Jasmine's Relationships with Women

Jasmine does not seem to interact much with women. Back when she was Jyoti, she listened to the village women as "[t]hey squatted in a row and gossiped" (54) during "'Ladie's Hour'"(55). "The women's strategy was to stick together," Jasmine tells us (55). Oddly enough, this is comparable Jasmine's relationship with Wylie. Wylie explains to Jasmine that they are "family; in a family don't sisters sometimes fight?" she adds (178). There is a feeling of togetherness between these women that can be related to my favourite line in Mary Oliver's poem "Wild Geese": "Tell me your despair, yours, and I will tell you mine." The idea of female togetherness and unity among women through difficulty is found in both parts of Jasmine's life. In Hasnapur, Jasmine and the other women "stick together" in order to avoid the "perverts from the village across the stream [who] sat on their bank and ogled at" them (55). In New York City with Wylie, they are united by the difficulty that Wylie faces: first, in that her daughter Duff considers Jasmine her "mummy" (instead of just a "day mummy") and secondly, when Wylie decides to leave Taylor (178). Jasmine's relationship with these women are rooted in a feeling of togetherness in that they are all women. Wylie can confide in Jasmine, because she is a women, a "sister" in the fight against problems, and the women from Hasnapur are bonded by fighting against problems as well; they want protection against men, safety from the "wild geese."

Jasmine has only had positive experiences with other women; she has close relationships with them, as we see from these two examples. However, when it comes to Bud's ex-wife Karin, a side of Jasmine comes out that we, as readers, have not seen before. When Jasmine and Karin encountered each other in the supermarket, Karin catches Jasmine "reaching for an apple pie," (195-196) and thinks, "She must have baked them from scratch for Bud" when they were married (196). This is the first moment we glimpse competition between these two women. It shows Jasmine's criticism of herself. Whenever she competes with Karin, comparing herself to Bud's ex-wife, she puts herself down. This is shown again when Jasmine says, "Karin would have read the signals" when Harlan was going to shoot Bud, pointing to the fact that Jasmine did not (198). This behaviour is something we haven't seen among women yet in the book, but is very common in The Handmaid's Tale where competition among Handmaid is based largely on fertility, pregnancy, and then providing a healthy child. Instead, in Jasmine, women - except, clearly, for Karin and Jasmine's relationship - seem to bond with one another and be close-knit, just like the women in Hasnapur during "'Ladie's Hour'"(55) and the "sisters" Wylie and Jasmine (178). 

Downton Abbey, The Handmaid's Tale, and Jasmine

(Continued discussion of Violet Crawley's statement from Downton Abbey related to Bharati Mukherjee's Jasmine; continued discussion of connections between Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale and Bharati Mukherjee's Jasmine, a sequence)

Jane and Prakash work together to fix a VCR, causing Prakash to joke they should "'open our own store someday'" and call it "'Vijh & wife,'" a play on the store "'Jagtiani and Son'" that Prakash works at (89). "'Maybe even Vijh & Vijh,'" he adds, showing that he is willing to treat his wife equally, giving her freedom and independence (89). He does not own her; their store would not be run by Prakash Vijh and his wife but by Prakash Vijh and Jasmine Vijh, two separate individuals. This is Prakash's belief: that women should have an identity separate from that of their husband, that women should have independence.

Jane does not appear to agree with this, however. She says that she and Prakash "lived for our fantasy. Vijh & Wife," showing that she does not mind being owned (89). While her husband strongly believes in women's independence, she is content being grouped with him, not an individual person.

She goes on to call their hypothetical shop "Vijh & Sons," which shows her desire to have children (89). This craving for children is not shared with Prakash. When Jane expresses she wants "to get pregnant," Prakash always responds, "'We aren't going to spawn'" (77). He explains that "[i]t was up to the women to resist" the desire for pregnancy, with a tone very much resembling the idea of women empowerment that both Moira and Offred's mother share (77 - 78).

Pitaji, Jane's father, does not share this belief in women empowerment. He suggests all women are good for is bearing children when he says the only reason his daughter should continue her education "'is that bright ladies are bearing bright sons,'" explaining, "'that is nature's design'" (51). Jane retorts that she wants to be a doctor, causing her father to scream, "'The girl is mad,'" which suggests women do not deserve independence and individual identities - the opposite of what Prakash believes (51).  Dida suggests Pitaji "'[b]lame it on the mother. Insanity has to come from somewhere. It's the mother who is mad'" (51). This suggests just what those of The Handmaid's Tale's Gilead believe: that motherhood is a women's only role.

An additional parallel to Jasmine's illustration of India to The Handmaid's Tale's Gilead is that female fertility and pregnancy are very valued. Offred and Jane both buy into this idea. However, Prakash does not. This is another example in which, despite their recent marriage, Jane and Prakash do not agree despite Downton Abbey's Violet Crawley suggestion that they should.

Downton Abbey and Jasmine

I was watching the show Downton Abbey which takes place in 1914, where Lady Mary Crawley expressed that her sister, Sybil, who the family has just learned attended a suffragette canvasing, "is entitled to her opinions." In response, her grandmother, Violet Crawley, said something I found rather striking and quite relevant to Bharati Mukherjee's Jasmine: "No, she isn't until she is married, then her husband will tell her what her opinions are." Pitaji's cousin seems to agree with Violet Crawley, saying "that big-city men prefer us village girls because we... have no minds of our own. Village girls are like cattle; whichever way you lead them, that is the way they will go" (46).

At first glance, Jane's opinions seem to be based purely on her husband's. Prakash expresses to Jane that he "wants for us to go away and have a real life" (81). Jane responds: "'All right,' I said, 'if you want me to have a real life I want it too'" (81). This shows Jane conforming to her husband's views very quickly. Like Violet Crawley said, Prakash "tell[s] her what her opinions are" and she accepts it.

Earlier on, Jane shows that she can form her own opinions. However, this is before her marriage to Prakash. She says, "I couldn't marry a man who didn't speak English, or at least who didn't want to speak English," an opinion that her mother, father, brothers, and sisters certainly did not force on her, as they do not share it (68). This statement disproves Violet Crawley's belief that a girl should not have her own opinion until "her husband... tell[s] her what her opinions are." It shows that Jane did have her own thoughts prior to her marriage to Prakash. It also shows women do not necessarily go "whichever way you lead them," but instead, they sometimes lead in their opinions (46).

Prakash's aunt shows that she does not agree with Violet Crawley's statement. When Jane and her husband do not live with his family, "his aunt wept, 'Your wife is so fancy that our place isn't good enough for her?'" (76). This shows that Prakash's aunt believes that Jane can form her own opinion about whether or not she would like to live with Prakash's family. She is, in fact, under the impression that the decision to live in an apartment instead of in Prakash's family home is not her nephew's but is, instead, Jane's.

The Handmaid's Tale and Jasmine

The first connection I saw between The Handmaid's Tale and Jasmine was when Jane relates her current life to her past life, just as Offred often does in her narration. Jane comments on Scott's "perfect teeth," saying, "I envy him his teeth... [because w]e had no dentist in Hasnapur" (19). This novel, like The Handmaid's Tale, is told non-linearly, and so both narrators dip in and out of past and present.

It becomes clear that Bud is living his life, although now divorced and handicapped, close to how he lived it before, whereas Jane and Du's lives change drastically as they have to escape. This is similar to Commanders' lives and the lives of all other roles, but namely the Handmaids. This fact about Jane's family made me think of the moment the Commander gives Offred a magazine, even though she "thought such magazines had all been destroyed" (152). For Offred, these magazines are destroyed, because she is forced to change her life drastically, like Jane and Du. Even though the Handmaids remained in the same place, with Offred still in the same town that she lived in with her husband and daughter, their lives still are undeniably altered as Gilead society begins to take over. For the Commander, however, just like Bud, life is much closer to being the same as it had been.

Du and Jane conform to their new society in Iowa, just as Offred begrudgingly conforms to Gilead. Even though they all keep aspects of their past with them in their thoughts, they keep those thoughts silent. The difference between these characters' conformation is that Du and Jane comply with society's demands by choice, because they want to fit in, while Offred goes along with Gilead due to the powerlessness of her position.

Jane's father and Offred both live in the past. (43)

Flowers (Continued)

(Continued discussion of flowers in Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale, a sequence)


Fast forwarding about a hundred pages to what stands out as being a very flower-centered scene, Offred decides to steal a flower from the vase in Serena Joy's living room. "A withered daffodil... will soon be thrown out," she says, so she sees no harm in stealing it (109). She discusses pressing it under her mattress to leave as a present for the next Handmaid that will have her room, which reminds me of the "print of flowers" at the very beginning of the story, because both of the flowers are flattened (17). This, perhaps, symbolizes the fact that the Handmaid's have a very slim chance of producing children, because the flower is crushed, dead. The "withered daffodil... [that] will soon be thrown out" symbolizes the same thing (109). It yields the image of a “withered” womb, shriveled up and unable to produce children (106). The flowers also symbolize the Handmaids themselves and the fact that their inability to produce healthy offspring will not be tolerated; it could end in death or possibly becoming an Unwomen.


But if flowers represent these negative things, why would Offred want to steal it? I understand her need to steal something is because she wants a small piece of power, and she wants to get back at the system in small ways. But what is the purpose of stealing a flower, specifically? Since flowers represent children, who, as I have expressed in previous blogs, are the key to power in this society, could her need to steal a flower just be a reiteration of her want for more power? Or it could be her want for children, because they are so rare and so desired in society? But what really stumps me is the fact that the flower is described as "withered," seeming to symbolize Handmaids and their inability to produce children (109). Why would Offred want to steal what is metaphorically herself? I would understand if Offred would want to steal her whole life back, because in her previous life, she could produce children - the daughter she misses so much. However, in her old life, there were no “withered daffodil[s];” people could produce children without problem – Offred seems to have had no difficulty there (109). Therefore, Offred’s inclination to steal a flower does not represent her yearning for her old life. Perhaps Offred stealing a dying flower is symbolic of her trying to return to the way society used to be, rather than return to her child. Their old society has "withered" now, and Offred wanting to press the flower to save it for the next Handmaid is her way of reminding the next Handmaid of what society used to be like (109). It is her way of making sure that people do not forget about what once was, just as the previous Handmaid presumably tried to do for Offred when she carved the Latin phrase in her room. 

Flowers

"Flowers are stilled allowed," Offred tells us early on in her tale (17). When returning to this quote to write a journal entry about Margaret Atwood's use of flowers, I realized how odd it is that flowers are allowed often for decorations. On the same page, there is mention of "a print of flowers" (17), and just a couple pages later, Offred describes "a fanlight of cloured glass: flowers, red and blue" (19). This made it a little more clear. Red and blue are the colours of the Handmaids and the Wives, respectively, the only two types of women who can reproduce in society. There must be a reason that these two colours are mentioned in relation to the flowers - reproduction. Flowers symbolize growth and life, because of the image we have of flowers growing from seeds and then blossoming. Therefore, it is not difficult to make the leap that these flowers symbolize the growth and life of children.

So, back to the question of why the flowers are used as decoration: they are placed all over the house as subliminal messaging for the Handmaids and the Wives to encourage them to reproduce. Aunt Lydia told the Handmaids, "Think of yourself as seeds" in what was described as a "conspiratorial" way (28). The women are seeds, because it is their job to produce flowers, AKA children. Think of flowers pollinating to create more flowers or seeds producing flowers.

But just before Aunt Lydia tells the Handmaids to consider themselves seeds, she tells them "Some of you are shallow-rooted" (28). Why would they be shallow-rooted if they are supposed to be flowers? Flowers cannot grow if they are shallow-rooted. I think this shows the state their underpopulated society is in. Many of the Handmaids have the potential to produce children, but so many are not. I suppose this is still like pollinating flowers. Dandelions, for example, rely on the wind to help distribute their seeds, but many of these seeds do not land where they can properly grow. Perhaps they land in a place with shallow soil, where they will end up shallow-rooted. Anyway, they have to throw something at the wall and hope something sticks. The fact that they are shallow-rooted shows that many of them have the potential to produce children, but so many do not.

Positives and Negatives to Women's Roles

The hierarchy in The Handmaid's Tale is much less clear than a hierarchy throughout history or in a different society. In a hierarchy that we are used to, everyone envies those at the top of the pecking order, because they have definitive qualities that make them more desirable than any other class. In the society within the novel that is not the case. Each role has distinct pros and cons for the women. 

As discussed in the previous blog, the Wives are the first in the line of feminine power, for one thing. They get the children at the end of the deal, provided their Handmaid's produce healthy babies, and children are like money in our society, they are a sign of power. This is all well and good, but at the same time, the Wives have to watch their husbands having sex with another women; they have to be in the same bed while it is happening, assisting the entire operation. This is a huge emotional negative and must be very difficult to live through. 

The Handmaids are one of the few people who can actually have sex in society. However, this sex involves no choice. It is not for pleasure or love. Instead, it is out of necessity; it is forced. It is, in a way, government-backed rape. But at the same time, if they do become pregnant, they have achieved their government-imposed life goal. Plus, as shown in the blog post before with Janine, they become prized possessions, but they are just that: possessions. Regardless of whether or not they produce children, they are owned by their Commander and his Wife. 

Marthas are not permitted to have sex at all. They are looked down upon in many ways, because they are infertile. In some ways they are made to feel useless to society. They must aid someone else in having sex and getting pregnant, the two things they are not able to do. This must be hard, but at the same time, they are not forced to go through something they do not want to, with a person they do not love, as the Handmaids are. They live comparatively normal lives, although they have to return to stereotypically feminine roles: cooking and cleaning and taking care of the Handmaid as if she is a child in some ways, such as when Offred needs assistance bathing.

Aunts are also not permitted to have sex and are essentially brainwashing those who will become Handmaids. But if they believe what they are teaching, they could possibly have the best lives of all other female roles.