"Are there any questions?" The final line in Margaret Atwood's modern classic, The Handmaid's Tale, has teased and perplexed fans since the book's original release more than 30 years ago. Now, in this Audible Original production, listeners get some of the answers they've waited so long to hear.

Featuring an all-new interview with Professor Piexoto, written by Atwood and performed by a full cast, The Handmaid's Tale: Special Edition is a must-listen for both fans and newcomers alike. Emmy Award winner Claire Danes (Homeland, Temple Grandin) gives a stirring performance of this classic in speculative fiction, where the message (and the warning) is now more timely than ever. In addition to rich sound design that honors the audio origins of Atwood's classic, the special edition also includes a brand-new afterword from the author and an essay written by author Valerie Martin (Mary Reilly, Property).

After a violent coup in the United States overthrows the Constitution and ushers in a new government regime, the Republic of Gilead imposes subservient roles on all women. Offred, now a Handmaid tasked with the singular role of procreation in the childless household of the enigmatic Commander and his bitter wife, can remember a time when she lived with her husband and daughter and had a job, before she lost everything, even her own name. Despite the danger, Offred learns to navigate the intimate secrets of those who control her every move, risking her life for mere glimpses of her former freedom, and records her story for future listeners.

Whether you're a fan of the original novel or someone who has recently discovered it, The Handmaid's Tale: Special Edition will shock, impress, and satisfy all those who listen.

The Handmaid's Tale: Special Edition features performances by Claire Danes, Margaret Atwood, Emily Bauer, Allyson Johnson, Gabra Zackman, Suzanne Toren, Tim Gerard Reynolds, Jennifer Van Dyck, Ray Porter, Emily Cox, Lauren Fortgang, Dan Reiss, Prentice Onayemi, Therese Plummer, and Mark Boyett.

Listening Length

12 hours and 6 minutes
Author

Margaret Atwood, see all
Narrator

Claire Danes, see all
Audible release date

April 4, 2017
Language

English
Publisher

Audible Studios
ASIN

B06XFX6QJP
Version

Unabridged
Program Type

Audiobook
See all details

Read & Listen

between reading the Kindle book and listening to Audible audiobook.
Add the audiobook for a reduced price of $9.99 after you get the Kindle book as part of your Kindle Unlimited subscription.

Your audiobook is waiting!

Click above for unlimited listening to select audiobooks, Audible Originals, and podcasts.
One credit a month to pick any title from our entire premium selection — yours to keep (you'll use your first credit now).
You will get an email reminder before your trial ends.
$14.95 a month after 30 days. Cancel online anytime.

Learn more about membership

Sold and delivered by Audible, an Amazon company

By completing your purchase, you agree to Audible’s Conditions Of Use and Amazon's Privacy Notice.

Sold and delivered by Audible, an Amazon company

People who viewed this also viewed

Page 1 of 1Start OverPage 1 of 1

The Underground Railroad (Television Tie-in): A Novel
Colson Whitehead
66,747
Audible Audiobook
$0.00 Free with Audible trial
The Kite Runner
Khaled Hosseini
33,657
Audible Audiobook
$0.00 Free with Audible trial
Mrs. Wickham
Sarah Page
23
Audible Audiobook
$0.00 Free with Audible trial
To Kill a Mockingbird
Harper Lee
130,746
Audible Audiobook
$0.00 Free with Audible trial
Finding Tamika
Erika Alexander
4
Audible Audiobook
$0.00 Free with Audible trial

People who bought this also bought

Page 1 of 1Start OverPage 1 of 1

I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings
Maya Angelou
33,749
in Cultural & Regional Biographies

Audible Audiobook
$0.00 Free with Audible trial
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
Douglas Adams
23,710
in Humorous Science Fiction

Audible Audiobook
$0.00 Free with Audible trial
The Bell Jar
Sylvia Plath
21,925
Audible Audiobook
$0.00 Free with Audible trial
Fahrenheit 451
Ray Bradbury
48,527
Audible Audiobook
$0.00 Free with Audible trial
Where the Crawdads Sing
Delia Owens
613,040
Audible Audiobook
$0.00 Free with Audible trial

Related to this topic

Page 1 of 1Start OverPage 1 of 1

The Blind Assassin
Margaret Atwood
5,645
Audible Audiobook
$0.00 Free with Audible trial
Children Playing Before a Statue of Hercules (Unabridged Selections)
Edited by David Sedaris
487
Audible Audiobook
$0.00 Free with Audible trial
Brick Lane
Monica Ali
2,384
Audible Audiobook
$0.00 Free with Audible trial
Mr. Fox: A Novel
Helen Oyeyemi
421
Audible Audiobook
$0.00 Free with Audible trial
Tar Baby
Toni Morrison
988
Audible Audiobook
$0.00 Free with Audible trial

Product details

Listening Length	12 hours and 6 minutes
Author	Margaret Atwood, Valerie Martin - essay
Narrator	Margaret Atwood, Claire Danes, full cast, Tim Gerard Reynolds
Whispersync for Voice	Ready
Audible.com Release Date	April 04, 2017
Publisher	Audible Studios
Program Type	Audiobook
Version	Unabridged
Language	English
ASIN	B06XFX6QJP
Best Sellers Rank	#1,745 in Audible Books & Originals (See Top 100 in Audible Books & Originals) #25 in Dystopian Science Fiction (Audible Books & Originals) #68 in Dystopian Fiction (Books) #106 in Literary Fiction (Audible Books & Originals)

Important information

To report an issue with this product, click here.

Customer reviews

4.3 out of 5

154,802 global ratings

5 star
4 star
3 star
2 star
1 star

How customer reviews and ratings work

Reviews with images

See all customer images

Sort reviews by

Top reviews from the United States

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

Barbara S

What kind of world we could be if we stop valuing the diversity of all people

Reviewed in the United States on January 29, 2017

Verified Purchase

I first read The Handmaid's Tale around the time it was published in 1986. I was just 22, a sheltered young thing. I recall wondering what everyone was raving about, since only the top story layer of the book connected for me. Now, with decades of life experience behind me, I see that this is a deeply moving, complex book. I'm so glad I decide to read again just at this moment in time.

You would think that something written thirty years ago would seem dated. But that wasn't the case for me. If anything, I think there are so many things imagined in the book which have become more possible today instead of less. In a sense, this is a cautionary tale that a large art of the population ignored or misunderstood.

More than ever, we should be reading this and sharing it with the young women in our lives. And discussing it with them, so they see more of the depth than my 22-year-old self did.

Margaret Atwood imagined a world where a totalitarian power went into action against foreign zealots and their own people's "wanton" behavior. This power was meant to make the world better, but it also created a world of highly distinct "haves" and "have nots."

She says, “Better never means better for everyone... It always means worse, for some.” It might be just me (although I suspect not) but this sure sounds like what we often hear today on the news and in conversations.

Reading this at the end of 2016 after a brutal election cycle, the following quote from Atwood seems both wise and horrible. Have we not been hearing about people who feel invisible?

“We were the people who were not in the papers. We lived in the blank white spaces at the edges of print. It gave us more freedom. We lived in the gaps between the stories"

Atwood's Republic of Gilead gives people one-dimensional functions. Correction - she gives women one-dimensional functions. They are Wives, Marthas, Handmaids, Aunts, or Unwomen (and a few more which would be spoilers). Unwomen are rebels, likely to be banished to the toxic waste dumps of the colonies. Everyone else plays a part in the singular female focus - procreation. As I read, I wondered what category I'd fall into should I have the bad luck to land in Gilead. The women there have no layers of life or experience. They are expected only to fulfill their narrow role.

Why is procreation such a focus? Because of falling birth rates among white people. This book doesn't discuss race except one small spot near the end. It's as if there is only one race in Gilead. And the only people in that race with any power are men.

The main character, Offred (literally of Fred named after the Commander she serves) is the perfect blend of weak and strong. She tells us of her past and says, “When we think of the past it's the beautiful things we pick out. We want to believe it was all like that.” But her life is not beautiful. And Atwood straddles the line of past and present, sending back and forth in a way that keeps you wanting more. Just as Offred wants more. Just as we all want more for ourselves and the generations of women coming after us.

If you read this book long ago, pick it up again. If you haven't yet read it, move it up to the top of your TBR. Buy it for friends. Buy for your sons and daughters. Use it to teach and to learn what kind of world we could be if we stop valuing the diversity of all people.

2,609 people found this helpful

Helpful

Trick Brown

A thoughful read, if and only if, you think about it.

Reviewed in the United States on August 11, 2013

Verified Purchase

The Handmaid's Tale is a relatively "old" book in that it was first published in 1985, but it is still popular/well-known. This is not surprising as Margaret Atwood is one of those author’s whose work will endure as "literature" and she will still be well known in 100 years. That is, unless the Handmaid's Tale is prophetic and all secular literature is burned.

Don't worry, it won't be. However, it does have some elements that could be argued as being a caricature of modern day happenings. There are plenty of reviews out there that give a run down of the plot and how they feel it's all happening right now. No doubt many of these reviews are from women, and justifiably so since this book "speaks to them". So I'm going to discuss the subtext of the novel, and hopefully, I can get a few guys to read this book because there is stuff in it for them.

The background story is that The United States has been taken over by religious fundamentalists. The religion is never mentioned by name, but it is clearly Christian/Jewish/Islamic. When it comes to their respective flavors of fundamentalism, they all bear a striking resemblance to one another whether they want to admit it or not. This is not surprising, since they all worship the same god and use overlapping religious texts. If you're curious about the tale of how this happened, this is not the book for you. After all, this is the Handmaid's Tale. All you get is the story of one woman starting probably about 10 years after an event called "The President's Day Massacre", i.e. the coup where the fundamentalists took over.

Personally, I do not think such a regime could take over in such a simple manner, but what followed after the coup is more plausible. As I said, we don't get much of this story directly, but we hear snippets of how, slowly, over the course of weeks and months, oppressive policies are implemented and they are always implemented for the same reasons that such policies are implemented today. Namely, the safety of the public, the betterment of society, etc. At the same time, women are slowly and unequally stripped of their rights.

If you think that women could never be usurped of their identities in this way, and no one would stand for it, blah, blah, blah. You are wrong. All it takes is the right social pressure. Imagine a scenario where the number of women capable of bearing children is cut to a small percentage. They then become a "national resource". (My words, not the author's.) When it comes to resources, there will always be people (usually men, and this is coming from a man) in power who will want to exploit and seize control of such resources. This is how such things can happen. And this is the scenario used by Atwood in The Handmaid's Tale.

When I was younger, I probably would never have bought that line of reasoning and not terribly enjoyed this story. As I've aged to a venerable 40 years and some of my Platonic idealism has tarnished, I have learned to accept that "the masses" don't get as outraged as individuals do. Most of the time, groups of people are scared when it comes to dramatic change and accept it if fed the line that it is temporary and for the good of all. Most of the time, these changes are never about being for the good of all, they are simply about control.

A past example to show even women are not above this: The Temperance movement to abolish alcohol. Propelled by religious minded women, fresh with their new ability to vote. Despite Jesus being pro-wine they felt it their duty to rid the world of drink. You can argue the details all you want, but at the end of the day, it was about asserting power and control.

A modern example: For the past 12 years, the U. S. citizens have been force fed the line that we are all living under a faceless threat of "Terror" and in this time we have fought two wars, one of which we are still fighting, and most of us don't really know why, other than we are "fighting terror". These wars are not as openly covered as the Vietnam War, because our government has learned that atrocities that are not visited daily are quickly forgotten because people prefer to stick their head in the sand. And so people forget. They don't get outraged. They simply accept the situation because it is supposedly temporary, for the good of us all, for all our safety, blah, blah, blah. What are we looking to control? Some say oil, others say that the area is strategically located real estate. Regardless, it is about control.

So do I think a "fast coup" could take over and make such radical changes? No. But a slow insidious change over the course of a decade or two? Well, I have seen it with my own eyes, so yes, the scenario in The Handmaid's Tale is plausible to me, but I know that such a shift would happen over years, not months. Anyone who thinks otherwise is sticking their fingers in their ears, closing their eyes, and repeating the above blah, blah, blahs.

A possible future example that's been a long time in the making: During the 80's (my youth) religious fundamentalists (in this country) blew up abortion clinics because they were outraged and wanted change. Presumably, they wanted things to return to the way they were when abortions were illegal, in back allies with coat hangers. Just in my lifetime, they have since learned that getting people upset only motivates them to stand with or against you. And if you're the one blowing up teenagers, it's tough to motivate people to stand with you. They have taken their fight political, a realm where everybody's eyes glaze over and become dispassionate, and they have slowly set about making laws against birth control and abortion clinics. As someone who is pro-choice, I can't say all of these laws are bad. Many are simply requiring clinics to uphold standard medical cleanliness practices. The laws that really hurt, are the laws that reduce or eliminate funding preventing the clinics from having the money to be able to upgrade their facilities and are forced to shut down. You can tell this is about the control of others and not about any religious objection because the number one cited religious reason is the belief that life begins at conception. Rather than supporting research for birth control that simply prevents conception, they politically attack all avenues of abortion and birth control. So even if you address their concerns, it does not change the way they behave.

Leaving the examples and subtext behind, back to the story at hand. The Handmaid's Tale is true literature, thus by practical definition, this makes the story a little slow and boring at points. When I was in college, I had to take plenty of slow and boring classes that I thought were of minimal value. However, I quickly learned that it is possible to garner lessons from and learn something from every class and that is what I set out to do. I took it upon myself to walk away with something for my time and money. This book requires that same model of thought. Even after 28 years, there is a wealth of intriguing thought experiments that went into the writing of this story and a similar trove for those willing to consider the next step of reasoning, but you have to be willing to dig for that gold.

And there you have it. The subtext of The Handmaid's tale is a marvellously thought provoking book about the subtleties that go into how societies change, but if you're not interested in thinking, move on to something formulated for entertainment purposes this is not the novel for you.

39 people found this helpful

Helpful

Top reviews from other countries

Caroline Walcot

Suppression of women's rights - more gruesome because based on the truth

Reviewed in Germany on October 2, 2019

Verified Purchase

My first reading of this world-famous novel (which I only discovered this year) left me chilled to the bone, despite (or maybe because of) the "aha" moments as I recognised many historical events referenced in the narrative. It is absolutely impossible to read it at the end of the second decade of the 21st century without linking the background narrative to current events in the USA.

Basically, this is civil war, overlords versus underdogs. It is also about the consequences of a disastrously declining birthrate and the lengths to which men will go to increase population numbers.

Margaret Atwood uses a laconic, almost poetic style of prose to narrate the immense feeling of numbness and shock felt by ordinary women in the immediate aftermath of their being stripped overnight of all citizen and family rights (including children ripped away from their mothers). They lose even their personal names, only to be classified like cattle according to criteria of fertility. The author highlights this oversimplification of society by a visually simple imposed puritanical dress code for all: black suits for the men of the ruling class (Commanders); black uniforms for the police (Eyes) and armed unqualified militiamen (Guardians), blue for Commanders' wives, brown for the clique of women who ruthlessly police the new laws (Aunts), dull beige-green for unpaid house servants (Marthas), unflattering stripes for the impoverished working class (Econowives), grey for convicts and those too old or ill to bear children (Unwomen) - they are deported to radioactive war zones to "clean up" and die there. Then there is red.

The colour red is reserved for the robes and dresses worn by the legal concubines (Handmaids) who lose not only their personal names but also all control over their personal lives, speech and movements. Each is defined by the first name of the Commander to whom she has been allocated by the Aunts, as her sole purpose in life is now to be a surrogate mother for his wife, bear a viable child that lives (Keeper as opposed to Shredder), then be passed on like a chattel to another childless Commander. The process of impregnation is degrading and tantamount to rape.

The story is told in the first person by a handmaid who does not give her own name. We know her as Offred, meaning Of Fred, belonging to a Commander whose first name is Frederick. She recounts in flashbacks how the social revolution took place, and reveals how an intelligent 21st century woman can survive mentally in such a harshly unfair world through hiding her true feelings of anger and rebellion which cannot be revealed in action. Time hangs heavy in a world where it is a crime for women to be caught reading or writing, attendance at public executions is obligatory, and some executions require the unwilling handmaids to take part. For this male-dominated society heavily indoctrinated child brides are the norm, especially for the ruling class.

Offred eventually finds other handmaids and marthas who share her feelings, but there is always the fear of denunciation and public execution. She has rebellious thoughts, certainly, but not the courage to act on them, even though for her the biological clock is ticking - she is already in her mid-thirties. When she falls pregnant, she has to hide the true father. But her final downfall is not her fault - it is her Commander's, and there is nothing she can do about it but wait for the expected arrest and punishment. At the end Offred regrets all her missed chances to choose her own death. But in the final pages there is a glimmer of hope, the possibility of evading a painful execution. The reader is left clutching onto this hope.

Margaret Atwood has always made it abundantly clear that every action, every event described in this book is based on true and documented historical events and societal customs. Although she invented the characters and the famous dress colour code, she has not made up or exaggerated what happens to them. When you close this book, you start thinking about the cultism of many modern religious sects, the oppressive use of religion as state power (nothing new there) in so many countries; also new and ancient totalitarian regimes, 20th century post-WW2 communism, and human trafficking on all continents throughout human history.

This novel came out in 1985, received many awards and is on school reading lists, as it should be. It has withstood the test of time and is astoundingly topical today. Hopefully this will not be the case 33 years on from now.

11 people found this helpful

Tracey Madeley

Shocking, but brilliant. A female 1984.

Reviewed in the United Kingdom on June 19, 2017

Verified Purchase

I remember this being a shocking book, but I had forgotten how shocking it was until I started to re-read it. Like 1984, Gilead is a totalitarian state and it would be easy to dismiss it as patriarchal, but it is not that simple. It is women, through the aunt’s network that reinforce the rules and the ideology of each woman having her place. From the Marthas, to the Handmaidens, the Wives, Econwives, the Daughters and the Aunts. We are told of the punishment for stepping out of line is to be an unwoman and sent to the colonies. A place of radioactivity where you are essentially sent to work in the squalor until you die. This is obviously meant to be a fate worse than death. Yet by the middle of the novel we see the Commander breaking the rules and seeing Offred on her own at night. Equally we see the wife offering her the chauffeur in the hope that he may be more fertile. There appears to be a double standard here, with those in power believing they can get away with what they see as indiscretions.

Handmaids are revered for their fertility and forbidden from self-harm, yet the wives can treat them as they like, short of killing them. There is a suggestion that their diet is closely monitored to ensure the maximum health and fertility. Any object that could be used as a weapon is removed. The windows are shatterproof, the light fittings can’t be used to hang yourself from, they are not allowed cigarettes or matches. When they leave the house they walk in two’s, for their protection and to monitor each other. This is state paternalism at its worst.

Like all imposed regimes they recognise the situation is difficult for the first generation, but it is done for the good of humanity. Education is removed at least for women, if not men, presumably to quell or stop the spread of dissent. There is strict policing on the grounds of safety, with the ‘eyes’ representing a secret police force. Daughters robed in white, are given in multiple arranged marriage ceremonies, reinforcing the idea of dating and promiscuity being a bad thing. There is even an underlying suggestion that all men are potential rapists.

The Handmaiden is called Offred, or ‘of Fred.’ A term of possession which is given to each successive Handmaiden as demonstrated by Ofglen who is replaced at the end of the novel. They are encouraged and don’t remember their old names, such is the mental conditioning. They are given tokens for their shopping, reinforcing the idea that they can’t read. Reading is forbidden, even the Bible is kept locked away. Like in the middle ages if the peasants learnt to read they would not need the priests. Again this is all about enforcing and maintaining control.

The colours used for the different women are interesting. Red is for the Handmaidens and is traditionally associated with sacrifice and the blood of Christ. Blue is for the wives and is usually associated with wisdom, it is also the colour of the virgin Mary in catholic tradition. Green is worn by the Martha’s and represents obedience. Brown worn by the Aunts symbolises sin, false teaching, death and Satan. This is interesting because the Aunts know what they are doing, but they still do it anyway. Either they are corrupted by power, or they are indoctrinated into believing this is the only solution and they are right.

The ending was very interesting, treating the Handmaids Tale as an account of what had happened in the past, as the basis of an academic assessment. By looking back to discover the people and the places in the account they are questioning the validity of the source. It also allows the author to explain certain practices and the wider significance. They refer to this period as redrawing the map of the world in terms of power and authority. The speaker points to nuclear accidents, Aids, biological warfare and chemical pollution as a reason for the sterility of the population. It explains the term salvaging and particicution as a way of giving the Handmaidens power to release the violence of their emotions. There is the private Jewish repatriation scheme which saw many people set adrift in boats and left to die, in the name of profit. The lecturer finishes by saying that history only gives us a partial view and we can never know exactly what happened.

13 people found this helpful

Mahendthiran

Good story

Reviewed in Singapore on July 22, 2022

Verified Purchase

Engaging