The music and lyrics are perfect, and there isn't a single weak song in the musical. Each song keeps with the humorous and energetic tone of the musical, which adds a bit of light to a lot of heavy and deep issues. On many occasions I found myself singing and dancing along to the upbeat tones. That said, the music is also touching, particularly when Billy reads his letter from his dead mother out to Mrs Wilkinson. It is the perfect mix of relief, hilarity and humanity. Furthermore, the tap dancing of the musical is one of its most fantastic features! I absoloutley love tap dancing and dancing anyway (as you might have gathered from my love of ballet) so for me this was just the icing on the cake. Specifically in Billy's 'Angry Dance' the tap dancing is just incredible and makes you feel the power, and expression Billy feels when he dances. Its really amazing to behold. The sheer amount of skill it must take to star in a musical like this is just breathtaking. Each cast member tap and ballet dances, sings and acts and our Billy (I'd love to credit him, but I didn't note down which Billy was our Billy i'm afraid!) was incredible. Our Mrs Wilkinson was to boyfriends delight, Ruthie Henshall, who is very famous for her role as Fantine in Les Miserables and she also was very very good!

All in all, Billy Elliot is a hilarious, energetic exploration of 80's Britain, which portrays some controversial issues in a positive and funny light which can be enjoyed both by young and older audiences. Its a real shame that it has finished in London for now, but it is on tour, so if you get the chance please I beg you, go and see it. I highly suspect after the renovations of The Victoria Palace are finished it will resume its rightful place on the West End but that remains to be seen.

Ballet - The Nutcracker

Performance: The Nutcracker
Performed by: English National Ballet
Date: 18th December 2015
Location: The Coliseum, Covent Garden, London
Seat: Balcony, Row B, Seat 27
Rating: 5/10


Firstly, I must apologise for how late this review is, christmas and university work has made it impossible to update the blog.
I was initially incredibly excited about going to see the Nutcracker, especially at Christmas. However, I felt a little bit let down by this particular performance. Admittedly, a lot of it could have been a serious mistake on my behalf for booking me and boyfriend tickets to the matinee production, which is something i've sworn off almost entirely, theatre is for the evening! However, the tickets were completely sold out on evening performances before christmas so this was my only option.  To their credit, ENO did warn me prior to booking that there would be children at the performance, but I really have to warn those of you considering taking the risk, just don't. This might not be the popular view, but what possesses parents to bring their under three year olds to two and a half hour ballets?! The ENO and ENB run special child friendly opera's and ballets so that children can enjoy the magic of such productions, whilst simultaneously condensing and abridging so that children do not lose focus, as they do. With the constant running commentary going on behind me, to the running up and down the balcony stairs, clicking mouth and random bursts of applause midway through dance from the very small child behind, it is safe to say, I found it so difficult to concentrate, enjoy and appreciate the ENB's beautiful dancing and Tchaikovsky's wonderful music.
Whilst I fully appreciate and even encourage introducing children to theatre at a young age, too much is too much, a young three year old is simply not going to appreciate a two-hour ballet. If they are being disruptive it is down to the parent to chastise the child, not just let them run up and down balcony stairs, throw their binoculars down said stairs and complain loudly throughout the entire performance.
That said, it happened and I have learnt from my mistakes! However, there were a few other reasons I didn't enjoy the ballet as much as I had hoped.
After The Sleeping Beauty, Tchaikovsky was once again called upon to write both an opera and a ballet, in which he adapted E.T.A Hoffman's story The Nutcracker and The Mouse King. It was first performed in 1892, as a two part ballet, and despite its unsuccessful beginnings still today remains one of Tchaikovsky's most famous, and recognisable repertoires. It contributes to nearly 50% of ballet ticket sales overall! As discussed, in other blog posts, Tchaikovsky is quite possibly my all time favourite composer, and particularly The Nutcracker Suites I have grown up on through the likes of Disney's Fantasia. Therefore, the music itself cannot be faulted. It was every bit as wondrous as I had hoped, and the orchestra played it flawlessly.
However, the dancing itself was somewhat troubling to me. Whist I certainly cannot pertain to be a ballet dancer or critic myself, I felt the dancing was not quite together. Particularly in Waltz of the Snowflakes and Arabian Dance (my favourite piece from the ballet) I felt the dancing wasn't quite all there, it was a little messy and out of sync, and not necessarily just these dances alone but other parts of the ballet. In complete contrast, Spanish Dance, Russian Dance, Chinese Dance were fantastic and The Dance of the Sugar Plum Fairy was astounding. Unfortunately, these were in the minority and I did not find my breathe taken away for the most part.
On the other hand, I have nothing but praise for the costumes. I feel one of the main parts of a ballet, is the costume as there is no speech, you focus more intently on such things. As the programme states, there are over 400 Swarovski Crystal elements in each of the nine Sugar Plum Fairy costumes, which amounts to £10,000 worth of crystal, so as you can imagine, the costumes sparkled beautifully and poured with regal beauty. But more than that, the costumes of the rats and the Rat King caught my attention even more! They were absolutely amazing, and genuinely terrifying, and how the dancers danced with such large rat heads balanced on top of their heads is beyond me. The costumes truly were astounding, so there is plenty of praise for that aspect.
Overall, I felt myself coming away from the production disappointed. which was really unexpected. The audience were unfortunately a lot of the problem, which there is nobody to blame for, however, I feel the dancing was not completely up to scratch, and some of the choreography was slightly dull, none of the dancing took my breathe away entirely, that is not to say the dancers are not incredible, they obviously very much are. I would love to go back and see if a different audience would perhaps change my perception, so maybe I shall try again next year!