"notme" <never.TakeThisOut@here.ok> wrote in message
news:c946ss$poe$1@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
> >
> Using the shift in tense to give Graces story gives us a greater feel for
> Grace and the hardships that led her to the point she was with Dr Jordan.
It
I disagree. Certainly, the drifting tenses separate Grace's past from her
present, but I wonder if it wouldn't have been more effective (and more
interesting) to switch and tell the story of Grace's life leading up to the
murders in the present tense and use the past tense for the narrative of
drawing that story out of her.
What other of Atwood's novels use present tense narratives? Handmaid,
certainly, but I've only read that and Robber Bride, and I don't remember
what she did with the verb tense in Robber Bride (which I honestly thought
quite a snore). I noticed elements of Grace's voice when she is giving a
first-person present tense account of events where the rhythm of her speech
and the way that she notices her environment that could have been switched
out wholesale with passages of Offred.
Besides, I thought that Atwood was largely downplaying Grace's hardships
(excepting those involving nineteenth century sexual politics, which become
more and more prominent as the book progresses, and which are not terribly
insightful).
> also fuels the ambiguity about Graces guilt or her mental state - so that
at
> the end we aren't quite sure as to her guilt or innocence , which isn't
> known anyhow as its a true story.
All right, I'll buy that. Third-person present tense narrative does create
a sort of truthfulness: the reader has a God's eye view of events as they
happen, not as they are interpreted as having happened. Grace's story is
more dubious because our awareness that it is a retelling of events is
heightened by the contrast of her first-person-past perspective with the
third-person-present of most of the rest of the book. But whatever shall we
do with Grace's first-person-present-tense narratives?
> It allows Atwood to free the character
> from just giving a dry account of the story. It's good ploy by Atwood to
> allow the Grace character to develop free from the restraint of past and
> present.
That I don't buy at all.
> All in all its a very well written and paced book - but the
> question is did she do it? - from the reading of it I think she had a form
> of schizophrenia and was unaware of her alter ego but who knows.
>
That's the least interesting thing about the entire book to me. I thought
that Atwood was working hard to exhonorate Grace throughout, and when she
tried to resolve the mystery and the plot and the contradictions in all the
testimony and histories by suggesting that Grace had a split personality, I
must say it dropped the book a peg or two in my estimation. In the end, the
sexual double standard was to blame for all, every woman was a victim of it,
most of the men were unhappy with it too... over and over again citing the
sexual appeal of imprisoned women (whether in hoopskirts, ankle chains,
actual jail, etc...) If Atwood ever finds out there was such a thing as a
hobble skirt, you'd better believe it's going to show up in whatever her
next novel is.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
>> Stay informed about: Alias Grace by Margaret Atwood