I finally got to sit down and watch episode four. I think this episode is a bit slower or maybe that’s because the first three are designed to be watched together and were written and directed to be as shocking as possible. Still, a very good episode with a pretty great message at the end.
Nolite Te Bastardes Carborundorum, indeed.
With Serena, the way she’s played feels to me so similar to Cersei from GOT — that seething rage just below the surface at her own powerlessness. The main difference is that Cersei was born into that system, whereas Serena actually helped produce it. So I guess I’m interested in the shades of complicity that the show is exploring: for example, I find the Aunties loathsome, but they seem to be simply sadistic religious zealots animated by a very authoritarian, vindictive reading of the Old Testament that got cherry picked to maximize the oppressive message. But Serena is a different kind of creature — is the idea that women like her were complicit with the coup in a (mistaken) bid to maximize their own power and social authority, a complicity that then backfired? And if so, does she buy into the ideology?
Serena is probably the most interesting aspect of the episode. You gotta wonder what women like Serena thought their lives would be like once their vision of government took hold. Did she imagine a sexless, loveless, existence where she’s treated as a subordinate and not an equal partner? I very much doubt that is what Serena was fighting for. We don’t get that much insight into Serena in the book either so it’s really hard to say but Serena, and women like her, were women who think that women and men had different spheres. Serena is the wife and her job is to care for her husband and make sure his life out in the world is bearable.
It’s almost a romantic notion, this idea of the being the ultimate caretaker. Except, of course, that when it’s put in to practice it also means that Serena loses her own agency, though not obviously not nearly as much as Offred. The opening breakfast scene where the Commander dismisses his wife’s astute observations by noting that “we have good men on the job” shows that whatever “separate but equal” partnership Serena Joy envisioned pre-Rebellion was one long con.
Speaking of, I think we need to talk about the Commander a bit. I don’t want him to be a sympathetic figure but we do need to parse out why he’s doing what he’s doing. He obviously benefits highly from this system of government; he’s in the upper echelon, has no compunction about institutionalized rape or the cultural and social structures that keep him at the top of the proverbial food chain. So when he says that he wants Offred’s life to be bearable–but still intends to rape her once a month, to keep her life heavily controlled, and not to curb Serena’s cruelty–it’s rather difficult for me to believe him. And I think this is where @sciencevsmagic’s animalization point might kick in. I agree with @nevermore that the analogy isn’t cut and dry as anmalization but Offred is treated like one might treat a prized horse. When they need the mare to perform, to produce a calf, they tend to treat that mare differently. Different foods, different exercises, different day to day routines in order to get what they want. I don’t necessarily think it’s all that different for Offred. The second she’s believed to be pregnant, everything changes. She’s given different food, she’s treated differently. And while we don’t see “mass confinement & artificial insemination” (to quote @nevermore upthread) I think we do see eugenic selective breeding because the women chosen to be handmaids are those who have had children before. They are proven capable of bearing fruit and thus have a higher chance of being able to do it again. If the government wasn’t thinking in terms of livestock, then why not have every woman be a Handmaid. Wouldn’t that increase the chances of more children? But not all women are Handmaids because not all women have had children. Their ability to reproduce is their only defining trait, hence why all other traits are removed like names, individuality in dress and mannerisms, knowledge through active learning and engagement (we finally learn that reading and writing are a punishable offense.)
So going back to the Commander I don’t think he’s genuine when he says that he wants Offred’s life to be bearable, at least not truly genuine. He wants Offred’s life to be bearable so that it benefits him (so that his mare will produce a calf) but also because I strongly suspect that it makes him feel good about himself. Not that he feels guilty about the society he not only directly benefits from but also helped establish and continues to run but that it makes him feel like he’s a good master who is looking out for his flock. It’s charity but it’s a self invested and selfish charity. “Look what a good master I am. I am helping the downtrodden and the unfortunate of my society” never minding the fact that he and his system are the ones keeping Offred downtrodden and unfortunate. He has a willful blindness to the whole situation while congratulating himself on his own largess.
Other passing thoughts
–There are some very clever shots in this episode that remind us of the common horror of this world. Particularly I liked the shot of the Handmaid sitting in the waiting room, pregnant, while above her are various pictures of Commander’s and the Wives holding the children that were born from the Handmaid.
–Moira’s rebellion and escape. Thoughts on leaving June behind? June more or less tells her to go with a slight head nod and seems happy that Moira gets away (everything about being a Handmaid is horrifying but there’s a different sort of horror for Moira and the woman who was Ofglen being lesbians and forced into institutionalized rape).
–June’s beating was hard to watch
–The theme of control looms large over this entire episode especially where Serena and Offred are concerned. Doors and windows and who has control over those things in particular.
–Hey it’s Orphan Black’s Donnie Hendrix as the suspiciously nice Doctor! I never could figure out, in the book and then here, if the Doctor is genuine in wanting to help or if he’s a spy who would turn Offred over to be punished as soon as she said “yes” to help. I suspect that’s by design so that we get a taste of what Offred is going through when this happens.
ETA
—I have some thoughts about that final jaunty struct at the end. I’m not so sure it’s as effective as the writer/director wants it to be. At the end of the day, Offred lives in a world where she can’t trust anyone. She trusted the first Ofglen but she can’t trust the second. She doesn’t know if she can trust Nick or the Doctor. There are literal Eyes everywhere. The scene is done in tandem with the scene of the Red Center where the other future Handmaid’s give June their food and that scene is much more effective. They are together in suffering but also in solidarity. But the Handmaid’s at the end are suspect. They are together in suffering but we don’t know if they are in solidarity. Maybe the show wants us to assume that they are without hearing all their stories but given that a lot of the first three episodes were about who you can trust and who you cannot, the scene is a bit false.
(with that said, I would 10000% wear ” Nolite Te Bastardes Carborundorum, *******” on a t-shirt)